Toasted vs untoasted muesli

Darkfalz wrote:
"Auntie Em" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:50:13 +1100, "Darkfalz"
wrote:

"Beverly" wrote in message
...

"Darkfalz" wrote in message
...
Is one healthier than the other? I know that some toasted have
more fat due to oil being used, but not all of them.

I prefer toasted, but I'll eat the ordinary if it's better for
digestion
etc.

What's the opinion on muesli in general?

There is nothing wrong with muesli. You do need to be careful
about the total amount of calories as most muesli is high in
calories. If you're worried about total calories you might try
oatmeal.

Is oatmeal just quick cooking oats (porridge)?


That's what my Canadian husband calls it - porridge. Must be a
cultural thing.

Just another case of Americans changing words to be different.

Oatmeal has been in the English language since 1420. Porridge has been in
the English language since 1532. I don't understand how you figure the
Americans changed it, considering that the word porridge did not exist when
oatmeal entered the English language, and America had not yet been
discovered by English speakers. Please explain.

Darkfalz wrote:
"Auntie Em" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 09:50:13 +1100, "Darkfalz"
wrote:

"Beverly" wrote in message
...

"Darkfalz" wrote in message
...
Is one healthier than the other? I know that some toasted have
more fat due to oil being used, but not all of them.

I prefer toasted, but I'll eat the ordinary if it's better for
digestion
etc.

What's the opinion on muesli in general?

There is nothing wrong with muesli. You do need to be careful
about the total amount of calories as most muesli is high in
calories. If you're worried about total calories you might try
oatmeal.

Is oatmeal just quick cooking oats (porridge)?


That's what my Canadian husband calls it - porridge. Must be a
cultural thing.

Just another case of Americans changing words to be different.

Oatmeal has been in the English language since 1420. Porridge has been in
the English language since 1532. I don't understand how you figure the
Americans changed it, considering that the word porridge did not exist when
oatmeal entered the English language, and America had not yet been
discovered by English speakers. Please explain.

" the establishment
shields these writers from potentially devastating critiques. The
reason being that the Kennedys were never part of that
establishment. No one protected JFK in Dallas. No one protected
RFK in Los Angeles. The ensuing investigations did everything
they could to protect the true murderers; to hell with the
victims. And since the Church Committee showed in public that the
Kennedys were not business as usual, there has been an intense
and incessant effort to reverse that verdict; in essence to
rewrite history. People like Slatzer, Davis, and now Hersh have
made their living off of it.

The Kennedys themselves deserve part of the blame. In Samuels'
article in The New Yorker, Kennedy family lawyer Myer Feldman
says that he advised the Kennedys not to even comment on Hersh,
let alone sue (p. 69). If I were advising, I would have urged a
lawsuit as far back as 1984 with both the Collier-Horowitz book
and the Davis book. I would have loved to hear how the two former
leftists had no idea that Priscilla Johnson was associated with
the CIA, had tied up Marina Oswald for years, and then issued a
tract on both