4 ms·

Sugarless Kellogs with whole milk are super healthy and also very tasty. Unfortunatelt people end up eating junk such as frosty flakes with some milk substitute

Sugarless Kellogs with whole milk are super healthy and also very tasty. Unfortunatelt people end up eating junk such as frosty flakes with some milk substitute.

eastbound 3y ago
Sugarless Kelloggs don’t exist. Bare raw Corn Flakes are 8.4g of sugar per 100g. (Still better than “nature yoghurt” with 11g per 100g, knowing that a yoghurt is 125g).
- fatfingerd 3y ago
  The problem here is Kelloggs is a brand from the era in which western nutritional diseases exploded and it's products reflect that. Corn flakes without added sugar are made by others and are like 3% carbs.
  - ilyt 3y ago
    > Corn flakes without added sugar are made by others and are like 3% carbs. No. They might be 3% sugars, but near entirety of corn flake is carbohydrates
    - fatfingerd 3y ago
      Ah yes, 88% carbs, 0.8% sugars (simple carbs).
    - yterdy 3y ago
      All of that insoluble (as opposed to soluble) fiber is not the best, either.
- Macha 3y ago
  If you add milk, that's an extra 6g per 100ml. For comparison, 100g of apples has an average of 10.4g of sugar: https://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/usda/apples?portionid=58449&portionamount=100.000 https://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/usda/apples?por..., and something like fruit loops is 30g of sugar per 100g (https://smartlabel.kelloggs.com/en_US/Product/Index/00038000017674 https://smartlabel.kelloggs.com/en_US/Product/Index/00038000...)
  - thriftwy 3y ago
    I think it's good enough if it's less sugary than apples. I see the typical American quest to eradicate (fats, then cholesterol, and now sugar) annoying.
    - fennecfoxy 3y ago
      1: different types of sugar 2: Apple would usually have much more raw fiber content = feel fuller for longer 3: because of first 2, it can be satisfying to eat a decent sized Apple for breakfast, with some water or coffee, but you'd have to otherwise have a whole bowl of cereal Sugars are bad in that we only need so much of them and our brains are hardwired to be addicted to them/want more. Sugars from fruits are absorbed much more slowly than refined sugar. Fats, sugars etc aren't inherently bad, there are healthy fats. But the main learning today is really that it's more about caloric intake (energy in, energy out) and it's easier to manage when fats/sugars & other carbs are delivered with foods that digest slowly/have a low GI - making us feel full for longer; it's better that our blood sugar experiences a constant slow release than spikes. The problem is when we refine sugars & fats down and sprinkle them over _everything_ because "it tastes good". I can't believe American bread often contains a buttload of sugar. It's bread, not brioche!
      - thriftwy 3y ago
        Just use these cereal that say "Contents: corn" with no sugar. I believe that some Kellog's qualified, but that could be some time ago. Bingo: They will have some sugars, but these are natural corn sugars which would absorbed slowly. Milk also contains slow-ish sugars, not refined sugar.

Sugarless Kellogs with whole milk are super healthy and also very tasty. Unfortunatelt people end up eating junk such as frosty flakes with some milk substitute.

eastbound 3y ago

Sugarless Kelloggs don’t exist. Bare raw Corn Flakes are 8.4g of sugar per 100g. (Still better than “nature yoghurt” with 11g per 100g, knowing that a yoghurt is 125g).

fatfingerd 3y ago
The problem here is Kelloggs is a brand from the era in which western nutritional diseases exploded and it's products reflect that. Corn flakes without added sugar are made by others and are like 3% carbs.
- ilyt 3y ago
  > Corn flakes without added sugar are made by others and are like 3% carbs. No. They might be 3% sugars, but near entirety of corn flake is carbohydrates
  - fatfingerd 3y ago
    Ah yes, 88% carbs, 0.8% sugars (simple carbs).
  - yterdy 3y ago
    All of that insoluble (as opposed to soluble) fiber is not the best, either.
Macha 3y ago
If you add milk, that's an extra 6g per 100ml. For comparison, 100g of apples has an average of 10.4g of sugar: https://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/usda/apples?portionid=58449&portionamount=100.000 https://www.fatsecret.com/calories-nutrition/usda/apples?por..., and something like fruit loops is 30g of sugar per 100g (https://smartlabel.kelloggs.com/en_US/Product/Index/00038000017674 https://smartlabel.kelloggs.com/en_US/Product/Index/00038000...)
- thriftwy 3y ago
  I think it's good enough if it's less sugary than apples. I see the typical American quest to eradicate (fats, then cholesterol, and now sugar) annoying.
  - fennecfoxy 3y ago
    1: different types of sugar 2: Apple would usually have much more raw fiber content = feel fuller for longer 3: because of first 2, it can be satisfying to eat a decent sized Apple for breakfast, with some water or coffee, but you'd have to otherwise have a whole bowl of cereal Sugars are bad in that we only need so much of them and our brains are hardwired to be addicted to them/want more. Sugars from fruits are absorbed much more slowly than refined sugar. Fats, sugars etc aren't inherently bad, there are healthy fats. But the main learning today is really that it's more about caloric intake (energy in, energy out) and it's easier to manage when fats/sugars & other carbs are delivered with foods that digest slowly/have a low GI - making us feel full for longer; it's better that our blood sugar experiences a constant slow release than spikes. The problem is when we refine sugars & fats down and sprinkle them over _everything_ because "it tastes good". I can't believe American bread often contains a buttload of sugar. It's bread, not brioche!
    - thriftwy 3y ago
      Just use these cereal that say "Contents: corn" with no sugar. I believe that some Kellog's qualified, but that could be some time ago. Bingo: They will have some sugars, but these are natural corn sugars which would absorbed slowly. Milk also contains slow-ish sugars, not refined sugar.