4 ms·

You are correct - Kirkland’s has no added sugar. [0] [0] - https://www.nutritionix.com/i/kirkland-signature/organic-peanut-butter-creamy/53f4dbc44f6e9c2b509e94

• pkaye 2y ago
  Despite the no added sugar, I always found it pretty sweet despite no added sugar. So I just looked it up and they use Valencia peanuts which apparently can taste sweeter.
  • adastra22 2y ago
    That’s the back door for an organic products. Source varieties that are naturally sweeter, then you don’t have to list the sugar as a separate ingredient.
• ugh123 2y ago
  Lately i've been avoiding all peanuts (and Kirkland's in my house) because of the saturated fat content, but i'm never sure if its that necessary.
  • pmg101 2y ago
    Saturated fat is very good at making you feel full. I view peanutS/PB as a snack-displacement food: if I'm roaming around for nibbles, some sat fat will kill my cravings and reduce the likelihood of eating sugar. But ymmv
    • globular-toast 2y ago
      This is one reason working in an office can be a disaster if you're someone who would "roam around for nibbles". In every place I've worked there has been a vending machine or otherwise easily accessible junk/sugar dispenser. In my eyes these are no different from having a cigarette machine or a gambling machine or something, but not everyone sees it that way. In my house there is no ready-to-eat food at all. I'm not just going to go to the kitchen and cook a potato when I feel a bit peckish. But this seems difficult for many people. Personally I find hunger to be a normal part of every single day. I don't fear it or feel the need to squash it the moment it arises. I also don't feel any discomfort when I'm not surrounded by ready-to-eat food at all times. But many people do seem to feel a constant need to have food available and find it deeply uncomfortable if the next meal doesn't seem readily available.
      • deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      • pmg101 2y ago
        I have a BMI of 20 so I'm not trying to avoid calories. However I do try to avoid sugar, UPFs, and so on, because what benefit would there be in putting that crap in your body.
      • r00fus 2y ago
        If you're good with handling hunger - that's great! A lot of people get hypoglycemic (ie, irritable) when low on blood sugar, so for them, snacking is an acceptable evil (esp. if only healthier snacks are stocked). For me, I find whipping up some dill/garlic/mayo dip + cut carrots, or celery + good PB a meaningful snack. My guideline is to try to find a good carb/fiber ratio (pref: 5:1), and avoid added sugars.
        • globular-toast 2y ago
          People without diabetes don't get hypoglycaemia. I believe you can train yourself to expect food at certain times. I eat two meals a day and only get irritable (hangry) around those times. But anyway, what you've written is basically my point. If you want/need to snack then unless you think ahead and make healthy snacks available then it's going to sugar/junk that you find in the socially acceptable junk machine.
  • r00fus 2y ago
    Man, the evil that was done to diets by the sugar industry in the 80s is still paying dividends. Saturated fats, like anything, are bad in excess. However, avoiding them completely is bonkers - and leads to people replacing (ok) fats with additional eating - mostly with sugary snacks.