View Full Version : Oatmeal

03-01-2005, 10:31 AM
I am just about to go on a cut. Aside from eggs/eggwhites, is oatmeal an acceptable choice for a cut? I amm cutting sugars completely and I know plain old oatmeal has none/minimal amounts. Thanks guys.

03-01-2005, 10:41 AM
ya oatmeal is great.

03-01-2005, 12:01 PM
woot woot for rolled oats, dont get the instant **** with all the sugar, just get 100% quacker oats

Brock Huard
03-01-2005, 01:38 PM
woot woot for rolled oats, dont get the instant **** with all the sugar, just get 100% quacker oats

quack quack

03-01-2005, 03:59 PM
You can get instant Quaker Oats. Cooks in much less time than the large flake without any extra sugers. I've tried both and it's really all about your personal taste (Large Flake vs. Small Flake).

03-01-2005, 05:22 PM
And get some of that syrup to flavor it that has no calories or anything in it. What was that stuff, Einstein Syrup or something like that?

03-01-2005, 05:22 PM
Oh yeah, it was DaVinci Syrup.

03-01-2005, 05:56 PM
quack quack


03-02-2005, 12:34 AM
IMHO Jumbo rolled oats are the best, but any kind is good (except instant)

03-02-2005, 01:35 PM
Check the package. It's what in the oats that count.
Check the listing of carbohydrates for sugar, and check the ingredients for anything foreign. The instant Quaker oats (in the pre-packaged serving size) have the same contents as the Large Flake and Instant Oats, bar a few ingredients. The only thing added is some salt, guam gum, and modified milk ingredients (essentially a bit of lactate). This adds 1 gram of sugar per serving.
The 1 kg Bag of Quaker Oatmeal is 100% rolled oats. No additives.
The 1 kg bag of Large Flake Quaker Oatmeal is 100% rolled oats. No additives.
The difference is in the flake size. A larger surface area of the instant oats allows a quicker water absorbtion rate, and therefore a quicker cook time.

Just check the ingredients to be sure that there isn't a lot of added sugar. I ate both oatmeals before, but I found that the instant ones were just faster to prepare. Sometimes you can have both the lesser cook time and the equal nutritional value.

03-02-2005, 02:27 PM
There's a difference because the smaller the oats the less time it takes to digest and causes a higher insulin spike. Instant oats are high on the gi scale.

03-02-2005, 02:37 PM
What about the oats that say "Quick oats, 1 minute to cook" Are they ok? I just want to know, because I don't care either way, I will still eat them.

03-02-2005, 04:28 PM
Yeah theres a diff. between those and old fashioned.

03-02-2005, 05:42 PM
plain oats, nothing pre cooked, quick or instant.

03-02-2005, 06:38 PM
I hate oatmeal!!!=(

I put about a 1/2 cup of old fashioned oats into my morning protein shake and its not that good.

03-02-2005, 06:47 PM
i eat oatmeal raw in milk, as if it was cereal. i cant stand the taste or texture of cooked oatmeal

03-02-2005, 08:35 PM
I never thought of that. Oatmeal is fine in my protein shake, but I don't like cooked oatmeal too much.

03-05-2005, 09:51 AM
quack, quack :)

I love my plain oats too! Great thing to snack on nonetheless........

03-07-2005, 12:42 AM
Oats are way good cooked with protein powder mixed in. I use the gnc 100% whey, berry flavor, tastes way good. Escpecially if u mix in fresh fruit.

03-07-2005, 01:34 AM
does anyone on this board know what the hell is up with oat bran, some places its listed at 98 cals for 40g's other places its up to 150 ... most of the nutritional data ive seen, including the usda is 98 cals however it still lists 26g carbs 6g fiber 7g protein 3g fat... (26-6 x 4 = 80cals) + (7 x 4 = 28 cals) + (3 x 9 = 27 cals) =135 cals???? what the hell is up with this? where are the cals going? in the toilet? :)