Results 1 to 3 of 3
-
04-16-2006, 04:11 PM #1
Nutrition facts are nutrition facts, right?
Okay, so I've read in a lot of places that old fashion oatmeal is better than instant or quick oats. But when I compare the label between old fashion and quick from Quaker, the nutritional information is the same. So what's the diff? I mean, if they have the same calories, the same fat, the same protein, etc.--why would one be better than the other? Even their new Steel Cut oats are only different in process and a 1/2 gram less fat. Is this just some weird media hype to get people to go back to slaving over a stove for 5 minutes instead of 1? (Or in my case, slave over a microwave. )
-
04-16-2006, 04:14 PM #2
is it the same sugar?...steel oats are really good...
-
04-16-2006, 06:20 PM #3
Labels can be quite deceptive ... especially where sugars are concerned...
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
First Tren Cycle (blast)
01-06-2025, 11:29 AM in ANABOLIC STEROIDS - QUESTIONS & ANSWERS