So, I never used to like oatmeal but am beginning to now.... but only with salt, nothing sweet. my coworkers think I am weird. anywho- my questions is this....
I know that we are supposed to not do the quick cook oats and I was wondering if any of you have eaten them both and been able to tell a difference in craving/fullness/etc? My problem is oatmeal has become a "when I don't have time to cook breakfast" meal for me, meaning I keep a baggie of it(quick cook) in my bag for if I become hungry at work and don't have time to fix breakfast before I go, or even if I get hungry in the afternoon and don't have anything to snack on... It seems to fill me up without causing cravings and in my head I have the well, its better than running to to trail mix or some other garbage I could be eating...
I think it's OK as long as it doesn't cause problems for you. My husband eats it every day (he insists on the quick cooking kind) and his cholesterol has come down nicely. I use Quaker Oat Bran hot cereal and it only takes 1 1/2 minutes in the microwave. I fix it at work all the time. It has 6 gms of fiber vs. 4 gms in the quick cooking oats.
I don't have an answer to your question, because I haven't really done a comparison myself, but I do have a question for you. What is the advantage of quick cook? I always use old-fashioned, but I just add some water and cook in the microwave for 2 minutes and it turns out great. I like mine with some body to it, a little chewier and solid rather than slimy-soft, so maybe that's the answer there, is it the texture? Because 2 minutes is plenty quick for me.
I make the old fashioned kind in the microwave in 5 minutes every morning. It is so easy and fast. I think I'll try reducing the time after reading how Schmoodle does it.
The only time I use the quick cook type is if I am camping and I have to rely on instant and then I am more likely to eat eggs instead.
the difference, i think, is in the fiber content (see phase 2 foods list for requirement). also, instant oatmeal has been modified a lot so it is less nutritious.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that it is much better than some other junk.
The regular rolled oats are more of a "whole" food than the quick cooking, but even the quick cooking oats are more of a "whole" food than even the South Beach granola bars.
Like Schmoo mentioned, the rolled oats don't take long in the microwave. You could keep a baggie with the measured amount in your desk drawer and dump in some water when you wanted to eat it. If you're looking for quick breakfast in the morning, you can take rolled oats and put them in some milk (or water) in the evening before bed, put it in the fridge to soak. In the morning, take it out and heat in the microwave. It softens the rolled oats so the texture is more like instant and it's super fast.
I make the old fashioned kind in the microwave in 5 minutes every morning. It is so easy and fast. I think I'll try reducing the time after reading how Schmoodle does it.
The only time I use the quick cook type is if I am camping and I have to rely on instant and then I am more likely to eat eggs instead.
the difference, i think, is in the fiber content (see phase 2 foods list for requirement). also, instant oatmeal has been modified a lot so it is less nutritious.
She doesn't use the instant (which usually is flavored or sweetened and have a lot more sodium). She uses the quick oats. Both quick oats and old fashioned are oat groats that are steamed, rolled and flaked. The quick ones are cut into smaller pieces so they cook quicker. The old fashioned ones take longer to digest due to the larger flake size, so the glycemic index would be lower and may keep you satisfied longer. Both have the same amount of fiber and the same nutrients.
Thanks for the help guys! I think I will try to buy the old fashioned next time, I didn't realize that they cooked almost as quick! I prefer mine dryer and less icky anyway! LOL
i have eaten both types of oatmeal for breakfast for the past 2 weeks. i didn't notice cravings. they both kept me plenty full until lunch. as for the nutrient content, i just checked the boxes and the only difference is that the rolled oats have riboflavin and thiamine. other than that, they're both exactly alike. (they were both quaker brand.)
oatmeal questions
