I have no idea, that's why I said may (maybe might would've been better... hmm *needs to revise her classes about modality*). I just supposed that if puffy stuff was recommended, then the person who wrote the article must have seen a couple of brands or the likes that would fit the purpose... else I really don't see why it would even be mentioned. (But then, I also have no idea about what brands are sold in the USA or elsewhere; personally, in France, I don't know of any 'puffy' cereal that would be very filling, since those are all sugar-laden. :|)

Something like Quaker Puffed Rice is not really sugary. The idea is that the air fills you up--it stretches your stomach without adding more calories. Same is true of a big salad--things like that.

This is pretty clear with something like popcorn--if I eat a big bowl (1 serving) of popcorn (Orville R's Light Natural), it's a 110 calorie snack but I'm full after I'm done with it. I'm not inclined to keep on snacking after that.

So I think there's a distinction we're losing here between feeling full and feeling satisfied. Better food tends to leave one feeling more satisfied, though not necessarily full. Or have I wigged out here...

Jay

We shop a liquidator store (like Big Lots, but privately owned), and any cereal under $1 a box we buy. I bought a huge bag of a captain crunch type cereal for 88 cents, figuring I would add it to bran flakes, or measure out a cup when I had a taste for something really sweet. My husband bought Life, and I discovered two things. 120 calories would get you 1 cup of the crunch berry cereal, or 3/4 cup of Life. Secondly, captain crunch tastes a lot better in my memory than in reality.