Have you tried GLP1 medications and found it didn't work for you? We'd like to hear about your experiences, what you tried, why it didn't work and how you're doing now. Click here to tell us your story

Steel Cut vs Rolled Oats

Theo166
Theo166 Posts: 2,564 Member
in Food and Nutrition
I've settled into a routine of eating instant oatmeal for breakfast, with peanut butter. Some other threads made me wonder if I should switch to cooking steel cut oats instead.

Here's a comparison I found. Any other comments from MFP pals?
For me, I still prefer instant because they are so quick and easy.

http://www.prevention.com/content/whats-healthier-steel-cut-oats-or-rolled-oats

fydjfv2z2nsv.jpg
8jnc27dcr7um.jpg

«1

Replies

  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,420 MFP Moderator
    edited February 2017
    There is such a minuscule difference, that it won't matter. Eat the one you enjoy the most. I enjoy rolled oats in overnight recipes, but quick oats if I am cooking that morning and want hot oatmeal..
  • cityruss
    cityruss Posts: 2,493 Member
    They fail to state that GI is only relevant if the food is eaten in isolation.

    So unless you are eating raw oats in isolation of anything else, disregard.

    Disregard anyway as medical issues aside you needn't throw a passing thought at the GI of a food.

    Oh, and arbitrary organic pushing.

    Also. If protein/carb/fat numbers are equal, how are the calorie counts different in the bright shiny info graphic?

  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,296 Member
    Steel cut take a long time to cook, and for whatever reason they're more expensive. I went through a phase with steel cut and now I'm back to rolled.

  • Theo166
    Theo166 Posts: 2,564 Member
    edited February 2017
    cityruss wrote: »
    They fail to state that GI is only relevant if the food is eaten in isolation.
    So unless you are eating raw oats in isolation of anything else, disregard.
    Disregard anyway as medical issues aside you needn't throw a passing thought at the GI of a food.

    Oh, and arbitrary organic pushing.

    Also. If protein/carb/fat numbers are equal, how are the calorie counts different in the bright shiny info graphic?

    Yea, I don't think prevention is the definitive source, but they had a good graphic to start the thread . :p
    Since a gram of sugar is 4 calories, can't explain the difference of 20 calories,
  • cityruss
    cityruss Posts: 2,493 Member
    Theo166 wrote: »
    cityruss wrote: »
    They fail to state that GI is only relevant if the food is eaten in isolation.
    So unless you are eating raw oats in isolation of anything else, disregard.
    Disregard anyway as medical issues aside you needn't throw a passing thought at the GI of a food.

    Oh, and arbitrary organic pushing.

    Also. If protein/carb/fat numbers are equal, how are the calorie counts different in the bright shiny info graphic?

    Yea, I don't think prevention is the definitive source, but they had a good graphic to start the thread . :p
    Since a gram of sugar is 4 calories, can't explain the difference of 20 calories,

    The calories from the sugar are accounted for in the total carb calories, so it's even wrongerer.
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    I mostly like steel cut for the texture. I put an egg and cheese on top and eat it all together. The texture of other oats doesn't fit with that combo, at least not for me.
  • CafeRacer808
    CafeRacer808 Posts: 2,396 Member
    edited February 2017
    jemhh wrote: »
    I mostly like steel cut for the texture. I put an egg and cheese on top and eat it all together. The texture of other oats doesn't fit with that combo, at least not for me.

    I agree with this. Steel cut works really well for savory oatmeal, but I definitely prefer rolled oats for sweet.

    The differences in nutritional value are nominal, so eat whichever version you prefer.
  • markrgeary1
    markrgeary1 Posts: 853 Member
    McCann steel cut Oatmeal. Yummy and so good. I presume cook them as at 7500' they took too long.
  • Theo166
    Theo166 Posts: 2,564 Member
    edited February 2017
    markrgeary1 wrote: »
    McCann steel cut Oatmeal. Yummy and so good. I presume cook them as at 7500' they took too long.

    Where do you live, Wyoming?
  • Gallowmere1984
    Gallowmere1984 Posts: 6,626 Member
    jemhh wrote: »
    I mostly like steel cut for the texture. I put an egg and cheese on top and eat it all together. The texture of other oats doesn't fit with that combo, at least not for me.

    I keep both around, and eat both a variety of ways. My favorite sco so far had goat cheese melted in it, and was topped with eggs and oil wilted kail. My favorite rolled is either black pepper, eggs and swiss cheese, or vanilla MPC, cinnamon and blueberries, depending upon mood.
  • __TMac__
    __TMac__ Posts: 1,669 Member
    Just to make sure we're all on the same page, there are three basic formats for oats. Steel cut, rolled, and instant/quick cook. I use the first two for different applications. The kids prefer the third, in various sugared flavor combinations.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Texture. FIFY.

    I keep both around as I am a variety girl. I also enjoy large flake got at the Bulk Barn.
  • Theo166
    Theo166 Posts: 2,564 Member
    Gallowmere1984 wrote: »
    jemhh wrote: »
    I mostly like steel cut for the texture. I put an egg and cheese on top and eat it all together. The texture of other oats doesn't fit with that combo, at least not for me.

    I keep both around, and eat both a variety of ways. My favorite sco so far had goat cheese melted in it, and was topped with eggs and oil wilted kail. My favorite rolled is either black pepper, eggs and swiss cheese, or vanilla MPC, cinnamon and blueberries, depending upon mood.

    I just tried it with a couple eggs on top, yum. Some cheese next time maybe
  • priestp1
    priestp1 Posts: 34 Member
    One thing to consider is the cost of each. I believe you get less steel cut oats vs rolled oats for a similar price. Since there is little difference, I go with rolled oats for my overnight oats recipes. Just my thought.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    I can't stand the texture of rolled oats...steel cut oats take a long time to cook, so I compromise with Coach's Oats which have a very similar texture to steel cut, but I can cook them in the microwave in about 4 minutes.

    Once in awhile I make steel cut oats as a special kind of thing. I won't touch rolled oats....ever.
  • Charis50
    Charis50 Posts: 181 Member
    Didn't the OP say "instant" oats? Those things stick with me about 10 minutes, and then I'm ravenously hungry. Steel cut oats or regular (not instant) rolled oats are both more filling--they seem to take longer to digest. I rarely have time to make steel-cut in the morning so I use the method where you bring them to a boil, simmer for 3 minutes, then take off the heat and store in glass containers until you need to nuke them.
  • Theo166
    Theo166 Posts: 2,564 Member
    edited February 2017
    Charis50 wrote: »
    Didn't the OP say "instant" oats? Those things stick with me about 10 minutes, and then I'm ravenously hungry. Steel cut oats or regular (not instant) rolled oats are both more filling--they seem to take longer to digest. I rarely have time to make steel-cut in the morning so I use the method where you bring them to a boil, simmer for 3 minutes, then take off the heat and store in glass containers until you need to nuke them.
    In my own experience, I need to add peanut butter to my 'instant oats' before they can last me to lunch. I'll need to experiment more with steel cut, but I really like the convenience of using packets of instant oats with my electric hot water pot.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,072 Member
    cityruss wrote: »
    Theo166 wrote: »
    cityruss wrote: »
    They fail to state that GI is only relevant if the food is eaten in isolation.
    So unless you are eating raw oats in isolation of anything else, disregard.
    Disregard anyway as medical issues aside you needn't throw a passing thought at the GI of a food.

    Oh, and arbitrary organic pushing.

    Also. If protein/carb/fat numbers are equal, how are the calorie counts different in the bright shiny info graphic?

    Yea, I don't think prevention is the definitive source, but they had a good graphic to start the thread . :p
    Since a gram of sugar is 4 calories, can't explain the difference of 20 calories,

    The calories from the sugar are accounted for in the total carb calories, so it's even wrongerer.

    I suspect what's going on here is that rolled oats, because they are flat, settle a bit more, so that a quarter-cup of rolled oats weighs a few grams more than a quarter-cup of steel-cut oats (notice the chart compares equal volumes of the two types of oats). Then notice that the note at the very bottom of the chart, while not 100% clear, indicates that the data it's based on is the rounded data used on nutritional labeling. We could easily be talking about barely more than a real 10 calorie difference (144 calories rounded down to 140, and 156 calories rounded up to 160). That small a difference in calories could easily be accounted for by a difference in less than one gram for each macro, which would round to the same whole number of grams for each type.

    The USDA nutrient data doesn't even distinguish between rolled oats and steel-cut oats for calorie counts, since they're the same food by mass. (According to USDA, there is .4868 g sat fat in 40 g of oats, so maybe the difference there just reflects some greater honesty or greater risk aversion in skating up to the edge of the rules by the steel-cut oats packagers, compared to the rolled oat packagers.)

    https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/6507?manu=&fgcd=Cereal Grains and Pasta&ds=Standard Reference

  • Sheisinlove109
    Sheisinlove109 Posts: 516 Member
    I think the steel cut makes me feel fuller longer. I make a three day batch, proportion and heat in the microwave. Easy!

Categories