You guys, I found pasta that's GASP....HEALTHY!
Options
DedDollChance
Posts: 12 Member
Simply Nature Organic Black Soybean Spaghetti! GET THEE TO ALDI! this pasta contains 1 ingredient; organic black soybean flour. This pasta cooks in about 4 minutes and tastes incredible! Even the texture is on point. Let's get to the stats; 2oz dry contains 180 calories, 19g of carbs;11 of which are from fiber! It's got a whopping 25g of plant based protein AND it's vegan. I added it to the database so you'll easily be able to log this food! I hope you love it!
25
Replies
-
What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?41
-
lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
Little nutritional value? OP mentions increased fiber and more protein..sounds more healthy/ nutritional to me.
14 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
Little nutritional value? OP mentions increased fiber and more protein..sounds more healthy/ nutritional to me.
That's what veggies and meatballs are for
44 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
My first thought was, "so is it you know, just pasta?" While I don't eat pasta all that often, I have had penne with marinara and leftover chicken twice in the past week. 2oz of penne was, contrary to popular belief, more than enough for me given the addition of chicken and (good) sauce. Not a lot of fiber, I'll give you that, but it was filling none the less. Also the pasta itself was really good.13 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
Little nutritional value? OP mentions increased fiber and more protein..sounds more healthy/ nutritional to me.
What makes that healthy?
Why do so many people major in the minors? Eat an OVERALL healthy diet and quit worrying about any one food group. No wonder so many diets fail....31 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
Little nutritional value? OP mentions increased fiber and more protein..sounds more healthy/ nutritional to me.
Regular pasta contains a decent amount of protein (for something that's not considered a tradition protein) as well as some iron, and if you get whole whear pasta, it's very high in fiber as well. Pasta is also a good source of complex carbs. Considering plain pasta is not usually a meal by itself, there are plenty of places to make the meal complete nutritionally. his pasta, while higher in fiber and protein, isn't complete nutrition on its own either.
The pasta she is mentioning has comparable calories to regular pasta (which is 190-200 calories dry for 2 ounces). So it doesn't really facilitate weight loss any better.
This pasta is fine if you want to have it (and enjoy the taste), but traditional pasta is plenty healthy for you. I think many of us disagree that this is finally a "healthy pasta" when we've always had that from traditional pasta all along.39 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
Little nutritional value? OP mentions increased fiber and more protein..sounds more healthy/ nutritional to me.
Regular pasta contains a decent amount of protein (for something that's not considered a tradition protein) as well as some iron, and if you get whole whear pasta, it's very high in fiber as well. Pasta is also a good source of complex carbs. Considering plain pasta is not usually a meal by itself, there are plenty of places to make the meal complete nutritionally. his pasta, while higher in fiber and protein, isn't complete nutrition on its own either.
The pasta she is mentioning has comparable calories to regular pasta (which is 190-200 calories dry for 2 ounces). So it doesn't really facilitate weight loss any better.
This pasta is fine if you want to have it (and enjoy the taste), but traditional pasta is plenty healthy for you. I think many of us disagree that this is finally a "healthy pasta" when we've always had that from traditional pasta all along.
Regular pasta made with bleached enriched flour is flat out junk. It's not a complex carbohydrate and is nothing more than a "filler upper" that breaks down into SIMPLE SUGARS. This means you will not stay as satiated for as long. Hate on me if you'd like, I won't be posting anything else. I didn't come here to be talked down to or have things assumed about me.. Good luck everyone.13 -
DedDollChance wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
Little nutritional value? OP mentions increased fiber and more protein..sounds more healthy/ nutritional to me.
Regular pasta contains a decent amount of protein (for something that's not considered a tradition protein) as well as some iron, and if you get whole whear pasta, it's very high in fiber as well. Pasta is also a good source of complex carbs. Considering plain pasta is not usually a meal by itself, there are plenty of places to make the meal complete nutritionally. his pasta, while higher in fiber and protein, isn't complete nutrition on its own either.
The pasta she is mentioning has comparable calories to regular pasta (which is 190-200 calories dry for 2 ounces). So it doesn't really facilitate weight loss any better.
This pasta is fine if you want to have it (and enjoy the taste), but traditional pasta is plenty healthy for you. I think many of us disagree that this is finally a "healthy pasta" when we've always had that from traditional pasta all along.
Regular pasta made with bleached enriched flour is flat out junk. It's not a complex carbohydrate and is nothing more than a "filler upper" that breaks down into SIMPLE SUGARS. This means you will not stay as satiated for as long. Hate on me if you'd like, I won't be posting anything else. I didn't come here to be talked down to or have things assumed about me.. Good luck everyone.
It is a complex carbohydrate.
Starches are complex carbohydrates, including highly refined starches like white flour, all the way to starches in "whole food" veggies like corn or beans.
Sugars are simple carbohydrates, whether in refined white table sugar or the dreaded high fructose corn syrup, or in a nice fresh organic apple.
Other aspects of the nutrition differ among those foods, but starches are complex carbohydrates, and sugars are simple carbohydrates. It's just chemistry, not a value judgement.
All of them, soon or later, in your body, break down into simple sugars. Whether you stay satiated depends on the composition of the whole meal or snack that's eaten together, and on personal satiation factors.
I don't hate on you at all, and don't personally eat much regular wheat pasta (white or whole wheat). My personal tastes have no influence over the definitions, though.
47 -
I didn’t see anyone in the thread assuming anything, so you coming out of the blue to make a non sequitur like that makes me at least assume you’re a shill for the product.
If the stats are accurate that pasta sounds useful for me, however. I’m a diabetic and regular pasta is too many carbs for me unless I have a very small portion. That is a whopping amount of protein and fiber compared to ordinary pasta.
Looking at Amazon there seem to be two catches: reviewers think it tastes like glue, and it’s absurdly expensive.29 -
I haven't had success yet with bean pastas. I'm a fan of whole wheat pasta - I prefer the taste over regular pasta. But, with limited shelf space in stores, most styles of whole wheat have been replaced with gluten free or bean varieties. I can't find a single package of whole wheat fettuccine, wide egg noodles, or elbow macaroni anywhere (we don't use it frequently enough to purchase 6 at a time via online). Spaghetti and penne are still available everywhere, fortunately.5
-
DedDollChance wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
Little nutritional value? OP mentions increased fiber and more protein..sounds more healthy/ nutritional to me.
Regular pasta contains a decent amount of protein (for something that's not considered a tradition protein) as well as some iron, and if you get whole whear pasta, it's very high in fiber as well. Pasta is also a good source of complex carbs. Considering plain pasta is not usually a meal by itself, there are plenty of places to make the meal complete nutritionally. his pasta, while higher in fiber and protein, isn't complete nutrition on its own either.
The pasta she is mentioning has comparable calories to regular pasta (which is 190-200 calories dry for 2 ounces). So it doesn't really facilitate weight loss any better.
This pasta is fine if you want to have it (and enjoy the taste), but traditional pasta is plenty healthy for you. I think many of us disagree that this is finally a "healthy pasta" when we've always had that from traditional pasta all along.
Regular pasta made with bleached enriched flour is flat out junk. It's not a complex carbohydrate and is nothing more than a "filler upper" that breaks down into SIMPLE SUGARS. This means you will not stay as satiated for as long. Hate on me if you'd like, I won't be posting anything else. I didn't come here to be talked down to or have things assumed about me.. Good luck everyone.
I'm not hating on you, but I live in Italy, and cook pasta everyday for the family. Everyone is very healthy and thin. Nothing wrong with regular pasta. Nothing wrong with yours. I'm sorry you're not open to learning something, and many people can't spend the money for exotic pastas. So, hope you stick around. Good luck.38 -
Why bother. Eat beans and say you had pasta.14
-
lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
My first thought was, "so is it you know, just pasta?" While I don't eat pasta all that often, I have had penne with marinara and leftover chicken twice in the past week. 2oz of penne was, contrary to popular belief, more than enough for me given the addition of chicken and (good) sauce. Not a lot of fiber, I'll give you that, but it was filling none the less. Also the pasta itself was really good.
This is my approach. I usually add a bunch of veg to my sauce, whatever kind it is, and then the lean protein. Overall dish ends up with reasonable cals, plenty of protein, and also some fiber (depending on the veg I add).
I have tried some of the alternative pastas like chickpea, and some are decent, while some I have not liked, but I reject the idea that there's something wrong with regular pasta.11 -
DedDollChance wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
Little nutritional value? OP mentions increased fiber and more protein..sounds more healthy/ nutritional to me.
Regular pasta contains a decent amount of protein (for something that's not considered a tradition protein) as well as some iron, and if you get whole whear pasta, it's very high in fiber as well. Pasta is also a good source of complex carbs. Considering plain pasta is not usually a meal by itself, there are plenty of places to make the meal complete nutritionally. his pasta, while higher in fiber and protein, isn't complete nutrition on its own either.
The pasta she is mentioning has comparable calories to regular pasta (which is 190-200 calories dry for 2 ounces). So it doesn't really facilitate weight loss any better.
This pasta is fine if you want to have it (and enjoy the taste), but traditional pasta is plenty healthy for you. I think many of us disagree that this is finally a "healthy pasta" when we've always had that from traditional pasta all along.
Regular pasta made with bleached enriched flour is flat out junk. It's not a complex carbohydrate and is nothing more than a "filler upper" that breaks down into SIMPLE SUGARS. This means you will not stay as satiated for as long. Hate on me if you'd like, I won't be posting anything else. I didn't come here to be talked down to or have things assumed about me.. Good luck everyone.
I find a couple ounces of regular pasta mixed with protein, a bit of fat, and vegetables to be filling and a satisfying meal that fits well into my nutritional needs. I've experimented with alternative pastas and they don't make much of a difference when it comes to my satiety (others, of course, may have a different experience).
I disagree that it's "flat out junk." If you don't want to be talked down to, maybe don't trash a food that plenty of people enjoy eating while also meeting their goals?32 -
wilson10102018 wrote: »Why bother. Eat beans and say you had pasta.
Great point! Will be a lot cheaper, too.
I toss a can of beans into most pasta dishes (the exception being spaghetti and meatballs, because my OH would pitch a fit. I think the only beans he had growing up were baked beans.)
I also add beans to a lot of pot roast type dishes. My OH used to complain, but he must be resigned to it now.
I also added beans to Cook's Country's one pot version of Pork Tinga (it has rice instead of tostadas.)9 -
I eat soy spaghetti, but the brands I've tried, to me, are quite a bit chewier than wheat pasta. (I haven't tried Aldi's, but have eaten several others). Therefore, I personally don't care for soy pastas in quasi-Italian dishes, such as with tomato sauce. If I get to the local Aldi's, I'll try theirs, to compare.
I do enjoy soy pasta in pseudo-Asian dishes, such as with miso and veggies and seasonings. A particular favorite is mixed with veggies and a reduced-calorie peanut sauce. The base is peanut powder (like PB2 or PBFit, etc.) mixed with rice vinegar, and seasonings. A favorite variation is adding fermented chile paste to the base. Other seasoning options could include any tasty combination of minced garlic clove, fresh ginger, Szechuan peppercorns, chopped green onions, soy sauce, or (if I have the calories) a bit of toasted sesame oil.
For tomato sauce or other Italian-esque preparations, I prefer chickpea or lentil pasta, as I find the texture more similar. The protein level is still nearly twice that of wheat pasta, which is useful to me as a vegetarian. Typically, it's just chickpea flour, though sometimes there's pea protein or other unsurprising ingredients.
I do find the flavor slightly flatter than wheat pasta, so I prefer a hearty sauce. Another MFP-er suggested a sauce made by pulverizing dried mushrooms to a powder, then combining with cooked lentils and tomato sauce, plus seasonings of choice. This is really hearty and tasty, and the lentils and mushrooms add even more protein.
Another product I tried recently and liked was chickpea "rice" (really just chickpea orzo in a small size, if you ask me). It has more protein than regular rice or wheat orzo, cooks quickly, has neutral flavor, and can be used as a rice alternate.
Like others here, I see nothing wrong with wheat pasta (white or whole wheat, though I prefer the latter for flavor). If one enjoys eating it, has the calories to spend, and gets overall good nutrition, it's fine.
As a vegetarian, I usually prefer to spend those calories on higher-protein foods. Sometimes that's actual beans, sometimes it's soy or legume pasta, sometimes the legume "rice".12 -
I eat soy spaghetti, but the brands I've tried, to me, are quite a bit chewier than wheat pasta. (I haven't tried Aldi's, but have eaten several others). Therefore, I personally don't care for soy pastas in quasi-Italian dishes, such as with tomato sauce. If I get to the local Aldi's, I'll try theirs, to compare.
I do enjoy soy pasta in pseudo-Asian dishes, such as with miso and veggies and seasonings. A particular favorite is mixed with veggies and a reduced-calorie peanut sauce. The base is peanut powder (like PB2 or PBFit, etc.) mixed with rice vinegar, and seasonings. A favorite variation is adding fermented chile paste to the base. Other seasoning options could include any tasty combination of minced garlic clove, fresh ginger, Szechuan peppercorns, chopped green onions, soy sauce, or (if I have the calories) a bit of toasted sesame oil.
For tomato sauce or other Italian-esque preparations, I prefer chickpea or lentil pasta, as I find the texture more similar. The protein level is still nearly twice that of wheat pasta, which is useful to me as a vegetarian. Typically, it's just chickpea flour, though sometimes there's pea protein or other unsurprising ingredients.
I do find the flavor slightly flatter than wheat pasta, so I prefer a hearty sauce. Another MFP-er suggested a sauce made by pulverizing dried mushrooms to a powder, then combining with cooked lentils and tomato sauce, plus seasonings of choice. This is really hearty and tasty, and the lentils and mushrooms add even more protein.
Another product I tried recently and liked was chickpea "rice" (really just chickpea orzo in a small size, if you ask me). It has more protein than regular rice or wheat orzo, cooks quickly, has neutral flavor, and can be used as a rice alternate.
Like others here, I see nothing wrong with wheat pasta (white or whole wheat, though I prefer the latter for flavor). If one enjoys eating it, has the calories to spend, and gets overall good nutrition, it's fine.
As a vegetarian, I usually prefer to spend those calories on higher-protein foods. Sometimes that's actual beans, sometimes it's soy or legume pasta, sometimes the legume "rice".
I tried the chickpea "rice" recently and enjoyed it, but I agree that it's really just orzo. I'd buy it again though.2 -
I've tried the green Edamame pasta from Aldi and enjoyed it - I know they had the other choice so will have to try it based on your recommendation. I liked that I can leave out any protein source that I would include with traditional spaghetti and still feel that I got a balanced meal. I also found the texture to not be that much different!3
-
DedDollChance wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »What's unhealthy about traditional pasta?
Little nutritional value? OP mentions increased fiber and more protein..sounds more healthy/ nutritional to me.
Regular pasta contains a decent amount of protein (for something that's not considered a tradition protein) as well as some iron, and if you get whole whear pasta, it's very high in fiber as well. Pasta is also a good source of complex carbs. Considering plain pasta is not usually a meal by itself, there are plenty of places to make the meal complete nutritionally. his pasta, while higher in fiber and protein, isn't complete nutrition on its own either.
The pasta she is mentioning has comparable calories to regular pasta (which is 190-200 calories dry for 2 ounces). So it doesn't really facilitate weight loss any better.
This pasta is fine if you want to have it (and enjoy the taste), but traditional pasta is plenty healthy for you. I think many of us disagree that this is finally a "healthy pasta" when we've always had that from traditional pasta all along.
Regular pasta made with bleached enriched flour is flat out junk. It's not a complex carbohydrate and is nothing more than a "filler upper" that breaks down into SIMPLE SUGARS. This means you will not stay as satiated for as long. Hate on me if you'd like, I won't be posting anything else. I didn't come here to be talked down to or have things assumed about me.. Good luck everyone.
Traditional pasta is made with semolina. It is a staple food in places like Italy...so everyone in Italy is just eating junk then? Also, pasta is a starch...starches are complex carbohydrates. Simple carbohydrates are sugar...like fruit is namely comprised of simple carbohydrates. See how silly this demonization is?27 -
Pasta is not usually the problem, it's what we put on it that does the damage...8
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions