Steel Cut vs Rolled Oats
Theo166
Posts: 2,564 Member
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
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
1
Replies
-
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..1
-
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?
3 -
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.
0 -
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 .
Since a gram of sugar is 4 calories, can't explain the difference of 20 calories,0 -
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 .
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.3 -
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.1
-
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.
2 -
Price drives me, I'll stick with rolled6
-
McCann steel cut Oatmeal. Yummy and so good. I presume cook them as at 7500' they took too long.0
-
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?0 -
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.0 -
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.0
-
Texture. FIFY.
I keep both around as I am a variety girl. I also enjoy large flake got at the Bulk Barn.2 -
Gallowmere1984 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 maybe1 -
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.0
-
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.0 -
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.1
-
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.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.
0 -
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 .
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
2 -
I think the steel cut makes me feel fuller longer. I make a three day batch, proportion and heat in the microwave. Easy!1
-
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?
Southwest Colorado in the San Juan Mountains.0 -
I prefer the steel-cut oats because the texture is so awesome. I even use them in oatmeal cookies.0
-
googled the area, very pretty.markrgeary1 wrote: »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?
Southwest Colorado in the San Juan Mountains.
Growing up, I lived in Wy. Those elevations really mess with baking.
1 -
FYI although nutritionally the same, larger rolled oats are shown to keep you fuller for longer than instant oats which are a finer texture so that they cook quicker.1
-
There's hardly any difference nutritionally. I do eat steel cut because I can get a giant bag from Costco for cheap and they take 7 minutes to cook on the stove. And I like them!0
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »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.
The time is definitely a factor. I make my steel cut oats on Sunday and pour them into a loaf pan to store in the fridge. I make 4 servings at a time so I can cut it into 4 slices and reheat one each morning. I never cook rolled oats (use them in overnight oats or just stir them into yogurt right before eating.)0 -
My mom turned me off any sort of cooked oatmeal. I get either instant/quick oats or rolled oats. I can pour boiled water on a serving of either and be done in 2 minutes. I can also control how wet/dry they are (I prefer drier; thanks Mom).
I compared the nutritional info of steel-cut, rolled, and quick oats and there wasn't much difference other than how much of the oat is still attached. Go with whichever you like the taste and texture of.0 -
-
I cook my Steel oats in batches of 10 and freeze them in portion sizes with milk, walnuts and cinnamon already blended in. Heats up quick for grab and go convenience, adding a fruit upon heating
if time is the issue perhaps this will help. 0 -
halizabeth wrote: »I cook my Steel oats in batches of 10 and freeze them in portion sizes with milk, walnuts and cinnamon already blended in. Heats up quick for grab and go convenience, adding a fruit upon heating if time is the issue perhaps this will help.
When I am *into* steel-cut oats, I also make a big batch with cinnamon and vanilla and whatever, already in it. I don't freeze mine though - I make enough for a week, and scoop it out into a take-to-work container, each morning.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions