Thread: Question about Oatmeal...

if it is the original oats then it is not instant oatmeal. It sounds like you have the right stuff.

If you over cook the oatmeal, would it turn out bad for you?

does it say old fashioned or large flake on it? if not.... are the peices "full" looking and not choppy? (thats the minute oats).

What's wrong with the minute oats? I have them every morning. Either minute oats, or the flavoured oatmeal that comes in a package.

Originally Posted by jaim91

What's wrong with the minute oats? I have them every morning. Either minute oats, or the flavoured oatmeal that comes in a package.

minute oats are processed and broken down. Flavoured oats are not only proccessed but they are full of SUGAR!!

so the quaker 1 minute oats are not good?

Originally Posted by sara

If you over cook the oatmeal, would it turn out bad for you?

I dont even cook it. I just eat it dry while drinking a glass of water.... am I weird?

I dont know how you guys can eat oatmeal all the time... it just seems like a hassle. With rice you can just cook up a bunch and leave it in the fridge. Oats you have to cook right when you want it. :/

Originally Posted by Monolith

I dont know how you guys can eat oatmeal all the time... it just seems like a hassle. With rice you can just cook up a bunch and leave it in the fridge. Oats you have to cook right when you want it. :/

not if you eat it dry.

Eh... i dunno. I use pinhead oatmeal usually. That stuff is just about impossible to eat unless its cooked. It's literally the consistency of little pebbles when its uncooked. I dont even think itd be digestable...

Originally Posted by Luke9583

I dont even cook it. I just eat it dry while drinking a glass of water.... am I weird?

cooked oats have more flavor than dry oats
I blend oats with my PWO shake all the time

Originally Posted by sara

cooked oats have more flavor than dry oats
I blend oats with my PWO shake all the time

Err... that just makes it into a high GI shake.

Originally Posted by Monolith

Err... that just makes it into a high GI shake.

Do you have a data that supports it?

Well, by blending the oats, youre essentially "refining" them further. Youre creating a much larger surface area than there would be if you ate the oats whole... meaning faster absorption in the intestines.

EDIT:

An Examination of the Possibility of Lowering the Glycemic Index of Oat and Barley Flakes by Minimal Processing
Yvonne Granfeldt1, Ann-Charlott Eliasson* and Inger Björck

Departments of Applied Nutrition and Food Chemistry, and * Food Engineering, Chemical Centre, University of Lund, S-221 00 Lund, Sweden

Differences in glycemic responses to various starchy foods are related to differences in the rate of starch digestion and absorption. In this study, the importance of the degree of gelatinization and the product thickness for postprandial glycemic and insulinemic responses to rolled oats and barley were studied in healthy subjects (5 men and 5 women). Thick (1.0 mm) rolled oats were made from raw or preheated (roasted or steamed) kernels. In addition, thin (0.5 mm) rolled oats were made from roasted or roasted and steamed (processed under conditions simulating commercial production) oat kernels. Finally, steamed rolled barley kernels (0.5 or 1.0 mm) were prepared. All thin flakes elicited high glucose and insulin responses [glycemic index (GI), 88–118; insulinemic index (II), 84–102], not significantly different from white wheat bread (P > 0.05). In contrast, all varieties of thick oat flakes gave significantly lower metabolic responses (GI, 70–78; II, 58–77) than the reference bread (P < 0.05). Thick barley flakes, however, gave high glucose and insulin responses (GI, 94; II, 84), probably because the botanical structure underwent more destruction than the corresponding oat flakes. We conclude that minimal processing of oat and barley flakes had a relatively minor effect on GI features compared with the more extensive commercial processing. One exception was thick oat flakes, which in contrast to the corresponding barley flakes, had a low GI.

Originally Posted by sara

cooked oats have more flavor than dry oats
I blend oats with my PWO shake all the time

I actually perfer it dry.... (quaker oaks)

It might be higher in GI, but it's better than having Processed carbs for PWO

Originally Posted by Monolith

I dont know how you guys can eat oatmeal all the time... it just seems like a hassle. With rice you can just cook up a bunch and leave it in the fridge. Oats you have to cook right when you want it. :/

i usually cook my oatmeal the night before and throw it in the fridge, flavors come out, especially if you put some blueberris in it or something, also it taste good cold too

Wow big hassle. It takes 3 minutes in the microwave

3 minutes is how long is takes to cook the normal oatmeal? Then what's the diff. between the 3 minute stuff and the 1 minute stuff?

Originally Posted by jaim91

what's the diff. between the 3 minute stuff and the 1 minute stuff?

2 minutes

Yeah, definitely stay away from the "white death" oatmeal (i.e., flavored in packets).

Originally Posted by jaim91

3 minutes is how long is takes to cook the normal oatmeal? Then what's the diff. between the 3 minute stuff and the 1 minute stuff?

The gi is lower in the old fashioned oats.

i dont bother cooking oats anymore. I simply throw in a cup of dry oats + a cup of milk into a blender... blend for 15-20 seconds. Makes a thick but slightly grainy shake.. that can be done and drunk in < 5 mins..for flavour throw in a handful of blueberries, or a tbsp of PB or even a tbsp or two or maple syrup!!

Originally Posted by Monolith

Well, by blending the oats, youre essentially "refining" them further. Youre creating a much larger surface area than there would be if you ate the oats whole...

So, don't chew them up either?

Don't forget that if they are blended in a shake, they have not softened to the extent that they would if they were cooked. Your stomach churning about can smush and liquefy a cooked oat faster than a small piece of a raw one. Think of how easy it is to destroy a cooked oat between your fingers, then try the same with a raw one. A gooey moving mass in your gut will allow faster absorption than small raw flakes floating around I believe.

In a blender it is most likely that the oat will be cut across the long wide face, which would only increase surface area by maybe 5%, because you are only adding two new small edges. If somehow most of the oats happened to be sliced thinner along the plane of the long wide face like with a deli meat shaver, I could see your argument might be worth concern.

Originally Posted by BlueX_v1

So, don't chew them up either?

Don't forget that if they are blended in a shake, they have not softened to the extent that they would if they were cooked. Your stomach churning about can smush and liquefy a cooked oat faster than a small piece of a raw one. Think of how easy it is to destroy a cooked oat between your fingers, then try the same with a raw one. A gooey moving mass in your gut will allow faster absorption than small raw flakes floating around I believe.

In a blender it is most likely that the oat will be cut across the long wide face, which would only increase surface area by maybe 5%, because you are only adding two new small edges. If somehow most of the oats happened to be sliced thinner along the plane of the long wide face like with a deli meat shaver, I could see your argument might be worth concern.

While your post is overflowing with such orgasms of intellectual delight as "smush" and "gooey moving mass," im going to have to disagree.

When i cook oats, i add water and microwave them. That turns them into what can be best described as paste. Now, last i heard, you really cant chew paste. I have no doubt that youve tried very hard to do so, but it just really doesnt work. Also, I'm not sure what kind of blender you have, but i have no idea how a blender could know to cut each oat only once and only down its length. Putting oats in a blender creates a powder, which is what makes it possible to drink oats in a fucking glass. Now if youre using this magic blender that only separates oats into little hemispheres, your argument could have some merit. But then again, you'd be arguing about something no one is even talking about - regular oats.

Now, i just went through all that because i was bored, basically... because all i should have really had to do is quote this, again:

Originally Posted by Monolith

An Examination of the Possibility of Lowering the Glycemic Index of Oat and Barley Flakes by Minimal Processing
Yvonne Granfeldt1, Ann-Charlott Eliasson* and Inger Björck

Departments of Applied Nutrition and Food Chemistry, and * Food Engineering, Chemical Centre, University of Lund, S-221 00 Lund, Sweden

Differences in glycemic responses to various starchy foods are related to differences in the rate of starch digestion and absorption. In this study, the importance of the degree of gelatinization and the product thickness for postprandial glycemic and insulinemic responses to rolled oats and barley were studied in healthy subjects (5 men and 5 women). Thick (1.0 mm) rolled oats were made from raw or preheated (roasted or steamed) kernels. In addition, thin (0.5 mm) rolled oats were made from roasted or roasted and steamed (processed under conditions simulating commercial production) oat kernels. Finally, steamed rolled barley kernels (0.5 or 1.0 mm) were prepared. All thin flakes elicited high glucose and insulin responses [glycemic index (GI), 88–118; insulinemic index (II), 84–102], not significantly different from white wheat bread (P > 0.05). In contrast, all varieties of thick oat flakes gave significantly lower metabolic responses (GI, 70–78; II, 58–77) than the reference bread (P < 0.05). Thick barley flakes, however, gave high glucose and insulin responses (GI, 94; II, 84), probably because the botanical structure underwent more destruction than the corresponding oat flakes. We conclude that minimal processing of oat and barley flakes had a relatively minor effect on GI features compared with the more extensive commercial processing. One exception was thick oat flakes, which in contrast to the corresponding barley flakes, had a low GI.

If you feel like continuing the argument, im sure the University of Lund would love to hear from you.

Originally Posted by Monolith

Also, I'm not sure what kind of blender you have, but i have no idea how a blender could know to cut each oat only once and only down its length. Putting oats in a blender creates a powder, which is what makes it possible to drink oats in a fucking glass. Now if youre using this magic blender that only separates oats into little hemispheres, your argument could have some merit. But then again, you'd be arguing about something no one is even talking about - regular oats.

Where can i get one of these magic blenders? are they expensive?

lol...thanks Luke...but really. Why are they so different?

Never mind...Jodi answered my question. Thanks