Regular versus instant oatmeal
Q. I have been eating instant oatmeal almost daily for a couple of years now. A friend recently told me I have been wasting my time if I thought I was eating it for nutritional reasons. Is instant oatmeal less effective than the regular stuff?
A. Actually, the nutritional differences between regular and instant or quick-cooking oatmeal are so insignificant that the Nutrient Data Laboratory for the USDA has just one analysis which applies to all three kinds of oatmeal. All three contain the same amount of fiber and the same amount of cholesterol-lowering compounds.
The biggest difference is in taste and texture. Regular oatmeal contains larger pieces of rolled oat grains and is a little chewier than the instant and quick-cooking varieties. (Ironically, it really doesn't take much longer to cook regular oatmeal than it does to make instant.)
Of course, I'm only talking about plain oatmeal. If the instant oatmeal that you're eating is flavored, then you're also getting a big helping of sugar with your oats. While that doesn't take anything away from the oatmeal, it may add undesirable (empty) calories. Also the little packets of instant oatmeal usually contain a slightly smaller serving than the standard serving of regular oatmeal--so you're getting a slightly smaller helping of fiber.
But rest assured that a serving of plain instant oatmeal is just as nutritious as the same amount of plain regular oatmeal.
 older posts |
home | newer posts  |
| Being a carb-counting vegan is a tough job | | Nutrition Data Blog | | Manufacturers replacing high fructose corn syrup with sugar. Big deal. |
Posted by: Evelyn | Aug 4, 2009 12:01:02 PM
Is there any type of unsweetened oatmeal that I can put in a bowl, add fruit and milk and eat--no cooking, no overnight.....I don't need sweeteners.
Thanks
Posted by: Trisha | Jul 14, 2009 9:43:49 AM
Nick, even if you are not yet seeing the results on the outside, you can be certain that there are significant changes happening on the inside! Your body is rebuilding itself from some of the best foods the world has to offer. Be patient and kind to yourself. You will see results! I would reiterate Pablo, trying bumping up your caloric intake just a little bit. You'll feel better and your body won't think you're starving.
As for the alcohol, the research shows that 1-2 servings per day for men can reduce the incidence of heart failure and stroke, so if you are enjoying your vodka and not taking it to excess, bottoms up!
Posted by: Jim Coates | Jul 13, 2009 6:34:55 PM
Although I don't have a valid source for this factoid, I learned years ago to avoid adding white sugar to oats because it literally negates or neutralizes the nutritional value of oats. Monica's statement: "While that ["a big helping of sugar"] doesn't take anything away from the oatmeal,..." encourages me to research.
Posted by: Jessica | Jul 13, 2009 5:14:04 PM
I don't see steel cut oats listed in the Nutrition Data database, or else I'm not seeing it. Are they listed?
Posted by: Dale T Mericle | Jul 13, 2009 3:54:37 PM
I have my most concern about the salt (Na) in the processed stuff. It is all in the nutrition labels.
Posted by: Anna | Jul 13, 2009 1:28:29 PM
I think the main difference between the instant and regular oatmeal is the taste. Slow (not very, though!)cooking seems to bring up more flavor. If you are looking for something more filling I recommend buckwheat porridge. Its GL is lower than that of oats. Read here:
http://yourfoodcoach.blogspot.com/2009/05/from-russia-with-love.html
Anna
whatsinyourbasket.blogspot.com
Posted by: Pablo | Jul 13, 2009 1:28:22 PM
Nick,
You may actually be eating too few calories and keeping your body in starvation mode.
I lost 70 lbs. gradually over a period of about 3 years taking in around 2,000 calories a day with exercise.
Posted by: moi meme | Jul 13, 2009 12:31:29 PM
Hello everyone! Thanks for sharing recipes and great info. Good group! :D
I want to encourage you, NickAdamsi, to keep on doing good things for your body. In the long run, it has to make a difference for the better! Also, Nick, maybe think about going vegetarian, or at least giving it a try. My experience has been similar to yours: that after a certain age, it didn't matter what I did or didn't do to lose weight - it wouldn't come off; finally I started eating a basically vegan diet (no meat, fish or poultry, no dairy), and dropped 35 pounds in two months. I still have a long way to go, but I'm so glad to have gotten this far, and am encouraged to continue. You might want to consider abstaining from all alcohol (at least for a while). I don't even take the occasional glass of wine anymore, but may at some point in the future. And one other thing - I've been taking about 4,000 mg. of CLA each day. Conjugated linoleic acid (hope that's the right spelling) helps convert fat, but it's a very gradual process, so I will probably be on it for a loooong time! :D
Hoping this is helpful to you. Blessings!
Posted by: Leah | Jul 2, 2009 10:42:11 AM
Hi there everyone!
I am with McCann's Irish Oatmeal, and I happened across this blog. As a fellow oatmeal lover I am excited to see such interest in oats!
If anyone is interested in quick cooking tips (for steel cuts) or would like some great recipes (I suggest the health muffin!) take a look at our website. www.mccanns.ie
Also, keep your eye open for our facebook page that should be launched within the month!
Leah
Posted by: NickAdamsi | Jun 25, 2009 4:23:07 PM
I really need your help. I'm a 61 year
old male, 5-11", who's ballooned to 260 pounds,
mainly from lack of exercise and eating all the
wrong foods.
For the past 50 days, I have been extremely
diligent about watching calories, eating nothing
white whatsoever, no oils (except some olive oil),
no sweets at all. I am trying to keep my calorie
intake under 1200 a day, eating only whole grain
products, salmon, canned tuna in water, fresh raw
spinach, no-fat dressing, tomatoes, blueberries,
2-4 cups of green tea a day, oatmeal, an
occasional egg, a cup or two of 1% milk, 1-2
ounces of vodka a day...NOTHING bad! I am taking
one Turmeric capsule (600 mg/day).
For the past 50 days, every day, I've been
walking between 4-5 miles every morning at a pace
of about 4 miles/hour, sometimes adding a jog of
1/2 - 1 mile.
My problem is this: I am not seeing hardly ANY
improvement in my body shape. Old clothes still
don't fit, etc.
I'm beginning to get really discouraged after
all my physical and dietary work. Am I expecting
too much after 50 days? Your help would be so
greatly appreciated!
Thanks, Nick
Gender: M
Age: 60-64
Interests: Interests: insomnia, weight loss,
natural health, natural weight loss
Posted by: Carl | Jun 24, 2009 1:39:40 PM
I love cold oats made swiss style better then the hot sticky ones. Got off Zonya dot com's recipies page. I do it this way (makes 2 serverings):
1.50 cup rolled oats
1.25 cup milk (skim)
3.00 tsp honey (or to taste)
1.00 tsp cinnamon (or to taste)
Mix and put in fridge overnight.
In the morning add 7 walnut halves and slice 1 banana into each serving.
Posted by: Tom Wilber | Jun 24, 2009 12:36:38 PM
If you look at the NuVal website you will see that regular versus instant oatmeal have scores.
McCann's Steel Cut Irish Oatmeal 91
Quaker Instant Oatmeal Original 39
Quaker Instant Oatmeal Weight Control Cinnamon 30
Monica's Response: Steel Cut Oats (which are chopped, not rolled flakes) aren't the same as the "regular" oatmeal we're discussing (so far) in this thread.
The Weight Control oatmeal contains a number of added ingredients (protein isolate, polydextrose, oat flour, etc.) and artificial sweeteners in addition to rolled oat flakes.
So the only listing in the Nuval comparison that applies to this discussion about the differences between plain, rolled oat products (regular, quick, and instant) is the one for instant oatmeal.
Posted by: Taylor Ryan | Jun 23, 2009 9:32:04 PM
I love oatmeal... my favorite thing to make is flourless-oatmeal pancakes from oatmeal, some vanilla, 2 egg whites and 1 tsp of peanut butter... they taste awesome and i get a great dose of protein and complex carbs and fiber to start the day.
Posted by: fat preacher | Jun 23, 2009 6:52:46 PM
As long as we're on the subject of oats. . . I like to eat my regular rolled oats raw. I add some raisins, cinnamon and non fat milk, let them soak for about five minutes (sometimes less) and then eat!
Will I still get the same benefits from eating them this way as I would if I cooked them first?
Monica's Response: You'll still get all the fiber and beta-glucans thought to be responsible for oatmeal's ability to regulate cholesterol. Uncooked oats may have a slightly higher glycemic impact. I wouldn't worry about it though.
Posted by: Tigger | Jun 23, 2009 6:43:41 PM
Monica,
Are we talking about a difference between regular oats and quick oats? Are quick oats the same thing as instant oatmeal? I am finding conflicting info on the web.
Monica's Response: We're talking about 3 different kinds of oatmeal: rolled oats (regular), quick-cooking, and instant. The difference between quick-cooking and instant is explained in my comment above.
Posted by: Tom Wilber | Jun 23, 2009 6:39:22 PM
An easy way to compare these products is to look at the NuVal score.
http://www.nuval.com/pages/ScoreCereal.aspx
Monica's Response: Actually the Nuval system (like the similar ND Rating, here on NutritionData.com) doesn't distinguish between regular, quick-cooking, and instant oatmeals. It only lists instant oatmeal (and several flavored brands).
Posted by: Colin | Jun 23, 2009 5:42:23 PM
Don't forget steel-cut oats and oat groats - these have marginally more fiber than rolled oats and take longer to digest (and a lot longer to cook). I like to pre-cook steel-cut oats, vacuum-seal them in boil-in bags, and then take them camping. Warm them up and eat them in the morning and they'll slowly release carbs into your system all day.
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Jun 23, 2009 4:15:12 PM
Tigger,
Whole oat grains are steamed and then run through a roller to make rolled oats (regular oats). To make quick-cooking oats, the oat grains are cut into pieces, then steamed and rolled. Instant oats are rolled oats that have been fully cooked, then dehydrated.
The GI data produced by the University of Sydney are a little hard to apply to the rolled oats we buy here in the U.S. but I'm not sure how helpful the Sydney data is anyway. As is often the case with GI testing, regular rolled oats might have a GI of 42 in one test and 73 in another.
To the extent that one can extrapolate from a very poorly matched (and internally inconsistent) data set, it appears that the GI of instant or quick oats is a bit higher than that of regular oats and that uncooked regular oats is somewhat higher still. Of course, this only applies if you are eating the oats with no other foods, as other foods will dramatically impact the speed of digestion.
Posted by: tigger | Jun 23, 2009 3:38:14 PM
RB, do you mind educating us on what the difference in GI is? And also, could you explain why this is? What is the actual difference between regular and quick oats?
Posted by: RB | Jun 23, 2009 12:42:07 PM
Maybe no difference in nutrition, but certainly a difference in glycemic index/load.
Posted by: Missy | Jun 23, 2009 12:04:43 PM
Was wondering the same thing myself, great to see a comparison and that they're both similar in nutrition.
Thx! Will blog it.
Missy
The Groovy Vegetarian
http://www.groovyvegetarian.com
