Hacker News Reader

Comment by scythe | Hacker News Reader

Quinoa, famous for protein and fiber content, still contains less protein and fiber than, say, oatmeal. It's okay - hyperventilating paleo bloggers have raised concerns about saponins -- but the whole "superfood" frenzy about quinoa is just a tad off base. It's okay, not bad for you, probably better than white rice or processed food, but most of what quinoa has going for it is simply that it is real and unmodified. If it "took over the world", it would be sweetened, boiled, extracted, and fried into chips with none of the nutritional benefits people are seeking therefrom anyway.

View on HN

Oatmeal is very dense. Calorie for Calorie Quinoa has more protein and dietary fiber than oatmeal.

100 calories of Quinoa

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=83+g+quinoa

100 calories of Oatmeal

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=26+g+oatmeal

However if you look at the vitamins, oatmeal wins.

I also wouldn't call Quinoa a super food, but it does fill a gap left by other grains and is definitely a worthy addition to a healthy balanced diet.

Side-by-side comparison: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=26+g+oatmeal+vs+83g+qui...

The vitamins is probably missing data-- Vitamin C is biochemically critical, so a plant would have some amount of it.

I checked, all the sources I found for it list 0.00mg of Vit C for any amount of Quinoa and .50mcg of Vitamin A per 100g.

Maybe I'm going cross eyed from a long day, but looking at that result... how can Quaker oatmeal have 2g of protein and be 5% USRDA, while quinoa has 4g of protein yet 7% USRDA? Shouldn't that be 10% USRDA for quinoa?

Rounding. The RDA is 50 grams. So oatmeal's 2g is closer to 2.5g and quinoa's 4g is closer to 3.5g. At least that'd be my guess.

Probably rounding issues, maybe intentional. Food vendors are known to fudge numbers in the low digits, legally, which result in problems like this when you extrapolate.

The source you really want to use for nutrition information is the USDA National Nutrient Database.

See http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/6359?fg=&man=&lfacet=... and http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/1866

These graphs are based on usda data:

http://food.vegtalk.org/nutrients/cereals/protein.html

It shows that some products, like wheat durum are richer in proteins but with the almost the same amount of calories.

100 calories of oatmeal is 26g. 100g of quinoa is 83g. Research [0] shows that portion size is important in controlling obesity.

[0] http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/76/6/1207.full (note - this was just a quick google, I'm no expert in this area)

Unfortunately WolframAlpha is a little off on this one. It shows data for cooked quinoa which is very misguiding.

The "correct" macronutrient values with some comparisons:

Quinoa: 368kcal / Protein 14g / Fat 6g / Carbs 64g

Oats: 379/13/6/67

Regular pasta: 360/12/1/72

Couscous: 361/13/1/72

  "Quinoa is a low-calorie, gluten-free, high-protein grain that tastes great." says the author.

It's low-calorie compared to butter maybe, and high-protein compared with a cucumber. But compared with the usual suspect of dinner alternatives like pasta or couscous it's just the same. Just by looking at the macros, there's no need to buy quinoa, especially if it's more expensive than other options. This is of course disregarding that it's gluten free and not looking at the micronutrients.

Quinoa is low calorie in the sense that it has fewer calories per gram of total mass (see several siblings to your comment).

"Probably better than processed food" ?

It's gluten free, which is important for some people (a lot if you buy into wheat belly). It's another source of a complete protein, which is important for vegans.

Not all popular health foods get converted into crap. There might be unhealthy variants of these, but fruits, vegetables, legumes, fish and soy tend to be popular and healthy. I'd even say that processed foods which are based on these, like french fries, are better than those based on sugar (like a chocolate bar).

It's about perspective. In a world where people eat fabricated sugars and fat, you're doing a disservice to it. It is, categorically, healthy.

French fries are a disaster. Higher glycemic index than, say, simply eating sugar (far worse than chocolate).

http://www.diabetesnet.com/food-diabetes/glycemic-index

Re: french fries

I'm afraid you've forgotten about what is, likely, the most critical piece of dietary advice in the past 30 years. Specifically, that unnatural trans-isomer fatty acids should never be consumed. Glutens, saponins, oligosaccharides etc are irritants; elaidic acid is basically toxic. Unfortunately, while some stable non-hydrogenated oils like palm oil have become popular, it seems that popular opinion at large generally forgot trans fats existed after 2009. They still exist and they're still really bad for you. So don't eat french fries, is what I'm saying. Or other deep-fried things from restaurants that haven't eliminated hydrogenated oils from their cooking. In-N-Out is ahead of the curve on this. Five Guys is as well.

>"Probably better than processed food"

Originally that sentence just said "probably better than rice", and was modified until it sounded silly...

> It's gluten free, which is important for some people (a lot if you buy into wheat belly).

Gluten is most likely not the problem for most people with digestive problems, although there is a strong belief that gluten is bad.

The most likely reason why many people have problems digesting wheat, is because it contains fructans. Nobody can digest it, but it causes more problems for some than for others, e.g. if you have IBS (which about 1 in 7 people has). Spelt, an ancient variety of wheat, also contains gluten, but has low levels of fructans, and is thus more easily digested.

There is a pretty well-researched diet for people with IBS, called the Low FODMAP (Fermentable Oligosaccharides, Disaccharides, Monosaccharides, and Polyols) diet. It tries to reduce the amount of complex carbohydrates (which are not easily digestible) from the diet to a level where they do not cause digestive problems.

Unfortunately, it is not widely known yet, so a lot of people buy into all kinds of wishful thinking (that often comes with a price tag).

"Not all popular health foods get converted into crap."

Have you seen kale chips and vegetable chips? Apparently the only way to convince people to eat their vegetables is to fry it and add a bunch of salt.

I agree with the parent, if quinoa actually became popular, the food industry will figure out a way to fuck it up.

Would you use Oatmeal in place of rice though? I couldn't picture a healthy curry or stir-fry that used Oatmeal instead of Quinoa in place of rice, could you?

Good question. I've never thought about why there aren't more savory foods out there that use oatmeal. Seems like all the oatmeal-based foods I've seen are sweet.

Don't the Scots eat their oats salted?

This Englishman too. Sweetened oat porridge is for children :)

Traditionally yes, and oatcakes are pretty common here as well. Bulk produced oatcakes are sometimes sweetened and rather compressed, proper oatcakes aren't sweetened and have a much rougher texture.

This looks like an interesting way to have oats in a savory way - http://www.101cookbooks.com/archives/miso-oat-porridge-recip...

Oatmeal prepared with soy sauce and green onions is awesome. It's a bit like a savory congee.

Rolled oats at least get very mushy when they are edible. They have no body like most other grains do.

I suppose that's because they are rolled. And most likely steamed as well. If you subjected wheat or corn to a similar processing, the outcome would certainly be the same.

Whole-grain oats on the other hand are pretty hardy things. You need to boil them for an hour and then chew like a horse.

Oatmeal with bacon crumbled in is delicious.

I've fairly often eaten oatmeal with chili, and curry wouldn't be bad, probably.

I have had oatmeal (steel cut) prepared as risotto. It was delicious.

There's a Heston Blumenthal recipe for quinoa sushi.

Surprisingly down to earth and insightful.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com