Hobie-wan wrote:Anyone else find the serving sizes ridiculous on cereal? If I'm making a meal out of cereal that's all I eat. Admittedly I'll eat it for any meal, I'm not picky about eating a food at the 'right' time. Each bowl worth is probably 2-3 servings and I might eat anywhere from 1 to 3 normally. I think I ate more than half a (decent sized) box of cereal once that I was really hungry.
Yes, so true!
Come on, half a cup of cereal per serving? That's like 3 spoonfuls. (with half a cup of skim milk to boot. I figure if you're using skim milk you should just take the plunge and switch to water)
I typically have two full bowls when I'm having cereal, and while it doesn't have to be that, anything less than one full bowl just seems pointless.
GameSack wrote:That's right, only Sega had the skill to make a proper Nintendo game.
Hobie-wan wrote:Anyone else find the serving sizes ridiculous on cereal? If I'm making a meal out of cereal that's all I eat. Admittedly I'll eat it for any meal, I'm not picky about eating a food at the 'right' time. Each bowl worth is probably 2-3 servings and I might eat anywhere from 1 to 3 normally. I think I ate more than half a (decent sized) box of cereal once that I was really hungry.
Yes, so true!
Come on, half a cup of cereal per serving? That's like 3 spoonfuls. (with half a cup of skim milk to boot. I figure if you're using skim milk you should just take the plunge and switch to water)
I typically have two full bowls when I'm having cereal, and while it doesn't have to be that, anything less than one full bowl just seems pointless.
That's at least partly because they have to be able to claim that the cereal is "part of this balanced breakfast," where they show a tiny serving of cereal along with milk, orange juice, fresh fruit, and whole wheat toast in a meal nobody would really eat. I mean, the stuff has very little in the way of real nutritional value, and is pretty much just junk food.
For a lot of the more healthy cereals, the serving sizes are a lot closer to being reasonable. For example, when I eat Shredded Wheat, I usually stop after two biscuits because it actually has fiber.
Limewater wrote:I mean, the stuff has very little in the way of real nutritional value, and is pretty much just junk food.
What? Even with overly sugary cereals, the side of the box still has them packed to the gills with various vitamins and minerals. There's still a lot of unhealthy sugar, sure, but it's still doing you a lot better than eating a Hersey's Bar every morning.
I'm known as ZebetiteGlitch or Zeza Von Thantos on other platforms.
Limewater wrote:I mean, the stuff has very little in the way of real nutritional value, and is pretty much just junk food.
What? Even with overly sugary cereals, the side of the box still has them packed to the gills with various vitamins and minerals. There's still a lot of unhealthy sugar, sure, but it's still doing you a lot better than eating a Hersey's Bar every morning.
Limewater wrote:I mean, the stuff has very little in the way of real nutritional value, and is pretty much just junk food.
What? Even with overly sugary cereals, the side of the box still has them packed to the gills with various vitamins and minerals. There's still a lot of unhealthy sugar, sure, but it's still doing you a lot better than eating a Hersey's Bar every morning.
In response to this, I looked up the nutritional information for Post Fruity Pebbles, your number one pick. Among other things, it weighs in with a whopping one gram of protein, and zero grams of fiber. Beyond that, it does have some added vitamins and minerals, but I would hardly describe it as "packed to the gills." It may beat a Hershey Bar on Folic Acid content, but a Hershey bar actually has more fiber and protein than a serving of Fruity Pebbles. Anyway, lots of candies include some quantities of vitamins and/or minerals.
