Friday, December 7, 2012

Food Reward Friday

This week's "winner"... Kellogg's Krave cereal!

Kellogg's Krave is a breakfast cereal with a crunchy outer shell and a chocolate-flavored filling.  An impressive 37 percent of its calories come from refined sugar.  Don't worry about feeding it to your kids though; it's also made from whole grains.

This cereal is aptly named-- I like how they don't beat around the bush.  I wonder what John Harvey Kellogg would think of it if he were still alive?

I think a good general rule is to avoid products that involve misspelled words.


Donna said...

What do you make of the Kellogg's added protein cereal bars? Also known as "A meal"...

Peter said...

Hey Stephen,

just wanted to say you are doing a good job by illustrating that in fact most of the calories which many associate with "carbs" actually comes from fat, hence dramatically increasing the overall caloric intake.

BTW, did you noticed study of the year which is likely to cause massive shock to the dietary confusionists out there.

High-quality meta-analysis consisting of 33 randomized controlled trials and 10 cohort studies around the world finds that low-fat diet result in modest but very significant and consistent weigh-loss in the absence of attempt to loose weight. Favourable effect on cholesterol and blood-pressure observed. Lower the fat intake, more weight-losss. The authors report: "GRADE assessment suggested high quality evidence for the relation between total fat intake and body weight in adults". Dietary recommendation emphasizing reduced fat intake highly recommended on a population-wide basis.

Not the best day for Taubes and the Harvard crew.

Stay away from those saturated fats folks, as the lead author of the study concluded to the press:

"...cutting down on saturated fat reduces our risk of heart disease and strokes, so the healthiest way to cut down on fat is to cut down on saturated fats.

The spindoctors and cholesterol denialists will find every excuse to dissmiss this study, but no need to worry. We have an eye on them and we make sure a high-quality second option is always available for everyone who is interested in hearing one

Forks Over Knives and Healthy Longevity: A Missed Opportunity for the Cholesterol Skeptics

Peter said...

Ups...I forgot to add: this new-meta analysis was not brought to you by the Kellog company, but was in fact comissioned by the WHO.

Sol Orwell said...

I swear Stephen, you are only posting links to foods I love and do eat!

Cameo said...

Avoid foods with misspelled words is excellent advice!

Lindsay said...

There are so many options for Food Reward Friday in the cereal aisle!! I love this series. So many mind-boggling foods.

Alana in Canada said...


It is practically a parody of itself. Mr. Kellog is turning in his grave.

Ben Kennedy said...

The best part is the goopy chocolate font

CarbSane said...

I'm with Alana. I thought that had to be a joke!

Dr. Curmudgeon Gee said...


i probably could eat a ton of those!

Unknown said...

The why do breakfast cereals universally protect against obesity if they are so rewarding?

Blogger said...


הורדות said...

Really nice article!
Check out my health blog for information about health, information, protein, and fitness.

Anonymous said...

I was caught in a weak moment on my way home from work - I was hungry and the bakery right outside my office building sells tasty raisin scones. But I decided to resist, and instead I crossed the street and got a bag of artisan spiced nuts, figuring I would have just one serving and get lots of protein while quelling my hunger. Well, it turns out that the nuts were so damn tasty that I ate the whole bag! Horrors. I guess I should have had the tea biscuit - it would have been half the calories, ironically. Sometimes rewarding food comes in deceptively healthy-seeming packages.

Alex said...

"illustrating that in fact most of the calories which many associate with "carbs" actually comes from fat"

Yes, the 3.5 grams of fat per 120 calorie serving of Kellogg's Krave truly does show how drippingly greasy that fatty, unctuous cereal really is.

Catt said...

I just tried this cereal when my friend was eating it dry as a snack! Its card-boardy; kinda musty. It reminded me of something that had been around mothballs.

Makes me wonder if milk/fluid makes things more palatable, because on its own this cereal tasted horrid.

Paul N said...

this Peter character wrote

"Stay away from those saturated fats folks, as the lead author of the study concluded to the press:

"...cutting down on saturated fat reduces our risk of heart disease and strokes, so the healthiest way to cut down on fat is to cut down on saturated fats.

It's too bad nobody told that to the people of Tokelau, as discussed by Stephan in these eleven posts:

"Over the time period in question, Tokelauans obtained roughly half their calories from coconut, placing them among the most extreme consumers of saturated fat in the world. Not only was their blood cholesterol lower than the average Westerner, but their hypertension rate was low, and physicians found no trace of previous heart attacks by ECG (age-adjusted rates: 0.0% in Tokelau vs 3.5% in Tecumseh USA). Migrating to New Zealand and cutting saturated fat intake in half was associated with a rise in ECG signs of heart attack (1.0% age-adjusted) (2, 3).

Yep, those *lethal* saturated fats...

I think I'll take Stephans advice over Peter's anyday...

Peter said...


second opinion of the Tokelaun story is provided by PrimitiveNutrion. Somewhat different story to that of Taubes or Guyenet :)

Running a Cholesterol Confusionist Gauntlet, Part 5 --The Tokelauns, the Samburu, and the Masai

Pay attention that Tokelauns actually had relatively low cholesterol levels but suffered from wide-spead obesity from their high-fat diet exactly as the new study I cited suggests. In case you do not trust the solid science around the relationship of saturated fats and dietary cholesterol to serum cholesterol, you can always experiment on yourself: eat a diet very rich in butter, coconut butter and egg yolks for a few months have have your lipid panel done. Switch to Dean Ornish style diet that is in congruence with the food reward hypothesis and have your lipids rechecked. Then, holla back at me and tell me your opinion on whether Stephen had it all figured out.

Stephen eats now days a high-carbohydrate, plant-based diet. Undoubtedly he'll be soon out of the closet and declare his lipid panel for his audience. He has his background context in the TC 250mg/dl range :) You can actually point this to him and ask him to hurry up in providing us the info from his n=1 case.

Jane said...

I've just read your 'study of the year which is likely to cause massive shock'.

'...diets lower in total fat on average reduced body weight by 1.6 kg, body mass index by −0.51, and waist circumference by 0.3 cm. ...Although further metabolic studies may reveal a mechanism of action, most studies that reported energy intake suggested lower energy intake in the low fat group than in the control or usual fat groups... This suggests that weight reduction may be due to reduced energy intake in those on low fat diets, rather than a specific effect of the macronutrient composition of the diet. ...'

In other words a small effect probably due to reduced energy intake. Now here's what the lead author says.

"We didn't consider different types of fat in this study," said Dr Hooper. "But cutting down on saturated fat reduces our risk of heart disease and strokes, so the healthiest way to cut down on fat is to cut down on saturated fats.

"This means having low fat milk and yogurt, cutting down on butter and cheese, and cutting the fat off meat. Most importantly have fruit instead of fatty snacks like biscuits, cake and crisps..."

So the authors think removing fat-soluble vitamins from dairy products is a good idea. They also seem to think that the problem with biscuits and cakes is not the nearly nutrient-free flour and sugar, but the fat. Does their study support these ideas? No.

Peter said...

And still waiting for the shock! You missed the opportunity to learn about the high-quality evidence suggesting strong relationship between dietary fat intake and obesity.

Again, it's usefull to mess around Flat-Earth-Society -style without giving studies and experiments a proper context. Yes, fat makes up energy dense calories, and if long-term weight loss is the key, it's better to emphasize tubers and (whole)grains instead of butter or coconut oil. The Tokelauns were often fat on their traditional high-fat diet and the Japanese-people were traditionally lean on their 10% fat diet, just to give you one example. This is not bullet-proof law, since there's some of variation in the individual level but this is about preponderance of evidence, and you are not really in a position to say anything meaningfull about it. Now one has evet gotten fat on quinoa, sweet potatoes and oranges while the same cannot be said with high-energy dense, fat laden foods.

Bray & Popkin delivering more shocks to people like you do not have background in obesity research:

Dietary fat affects obesity rate

Since that time, a 6-mo multicenter trial in 400 overweight men and women reported a significantly greater weight loss of 0.94–1.81 kg associated with a decrease in fat intake of 7.9–10% of energy. The control groups in this study gained 0.82–0.18 kg during the same interval. Whether the low-fat diet had complex or simple carbohydrates made no significant difference

Willett did not address the range of experimental animal and human studies we reviewed, in particular, he did not comment on those that showed the ways that reducing fat with fat modifiers or other means does not lead to full energy compensation. This led to our major point. We did not expect the thermic effect of fat reduction to be important. Rather, we felt that changing the fat content of food had a major effect on energy density, and in turn, this significantly affected total energy intake. In other words, our main argument is that the effect of energy density on food intake affects total energy intake. We used a set of animal and human studies to address this topic. Willett's editorial did not address this half of our paper.

Bog said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Peter said...

Bray & Popkin delivering shocks to laypeople with zero knowledge in the pathophysiology of obesity, that is.

Lower energy intake is build-in feature of low-fat diets. In other words, eating a low-fat diet results in eating less.

Zachary said...

Wow! After reading through Peter's comments briefly I wondered what he was on about. My mind is blown I think.. ;)

Funny though, I continue to eat large amounts of saturated fat, cholesterol, and carbohydrate exclusively in whole form. My co-workers tease my eating habits but they do not understand: this lifestyle keeps me in peak condition.

Peter I think you are grossly simplifying our physiology. Your obsession with LDL-C and saturated fat is out of control. Our brain, microbiota, and metabolism are far more complex than you are suggesting.

blogblog said...


"The results show that eating less fat reduces body weight by 1.6kg, BMI by 0.56kg/m² and waist circumference by 0.5cm."

Actually this meta-analysis shows nothing of any consequence.

blogblog said...


"Bray & Popkin delivering more shocks to people like you do not have background in obesity research."

The paper was published in 1999. That is ancient history as far as medical research goes.

Anonymous said...

It was so delicious herbal incense and I love to eat.

Unknown said...

We are offering gym supplements, gym supplements for men and many more on affordable price.For a nice physique try gym supplements and make a good impression on others.Shop by category at the world's largest gym supplement online store. Get the right information about gym supplements to acheive your fitness goals!more : Gym Supplements