AS for the milk issue: perhaps the European processing of milk into low fat is different than ours? The only difference I see on the nutritional facts here (between whole, 2%, 1%, and skim) is the fat content.
Trust me on that. There's a number of things which the nutrient contents don't list (mainly biologically active material, which also includes bacteria cultures among others)
What's the difference between the different kinds of milk?
AWhole Milk is 3.5% milkfat, which is why it tastes so delicious and has a rich, creamy texture. After babies stop drinking mother’s milk, they usually drink whole milk until they are at least two years old. The fatty acids in whole milk are important to the development of the brain and the nervous system.
2% Lowfat Milk has the benefits of less milkfat, but still tastes great. It is fortified with skim milk and has 10 grams of protein per cup. Two percent milk is almost as popular as whole milk.
1% Lowfat Milk is made by reducing the milkfat content even more. Like two percent milk, it is fortified with skim milk, making it vitamin and mineral rich. One percent milk is great for people on diets and women and girls who want a concentrated source of calcium in a delicious drink.
Skim Milk, also called nonfat milk, is one of the most nutrient-dense foods of all. It has as much fat as possible removed, less than ½ gram per serving, and 45% less calories than whole milk. Yet skim milk still supplies all of the nutrients of whole milk. - not entirely true. And it also tastes disgustingly
Buttermilk, despite its name, is typically made from nonfat or lowfat milk. It is a cultured sour milk made by adding certain organisms to sweet milk. It is very popular in cooking. How about some buttermilk biscuits or buttermilk pancakes or…
Chocolate Milk is milk plus cocoa and sweeteners. It is usually made from lowfat or nonfat milk. The chocolate doesn’t add any fat, just calories (about 60) and a little caffeine (about 5 mg per cup, the same amount in a cup of decaf coffee).
Acidophilus Milk is made by adding a live bacterial culture to milk after pasteurization. It is easier to digest for some people.
A quick aside about milk. A cup of whole milk is 148 calories; 72 are from fat, 44 are from carbs and 32 are from protein. A cup of 2% milk is 133 calories, 45 are from fat, 56 are from carbs and 32 are from protein. A cup of skim milk is 80 calories, zero from fat, 48 are carbs and 32 are from protein.
For all practical purposes, there is no difference between whole milk and 2% milk. In the course of a day 15 total calories will have no effect on anybody, regardless of the minor difference in the amount of fat.
If you enjoy milk and limit your intake to about a cup per day, there is no reason to not drink whole milk. The vast majority of us who grew up drinking real milk - and who still enjoy real milk - would rather not drink any milk, than drink skim milk.
If you believe that skim milk tastes like real milk, or close to it, I'm not going to try and argue the point. It's like trying to debate a proponent of tofu and veggie burgers that think these substitutes taste like the real thing.
If you enjoy the taste of skim milk, mazel, mazel, good things. But for the rest of us, the 68 calorie difference between whole and skim milk just doesn't matter in the grand scheme of dietary things. You're better off drinking whole milk that not drinking any milk at all. And the aversion to fat is irrational, as the no-fat diet is a failure in all regards.
Exactually my point, real foods help your body. Fake factory stuff in fast food burgers contain nothing but shite. If you made yourself a burger made from free ranged goods then it would be alot better for you. It's seem weird to eat it in the morning because its more something you would have for tea, its quite a big meal for me personnaly, I will stick too my breakfasts.
tyrannicida;4252452Heh, difficult to answer. That's just how it is I guess. Fatty stuff is probably not the best to start your day with.
Cheeseburgers aren't necessarily fatty . . just most of them are. I'm pretty much trying to say what Vasili is getting at.
Snipes With Artillery
22nd March 2005
wraithcat;4258800Trust me on that. There's a number of things which the nutrient contents don't list (mainly biologically active material, which also includes bacteria cultures among others)
If you don't need the bacteria cultures to help you digest, then you won't really miss them.
Bacteria is everywhere, especially on food – much of which is required for our ability to survive, thankfully our saliva and stomach acids kill most of the bad ones and our immune system typically identifies and neutralizes any that might cause havoc during digestion. Viruses and bacteria are everywhere, short of atomic sterilization you can’t get away from it no matter how often you wash or clean, and sometimes over sterilization can make matters worse.
Sometimes. That's not to say it's wise never to wash your hands or take a shower ever again.
There's a number of things which the nutrient contents don't list (mainly biologically active material, which also includes bacteria cultures among others)
I can't really think of any, can you care to name any?