Another excursion off-topic.
Mark Bittman had an interesting NY Times blog post yesterday about potatoes and other issues. His post was stimulated by the fact that Procter & Gamble recently sold its Pringles brand name to Kellogg for 2.7 billion dollars. The text below has been extracted from Bittman's post.
“Basically, Kellogg
is big in the business of selling hyper-processed grain heavily laced with
sugar, so it makes sense that it seize the opportunity to jump into the market
of selling hyper-processed potatoes heavily laced with fat and salt.
Don’t, however, make
the mistake of blaming the potato for Pringles. (They’re only 42 percent potato
anyway, and about 33 percent fat...) Nor should you blame corn for nachos… You can’t blame the raw
ingredients with which the earth blesses us for the evil — is that too strong?
How about “destructive”? — uses to which they are put.
Yet some people,
heavily influenced by the bad press both potatoes and corn routinely garner,
have asked me whether those foods are indeed “real” and worth eating at all.
Corn and potatoes
are real foods. Unadulterated, an ounce of corn and an ounce of potato contain
24 and 22 calories respectively; their biggest component is water. (A potato is
about 80 percent water.) Corn is about 3 percent protein, 2 percent fiber and 1
percent fat; potatoes’ numbers are similar. Not bad.
A 1-ounce serving of
corn chips, though, contains around 139 calories,… and an ounce of Pringles
runs 150. (Everyone knows, however, that the official 1-ounce serving is
nonsense. Even Pringles, which says, “once you pop, you can’t stop.”)”
The complete post is at: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/dont-blame-the-potato-for-pringles/?emc=eta1
No comments:
Post a Comment