• Share:
  • Send to StumbleUpon
  • Send to Facebook
  • Send to del.icio.us
  • Send to digg

Now At Krispy Kreme: Hot Fresh Whole Wheat Doughnuts

krispykremewholewheat.jpg

Krispy Kreme introduced their newest doughnuts yesterday: they're glazed, caramel flavored... and made of whole wheat: "The company called the new doughnut an alternative for health-conscious consumers, with 180 calories. The original glazed has 200 calories, according to the company's Web site."

Seriously, a saving of just 20 calories? Sorry, but that's the same vein of ridiculous as people who order gallon-size Diet Cokes along with their buttered popcorn at the movie theater because they think it's going to help them lose weight. Have the real thing occasionally as a treat—you won't feel deprived, and perhaps even more important, you won't be fooling yourself about your nutrition.

[via yumsugar]

7 Comments:

Nutrition means more than the absence of calories. Whole wheat is better for you because it has the vitamins, minerals and fiber from the germ and the bran of the wheat. This doughnut isn't a diet plan, its just better for you.

A doughnut shouldn't have to be better, is my point. It should be okay for a doughnut to be a delicious fatty treat, and people should be able to have a delicious fatty treat every once in a while without feeling any guilt. The health hype is wrapped up in food guilt, and that to me is a large component of what makes eating in the US both unhealthy and fearful. Eating should be pleasurable, not stressful.

You also trivialized the health benefits by saying it was a "saving of just 20 calories", and I was addressing this calorie-centric view of nutrition. As to your point, that a "doughnut shouldn't have to be better", its illogical for its own reasons, not least of which being that people may actually prefer the taste of whole wheat. Or they may prefer having 4 marginally less delicious whole wheat doughnuts a month to their normal 3 traditional doughnuts.

I was addressing this calorie-centric view of nutrition

Read my post again, please; that's actually Krispy Kreme's view, not mine. My comment about the 20 calories savings was not pulled out of thin air—it's clearly in response to their touting the lesser calories as A Big Deal.

And let's be honest, Krispy Kreme is doing this in response to their losing money because of low carb diets, hoping that people who don't know much about nutrition (most people) will think the whole wheat doughnut is going to be a treat they can swap in that's going to help make things better, and that's wrong. The huge emphasis being placed on low carb, low fat, whole wheat, skim milk, etc is messed up in a diet-crazy, eating-disordered country where people will gladly eat all those things but in hugely oversized portions, when the truth is we'd most of us do just fine eating traditional food in moderations.

people may actually prefer the taste of whole wheat

See, now that's crazy talk right there! But seriously, you totally missed my point: doughnuts are perfectly fine the way they are, it's our eating habits that are messed up.

Or they may prefer having 4 marginally less delicious whole wheat doughnuts a month to their normal 3 traditional doughnuts.

If you want an example of illogical thought, that's a classic example right there, from the US "more is better" school. There's no good reason someone with a healthy attitude towards eating would or should prefer to have four less tasty, only slightly healthier doughnuts to three tastier doughnuts in one day, let alone over a month. Imagine asking your average Parisian to choose between eating three proper butter croissants and four whole wheat croissants!

Well its all wrong, of course, but the worst part is when you say "doughnuts are perfectly fine the way they are". Maybe you should circulate a list of foods that are already perfectly fine, so restaurants won't be foolish enough to try to change them.

Okay- if you are eating Krispy Kreme are you really looking for healthy?!However, given that it probably doesn't affect taste or texture that much, what's the harm in adding a little nutritional value!

Can we retire the misconception that it's ridiculous to order Diet Coke with popcorn, Big Macs or any other kind of junk food? Choosing Diet Coke (as opposed to regular Coke) avoids hundreds of calories as well as unnecessary sugar -- why is this so absurd? Obviously there are better choices than Diet Coke (or buttered popcorn, for that matter), but to drink regular Coke just because you're having popcorn is like eating the whole box of cookies just because you already had one. The prevalence of this kind of logic may explain, in part, this country's weight problems.

Add a comment:

Comments can take up to a minute to appear - please be patient!

Previewing your comment:

 

HTML Hints

Some HTML is OK: <a href="URL">link</a>, <strong>strong</strong>, <em>em</em>

Comment Guidelines

Post whatever you want, just keep it seriously about eats, seriously. We reserve the right to delete off-topic or inflammatory comments. Learn more at our Comment Policy page.

If you see something not so nice, please, report an inappropriate comment.