Bare Naked rice/noodles

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mackem00

Mackem00

Striker
Anyone tried these as a low calorie replacement for the above. I had it with chilli the other day and found it canny (white rice at the best of times is bland anyway so it done the job).

Was on Dragon's Den a while a go apparantly. Works out at 8cals per 100g.

https://www.barenakedfoods.co.uk/
 


Mackem00 said:
Any good?
Click to expand...

They're ok if you prepare them exactly as the instructions say & eat them straight away. The main problem for me was they don't microwave well so I couldn't just put some in a container with some sauce for my bait to microwave at work which was the whole point of getting them. If the bare naked people have figured out how to get round that I'll probably give them a go.
 
Mackem00 said:
Don't know what that is mate. Doubt cement would go very well with chilli tbh.

How many calories are in cement anyway?
Click to expand...
Lime? You know lime CaO, as in limestone? Well when you add water to it in order to make cement, it get's hydrated to become Ca(OH)2 and so is called slaked lime. That's what they're putting into that food to fill it - and you -out.
 
AlpineExile said:
Lime? You know lime CaO, as in limestone? Well when you add water to it in order to make cement, it get's hydrated to become Ca(OH)2 and so is called slaked lime. That's what they're putting into that food to fill it - and you -out.
Click to expand...
What's the downsides to this mate? Seems all above board like.
 
Instead of low calorie this and low calorie that, has anyone looked at what and how much they eat? The size of plates has risen over the past fifty years, portions have become ridiculously large. It's the advent of foreign take away food where one portion could easily feed two or even three people. A bag of chips cost 3d (1.25p) which through time rose to 6d (2 and a halfp) when I was a kid. The bag was tiny by today's standards, yet it fed us, one bag would feed one person, a portion of chips these days will go three ways in our house. We don't eat less and don't think about low calorie because we aren't overweight. I am not getting at anyone here, some have never known a time when portions for takeways and pub meals were less than they are now. This has led to portions at home being larger. Never mind fat it's size of portion that counts. A quick look at portions will I am sure stop the need for diets and low calorie rubbish. About calories, If you look at a packet it might say calories, all lower case, that is significant because they use calorie to mean the scientific calorie. That is the amount of heat required to heat one gramme of water by one degree Centigrade (a unit of specific heat capacity) As calories (scientific) is a very small unit it doesn't look too good on food packets. As a response they have gone over to kcals, k being 1,000. So when you see 600 CALORIES it means 600,000 calories, they put kcals in capital letters or with a capital C to denote 1,000s of calories but how many people know that. No excuses now.
 
Mackem00 said:
What's the downsides to this mate? Seems all above board like.
Click to expand...
Well it was banned as a food additive in the UK after WWII, but that might just have been as an anti-fraud measure as bakers used to put it in their bread to make it look like they'd used a better quality of flour.

redgauntlet said:
Instead of low calorie this and low calorie that, has anyone looked at what and how much they eat? The size of plates has risen over the past fifty years, portions have become ridiculously large. It's the advent of foreign take away food where one portion could easily feed two or even three people. A bag of chips cost 3d (1.25p) which through time rose to 6d (2 and a halfp) when I was a kid. The bag was tiny by today's standards, yet it fed us, one bag would feed one person, a portion of chips these days will go three ways in our house. We don't eat less and don't think about low calorie because we aren't overweight. I am not getting at anyone here, some have never known a time when portions for takeways and pub meals were less than they are now. This has led to portions at home being larger. Never mind fat it's size of portion that counts. A quick look at portions will I am sure stop the need for diets and low calorie rubbish. About calories, If you look at a packet it might say calories, all lower case, that is significant because they use calorie to mean the scientific calorie. That is the amount of heat required to heat one gramme of water by one degree Centigrade (a unit of specific heat capacity) As calories (scientific) is a very small unit it doesn't look too good on food packets. As a response they have gone over to kcals, k being 1,000. So when you see 600 CALORIES it means 600,000 calories, they put kcals in capital letters or with a capital C to denote 1,000s of calories but how many people know that. No excuses now.
Click to expand...
And you were doing so well up to there. :neutral:
 
AlpineExile said:
Well it was banned as a food additive in the UK after WWII, but that might just have been as an anti-fraud measure as bakers used to put it in their bread to make it look like they'd used a better quality of flour.

And you were doing so well up to there. :neutral:
Click to expand...
I'm knocking on a bit that's new to me. Or was it the unit, which I badly worded, a calorie is a unit of specific heat capacity.
 
redgauntlet said:
Instead of low calorie this and low calorie that, has anyone looked at what and how much they eat? The size of plates has risen over the past fifty years, portions have become ridiculously large. It's the advent of foreign take away food where one portion could easily feed two or even three people. A bag of chips cost 3d (1.25p) which through time rose to 6d (2 and a halfp) when I was a kid. The bag was tiny by today's standards, yet it fed us, one bag would feed one person, a portion of chips these days will go three ways in our house. We don't eat less and don't think about low calorie because we aren't overweight. I am not getting at anyone here, some have never known a time when portions for takeways and pub meals were less than they are now. This has led to portions at home being larger. Never mind fat it's size of portion that counts. A quick look at portions will I am sure stop the need for diets and low calorie rubbish. About calories, If you look at a packet it might say calories, all lower case, that is significant because they use calorie to mean the scientific calorie. That is the amount of heat required to heat one gramme of water by one degree Centigrade (a unit of specific heat capacity) As calories (scientific) is a very small unit it doesn't look too good on food packets. As a response they have gone over to kcals, k being 1,000. So when you see 600 CALORIES it means 600,000 calories, they put kcals in capital letters or with a capital C to denote 1,000s of calories but how many people know that. No excuses now.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't come close to filling me and i'm "normal" weight. Where do you get your chips from? I need to start going there. :lol:
 
Don't bother with Slim Noodles http://www.slimnoodles.co.uk/

Got a free sample pack and they were vile. They had a really rubbery texture and a weird fishy aftertaste. Even my eldest wouldn't eat them and he eats anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top