Oat Bran vs Wheat Bran -- Why the Calorie Difference?
So, I'm planning to make some bran muffins, and I stopped by the grocery store to pick up some bran. I wandered over to the bulk foods section and saw oat bran and wheat bran side by side. I glanced at the nutrition label stuck to the lid of each bin, and I was shocked! For 1/4 cup (I think that's what its serving size was), oat bran was 130 calories and wheat bran was only 30? Huh? The total carboyhdrate & fiber count were pretty much the same, too (I was in a hurry so didn't look at the rest of the label closely). Is it because oat bran has soluble fiber? Does the US count calories from soluble fiber? I thought we didn't count fiber calories at all. Needless to say, I'm perplexed. Anyone got answers?
Was it 1/4 c cooked wheat bran?
The wheat bran I use is 100 calories per 1/2 cup. It has a lot of carbs that is not fiber....
All right... and here's what CC has to say on the subject:
"crude" (I assume that means uncooked??) wheat bran: 125 cal/cup.
Raw oat bran: 231 cal/cup.
The stats are around double too. Is oat just a denser material than wheat? I'm starting to think the labels at the store were a little bit off, though. :|
Its because oat bran weighs more than wheat bran. Look at the stuff, a cup of oat bran is (obviously) denser than a cup of wheat bran.
Compare by weight instead of volume and see how they match up.
well, oat bran is like a hot cereal...you'd eat it alone..if you ate wheat bran alone it'd be like ground up cardboard, not tasty at all. So, one is denser and tasty by itself (oat bran) while the other is coarse and not intended to be eaten alone (wheat bran).