Starbucks Blueberry Muffin Shocker

OK, I knew Starbucks muffins had a lot of calories in them, but boy was I shocked over the weekend to discover that the low-fat muffins are WAY WORSE than the regular ones. I picked up a blueberry muffin for my skinny-can-eat-whatever-he-wants husband, brought it home, then looked longingly at it, wanting a bite. I decided I would eat half as part of my lunch and load up on veggies and a some protein for the other. Yes, I justified the muffin! Afterwards, I got online to check the calories and here's what I found:

Starbucks Blueberry Muffin
Serving size: 1 muffin (101 g)
Calories: 380
Total fat: 19.0g
Sodium: 380 mg
Total Carbs: 49g
Sugars: 28g
Protein: 5g

Starbucks Low-fat Bluerberry Muffin
Serving size: 1 muffin (135 g)
Calories: 430
Total fat: 2.5 g
Sodium: 540 mg
Total Carbs: 98g
Sugars: 57g
Protein: 6g

I don't know about you, but I was shocked to see more calories, almost twice the sodium, twice the carbs, and twice the sugar in the slightly larger LOWFAT MUFFIN! 
 

They don't advertise it as the "healthier" muffin, they advertise it as the "lower fat" muffin, which it is. ;) Regular has 19 grams of fad, low-fat has only 2.5 grams. You just really need to be careful with "low fat" gimmicks, they're often misleading!

By removing the fat they remove a lot of taste. They need to replace it somehow. The result? More sodium, carbs, sugar, and calories.

You gotta remember that the low fat muffin is ONE THIRD bigger than the smaller muffin.  The full fat muffin is 376 calories per 100 grams. The low fat muffin is 318 calories per 100 g. So overall, it IS lower cal.  They just aren't exactly the same size.

Muffins are high calorie sweet treats.  They are either full of fat or sugar, one or the other.  You can make better, healthier muffins at home, but generally it's tough to make one under 350 calories, that's just the nature of the beast.   And you don't think Starbucks is using a high quality fat in that muffin either do you?  It's the cheapest, unhealthiest possible fat to save cost and increase profits, might even be transfats...who knows...you certainly don't... 

from my experience, almost everything that says low fat is higher calorie than the 'regular' version of it. And since the fat is taken away, like OP said they replace it with more sugar, sodium, high fructose corn syrup and carbs.The only things l buy fat free without worrying about what the replacement are milk and yogurt.

I forget where I heard this but "muffins are just an excuse to say it's okay to eat cake for breakfast" LOL I love muffins!

I LOVE that quote!  I was just in Starbucks for the first time in months (it's like a drug dealer for me - I don't go in unescorted) and when the barista asked if we wanted any breakfast, I looked at the pastries and thought, "These are all desserts!"  And I used to eat one or even two every morning I went in there!

I see that they now serve oatmeal, but I wanted to look up the "nutritional" information before I took the chance on it - I just stuck with my skinny vanilla latte. 

I'm glad to have confirmation that low-fat is not better from a calorie standpoint.  I have noticed what others have said about other low-fat desserts, they compensate with increased sugar - so pick your poison!

FYI:  Beware the Starbucks cinnamon coffee cake as well:  The regular has like 19 grams of fat, the "reduced fat" has 10 grams (the numbers may not be exactly right but it's very close).  They aren't lying, it IS reduced, but they know that we want to deceive ourselves and they are willing to help.

Basically, if something looks like cake and tastes like cake, it probably isn't cottage cheese.  Not that there's anything wrong with eating cake - just be sure you are conscious of what you are doing when you do it!

In NYC, they recently passed legislation that requires restaurants like Starbucks to post the calorie content of all their foods and beverages.  It's right there next to the prices!  I nearly burst into tears the first time I walked into Starbucks after the law went into effect.  It was shocking!  I haven't eaten anything there since. 

I think this thread made me crave blueberry muffins.  Here's a link to my healthy version! 130 cal Blueberry Muffins.

Recently I went to Starbucks with my mom.  We decided to share a ginger molasses cookie to go with our coffees.  I figured, hey, one cookie, can't be too bad to eat only half. Expected calorie count to be around 200 or so. Well, I came home and looked it up. Here's the nutrional data:

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size: 1 cookie (100g)

Amount per Serving Calories 430 Calories from Fat 110 % Daily Value * Total Fat 12g 18%     Saturated Fat  2g 10%     Trans Fat  4g Cholesterol 25mg 8% Sodium 450mg 19% Total Carbohydrate 70g 23%     Dietary Fiber  1g 4%     Sugars  41g Protein 6g 12% Vitamin A 10% Vitamin C 0% Calcium 4% Iron 15%

Est. Percent of Calories from:
Fat 25.1%     Carbs 65.1% Protein 5.6%

Wow!  What an eye opener! So that 1/2 cookie cost me 215 calories out of my 1342 allowed for the day! Never again while I am on my weight loss phase anyways!

Just thought I'd share that as it seems that most of Starbucks "treats" are exorbitantly high in calories and fat.

 

 

"Just thought I'd share that as it seems that most of Starbucks "treats" are exorbitantly high in calories and fat."

That's what makes them so horribly delicious!  I stay away rather than "kiss the cobra" by going in there - the line HAS to parade you by the snacks!

i'm not sticking up for them, but starbuck's low-fat muffin is like 34g bigger than the reg muffin.

I'm fond of their spinach feta wrap.