Bagrry's No Added Sugar Crunchy Muesli, if compared to another Bagrry's Muesli product with added sugar, should logically contain fewer calories, right? Otherwise why advertise it as "No Added Sugar" on the food label? The calorific difference is just 1 calorie as seen in the nutrition information! The No Added Sugar Muesli is 119 cals for 30 grams and 398 cals for 100 grams, even though this high calorie muesli has no nuts, just rolled oats and bran, wheat flakes and bran, and apple juice concentrates. Where are the calories coming from then? This makes one doubt the nutritive value of Muesli as a breakfast food.
The other Crunchy Muesli from Bagrry's has the same ingredients but added sugar, honey and raisins, corn flakes, and also almonds and yet it is 120 cals for 30 grams and 399 cals for 100 grams! Just one calorie more than the No Sugar and no nuts variety? Something seriously wrong here. Misleading and false claims by Bagrry's one would think.
Express Foods' Harvest Crunch has similar ingredients like nuts and honey, and it is 123 cals for 30 grams, just slightly over the Bagrry's nut mixture. However this is a very poor quality product. I have bought it several months before the expiry date but it still emanates a stale stink. Probably due to inferior quality ingredients. Avoid this one if you can.
Interestingly, a muesli mixture of dried nuts and fruits (the Indian brands referred to here have a very small quantity of nuts and hardly any dried fruit) from a developed country is just 118 for 30 grams. This too with a far larger number of nuts! And muesli without nuts and fruits from a developed country is 108 calories for 30 grams, with sugar included! And Sainsburry's no added sugar muesli with nuts is only about 106 cals for 30 grams.
Our Indian brands skimp on the nuts, but put a high calorie count on their labels, it would appear. Either the labels are wrong or we are consuming hidden calories. Even if we assume that developed countries like the UK and the USA are labelling their products wrong despite the strict labelling laws there, the minimal difference between two products of Baggry's (one with sugar, another without) raises suspicions.
The reason I have not mentioned Kelloggs here is that I cannot eat their muesli and never buy it. I hate those little fruity brightly coloured fake food that they put in their muesli. Also I think their value for money equation is very poor. I am not at all satisfied with the quality, and I consider Kelloggs worse that Harvest Crunch and Bagrry's. Unfortunately their distribution might ensures that they sell their products!
Related Images: or How to recognize a fake Tata Tetley tea bag or
Obesity statistics of the world or Obesity silhouettes or Images of overweight people
High Calorie Food - Sausages and Fries or Processed foods in India or Should you take Multi Vitamins and Mineral tablets?
Sketches and images of feet on a weighing machine or pictures of Gymnasium and training equipment