By Dr. Jen Newell, ND

Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, MD recently posted a blog revealing the “healthwashing” surrounding Holy Crap cereal and compared this cereal to Froot Loops. While I love Dr. Freedhoff’s intention of educating people about nutrition, I think some nutrition myths and misinformation were provided in this instance. Dr. Freedhoff, if you happen to stumble across this blog I encourage you to continue with your mission but I also suggest you look a little deeper.

Don’t trust the Toucan
I would strongly encourage people to eat Holy Crap over Froot Loops any day. Let’s compare the two:

Holy Crap vs Froot Loops

Dr. Freedhoff’s primary concern with Holy Crap cereal is the small serving size of just 2 tbsp and the price. However, I am not sure he has tried this cereal because if he had he would be aware of how filling 2 tbsp of chia seeds and other sources of soluble fibre and protein can be. I would be concerned if someone were to have more than this 2 tbsp serving because without sufficient water intake they may become incredibly and uncomfortably constipated and with sufficient hydration you may not leave your bathroom all day. Those 2 tbsp contain 6 g of fibre as well as 5 g of protein, making this cereal really filling. Also, had he tried this cereal he would see that 2 tbsp of this cereal when mixed with a liquid becomes a much more substantial serving as the chia seeds plump and develop their slippery slimy coating.
The other thing that Dr. Freedhoff failed to mention is the significant research on the value of soluble fibre in the diet. The recommended daily intake of fibre is a minimum of 25 g/day; however, the average North American only consumes ~15 g/day. Dietary fibre has been shown to promote healthy weight loss, stabilize blood glucose levels, prevent cardiovascular disease and reduce unhealthy cholesterol values.
He also failed to mention anything about the ingredient quality of both cereals. Its like comparing apples to donuts. The Holy Crap cereal is jam-packed with high quality, non-GMO, organic, unprocessed, real food ingredients. Froot Loops are a minefield of nutrient void, heavily processed, food-like ingredients offering little to no health benefits.
I don’t think its fair to compare Holy Crap and Froot Loops “spoon-for-spoon”. Just by looking at the ingredients and the nutrient quality of both cereals I know which one I would choose for breakfast.

Have an awesome day!
Dr. Jen Newell

Dr. Jen Newell is passionate about helping people embrace health, feel amazing and easily incorporate “real” food into their busy lives. Her mission is to make health accessible and achievable, and to inspire patients to live an active, vibrant and healthy life.

Jen has a clinical focus on digestive health, food sensitivities and healthy nutrition; mental health and stress-related illness; women’s health, hormone balance and fertility; optimal aging; and dermatology. She focuses on integrating healthy foods into one’s diet in a medicinal and therapeutic capacity and providing individuals with nutritional support that is easy to incorporate into a busy day. Dr. Newell practices at the Integrative Health Institute in Downtown Toronto.

Research:

Ali, et al. (2012, Nov 21). The Promising Future of Chia, Salvia hispanica L. J Biomed Biotechnol .

Brown, et al. (1999). Cholesterol-lowering effects of dietary fiber: a meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr , 69, 30-42.

Fuchs, et al. (1999). Dietary Fiber and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma in Women. N Engl J Med , 340, 169-176.

Krishnan S, et al. (2007). Glycemic index, glycemic load, and cereal fiber intake and risk of type 2 diabetes in US black women. Arch Intern Med , 167, 2304-2309.

Mellen PB, et al. (2007). Whole grain intake and cardiovascular disease: A meta-analysis. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis .

Park, et al. (2005). Dietary Fiber Intake and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies. JAMA , 294, 2849-2857.

Pereira, et al. (2004). Dietary Fiber and risk of coronary heart disease: a pooled analysis of cohort studies. Arch Intern Med , 164, 370-376.