New Milo 'it is rank'

Forums › Off topic › New Milo 'it is rank'

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

20520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4797

#1319789 8-Jun-2015 23:42

Sideface: It's gone global.

From the BBC:

New 'healthier' Milo causes uproar in New Zealand

"Parent company Nestle said it had made some changes to the New Zealand formula to make Milo healthier for children, and more environmentally sustainable."

Is New Zealand being used for testing purposes (again)?

Overseas, they are probably laughing at our 3rd world problems. But if you want something healthy to give to children, you are hardly going to give them milo. When I was a kid I never got it for this reason, instead just got milk.

JWR

821 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 272

#1319797 9-Jun-2015 00:33

Geektastic: I'll be honest and say that Milo simply does not do anything for me. It tastes of almost nothing - certainly not chocolate - and I think I would need half a tin per glass to make it taste of much.

Yep and you would only get slightly less than half a tin of sugar as well.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1319812 9-Jun-2015 06:39

mattwnz:
Sideface: It's gone global.

From the BBC:

New 'healthier' Milo causes uproar in New Zealand

"Parent company Nestle said it had made some changes to the New Zealand formula to make Milo healthier for children, and more environmentally sustainable."

Is New Zealand being used for testing purposes (again)?

Overseas, they are probably laughing at our 3rd world problems. But if you want something healthy to give to children, you are hardly going to give them milo. When I was a kid I never got it for this reason, instead just got milk.

3rd world ????? Really, what is with this habit of late of folks erroneously referring to anything challenged or different or not what they believe as third world?

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

JayADee

2236 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#1319816 9-Jun-2015 07:19

Off topic a bit I know but my hubby brought home some Lewis Road Creamery chocolate milk as a treat and it was pretty good.

rmt38

320 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 55
Inactive user

#1319828 9-Jun-2015 07:42

Geektastic: Not sure if you can get it here (never looked tbh!) but when I was at boarding school we had a school tradition which was Cadbury drinking chocolate mixed with cold milk. Drank it every day of term for 5 years and never touched it since! I recall the method well though - 4 teaspoons of chocolate powder plus a little milk, mix to a creamy paste and then slowly add more milk until the cup is full.

Yes, Cadbury drinking chocolate! My grandparents used to buy it in invercargill, but it was available throughout the country. I stopped eating Milo out of the packet, and started eating Cadbury drinking chocolate out of the packet after that, and couldn't eat/drink Milo after that.

But these days, Cadbury are all about removing the actual chocolate from their products and still calling it chocolate, if I recall the Cadbury/Whittakers thing from a few years back. I'd be surprised if they hadn't ruined that, if it ever tasted as good as it did through my rose coloured glasses of nostalgia.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1319927 9-Jun-2015 08:33

Important perhaps to note the composition of sugars in a glass of milo.
About 20% is from added "sugar".
About 27% is from the malted barley (glucose, maltose, and other glucose polysaccharides).
The balance is lactose (glucose, galactose etc) from the milk.

There's growing concern about intake of "sugar" in general (WRT obesity in general) but more specific concern about "sugar" = table sugar/sucrose, which is a 50:50 disaccharide of fructose and glucose. There is compelling data about the metabolic pathway in the body and the role of fructose in human disease. High fructose corn "syrup" (HFCS) is normally about 55% fructose, 45% glucose. I put "syrup" in inverted commas because typical of the BS from the sugar and related industries - they like to push a concept of "a natural part of life". HFCS is not "syrup" which exudes from corn - it's synthesised from corn starches.

There's pushback from the global sugar industry about this for obvious reasons, but also from global processed food industry who add sugar to almost everything.

Anyway, WRT Milo, in case you're worried about the fructose (from added "sugar" content), you'd need to add about 200g (40 heaped teaspoons) of Milo to a glass to achieve the same fructose content as one can of coke.

It would be interesting to see if Nestle have adjusted the sugar composition in "new" Milo.
Getting rid of the methyl (and/or ethyl) vanillin is interesting. Some people are sensitive to these chemicals, but AFAIK synthetic methyl vanillin is identical to natural vanillin in vanilla extract.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

wasabi2k

2102 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 860

#1319947 9-Jun-2015 08:57

Fred99: Important perhaps to note the composition of sugars in a glass of milo.
About 20% is from added "sugar".
About 27% is from the malted barley (glucose, maltose, and other glucose polysaccharides).
The balance is lactose (glucose, galactose etc) from the milk.

There's growing concern about intake of "sugar" in general (WRT obesity in general) but more specific concern about "sugar" = table sugar/sucrose, which is a 50:50 disaccharide of fructose and glucose. There is compelling data about the metabolic pathway in the body and the role of fructose in human disease. High fructose corn "syrup" (HFCS) is normally about 55% fructose, 45% glucose. I put "syrup" in inverted commas because typical of the BS from the sugar and related industries - they like to push a concept of "a natural part of life". HFCS is not "syrup" which exudes from corn - it's synthesised from corn starches.

There's pushback from the global sugar industry about this for obvious reasons, but also from global processed food industry who add sugar to almost everything.

Anyway, WRT Milo, in case you're worried about the fructose (from added "sugar" content), you'd need to add about 200g (40 heaped teaspoons) of Milo to a glass to achieve the same fructose content as one can of coke.

It would be interesting to see if Nestle have adjusted the sugar composition in "new" Milo.
Getting rid of the methyl (and/or ethyl) vanillin is interesting. Some people are sensitive to these chemicals, but AFAIK synthetic methyl vanillin is identical to natural vanillin in vanilla extract.

They address it specifically on their website (unclear if this is old/new recipe): https://www.milo.co.nz/common-questions/

Milo powder is specially formulated to be added to milk and consumed as a beverage. Assessing total sugar content on a dry weight basis per 100g of the powder alone is therefore inappropriate. It is more appropriate to assess the product on an ‘as consumed’ basis, as a beverage. If you calculated total sugars on an ‘as consumed’ basis (as a beverage) there is 8g/100mL. When reading the label it is more helpful to look at the last 2 columns of the Nutrition Information Panel where it says 15g of powder with 200ml trim milk. This shows how much total sugar there is in ‘a serve’ (glass of MILO and Milk) which is what really counts. Based on the recommended recipe there is 17.3g of sugar in a glass of MILO and milk depending on the type of milk used.

Less than one teaspoon (2.8g) is added sucrose (cane sugar) from MILO powder
Around one teaspoon (4.1g) comes from naturally occurring sugars from the malted barley (maltose) and milk powder ingredients (lactose) of the MILO powder product
Over half the total sugars (10.4g) come naturally from the milk alone

Note this doesn't cover everyone's preferred method of consuming milo - with a spoon out of the tin (second place being with ice cream all mushed up).

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1319995 9-Jun-2015 09:17

wasabi2k:
Fred99: Important perhaps to note the composition of sugars in a glass of milo.
About 20% is from added "sugar".
About 27% is from the malted barley (glucose, maltose, and other glucose polysaccharides).
The balance is lactose (glucose, galactose etc) from the milk.

There's growing concern about intake of "sugar" in general (WRT obesity in general) but more specific concern about "sugar" = table sugar/sucrose, which is a 50:50 disaccharide of fructose and glucose. There is compelling data about the metabolic pathway in the body and the role of fructose in human disease. High fructose corn "syrup" (HFCS) is normally about 55% fructose, 45% glucose. I put "syrup" in inverted commas because typical of the BS from the sugar and related industries - they like to push a concept of "a natural part of life". HFCS is not "syrup" which exudes from corn - it's synthesised from corn starches.

There's pushback from the global sugar industry about this for obvious reasons, but also from global processed food industry who add sugar to almost everything.

Anyway, WRT Milo, in case you're worried about the fructose (from added "sugar" content), you'd need to add about 200g (40 heaped teaspoons) of Milo to a glass to achieve the same fructose content as one can of coke.

It would be interesting to see if Nestle have adjusted the sugar composition in "new" Milo.
Getting rid of the methyl (and/or ethyl) vanillin is interesting. Some people are sensitive to these chemicals, but AFAIK synthetic methyl vanillin is identical to natural vanillin in vanilla extract.

They address it specifically on their website (unclear if this is old/new recipe): https://www.milo.co.nz/common-questions/

I looked at that - and guess it's "old" Milo.

Milo powder is specially formulated to be added to milk and consumed as a beverage. Assessing total sugar content on a dry weight basis per 100g of the powder alone is therefore inappropriate. It is more appropriate to assess the product on an ‘as consumed’ basis, as a beverage. If you calculated total sugars on an ‘as consumed’ basis (as a beverage) there is 8g/100mL. When reading the label it is more helpful to look at the last 2 columns of the Nutrition Information Panel where it says 15g of powder with 200ml trim milk. This shows how much total sugar there is in ‘a serve’ (glass of MILO and Milk) which is what really counts. Based on the recommended recipe there is 17.3g of sugar in a glass of MILO and milk depending on the type of milk used.

Less than one teaspoon (2.8g) is added sucrose (cane sugar) from MILO powder
Around one teaspoon (4.1g) comes from naturally occurring sugars from the malted barley (maltose) and milk powder ingredients (lactose) of the MILO powder product
Over half the total sugars (10.4g) come naturally from the milk alone

Note this doesn't cover everyone's preferred method of consuming milo - with a spoon out of the tin (second place being with ice cream all mushed up).

IMO that's perhaps not as bad as it seems. Chocolate is normally about 50% sugar (sucrose), so weight for weight contains more than double the fructose content of Milo powder. Eating 10 teaspoons of Milo powder might seem to be disgusting unhealthy gluttony by the same people who'd consider eating 5 squares from a block of chocolate a normal healthy thing to do.
(Somewhat aided in this case by research funded by the chocolate industry on the supposed health benefits of some chemicals in chocolate - which - even if real - are almost certainly negated by the quantity of sugar consumed)

JimmyH

2898 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1554

#1320568 9-Jun-2015 19:40

rmt38:
Geektastic: Not sure if you can get it here (never looked tbh!) but when I was at boarding school we had a school tradition which was Cadbury drinking chocolate mixed with cold milk. Drank it every day of term for 5 years and never touched it since! I recall the method well though - 4 teaspoons of chocolate powder plus a little milk, mix to a creamy paste and then slowly add more milk until the cup is full.

Yes, Cadbury drinking chocolate! My grandparents used to buy it in invercargill, but it was available throughout the country. I stopped eating Milo out of the packet, and started eating Cadbury drinking chocolate out of the packet after that, and couldn't eat/drink Milo after that.

But these days, Cadbury are all about removing the actual chocolate from their products and still calling it chocolate, if I recall the Cadbury/Whittakers thing from a few years back. I'd be surprised if they hadn't ruined that, if it ever tasted as good as it did through my rose coloured glasses of nostalgia.

Milo is vile. I have no doubt the new mix is awful, but then again I thought the old one was as well. My parent's tried to give it too me a few times when I was a lad, as well as tea which I don't like either, but around age 7/8 I decided I preferred coffee and never looked back.

Regarding Cadbury's drinking chocolate, it was an occasional treat for me but it has definitely gone down hill. I finished some a while ago (probably horribly date expired) from the old cardboard packet and it was nice - dark and chocolatey. I finished it, so I purchased one of the new round foil lined cardboard tin packets and it didn't compare well - much lighter in colour, much sweeter, and much less chocolatey. I chucked it out.

Avalanche is drinkable as an alternative, but actually just grating some chocolate off a Whittakers chocolate bar into the hot milk seems to give the best result so far. My preference being their Dark Ghana, which is pretty moreish. Microwaving the milk with a few catering chocolate buttons thrown in seems to work pretty well too.

I don't buy Cadbury's chocolate bars any more, and haven't done so for some time. There is so much sugar, and so little actual cocoa solids in that I actually wonder how they can get away with calling it chocolate under the Fair Trading Act? It's more like vaguely-cocoa-flavored confectionery than chocolate in my book.

blakamin

4431 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1306
Inactive user

#1320647 9-Jun-2015 20:51

Fred99: you'd need to add about 200g (40 heaped teaspoons) of Milo to a glass to achieve the same fructose content as one can of coke.

That's my problem... I can't get 40 heaped teaspoons in a glass...

I don't drink coke either.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1320723 9-Jun-2015 21:52

JayADee: Off topic a bit I know but my hubby brought home some Lewis Road Creamery chocolate milk as a treat and it was pretty good.

Just don't look at the sugar content...! ;-)

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1320726 9-Jun-2015 21:55

JimmyH:
rmt38:
Geektastic: Not sure if you can get it here (never looked tbh!) but when I was at boarding school we had a school tradition which was Cadbury drinking chocolate mixed with cold milk. Drank it every day of term for 5 years and never touched it since! I recall the method well though - 4 teaspoons of chocolate powder plus a little milk, mix to a creamy paste and then slowly add more milk until the cup is full.

Yes, Cadbury drinking chocolate! My grandparents used to buy it in invercargill, but it was available throughout the country. I stopped eating Milo out of the packet, and started eating Cadbury drinking chocolate out of the packet after that, and couldn't eat/drink Milo after that.

But these days, Cadbury are all about removing the actual chocolate from their products and still calling it chocolate, if I recall the Cadbury/Whittakers thing from a few years back. I'd be surprised if they hadn't ruined that, if it ever tasted as good as it did through my rose coloured glasses of nostalgia.

Milo is vile. I have no doubt the new mix is awful, but then again I thought the old one was as well. My parent's tried to give it too me a few times when I was a lad, as well as tea which I don't like either, but around age 7/8 I decided I preferred coffee and never looked back.

Regarding Cadbury's drinking chocolate, it was an occasional treat for me but it has definitely gone down hill. I finished some a while ago (probably horribly date expired) from the old cardboard packet and it was nice - dark and chocolatey. I finished it, so I purchased one of the new round foil lined cardboard tin packets and it didn't compare well - much lighter in colour, much sweeter, and much less chocolatey. I chucked it out.

Avalanche is drinkable as an alternative, but actually just grating some chocolate off a Whittakers chocolate bar into the hot milk seems to give the best result so far. My preference being their Dark Ghana, which is pretty moreish. Microwaving the milk with a few catering chocolate buttons thrown in seems to work pretty well too.

I don't buy Cadbury's chocolate bars any more, and haven't done so for some time. There is so much sugar, and so little actual cocoa solids in that I actually wonder how they can get away with calling it chocolate under the Fair Trading Act? It's more like vaguely-cocoa-flavored confectionery than chocolate in my book.

There's a drinking chocolate brand called Charbonnel et Walker in Europe which is mostly just grated chocolate with a little sugar. It was about $25 a tin before I left more than 10 years ago, but worth every penny.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1320743 9-Jun-2015 22:18

everything has sugar ... especially fruit "juices" ... about the same amount as coke ....

mattwnz

20520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4797

#1320759 9-Jun-2015 22:51

joker97: everything has sugar ... especially fruit "juices" ... about the same amount as coke ....

The thing about fruit juice, is everyone thinks it is all natural and unprocessed. But unless it is fresh squeezed stuff, much of it goes through a lot of processing. This story shed more light on some of the processing it goes through, http://www.medicaldaily.com/truth-about-orange-juice-concentrate-not-concentrate-juices-only-minimally-better-soda-268915 Radio NZ did a similar story on it. I don't drink orange juice.

rmt38

320 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 55
Inactive user

#1320829 10-Jun-2015 08:25

JimmyH: I don't buy Cadbury's chocolate bars any more, and haven't done so for some time. There is so much sugar, and so little actual cocoa solids in that I actually wonder how they can get away with calling it chocolate under the Fair Trading Act? It's more like vaguely-cocoa-flavored confectionery than chocolate in my book.

And when they reduced the size of their "king size" bars 1/5th they should have renamed it to "queen sized" :-) If whittakers did a version of the black forest bar with real chocolate, I'd stop buying cadbury's completely.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6