On Tue, 7 Jul 2015 15:23:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>On Tuesday, July 7, 2015 at 12:22:36 PM UTC-7, graham wrote:
>> http://www.iflscience.com/health-and...ally-healthier
>
>Yes, a paper study looking at lists of ingredients is always the last
>word in anything.

Depends on the study...no reason to discount such an analysis without
some specific reasons for it. What are your objections?
>
>I remember, decades ago, when Consumer Reports investigated the
>nutrition of breakfast cereals by feeding them to rats. The
>most nutritious was Lucky Charms.

It was Cheerios, Special K And A version of Maypo, actually, but hey,
don't let that stop you....

https://news.google.com/newspapers?n...28,54236&hl=en
>
>Apparently this result freaked out the CR poobahs, because the next
>time breakfast cereals were evaluated,it was based on an ingredient
>analysis only.

While you are at it, why not back up that claim, too? Hmmm?