I make the oats that cook in 5 minutes. I like this cereal but there is
always this slimy stuff at the bottom of the pot. What is this slimy
stuff? Does anyone know?

TIA
--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

Janet Wilder wrote:
>
> I make the oats that cook in 5 minutes. I like this cereal but there is
> always this slimy stuff at the bottom of the pot. What is this slimy
> stuff? Does anyone know?

Cooked starch.

I only use the "old fashioned" long cooking oatmeal, I cook it for about
1:30-2:00 in the microwave (depends on summer / winter tap water temp),
which probably is undercooked, but I like it that way with some texture
and firmness left to the oatmeal.

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
...
>I make the oats that cook in 5 minutes. I like this cereal but there is
>always this slimy stuff at the bottom of the pot. What is this slimy stuff?
>Does anyone know?
>
> TIA
> --
> Janet Wilder
> Way-the-heck-south Texas
> Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
Starch. There shouldn't be any separate starch in your oatmeal if cooked
and stirred properly. Try starting your oats in cold water, bring to a
boil, simmer until thick, stir and let sit for a couple of minutes. Stir
again and serve.
Janet

On Mar 4, 8:19*pm, Janet Wilder > wrote:
> I make the oats that cook in 5 minutes. I like this cereal but there is
> always this slimy stuff at the bottom of the pot. What is this slimy
> stuff? *Does anyone know?

If you don't like it, take non-quick-cooking oats (or steel cut) and
cook them like spaghetti - e.g. in lots of water until they're tender
(al dente) - and then dump the extra starch / water down the drain.
They will cook slower than quick oats, but faster than the usual
method of just barely enough water.

Thanks to everyone. I was just following the directions on the box. If
it is extra starch, I think I'd rather it goes to the bottom of the pot
than onto my hips. :-)

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

"Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
...
>
> Thanks to everyone. I was just following the directions on the box. If it
> is extra starch, I think I'd rather it goes to the bottom of the pot than
> onto my hips. :-)
>
> --
> Janet Wilder
> Way-the-heck-south Texas
> Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
It is impossible to separate starch, water, nutrients and vitamins in this
case. I assume that you are eating the oats for some health benefit. Don't
dump the baby out with the bath water. Stir everything together as it is
supposed to be. You wouldn't throw out all the stuff that settles to the
bottom of the pot when you make soup, would you?
Janet

On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 08:33:25 -0600, Janet Wilder
> wrote:

>
>Thanks to everyone. I was just following the directions on the box. If
>it is extra starch, I think I'd rather it goes to the bottom of the pot
>than onto my hips. :-)

Oh Pleasssseeeeeeee, you look wonderful Darlinggggggg

)

On Mar 5, 9:43*am, "Janet Bostwick" > wrote:
> "Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Thanks to everyone. *I was just following the directions on the box. If it
> > is extra starch, I think I'd rather it goes to the bottom of the pot than
> > onto my hips. :-)
>
> > Janet Wilder
> > Way-the-heck-south Texas
> > Spelling doesn't count. *Cooking does.
>
> It is impossible to separate starch, water, nutrients and vitamins in this
> case. *I assume that you are eating the oats for some health benefit. *Don't
> dump the baby out with the bath water. *Stir everything together as it is
> supposed to be. *You wouldn't throw out all the stuff that settles to the
> bottom of the pot when you make soup, would you?
> Janet

I don't eat breakfast until I get to work, so to avoid a rush in the
morning, I'll fix my oatmeal at night. Old fashioned oats, milk, a
pinch of salt, a ton of cinnamon, and some applesauce. Overnight, it
absorbs most of the liquid, so I'll add a little water before nuking
it for a minute.

I end up with hot cereal that's a little al dente, which is
surprisingly pleasant.. And no goo at the bottom of the bowl.

maxine in ri
Sneezy, Sleepy, Dopey, Coughy--Hey Snow White! Call back your dwarves!

In article >,
Janet Wilder > wrote:

> I make the oats that cook in 5 minutes. I like this cereal but there is
> always this slimy stuff at the bottom of the pot. What is this slimy
> stuff? Does anyone know?

My wife and I have been eating oatmeal every morning for a few weeks.
I've never been a breakfast eater, but I take insulin, and I need to
eat. So we argue. I always win, because I make it. She says that it's
5 minute oatmeal. Well, that's fine, but it takes 20 minutes, and
that's that. I cook it for 10 minutes and then it sits for 10 minutes.
At the end of 5 minutes, there's all this slimy liquid at the bottom.
At 10 minutes there is less, but still some. At the end of 20 minutes,
there is *no* liquid, just oatmeal. I stir it a couple or three times
during the cooking. It needs to be on very low heat during cooking, or
it sticks. A lid for the last 10 minutes helps keep the heat in.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Janet Wilder > wrote:
>
> I was just following the directions on the box. If
>it is extra starch, I think I'd rather it goes to the bottom of the pot
>than onto my hips. :-)

That slime is not starch, it's over cooked oat bran, which is water
soluable. I think oat bran goes to your breasts and makes em sag to
your hips. LOL

In article > ,
"Janet Bostwick" > wrote:

> "Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Thanks to everyone. I was just following the directions on the box. If it
> > is extra starch, I think I'd rather it goes to the bottom of the pot than
> > onto my hips. :-)
> >
> > --
> > Janet Wilder
> > Way-the-heck-south Texas
> > Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
> It is impossible to separate starch, water, nutrients and vitamins in this
> case. I assume that you are eating the oats for some health benefit. Don't
> dump the baby out with the bath water. Stir everything together as it is
> supposed to be. You wouldn't throw out all the stuff that settles to the
> bottom of the pot when you make soup, would you?
> Janet

Try Oat Bran. Supposed to be healthy for the arteries and it really does
make a delicious cereal. I used to eat it every morning for breakfast.
Made it in the microwave and served it with home made fat free yogurt.
I only quit eating it when I went low carb. <sigh> I miss it.
--
Peace! Om

"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down."
--Steve Rothstein

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>

Subscribe:

Janet wrote:

> Thanks to everyone. I was just following the directions on the box. If it
> is extra starch, I think I'd rather it goes to the bottom of the pot than
> onto my hips. :-)

You mean you don't want to be callipygian (like Nigella Lawson)? :-)

Bob

On Mar 5, 9:43*am, "Janet Bostwick" > wrote:
> "Janet Wilder" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Thanks to everyone. *I was just following the directions on the box. If it
> > is extra starch, I think I'd rather it goes to the bottom of the pot than
> > onto my hips. :-)
>
> > --
> > Janet Wilder
> > Way-the-heck-south Texas
> > Spelling doesn't count. *Cooking does.
>
> It is impossible to separate starch, water, nutrients and vitamins in this
> case. *I assume that you are eating the oats for some health benefit. *Don't
> dump the baby out with the bath water.

That doesn't make any sense. Unless there are vitamins sprayed onto
the oats, you're not losing anything. Nobody worries about losing
vitamins when they drain spaghetti. The only reason people worry about
rice is because rice has vitamins added to it.

On Mar 5, 1:21*pm, Dan Abel > wrote:
> In article >,
> *Janet Wilder > wrote:
>
> > I make the oats that cook in 5 minutes. I like this cereal but there is
> > always this slimy stuff at the bottom of the pot. What is this slimy
> > stuff? *Does anyone know?
>
> My wife and I have been eating oatmeal every morning for a few weeks. *
> I've never been a breakfast eater, but I take insulin, and I need to
> eat. *So we argue. *I always win, because I make it. *She says that it's
> 5 minute oatmeal. *Well, that's fine, but it takes 20 minutes, and
> that's that. *I cook it for 10 minutes and then it sits for 10 minutes. *
> At the end of 5 minutes, there's all this slimy liquid at the bottom. *
> At 10 minutes there is less, but still some. *At the end of 20 minutes,
> there is *no* liquid, just oatmeal. *I stir it a couple or three times
> during the cooking. *It needs to be on very low heat during cooking, or
> it sticks. *A lid for the last 10 minutes helps keep the heat in.
>
> --
> Dan Abel
> Petaluma, California USA
>

The benefits of oat bran over just oat meal is significant, in so far
as the lowering of cholesterol is concerned, as well as the overall
quantity of food. I cook Hodgins nearly every morning. It has
lowered my cholesterol from 299 to 107. The lowest reading I ever got
was 96. Just one-quarter cup has 3 grams of soluble fiber from oat
bran, which has the greatest concentration that I have ever seen in
any other hot cereal, and certainly over any dry cereal.
It's the soluble fiber which absorbs the fats which one eats.

After two minutes in the microwave, I usually add some raisins and zap
it for another two minutes. I then add about a teaspoon of Benecol, a
packet of Splenda and some brown sugar. I dilute with low fat milk as
I eat. If available, I'll add strawberries or whatever is around that
catches my attention. I love it, and apparently it loves me. As the
day goes by, I eat whatever I want......and let the oat bran do its
work of extracting out the nasty stuff in the desserts, etc., that I
consume.

"oz" > wrote in message
...
On Mar 5, 1:21 pm, Dan Abel > wrote:
> In article >,
> Janet Wilder > wrote:
>
> > I make the oats that cook in 5 minutes. I like this cereal but there is
> > always this slimy stuff at the bottom of the pot. What is this slimy
> > stuff? Does anyone know?
>
> My wife and I have been eating oatmeal every morning for a few weeks.
> I've never been a breakfast eater, but I take insulin, and I need to
> eat. So we argue. I always win, because I make it. She says that it's
> 5 minute oatmeal. Well, that's fine, but it takes 20 minutes, and
> that's that. I cook it for 10 minutes and then it sits for 10 minutes.
> At the end of 5 minutes, there's all this slimy liquid at the bottom.
> At 10 minutes there is less, but still some. At the end of 20 minutes,
> there is *no* liquid, just oatmeal. I stir it a couple or three times
> during the cooking. It needs to be on very low heat during cooking, or
> it sticks. A lid for the last 10 minutes helps keep the heat in.
>
> --
> Dan Abel
> Petaluma, California USA
>

The benefits of oat bran over just oat meal is significant, in so far
as the lowering of cholesterol is concerned, as well as the overall
quantity of food. I cook Hodgins nearly every morning. It has
lowered my cholesterol from 299 to 107. The lowest reading I ever got
was 96. Just one-quarter cup has 3 grams of soluble fiber from oat
bran, which has the greatest concentration that I have ever seen in
any other hot cereal, and certainly over any dry cereal.
It's the soluble fiber which absorbs the fats which one eats.

After two minutes in the microwave, I usually add some raisins and zap
it for another two minutes. I then add about a teaspoon of Benecol, a
packet of Splenda and some brown sugar. I dilute with low fat milk as
I eat. If available, I'll add strawberries or whatever is around that
catches my attention. I love it, and apparently it loves me. As the
day goes by, I eat whatever I want......and let the oat bran do its
work of extracting out the nasty stuff in the desserts, etc., that I
consume.

Just curious. Why do you use both Splenda and brown sugar?

JonquilJan

Learn something new every day
As long as you are learning, you are living
When you stop learning, you start dying

On Mar 8, 4:06*pm, "JonquilJan" > wrote:
> "oz" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Mar 5, 1:21 pm, Dan Abel > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article >,
> > Janet Wilder > wrote:
>
> > > I make the oats that cook in 5 minutes. I like this cereal but there is
> > > always this slimy stuff at the bottom of the pot. What is this slimy
> > > stuff? Does anyone know?
>
> > My wife and I have been eating oatmeal every morning for a few weeks.
> > I've never been a breakfast eater, but I take insulin, and I need to
> > eat. So we argue. I always win, because I make it. She says that it's
> > 5 minute oatmeal. Well, that's fine, but it takes 20 minutes, and
> > that's that. I cook it for 10 minutes and then it sits for 10 minutes.
> > At the end of 5 minutes, there's all this slimy liquid at the bottom.
> > At 10 minutes there is less, but still some. At the end of 20 minutes,
> > there is *no* liquid, just oatmeal. I stir it a couple or three times
> > during the cooking. It needs to be on very low heat during cooking, or
> > it sticks. A lid for the last 10 minutes helps keep the heat in.
>
> > --
> > Dan Abel
> > Petaluma, California USA
> >
>
> The benefits of oat bran over just oat meal is significant, in so far
> as the lowering of cholesterol is concerned, as well as the overall
> quantity of food. *I cook Hodgins nearly every morning. *It has
> lowered my cholesterol from 299 to 107. *The lowest reading I ever got
> was 96. *Just one-quarter cup has 3 grams of soluble fiber from oat
> bran, which has the greatest concentration that I have ever seen in
> any other hot cereal, and certainly over any dry cereal.
> It's the soluble fiber which absorbs the fats which one eats.
>
> After two minutes in the microwave, I usually add some raisins and zap
> it for another two minutes. *I then add about a teaspoon of Benecol, a
> packet of Splenda and some brown sugar. *I dilute with low fat milk as
> I eat. *If available, I'll add strawberries or whatever is around that
> catches my attention. *I love it, and apparently it loves me. As the
> day goes by, I eat whatever I want......and let the oat bran do its
> work of extracting out the nasty stuff in the desserts, etc., that I
> consume.
>
> Just curious. *Why do you use both Splenda and brown sugar?
>
> JonquilJan
>
> Learn something new every day
> As long as you are learning, you are living
> When you stop learning, you start dying- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I like it sweetened, but I hate putting too much real sugar in it,
calorie-wise. At the same time, I like the taste of the oat bran with
the brown sugar. I guess it's my own way of compromising the taste
with the calories.

oz wrote:

> I like it sweetened, but I hate putting too much real sugar in it,
> calorie-wise. At the same time, I like the taste of the oat bran with
> the brown sugar. I guess it's my own way of compromising the taste
> with the calories.

I use Stevia in the Raw on my oatmeal.
--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

Janet Wilder > wrote:

>I use Stevia in the Raw on my oatmeal.

Stevia is associated with liver damage.


Steve

I bet it's the like fluids s

wrote:
> I bet it's the like fluids s


TROLL FAIL

tert in seattle wrote:

> wrote:
> > I bet it's the like fluids s
>
>
> TROLL FAIL


BWAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...........!!!!!!


--
Best
Greg

Old fashioned oats say to use 1 C of water for 1/2 C of oats and to cook it 5 min, I use 1.25 C of water and cook 6 min.

On 2017-05-02 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
> wrote:
>> I bet it's the like fluids s
>
>
> TROLL FAIL

It got a response from you.

Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2017-05-02 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> I bet it's the like fluids s
>>
>>
>> TROLL FAIL
>
> It got a response from you.

****en Dave man - nothing gets past this guy!

On 5/2/2017 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
> wrote:
>> I bet it's the like fluids s
>
>
> TROLL FAIL
>
I can see I'm going to have to killfile the gmail domain again for a
while. <sigh>

Jill

Am Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 23:45:17 UTC+2 schrieb Jill McQuown:
> On 5/2/2017 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
> > wrote:
> >> I bet it's the like fluids s
> >
> >
> > TROLL FAIL
> >
> I can see I'm going to have to killfile the gmail domain again for a
> while. <sigh>

Bye then. :-(

Bye, Sanne.

On Wed, 3 May 2017 15:45:03 -0700 (PDT), sanne
> wrote:

>Am Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 23:45:17 UTC+2 schrieb Jill McQuown:
>> On 5/2/2017 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>> > wrote:
>> >> I bet it's the like fluids s
>> >
>> >
>> > TROLL FAIL
>> >
>> I can see I'm going to have to killfile the gmail domain again for a
>> while. <sigh>
>
>Bye then. :-(

What's the logic behind killfiling everybody who uses a gmail address?
What does that achieve?

Am Donnerstag, 4. Mai 2017 00:57:57 UTC+2 schrieb Bruce:
> On Wed, 3 May 2017 15:45:03 -0700 (PDT), sanne
> > wrote:
>
> >Am Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 23:45:17 UTC+2 schrieb Jill McQuown:
> >> On 5/2/2017 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> I bet it's the like fluids s
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > TROLL FAIL
> >> >
> >> I can see I'm going to have to killfile the gmail domain again for a
> >> while. <sigh>
> >
> >Bye then. :-(
>
> What's the logic behind killfiling everybody who uses a gmail address?
> What does that achieve?

Nothing good.
I do have a googlemail address since they offered it to me in 2004 and
always (well, almost ;-)) try to post reasonable and helpful stuff.
Before, it was AOL and others that got killfiled a lot... Oh well.

Bye, Sanne.

On 2017-05-03 7:20 PM, sanne wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 4. Mai 2017 00:57:57 UTC+2 schrieb Bruce:
>> On Wed, 3 May 2017 15:45:03 -0700 (PDT), sanne
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Am Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 23:45:17 UTC+2 schrieb Jill McQuown:
>>>> On 5/2/2017 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I bet it's the like fluids s
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> TROLL FAIL
>>>>>
>>>> I can see I'm going to have to killfile the gmail domain again for a
>>>> while. <sigh>
>>>
>>> Bye then. :-(
>>
>> What's the logic behind killfiling everybody who uses a gmail address?
>> What does that achieve?
>
> Nothing good.
> I do have a googlemail address since they offered it to me in 2004 and
> always (well, almost ;-)) try to post reasonable and helpful stuff.
> Before, it was AOL and others that got killfiled a lot... Oh well.
>
> Bye, Sanne.
>


You can thank the multitude of trolls using gmail addresses for the
reasonable action of filtering it.

On Wed, 3 May 2017 16:20:07 -0700 (PDT), sanne
> wrote:

>Am Donnerstag, 4. Mai 2017 00:57:57 UTC+2 schrieb Bruce:
>> On Wed, 3 May 2017 15:45:03 -0700 (PDT), sanne
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Am Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 23:45:17 UTC+2 schrieb Jill McQuown:
>> >> On 5/2/2017 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> I bet it's the like fluids s
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > TROLL FAIL
>> >> >
>> >> I can see I'm going to have to killfile the gmail domain again for a
>> >> while. <sigh>
>> >
>> >Bye then. :-(
>>
>> What's the logic behind killfiling everybody who uses a gmail address?
>> What does that achieve?
>
>Nothing good.
>I do have a googlemail address since they offered it to me in 2004 and
>always (well, almost ;-)) try to post reasonable and helpful stuff.
>Before, it was AOL and others that got killfiled a lot... Oh well.

I try that too and I fail often, but that has nothing to do with my
email address.

Am Donnerstag, 4. Mai 2017 01:30:05 UTC+2 schrieb Dave Smith:
> On 2017-05-03 7:20 PM, sanne wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, 4. Mai 2017 00:57:57 UTC+2 schrieb Bruce:
> >> On Wed, 3 May 2017 15:45:03 -0700 (PDT), sanne
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>> Am Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 23:45:17 UTC+2 schrieb Jill McQuown:
> >>>> On 5/2/2017 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> I bet it's the like fluids s
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> TROLL FAIL
> >>>>>
> >>>> I can see I'm going to have to killfile the gmail domain again for a
> >>>> while. <sigh>
> >>>
> >>> Bye then. :-(
> >>
> >> What's the logic behind killfiling everybody who uses a gmail address?
> >> What does that achieve?
> >
> > Nothing good.
> > I do have a googlemail address since they offered it to me in 2004 and
> > always (well, almost ;-)) try to post reasonable and helpful stuff.
> > Before, it was AOL and others that got killfiled a lot... Oh well.
> >
> > Bye, Sanne.
> >
>
>
> You can thank the multitude of trolls using gmail addresses for the
> reasonable action of filtering it.

As I tried to point out - you may lose interesting postings.
I don't filter anything - I've seen interesting and (friendly put) not so interesting posts from one and the same posters.
No one forces me to read the latter.
If I'd filter everyone whose posts I don't always agree with - what's left?

Bye, Sanne.

On Wed, 3 May 2017 19:30:19 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2017-05-03 7:20 PM, sanne wrote:
>> Am Donnerstag, 4. Mai 2017 00:57:57 UTC+2 schrieb Bruce:
>>> On Wed, 3 May 2017 15:45:03 -0700 (PDT), sanne
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 23:45:17 UTC+2 schrieb Jill McQuown:
>>>>> On 5/2/2017 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I bet it's the like fluids s
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TROLL FAIL
>>>>>>
>>>>> I can see I'm going to have to killfile the gmail domain again for a
>>>>> while. <sigh>
>>>>
>>>> Bye then. :-(
>>>
>>> What's the logic behind killfiling everybody who uses a gmail address?
>>> What does that achieve?
>>
>> Nothing good.
>> I do have a googlemail address since they offered it to me in 2004 and
>> always (well, almost ;-)) try to post reasonable and helpful stuff.
>> Before, it was AOL and others that got killfiled a lot... Oh well.
>>
>> Bye, Sanne.
>>
>
>
>You can thank the multitude of trolls using gmail addresses for the
>reasonable action of filtering it.

If you want to filter trolls, you can try looking at the news server
they're using. I can fill in anything as my email address.

On 2017-05-03 8:11 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Wed, 3 May 2017 19:30:19 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>

>> You can thank the multitude of trolls using gmail addresses for the
>> reasonable action of filtering it.
>
> If you want to filter trolls, you can try looking at the news server
> they're using. I can fill in anything as my email address.
>

That's true. The thing is that every once in a while there is a run of
trolling, and a lot of it comes from gmail.

"sanne" wrote in message
...

Am Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2017 23:45:17 UTC+2 schrieb Jill McQuown:
> On 5/2/2017 2:32 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
> > wrote:
> >> I bet it's the like fluids s
> >
> >
> > TROLL FAIL
> >
> I can see I'm going to have to killfile the gmail domain again for a
> while. <sigh>

Bye then. :-(

Bye, Sanne.

==

Bye from me too!

O


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

Oh ok. Thanks janet.
I was about to throw the box out. But i will try it in cold water like you said.