I recall reading a lot of information years ago that rolled oats have more micronutrients than instant oats. But every article I read now claims that they’re the same and they’re quoting the same article from heart.org. I am unable to find data on the nutritional facts of different processed oats. The new food label on instant oatmeal does not even list any additives. It only says 100% oat. I’m very confused.
The micronutrients should be the same. They are all whole oat groats that have just been mechanically processed in different ways - cutting, rolling, etc. The main difference between the different types of oats is the glycemic index.
There are differences because the processing methods are different, but whether it matters is debatable.
All oats get hulled and toasted. Steel cut just get chopped up at this point. Rolled and instant also get steamed before flattening or pulverising.
So it looks like steel cut gets the least processing at the factory, but then they get cooked for a fair time at home.
There’s also the particle size of steel cut oats to consider which may affect the glycemic index. And instant oats may not be just oats, if they have a bunch of extra ingredients in the packet.
I don’t get this fascination with steel-cut oats. I get the 7-grain or the 10-grain oats from some guy “Bob” with a mill (not sure if we’re allowed to give product names here) and they have far more fiber and protein than steel-cut.
Agree with most folks here that since it’s the same oats, they have the same nutrient content. The glycemic index is something to watch. Although I don’t have diabetes, I track my blood sugars. I love oats and have eaten them all my life, but I was surprised to see how much they can raise blood sugar. More than I thought, and definitely the more processed the higher spike.