Similarly, the multimillion commercial venture known as the Nutribullet blender has built its reputation by going after the juicer market, claiming that it is a 'nutrient extractor'. If you've seen the hype for this on the shopping channels or websites you could be forgiven for agreeing with us that this cheap chinese blender seems to be sold primarily on the basis of 'nutribullshit'. The argument that a blended drink is better than extracted juice largely rests on the claim that you waste a lot of goodness when you are juicing by discarding pulp, whereas you include everything in the drink when blending.
This is only half true because with an efficient juicer you are mainly wasting the fibre element of the ingredients. If you already get enough fibre in your diet generally, what is the big advantage to adding more in the form of blended vegetable drinks? To understand this point more fully we need to look at what is potentially misleading in the claims made by Vitamix.
A good quality juice extractor does exactly the opposite to what Vitamix say here. They are selling blenders by trying to introduce a fear of the risk of disease if you use a juicer.
These claims are made in bold headings in literature that they've produced and they are completely unsupportable. If I juice a bunch of grapes there is a tiny proportion of waste, consisting mostly of grape skins. With fibrous vegetables there is more waste, because there is more fibre. The waste from a good juice extractor consists mainly of this indigestible plant fibre and the majority of the nutritional content available is already extracted in the juice, so juicing is not as wasteful as claims by some blender manufacturers disingenuously suggest.
The most misleading aspect of this negative, anti-juicing, parasitic marketing is that it conveniently fails to address the main nutritional advantages that juicers can offer. Same hype; different manufacturer. But we're probably being naive if we expect marketers to tell it like it is. Instead of concentrating on the positive features of their blenders, they have attacked juicing as wasteful and less nutritious to try and steal sales.
Naturally, neither Vitamix nor Blendtec mention the main ways that good quality juicers offer access to better nutrition. See our Ninja vs. Nutribullet comparison guide see these blenders in action.
Many blending enthusiasts will tell you that juicing is wasteful, while keen juicers will argue that it is the best possible way to get all the nutrients you need. The truth is that there is no right answer; both methods of processing have benefits and drawbacks, and both have their place in a healthy kitchen. Read on to discover some of the benefits of each. A blender processes everything you put into it; there is no fibrous pulp to be thrown away at the end.
The fibre in the drink slows down digestion so that energy is released slowly and evenly. This prevents sugar highs and lows and means that you will feel full for longer after drinking it. The fibre from fruits and vegetables works its way through your digestive system, acting like a broom that sweeps it clean. This helps to remove toxins and encourages regular elimination. A sturdy jug blender works well for general kitchen use and makes great smoothies.
Cheaper models might not blend harder veg or thoroughly smooth out crunchy seeds and nuts, but a simple jug blender will do a great job on soft fruits, veg, yogurt, nut butter, honey, and other soft ingredients. They are large enough for a good quantity of ingredients, so they are great if you need to make smoothies in bulk.
Featured in our Vitamix vs. Ninja comparison, this blender excels at most things, from smoothies and hot soups to nut butter and sorbet. The single-serving cup blender has become very popular over the last few years. Perhaps the most well-known is the Nutribullet blender, though similar designs are available from many other leading kitchen brands. Blending and juicing have their advantages, but there is no silver bullet for nutrition. Neither will consistently retain all the key nutrients in your fresh ingredients.
So, neither should replace eating fruit and veg altogether, as this is still the best way to get the key nutrients your body needs. We made a juice or smoothie using an identical fruit and vegetable recipe in seven blenders and 13 juicers from big brands and specialist juice retailers. Our aim was to see how well key nutrients such as vitamin C, beta-carotene, potassium, iron and fibre are retained by each machine.
To make sure no nutritional components escaped our clutches, we used two scientific techniques:. To find the best juicer or blender for you, try our independent blender reviews , including our review of the Nutribullet and alternative mini blenders, and our juicer reviews , which cover both centrifugal and masticating models. Test score. Looking to get more fruit and veg in your diet, but not sure whether to go for a blender or juicer?
We examine the health claims of both. Aaron West. In this article Blending vs juicing - what's the difference? Which is better - blending or juicing? How we tested nutritional claims Related articles.
Blending vs juicing - what's the difference? How we tested nutritional claims We made a juice or smoothie using an identical fruit and vegetable recipe in seven blenders and 13 juicers from big brands and specialist juice retailers.
To make sure no nutritional components escaped our clutches, we used two scientific techniques: Mass spectrometry - this method separates nutritional components by mass. It works by converting a portion of our fruit and veg sample into ions, which are then fed through a mass analyser for us to detect. High pressure liquid chromatography HPLC - this separates nutritional components by solubility. The smoothie and juice samples were put through a column of liquid at high pressure.
Because each component reacts differently to this process, they separate, allowing us to measure them.
0コメント