Aldi Hike Protein bars

IrishHomer

Anyone any thoughts on Aldi protein bars? I tried one last night, very sweet but for 79 cent its a steal

Dial Hard

Well what does the nutritional info say?

Alf Veedersane

Typical Values Per Bar 55g
Energy 168kcal
Fat 0.8g
of which Saturates 0.2g
Carbohydrate 25.8g
of which Sugars 17.5g
Fibre 9.4g
Protein 10.5g
Salt 0.18g

Tigger99

I know they are cheap but for that amount of calories I'd get way more protein in a fage yoghurt or fulfil protein bar. Also very high in carbs is mostly sugar. Good amount of fibre tho.

Gamebred

Is that not way too much sugar in them?

How comes when products state that they contain high levels of protein the word "protein" is often typed in a certain kind of font, you know the one, kind of manly gritty font? Whose decision was that?

Tigger99

Tigger99 wrote: »

I know they are cheap but for that amount of calories I'd get way more protein in a fage yoghurt or fulfil protein bar. Also very high in carbs is mostly sugar. Good amount of fibre tho.

Don't worry, you'd get your 50-60g Rda of protein easily enough just eating a small bit of meat once a day as part of one of your 3 normal meals a day with normal pre-protein-fixation-era carb levels

Tigger99

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Don't worry, you'd get your 50-60g Rda of protein easily enough just eating a small bit of meat once a day as part of one of your 3 normal meals a day with normal pre-protein-fixation-era carb levels

Thanks sweetie

Macy0161

Tried the berry one last night - was quite impressed tbh. Not as much protein as a fulfil/ quest bar, but a third of the price. And less calories and less than half the price for the same protein as the nature valley "protein" bars.

I'll still be looking to make my own protein snacks, but often I'd only need 8-10 to get me over my line (I know it doesn't matter that much, but still...) and these would swap out for some cereal bar that I might have with an afternoon brew in work!

Cocoa one to try this afternoon, which are slightly higher calories...

darrenw5O94

There is more sugar in them than protein.

They should be called sugar bars not protein bars.

bladespin

darrenw5O94 wrote:

They should be called sugar bars not protein bars.

Very, false advertising imo.

Alf Veedersane

bladespin wrote: »

Very, false advertising imo.

Not really. They have a decent quantity of protein. They also have a high sugar content.

But here's the thing...they're bars.

bladespin

Alf Veedersane wrote:

Not really. They have a decent quantity of protein. They also have a high sugar content.

Imo if there's more crap than protein in it then it shouldn't be called a protein bar.

Alf Veedersane

bladespin wrote: »

Imo if there's more crap than protein in it then it shouldn't be called a protein bar.

People buy them because protein. There's a decent chunk of protein in them.

I don't disagree there's a high sugar content.

Anyway, they're bars. If the sugar content is making a difference to your diet then there's to much protein bar in your diet.

I don't mean you specifically, btw

TerrorFirmer

Tried a few of these recently and they're excellent considering they're 79c. Really like the berry one.

There is more sugar in them than protein.

They should be called sugar bars not protein bars.

It's fruit sugar. How do you propose to make a protein fruit bar without sugars?

Sometimes I think people fail to actually realise that fruit is full of natural sugars but it is sugar content all the same.

Eating two pieces of actual fruit would have more sugar than this bar.

Same with the Nakd fruit bars. 100% natural ingredients and low calorie but still high in sugar due to the high date/raisin content.

bladespin

TerrorFirmer wrote:

It's fruit sugar. How do you propose to make a protein fruit bar without sugars?

TerrorFirmer wrote:

Sometimes I think people fail to actually realise that fruit is full of natural sugars but it is sugar content all the same.

Here's the problem, imo if you're presenting domething as a 'protein' product then protein should be dominant, not carbs/sugars, I think it's misleading. A 'healthier' bar maybe but that's about it.

JimsAlterEgo

its because most bars have little or no protein

Macy0161

I think the Hike bars do ok compared to a lot of the non-specialist bars that have "protein" attached to them to be fair, and a lot cheaper.

TerrorFirmer

bladespin wrote: »

Here's the problem, imo if you're presenting domething as a 'protein' product then protein should be dominant, not carbs/sugars, I think it's misleading. A 'healthier' bar maybe but that's about it.

They don't though. It's advertised as a protein rich energy bar, it's not described as a 'protein bar' on the actual label.

It's a fruit bar with 10g of protein for 79c. And again, those sugars are natural fruit sugars (or crap as you called it?), it's not like it's a Mars Bar.

bladespin

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

They don't though. It's advertised as a protein rich energy bar, it's not described as a 'protein bar' on the actual label.

It's a fruit bar with 10g of protein for 79c. And again, those sugars are natural fruit sugars (or crap as you called it?), it's not like it's a Mars Bar.

But it's not 'protein rich' is it? It's carb rich, just like a mars bar, in fact they have nearly the same carbs as a standard 51g Mars bar 25g compared to 31g.

I understand your point about sugars but don't care, I'm only interested in the protein content, which is only about 5g more than the mars bar.

Alf Veedersane

bladespin wrote: »

I'm only interested in the protein content, which is only about 5g more than the mars bar.

That's twice as much.

If I get p[aid twice as much tomorrow, I'm rich!!!eleven.

bladespin

Alf Veedersane wrote:

That's twice as much.

Just eat 2 mars bars, much nicer. If I'm carbing I'm gonna enjoy it.

TerrorFirmer

bladespin wrote: »

But it's not 'protein rich' is it? It's carb rich, just like a mars bar, in fact they have nearly the same carbs as a standard 51g Mars bar 25g compared to 31g.

I understand your point about sugars but don't care, I'm only interested in the protein content, which is only about 5g more than the mars bar.

A Mars bar is full of artificial sugars. It also has more calories and more fat.

You've also claimed that it has half the protein of the Hike bar but it doesn't - it has about 3g of protein vs 10.5g of the Aldi bar.

The Aldi Hike bar is full of fruit (dates and raisins), which is where the sugar content comes from.

By your logic, eating an apple and an orange is the same as eating a Mars bar because they have the same sugar carb content on paper.

bladespin

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

A Mars bar is full of artificial sugars. It also has more calories and more fat.

True, but they taste nice and have carbs, if I'm bulking I'd prefer that.

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

You've also claimed that it has half the protein of the Hike bar but it doesn't - it has about 3g of protein vs 10.5g of the Aldi bar.

The Aldi Hike bar is full of fruit (dates and raisins), which is where the sugar content comes from.

Mars has 4.13, Hike has 10.5, apologies, there's a 6g gap - still feck all tbh.

And yes, if I'm watching macros then all carb sources are considered equal though I prefer to get mine from fresh fruit and veg really.

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

By your logic, eating an apple and an orange is the same as eating a Mars bar because they have the same sugar carb content on paper.

Think you're deliberately missing my 'logic' here, to say something is protein rich when it's not, the bar is carb rich, good carbs or not, I don't care.

If you'd like a bar whit good carbs and a bit of protein in it then fire away, I'm only interested in protein/protein rich bars that have more protein than other crap in.

TerrorFirmer

OK....so why is the yardstick for a fruit energy bar with 10g of protein suddenly how good it is for a bodybuilding diet?

It's a fruit bar with high protein content, which is completely true in the context of a fruit bar.

For 99% of people it's a far, far healthier, and better, alternative to a Mars bar. Natural sugars. Little to no fat. 10.5g of protein.

It does what it says on the tin pretty well for 79c. It's not designed for nor aimed at supplementing a bodybuilders bulking diet.

For 79c in that context you'd be better off with a pint of milk but that's not the point of the bar so it seems a bit unfair to judge it that way.

bladespin

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

OK....so why is the yardstick for a fruit energy bar with 10g of protein suddenly how good it is for a bodybuilding diet?

It's not, that's my yardstick for something (anything) describing itself as protein rich. It's packaging it just another cynical swipe at the protein pound (euro?).

Describe it as a straightforward fruit energy bar or even as a health bar (as I already suggested) and all's happy.

Not much different to 'protein' milk come to think of it considering there's feck all more protein in that than normal milk but I digress, you'll probably go off on a lecture on how good milk is for you missing my point again lol.

Macy0161

Laying off the mars bar comparison, it would have a good deal more protein than a "normal" fruit/ energy/ cereal bar imo. So if you were going to have a bar anyway, and you like the taste.... They're less calories than a Nature Valley 2 bar pack, and 7g more protein. Less calories and similar protein to the Nature Valley "Protein" range, and less expensive.

They're more calories, more protein, more expensive and less tasty than my preferred afternoon brew accompaniment of the Aldi/ Harvest Morn Fruit and Fibre Cereal bars though!