Any Good Lowfat cheeses?


I’ve never had those “cheese” slices…or least that I remember. But if Kenji loves them - as I shared above - that reduces IMO the “ribbing” rationale :smile:


Kenji likes American cheese. He didn’t have anything positive to say about prepared cheese product.

“Some folks also like to avoid modern process cheeses made with MPC, since it’s often imported from countries with less rigid safety standards or oversight. This is a valid concern!”


"Let’s get one thing straight. When I say American cheese, I am referring specifically to process American cheese. The kind that comes either in individual slices from the refrigerated dairy case or sliced off of a rectangular block at the deli counter. " Kenji

I don’t know why this silly thing is important to you. Whatever. xoc


And bringing this back on topic, for the OP’s intended uses, I’d probably use a low fat mozzarella for the bulk of the cheese with a small quantity of a grated concentrated flavor hard cheese added.


Regular American cheese is food. Nothing wrong with deli cheese or Velveeta except they’re bland.

Borden “milk slices” and some of the other corporate products are what Michael Pollan calls “foodish.”


But it’s not gonna kill ya and if it’s what someone prefers…


Eating a lot of foodish products will make you sick and shorten your lifespan. It’s hard to believe that anyone who pays attention to how things taste and thinks about what they eat would pick milk protein concentrate gel over pasteurized process cheese.


Who’s talking about “a lot”? Re making you sick and/or shortening your lifespan, it may or it may not. Plenty of people live a gazillion years doing everything ‘wrong.’ Others eat right, exercise etc. and die young.



What in the world do you have against people eating food that they like?

No one is making you eat it.

Seriously, chill.

Your high horse is squealing. Says you’re a bit too heavy, should dismount.


iIt sounds too simple but because there are very little nutritional recommendations backed up by sound clinical data the “famous” quote from Michael Pollan is still the best recommendation “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants”. Every other nutritional recommendation / diet advices, e.g. eat more fiber, less cholesterol, more omega-3, more whole grains, less carbohydrates, less sodium etc aren’t backed up by scientific data including clinical trials. His quote really captures the few recommendations which are backed up by data, e.g. intake of fruits and vegetables lowers blood pressure and reduces risk of CVD, your total calorie intake is important compared to your calorie use (how the calories are stored (fat vs carbohydrate is in the bigger picture actually of little relevance) and a number of food additives have shown significant side effects in animals (which can’t be followed up with clinical trials due to ethnical issues). Everything else I have seen, e.g. Wheatbelly, sugar is toxic etc. are just people who are trying to make a lot of money with unscientific recommendation.


I don’t know where this belongs but I’ll put it here because I love your contributions:

Everything in moderation … including moderation.


You can’t eat what you want if you don’t know what you’re eating.

Corporations pass off adulterated and imitation food as the real thing. It shouldn’t be legal to cut costs by replacing milk with potentially contaminated milk protein concentrate.


I think “total calorie intake” that treats all calories as equal has been thoroughly discredited, not that we’re all that close to understanding the complicated reality.


As I wrote “it is of little relevance” - yes, there is a slight difference between how the body treats calories coming from fat or carbohydrate but it has little relevance in terms of your health, how you might lose weight etc. There is hardly any scientific sound evidence that any of the different life styles, e.g low fat/high carbohydrate, high fat/low carbohydrate and the many, many more iterations/variations have any significant impact on your health, weight, chances to get diseases like cancer, CVD etc. Ultimately the only thing which matters is the difference between your calorie intake and usage. And that’s what Polla meant with “Not too much”. If people would care more how much they eat (in terms of calorie intake) instead of where it comes from (fat, carbohydrate etc) and how much activity they do we wouldn’t have an obesity problem. You are focusing like too many people on the wrong parameters which unfortunately helps a lot of people earning millions with books and diets etc. which are based quackery


Another rec for the Jarlsberg reduced fat Swiss.


Despite trying their best to eat well, lots of people end up fat or with diet-related diseases. “Not too much” isn’t helpful advice to someone who doesn’t know how to eat in order not to get hungry between meals and not gain weight. Pollan’s personal diet (eat whatever you want for breakfast and lunch so long as you make it from scratch yourself) is pretty much like what works for me, but I don’t think it’s very practical for people who work outside the home.

Since you dismiss epidemiological studies, you’re ignoring the information that’s most useful to most people.



Bodies and lifestyles are different, and what folks eat and why they eat it vary widely. Instead of derailing this thread and making suggestions against the initial poster’s doctor’s recommendations, perhaps start a new topic about health claims and cautions.


Chowhound was ridiculous frequently when health claims and dangers were brought up. I wish it wouldn’t even go there…even though I participate :frowning:


As said before epidemiological studied have often major flaws which makes their outcomes often not suitable to get any meaningful correlation (and rules). In addition, many claims originally established by such studies have turned out to be false once tested in clinical studies which are the established gold standard throughout the scientific communities. It seems obvious that you don’t work in a science related field or have much experience with interpretation of scientific data but just because you don’t like results of science experiments doesn’t mean you can just ignore them or try to use other less useful methods in the hope to find a more convenient result. Saying that the current scientifically backed results which only offer such “simple” rules as said by Pollan don’t help enough people and so we just have to make up new rules without any scientific evidence is the same as saying there are still many people dying from smoking because they can’t follow the simple rule of “stop smoking or your chances of dying from cancer are significantly increased” and so we have to make up some new rules like “only smoke cigarettes with menthol flavor” so that it is just a “simpler” rule for people to follow even though it won’t have any health benefit for them. I hope you realize that your “new” rules suggestion is quite silly and completely unscientific.