Fancy coffee's, healthy or unhealthy?

Archeron

I was never a lover of coffee, but since so many places have started selling all types of it lately, I've found that one type I do like it Latte. I'd drink it without sugar, and some extra milk, and would happily drink 2 a a day (though normally 2 a week is more like it).

A couple of people said to me recently how they had heard that Latte and cappuccino both have massive amounts of calories in them (like 500 or more) and I find it hard to believe that, as I dont know whats different in a latte except for hot frothy milk. I also read a comment in a mag recently on obesity which said "a 500 calorie cappucino or a 20 calorie cup of tea?".
However, if they are right, I would be more than happy to have a regular coffee, which I believe is reasonable enough on the unhealthy stakes.

So does anyone know the sinister truth? Is fancy coffee incredible calorie filled or am I being spoofed?

Mr Magnolia

A latte is made up from frothed milk and a double espresso.

A quick search reveals that a 1 Glass, 8 fl.oz has 150 calories, a double espresso has maybe 4, total = 154.

A cappuccino would have the hold the same calories if you leave out the shake of chocolate on the froth at the end.

All this is without sweetner, which you point out, you don't take any.

leahcim

Latte is usually 1/3 espresso, 2/3 steamed milk with a small bit of foamed milk on top.

Cappuccino is 1/3 expresso, 1/3 steamed milk and 1/3 foamed milk.

The espresso part is fairly low in calories, probably the same as a black coffee.

When milk is steamed it doubles in volume.

A 300mls latte would probably have been made with about 100mls of milk.
i.e. 2/3 of 300ml for the amount of steamed milk divided by 2 for amount before steaming.

Full fat milk is approx 64kcal per 100mls. I would be surprised if the calories of the whole latte was greater than 100kcal.

If you get a latte made with skimmed milk it would be even lower.

In my opinion the problem arises when people get hugh cups 500mls or more and put 4 spoons of sugar and get some sort of flavoured syrup etc. The calories would rise substantially.

Another problem is that the places that sell coffee also have nice muffins and pasteries on the counter and people think nothing of buying one of these to go with the latte. This sort of combination could easily top 500kcal.

Archeron

Cool, thanks for that. I wondered how it could be so high, but some people seemed adamant that these things were pure evil, but I couldnt understand it, or find much about it. Nice one.

Khannie

There was a show on TV there recently where there was some variant of latte that they were saying had 330 calories. Double latte? Does such a thing exist? Maybe they use cream in it. Maybe it's that the girl was having 2 a day (making them 165 calories each). Anyway.....

150 calories is quite a chunk. A normal coffee with even full fat milk + artificial sweetner would weigh in at around 25-30 calories. That's a 120 calorie difference. Two apples. Or a slice of toast with spread and a slice of ham. Or 2 digestives. etc.

It all adds up.

Faith

A double latte just has an extra shop of espresso in it. I can't imagine they have many calories in them. Like the others have said, the only calorific element is the milk. There's very little difference between drinking a glass of milk and a glass of latte.

According to here, a tall Starbucks latte with full fat milk has 180 kcals, a grande has 234 kcals and a venti has 306. However, if you get it with skimmed milk, it goes down to 126 for a tall and 168 for a grande.

Coffee actually speeds up your metabolism too, so I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Edit: Here's Starbucks official nutritional information (pdf): http://starbucks.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/A1F93080-B168-41AF-85AC-2F42764B6FB9/5968/UKBeverageNutritionalGuide2008.pdf

Cappuchino's a far lower in cals than lattes.

Khannie

168 calories is a fair chunk IMO. You overeat by that much every day and you'll gain (*breaks out calculator*) a bit over a stone in a year. Like I said....it all adds up.

G'em will come on and berate me for not pointing out that there's a range in which you wont gain or lose any weight, so I'll do that now. I mean strictly storing 168 calories a day.

g'em

Khannie wrote: »

G'em will come on and berate me for not pointing out that there's a range in which you wont gain or lose any weight, so I'll do that now. I mean strictly storing 168 calories a day.

My Fitness Nazi rep follows me everywhere

I adore Skinny Chai Lattes but on the days I have them I count them as a mid-morning snack and forgoe my usual fruit/ yoghurt. The occasional fancy coffee won't do you any harm, and it's the syrups and whipped cream that usually do most damage, grande hot chocolate with cream & marshmallows can be upwards of 400 calories!!

rubadub

Archeron wrote: »

I'd drink it without sugar, and some extra milk,

Without extra sugar. There is already natural sugar in milk, skim milk has more sugar than full fat milk. Skim milk has more sugar per ml than lilt! it is just that it is lactose and not particularly sweet.

Black coffee hasnt much calories at all. I also wonder if the caffeine boosts the metabolism in such a way that it could negate a small bit of milk.

LivingDeadGirl

Ugh this thread is depressing me, I LOVE having a latte when I'm out! I suppose it isn't too often, but I hate using up precious calories on liquids!

How Strange

Surely portion size comes into consideration too. If you only had a 'continental' size cappucino or latte then the calories would be reasonable but unfortunately we are following the american sizes. One of those coffees could easily be two or three portions.

I don't drink coffee because I used to drink too much of it so gave up but every now and then I get the yearning for a cappucino so I have a decaf one in one of those italian places near jervis st. Yum. Or I may have one for desert if I'm out for dinner. I feel its better than eating the icecream or whatever.

r3nu4l

rubadub wrote: »

Without extra sugar. There is already natural sugar in milk, skim milk has more sugar than full fat milk. Skim milk has more sugar per ml than lilt! it is just that it is lactose and not particularly sweet.

Black coffee hasnt much calories at all. I also wonder if the caffeine boosts the metabolism in such a way that it could negate a small bit of milk.

Very interesting post rubadub!

Looks like it's black coffee for me from now on...although I've recently gone from 6+ coffees a day to 3 and intend to go to 1/day before eventually quitting altogether.

leahcim

skim milk has more sugar than full fat milk

Can you explain why this is so Rubadub?

I have a relative who works in a creamery and I mentioned this to him. He said all they do to make skimmed milk was remove most of the fat, they dont add anything to compensate.

I know milk contains lactose (which is a form of sugar) but why should simply removing most of the fat from milk (skimming) change its sugar content?

rubadub

leahcim wrote: »

Can you explain why this is so Rubadub?

I have a relative who works in a creamery and I mentioned this to him. He said all they do to make skimmed milk was remove most of the fat, they dont add anything to compensate.

I know milk contains lactose (which is a form of sugar) but why should simply removing most of the fat from milk (skimming) change its sugar content?

It is only a slight increase. It is not added or anything. Imagine you have 2 litre bottles of milk. Both 4% fat. Now take the fat out and they both still have around the same amount of sugar in there BUT the skim milk bottle has now got a lower volume, around 4% less volume, so therefore the sugar is slightly more concentrated in it.

I eat tesco "healthy living" cheese, it has about half the fat of normal cheddar, so therefore the extra weight must come from something else, which is protein. Normal cheddar is around 1:1 protein:fat , while this cheese is around 2:1 protein:fat- so it is good on 2 counts, low in fat per 100g, and high in protein per 100g, about 30-35% protein.

Looks like it's black coffee for me from now on

Well I still consider milk perfectly fine. The natural sugars in milk would be better than the added sugar, I am just pointing out where the calories come from, some people think skim milk is like a diet coke with next to no calories.

Also when milk is steamed/frothed it does become sweeter, so many find there is no need to add more sugar. Some add it without thinking to steamed milk drinks. Like how some people put salt on food before they even taste it- it might not need any.

r3nu4l

rubadub wrote: »

Well I still consider milk perfectly fine. The natural sugars in milk would be better than the added sugar, I am just pointing out where the calories come from, some people think skim milk is like a diet coke with next to no calories.

Also when milk is steamed/frothed it does become sweeter, so many find there is no need to add more sugar. Some add it without thinking to steamed milk drinks. Like how some people put salt on food before they even taste it- it might not need any.

I don't take sugar in coffee at all so I'll keep cutting the milk until there's none, I get more than enough sugar each day from my glass of pink grapefruit juice, fruit and meals during the day (fructose, glucose, sucrose etc.) ...not to mention the 70% cocoa chocolate

Khannie

leahcim wrote: »

I have a relative who works in a creamery and I mentioned this to him. He said all they do to make skimmed milk was remove most of the fat, they dont add anything to compensate.

I thought they added some whey to it to compensate (they call it "milk proteins" or something in the ingredients). I'll check. We have some in the fridge.

leahcim

I thought they added some whey to it to compensate (they call it "milk proteins" or something in the ingredients)

When I said they don't add anything to compensate, I meant for the lack of fat. They usually fortify milk with vitamins. They do add milk proteins but I believe this is because if they don't the milk will not be as white as we come to expect.

Khannie

leahcim wrote: »

They do add milk proteins but I believe this is because if they don't the milk will not be as white as we come to expect.

Interesting.

Khannie's useless and somewhat related factoid: In the cadbury's ad, they use white paint for the milk that they pour into the chocolate because milk didn't look milky enough.

aphex™

In some cafes they use milk with more fat in it for the coffee. I would watch out for that. Think Insomnia use a special milk. So using the average amount of calories for normal milk in your calculations may be incorrect.

Khannie

More interesting stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if it's "half n' half" which is fairly popular in the US. Just did some digging and found this on wikipedia:

In the United States, half and half is a very light cream typically used in coffee. Its butterfat content is about 12.5%,[1] which makes it lower-calorie and more stable in coffee. It is widely available in the United States, both in individual-serving containers and in bulk. It is also used to make ice cream. The same product is known as half cream in the United Kingdom.

12.5% :eek:

lol@lower calorie. Lower calorie than full cream perhaps, but very little else that you'd put in a coffee.

jdivision

In fairness that's just the thing you add to make a black coffee white. You'd barely put any in. And it tastes crap anyway