Why are tubers so much better then grains. For example, lets say i want to get 75g of carbs in my diet, i can do this from 100g of Millet or i can do this from 400g/sweet potato. That sweet potato will be packed with Salicylate, Oxylates and fermentable fiber that is causing problems for lots of people. What is it in millet that would make it such a killer while everyone is saying sweet potato is great? There are antinutrients in everything, so my questions is why is paleo only concentrating on the antinutrients in grains?
As a side note has anyone considered how heattreating different antinutrients deactivates them? What i have read antinutrients in millet is mostly lost when cooked while oxylates gets ever worse when heat treated.
asked byfavetelinguis (25)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on May 02, 2013
at 03:24 PM
So my questions is why is paleo only concentrating on the antinutrients in grains?
You must not have been around when people were running away, screaming in fear from white potatoes. ;-)
AFAIK, millet's main issue is that it contains strong goitrogens. So, it may be OK for those that are gluten sensitive, but less so for those who have thyroid issues. With regards to all the delicious vegetables that contains oxylates, I'm really just not worried: my family has no history of kidney stones, and I'm pretty sure that's the only big issue with oxalic acid. Short of allergies, if you are afraid of eating spinach or a sweet potato, something is very wrong with you.
Your "100g of millet" for 75g of carbs is uncooked millet, which is completely indigestible for humans. Would I rather eat 2 cups of mucus-y millet, or a large, cooked sweet potato (probably mashed, 'cause that's how I roll)? Definitely the sweet potato.
My biggest beef with grains is that unlike meat and tubers they lose nutritional value when cooked (this isn't because water has been added to the entire mass - vitamins and minerals are lost). Matt Lalonde's talk on nutrient density at AHS12 was very interesting, especially regarding this point.
Other pseudo-grains seem to be hit or miss: most report no problems with buckwheat, while some (like myself) have issues with quinoa (even if it's thoroughly washed).
It's seems that plenty of people here eat rice. I fermented teff and made injera last weekend. Some people here eat oats. I don't think most of us consider it optimal food, and definitely not paleo. However, it has it's place, but I don't it's a substantial one compared to veggies, meats, or fruits.
Regarding cooking and heat, boiling should reduce oxalic acid. This works great for some veggies (mmmm, mashed beets), but less so for others - e.g. I hate boiled spinach - it's a travesty. I do not believe oxylates get worse when heated, as it is often suggested to boil or steam to remove them. However, roasting, by removing some water content, hypothetically could make oxylate concentration denser if it didn't break down the oxylates.
on May 02, 2013
at 04:07 PM
It's not just the anti-nutrients but the minerals. Look at the Millet and at the Sweet Potato, one of them is packed full of potassium, the other has almost no potassium. The same is true when comparing most grains to most tubers.