1

votes

how are grains bad for you? does not make sense

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created August 24, 2012 at 11:01 PM

i get why wheat is bad for you, but why is rice considered "bad"

japanese people eat rice multiple times a day, and are the healthiest people in the world.. does not make sense.

3c997ffae3db9464325b96979346d9e9

(1290)

on August 26, 2012
at 01:57 AM

Glad you're here Steve.

Medium avatar

(2338)

on August 25, 2012
at 10:58 PM

why does everyone refer to michael phelpes when the topic of carbohydrates comes up, like somehow he's the norm and we should all strive to be michael phelps and eat 4 subway sandwiches a day.... can it please just stop already, we know he eats a lot of food. he's a freak olympic athlete. it literally adds nothing to any conversation.

0a9ad4e577fe24a6b8aafa1dd7a50c79

(5150)

on August 25, 2012
at 05:25 PM

Lots of people eat grains in volume. Breakfast pizza/sandwich for breakfast. Lunch: some noodles and maybe a sandwich. Dinner: Huge ass bowl of pasta. And a snack in between of maybe some oatmeal or a protein bar (often contain grain flours and gluten.)

Medium avatar

(2923)

on August 25, 2012
at 05:05 PM

Mambo has the key phrase: "used to be healthy" -- both Japan and Okinawa have seen massive rises in the "diseases of civilization" as the populations have switched from traditional foods to Westernized foods -- the switch from white rice, seafood, and veggies to McDonalds and Coke doesn't do your body good ...

742ff8ba4ff55e84593ede14ac1c3cab

(3536)

on August 25, 2012
at 04:23 PM

Forever...Do you have a reference for the macadamia having a very high phytate content. I have been searching for it for ages but I can't find anything online.

F5a8a14fc6a4d33c2563d0dd3066698a

(714)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:33 PM

Ditto to foreveryoung

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on August 25, 2012
at 05:47 AM

Thanks for this question! I was always wondering that. I think traditional grains made by soaking and fermenting are not bad for you if you are young and healthy. However, if your immune system has been suffering and you have a damage gut - grains can be poison. There is nothing wrong with eating rice, if your diet is overall healthy.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:37 AM

Hard to really infer anything about such a lifestyle, with so many factors. Certainly, if one was to pick out any element via cherry picking, from a population that on average lives a bit longer (not the longest, but longer), one could claim that smoking is harmless.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:36 AM

Hard to really infer anything about such a lifestyle, with so many factors. Certainly, if one was to pick out any element via cherry picking, from a population that on average lives longer, one could claim that smoking is harmless.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:34 AM

Its hard to single out reasons for their somewhat longer lives. Fish might be part of it, there collectivist culture and practice of buddhism might also be involved. One thing I find facinating is that smoking is extremely prevelant in japan, and yet they have relatively low rates of lung cancer, and very low incidence of heart disease. Maybe thats down to all the fish and veg, but its a bit of a mystery to me.

1296f5fecd084f101d7c5fbe013f07eb

(1213)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:31 AM

Can you elaborate on why rice isn't "completely safe?" Genuine curiosity, not sarcasm.

Bb3d1772b28c02da2426e40dfcb533f5

(5381)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:24 AM

IDK about them being the healthiest people in the world. http://factsanddetails.com/japan.php?itemid=835&catid=23&subcatid=151 Just from a quick google, they have a high incidence of strokes, a reasonably high incidence of diabetes, and a relevatively high rate of tuberculosis. On the plus side, they have only moderately high rate of IBS (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19920955) versus the prevelance in italy, and on average they live longer.

3a9d5dde5212ccd34b860bb6ed07bbef

(1782)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:18 AM

Stop listening to CW! It is killing you!

3a9d5dde5212ccd34b860bb6ed07bbef

(1782)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:15 AM

Stop listening to CW! It is toxic.

5e92edc5a180787a60a252a8232006e9

(345)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:02 AM

Fiber does make a lot of difference. Start eating a couple of avocadoes and total up your carbs and compare to net. You don't think it makes a difference? Still, if your only carb sources are them, they won't kick you out of ketosis.

C2ecbc6f2948c232d60a639c50b7f4f9

(504)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:56 AM

@jayjay, have you seen michael phelps diet, and the amount of carbs he eats?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:14 AM

That is literally the exact diet that I followed throughout high school. In college I switched to strict paleo/primal by replacing the oats and sprouted grain bread with Japanese sweet potatoes.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:06 AM

That's a post that's very close to how I view carbs/grains in the context of a paleo diet.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:06 AM

http://www.travisstoetzel.com/paleocheat/

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:05 AM

I had to edit some grammar, same gist though.The down vote honestly doesn't bother me (it's the anonymous down voting that does). Thanks for being willing to hear my side of the story though. Look, I just don't like the demonizing of foods- virtually any food can be bad in some contexts and good (or benign) in others.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:03 AM

if you read my exact words and don't extrapolate, I am specifically talking about zero glucose (those that "don't eat glucose"). But you are right, it is provoking. I just get annoyed with the carb demonizing that goes on. It reminds of reckless sailor who sailed off into a stormy sky, sunk his ship and now says sailing is bad for you. It's not sailing, it's reckless sailing.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:01 AM

if you read my exact words and don't extrapolate, I am specifically talking about zero glucose (those that "don't eat glucose"). But you are right, it is provoking. I just get annoyed with the carb demonizing that goes on. It reminds of reckless sailor who sailed off into a storm and now says sailing is bad for you- when it's being a reckless sailor that's bad for you.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:57 AM

It's all good....I'll remove the downvote. Just struck me as kinda demeaning and definitely untrue to a subsection of paleo eaters.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:55 AM

Then why do you bother with that second paragraph. Sorry, but saying anyone eating VLC or LC is automatically going to be "lazy, inactive,have a low quality of life and not look good naked"....kinda provokes some of us.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:55 AM

If you read my whole answer, I said that "note, I am not advocating a high carb diet."

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:53 AM

I am positive that every one of the people you know that is lean eats some glucose from fruit or starch. You can be low carb and eat fruit/starch, you just have to watch your portions.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:52 AM

Yeah, I am a low carber. I've been eating 150-200g protein a day and cycling my carbs in 4 day spurts with a reefed every 2 cycles (200g+ carbs). Day 1 is 75-85g, day 2 and 3 is 25-35g, and 4 is 35-45g. That's not zero carb, I'm not counting green vegetables as a carb source, but it's certainly lower carb than most.

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:51 AM

Second that....

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:49 AM

I don't mind 100-150, but I take the gross rather than net rout. Fiber still counts in mine (kinda like PB instead of PHD).....not a huge difference though TBH, since I dont bother with much vegetables.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:47 AM

Down voted for paragraph 2. Total bullshit to say the least. Seriously...do you even know any low carbers? Most I know are lean and strong.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:46 AM

Down voted for paragraph 2. Total bullshit to say the least. Seriously...do you even know any low carbers? Most I know are lean and strong.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:40 AM

no their not.....

5e92edc5a180787a60a252a8232006e9

(345)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:27 AM

Those in Japan used to be healthy because they ate white rice, lots of fish and vegetables. It's the toxin-free nature of rice which made them healthy: instead, they could have eaten modern wheat variety, which is higher glycemic and has more effect on BG and whets your appetite even more.

5e92edc5a180787a60a252a8232006e9

(345)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:25 AM

You're allowed empty calories. Especially toxin-free empty calories. You should only eat nutrient-dense food argument has always been wrongheaded. What is the easiest and harmless glucose source of all? If believe, as PHD does, that about 100-150g of carbs is ideal, then you have a choice of either tubers or white rice, the two most ideal sources of glucose.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:22 AM

"the great majority of people" abuses a substance and tries to demonize it and ruin it for everyone else.

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:12 AM

For the first part of your statement; the great majority of people, eat grains in high quantities, do you know how much wheat does it take to make a dinner roll or a baguette or a bagel? and most people eat grains on every meal. For the second part; there are many plants and vegetables that benefit from being eaten, and not just benefit, that's the only mean for them to get their seeds activated and spread, grains and legumes, among others, on the other hand, are destroyed when eaten.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:55 AM

Who are these people that eat them in volume? I did eat oatmeal almost daily up until the age of 13, and often ate a slice of baguette at lunch and dinner, but that's like 70 grams of grains TOPS. You are also admitting that eating too much is what makes them bad. And sissons other argument that they're designed to ward of predators so we shouldn't eat them would also lead to the conclusion that we should not be eating any vegetable matter whatsoever (or is the glucose that is it just the tasty glucose meant to ward of predators). So much for his daily "Big Ass Salad" idea.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:53 AM

Who are these people that eat them in volume? I did eat oatmeal almost daily up until the age of 13, and often ate a slice of baguette at lunch and dinner, but that's like 70 grams of grains TOPS. You are also admitting that eating too much is what makes them bad. And sissons other argument that they're designed to ward of predators so we shouldn't eat him would be in direct conflict to the idea that humans should be eating any vegetable matter either (so much for his daily BAS).

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:49 AM

It's all about amounts, you don't eat nuts by the pound, he condemns that, you eat a couple of oz. per day, but grains, people eat them in volume. That's my point, does it make sense to you?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:47 AM

And, you think I don't understand it? I don't understand logical inconsistencies, yes, but I do comprehend what I read. I was just pointing out an inconsistency in his book.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:45 AM

He does not condemn nuts in PB, and he does not condemn that at all in general. Look at his "a week in the life" post and you'll hear him saying "mac nuts are superior to all other nuts" and you'll also see him eating nuts on a near daily basis. Grains are definitely made out to be the villain in that book, not nuts.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:42 AM

I'm not making it one dimensional at all- I'm making several clarifications, including the variety eaten. But eaten for too long makes no sense. One could eat 1 slices of sprouted bread a day for a lifetime and have no noticeably negative effects. However, one could not eat 2 loaves of sprouted bread for 10 years without noticeably negative effects. It is the quantity, not the time eaten.

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:41 AM

Calling it mumbo jumbo just because you don't understand or don't agree with it, says tons about your character boy

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:41 AM

He condemns nuts,he mentions they are high in phytic acid, he says they should be a sensible treat in our diet. He also adds that if we only ate grains by the handful and not as we do in the present, they wouldn't constitute a problem

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:24 AM

Eating too much of everything is bad, yes. Even water can kill you if you drink too much of it. It's just that for grains, the threshold is much, much smaller than for any other food. They're simply badder than the rest. I EXPLAINED the conditions that one has to go through in order to eat grains. It's NOT just about the quantity (you seem to try to push on us that "eating little of it is ok"), but also it's about the variety eaten, the fermentation of it, and if the person has already eaten modern grains for too long or not. So please stop trying to make it sound one-dimensional, it's not.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:14 AM

but that eating too many of them is bad, being metabolically deranged is bad, and eating too much of any food is bad.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:14 AM

So, eating TOO many grains is what causes them to be "bad." Eating too many nuts is what causes them to be bad. Eating to many x,y, and z is what causes them to be bad. This does not say that consuming grains is bad...it says consuming too many grains is bad. Metabolic syndrome does not come from grains- it comes from eating too much nutrient deficient food and not being physically active. If that were the case, eating 1/4 cup of oatmeal a day post workout would give me diabetes, no matter what. I hate to break it you, but that is not the case. The logical verdict is that grains are not bad...

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:12 AM

So, eating TOO many grains is what causes them to be "bad." Eating too many nuts is what causes them to be bad. Eating to many x,y, and z is what causes them to be bad. This does not say that consuming grains is not bad, it says consuming too many grains is bad. Metabolic syndrome does not come from grains- it comes from eating too much nutrient deficient food and not being physically active. You still really have not said that eating grains are bad for normal (i.e. not metabolically deranged) people is inconsistent with being healthy.

1d0497f8781845ab371b479455bfee8e

(11157)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:12 AM

Probably all of that fish and seaweed they eat. I highly doubt the rice contributes to their longevity, lol.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:08 AM

Ad hominem .

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:02 AM

I am not going to re-read that mumbo jumbo, but I read it several years back when PB first came out (yeah, I bought it at the bookstore when it was first released), but from what I recall of his argument (phytates, gut irritants, "anti-nutrients") then Sisson should also be condemning ALL nuts, even his beloved low omega 6 mac-nut, which contains some of the highest phytates per gram of any nut.

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:45 PM

@foreveryoung Read my response after yours. I explain when grains could be used. For us who already grown up on grains, it's already too late, carbs or not, gluten or not. But obviously, the massive amounts of carbs they have don't help at all the situation. Just because I didn't mention their carb content doesn't mean that they're not a big factor to the metabolic syndrome. I told the OP to do a google search, because it's not really practical putting all this knowledge in here.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:44 PM

Sorry for the time chronologic mishap. I had to re-edit my questions (mostly just grammar/spelling- same point though).

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:43 PM

So you're admitting then that grains are NOT bad because they are a carbohydrate which (according to some) causes in insulin which causes fat, but rather because they contain gluten (or 'super-gluten??). So, really you're not making a mark against grains or carbs at all, you're making a mark against gluten. Correct?

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:42 PM

None are really safe. However, a few of them are safer than others, WHEN a certain threshold hasn't been reached (different for each person). For many of us, eating grains for 30+ years, that threshold is reached, and we can't tolerate any grain anymore. "Safe" grains, in my opinion, only means non-selected (ancient) varieties of grains, fermented, in low quantities, AND only for people that just start out their life and they haven't already crippled their immune system with modern gluten/grains for years. As you can see, there are many "if" and "buts" there before I call something "safe".

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:41 PM

You you admit then, that grains are not bad because they are a carbohydrate, which causes in insulin which causes fat, correct? YOu think grains are bad because gluten. Which is to say, you acknowledge that grains are not bad, but gluten is bad.

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:33 PM

Wouldn't oats be one of the safest?

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:31 PM

this message was brought to you Soylent red and Soylent yellow, high energy vegetable concentrates, and new, delicious, Soylent green.

A2c38be4c54c91a15071f82f14cac0b3

(12682)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:09 PM

A lot of people here don't think rice is bad.

  • 5f6d15c9dd935b6fed3623caf984c14e

    asked by

    (439)
  • Views
    8.2K
  • Last Activity
    1406D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

12 Answers

7
3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:13 PM

rice (especially white rice) is just empty calories, there's nothing bad about them, not really anything good either. Cook the rice in bone broth and at lease you get minerals -- but I'd rather just drink the broth.

Japanese people may be healthy due to something else that is in their diet -- like high O3 to O6 ratio that has nothing to do with rice.

5e92edc5a180787a60a252a8232006e9

(345)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:27 AM

Those in Japan used to be healthy because they ate white rice, lots of fish and vegetables. It's the toxin-free nature of rice which made them healthy: instead, they could have eaten modern wheat variety, which is higher glycemic and has more effect on BG and whets your appetite even more.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:49 AM

I don't mind 100-150, but I take the gross rather than net rout. Fiber still counts in mine (kinda like PB instead of PHD).....not a huge difference though TBH, since I dont bother with much vegetables.

5e92edc5a180787a60a252a8232006e9

(345)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:02 AM

Fiber does make a lot of difference. Start eating a couple of avocadoes and total up your carbs and compare to net. You don't think it makes a difference? Still, if your only carb sources are them, they won't kick you out of ketosis.

5e92edc5a180787a60a252a8232006e9

(345)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:25 AM

You're allowed empty calories. Especially toxin-free empty calories. You should only eat nutrient-dense food argument has always been wrongheaded. What is the easiest and harmless glucose source of all? If believe, as PHD does, that about 100-150g of carbs is ideal, then you have a choice of either tubers or white rice, the two most ideal sources of glucose.

1d0497f8781845ab371b479455bfee8e

(11157)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:12 AM

Probably all of that fish and seaweed they eat. I highly doubt the rice contributes to their longevity, lol.

5
3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:10 PM

Rice is the safest of the grains, but even rice is not completely safe. The main problem with grains comes from genetically modified/selected wheat, the one we have in the last 50-150 years. The ancient forms of wheat, like farro and spelt, when lacto-fermented were not as bad as modern wheat with its super-gluten. Most people are intolerant with wheat without knowing it (some say that 7/10 people are intolerant and that it's the next big bubble to burst after the cigarettes thing in the '60s), while others become intolerant at some point in their life, because of its "super-gluten", as it's now called, that is not easily digestible.

I don't think I should be re-iterate on this any further, just do a google search on the subject, there are way too many articles and knowledge about it to fit them here.

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:42 PM

None are really safe. However, a few of them are safer than others, WHEN a certain threshold hasn't been reached (different for each person). For many of us, eating grains for 30+ years, that threshold is reached, and we can't tolerate any grain anymore. "Safe" grains, in my opinion, only means non-selected (ancient) varieties of grains, fermented, in low quantities, AND only for people that just start out their life and they haven't already crippled their immune system with modern gluten/grains for years. As you can see, there are many "if" and "buts" there before I call something "safe".

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:14 AM

but that eating too many of them is bad, being metabolically deranged is bad, and eating too much of any food is bad.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:42 AM

I'm not making it one dimensional at all- I'm making several clarifications, including the variety eaten. But eaten for too long makes no sense. One could eat 1 slices of sprouted bread a day for a lifetime and have no noticeably negative effects. However, one could not eat 2 loaves of sprouted bread for 10 years without noticeably negative effects. It is the quantity, not the time eaten.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:12 AM

So, eating TOO many grains is what causes them to be "bad." Eating too many nuts is what causes them to be bad. Eating to many x,y, and z is what causes them to be bad. This does not say that consuming grains is not bad, it says consuming too many grains is bad. Metabolic syndrome does not come from grains- it comes from eating too much nutrient deficient food and not being physically active. You still really have not said that eating grains are bad for normal (i.e. not metabolically deranged) people is inconsistent with being healthy.

1296f5fecd084f101d7c5fbe013f07eb

(1213)

on August 25, 2012
at 03:31 AM

Can you elaborate on why rice isn't "completely safe?" Genuine curiosity, not sarcasm.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:41 PM

You you admit then, that grains are not bad because they are a carbohydrate, which causes in insulin which causes fat, correct? YOu think grains are bad because gluten. Which is to say, you acknowledge that grains are not bad, but gluten is bad.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:44 PM

Sorry for the time chronologic mishap. I had to re-edit my questions (mostly just grammar/spelling- same point though).

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:43 PM

So you're admitting then that grains are NOT bad because they are a carbohydrate which (according to some) causes in insulin which causes fat, but rather because they contain gluten (or 'super-gluten??). So, really you're not making a mark against grains or carbs at all, you're making a mark against gluten. Correct?

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:33 PM

Wouldn't oats be one of the safest?

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:24 AM

Eating too much of everything is bad, yes. Even water can kill you if you drink too much of it. It's just that for grains, the threshold is much, much smaller than for any other food. They're simply badder than the rest. I EXPLAINED the conditions that one has to go through in order to eat grains. It's NOT just about the quantity (you seem to try to push on us that "eating little of it is ok"), but also it's about the variety eaten, the fermentation of it, and if the person has already eaten modern grains for too long or not. So please stop trying to make it sound one-dimensional, it's not.

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:45 PM

@foreveryoung Read my response after yours. I explain when grains could be used. For us who already grown up on grains, it's already too late, carbs or not, gluten or not. But obviously, the massive amounts of carbs they have don't help at all the situation. Just because I didn't mention their carb content doesn't mean that they're not a big factor to the metabolic syndrome. I told the OP to do a google search, because it's not really practical putting all this knowledge in here.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:14 AM

So, eating TOO many grains is what causes them to be "bad." Eating too many nuts is what causes them to be bad. Eating to many x,y, and z is what causes them to be bad. This does not say that consuming grains is bad...it says consuming too many grains is bad. Metabolic syndrome does not come from grains- it comes from eating too much nutrient deficient food and not being physically active. If that were the case, eating 1/4 cup of oatmeal a day post workout would give me diabetes, no matter what. I hate to break it you, but that is not the case. The logical verdict is that grains are not bad...

4
3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:41 AM

I love when obvious trolls get all you fools to answer their silly questions ;)

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:51 AM

Second that....

4
Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:55 PM

I don't like answering with a link, but this can explain it better than i can

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/why-grains-are-unhealthy/#axzz24Vl0BUlQ

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:22 AM

"the great majority of people" abuses a substance and tries to demonize it and ruin it for everyone else.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:55 AM

Who are these people that eat them in volume? I did eat oatmeal almost daily up until the age of 13, and often ate a slice of baguette at lunch and dinner, but that's like 70 grams of grains TOPS. You are also admitting that eating too much is what makes them bad. And sissons other argument that they're designed to ward of predators so we shouldn't eat them would also lead to the conclusion that we should not be eating any vegetable matter whatsoever (or is the glucose that is it just the tasty glucose meant to ward of predators). So much for his daily "Big Ass Salad" idea.

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:41 AM

Calling it mumbo jumbo just because you don't understand or don't agree with it, says tons about your character boy

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:41 AM

He condemns nuts,he mentions they are high in phytic acid, he says they should be a sensible treat in our diet. He also adds that if we only ate grains by the handful and not as we do in the present, they wouldn't constitute a problem

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:02 AM

I am not going to re-read that mumbo jumbo, but I read it several years back when PB first came out (yeah, I bought it at the bookstore when it was first released), but from what I recall of his argument (phytates, gut irritants, "anti-nutrients") then Sisson should also be condemning ALL nuts, even his beloved low omega 6 mac-nut, which contains some of the highest phytates per gram of any nut.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:53 AM

Who are these people that eat them in volume? I did eat oatmeal almost daily up until the age of 13, and often ate a slice of baguette at lunch and dinner, but that's like 70 grams of grains TOPS. You are also admitting that eating too much is what makes them bad. And sissons other argument that they're designed to ward of predators so we shouldn't eat him would be in direct conflict to the idea that humans should be eating any vegetable matter either (so much for his daily BAS).

742ff8ba4ff55e84593ede14ac1c3cab

(3536)

on August 25, 2012
at 04:23 PM

Forever...Do you have a reference for the macadamia having a very high phytate content. I have been searching for it for ages but I can't find anything online.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:45 AM

He does not condemn nuts in PB, and he does not condemn that at all in general. Look at his "a week in the life" post and you'll hear him saying "mac nuts are superior to all other nuts" and you'll also see him eating nuts on a near daily basis. Grains are definitely made out to be the villain in that book, not nuts.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:47 AM

And, you think I don't understand it? I don't understand logical inconsistencies, yes, but I do comprehend what I read. I was just pointing out an inconsistency in his book.

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:12 AM

For the first part of your statement; the great majority of people, eat grains in high quantities, do you know how much wheat does it take to make a dinner roll or a baguette or a bagel? and most people eat grains on every meal. For the second part; there are many plants and vegetables that benefit from being eaten, and not just benefit, that's the only mean for them to get their seeds activated and spread, grains and legumes, among others, on the other hand, are destroyed when eaten.

0a9ad4e577fe24a6b8aafa1dd7a50c79

(5150)

on August 25, 2012
at 05:25 PM

Lots of people eat grains in volume. Breakfast pizza/sandwich for breakfast. Lunch: some noodles and maybe a sandwich. Dinner: Huge ass bowl of pasta. And a snack in between of maybe some oatmeal or a protein bar (often contain grain flours and gluten.)

Medium avatar

(3213)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:49 AM

It's all about amounts, you don't eat nuts by the pound, he condemns that, you eat a couple of oz. per day, but grains, people eat them in volume. That's my point, does it make sense to you?

2
9f489b03123daff584f89bf43dfc963a

on August 25, 2012
at 10:37 PM

First off, I want to thank everyone on this website for all the helpful information they provide about the Paleo diet. I have learned so much!

As a preschooler, over 50 years ago, I lived with my mother and ate mainly meats, fruits, vegetables, as well as some carbs (sandwiches as such). My health was fine. When I started school I went to live with my father, and he is of Hispanic decent. Enter the carbs by the truckload! Wheat, corn, rice, beans...you name it. And lots of cheese! Consequently, I also entered years and years of stomach upset with no explanation, not to mention hitting 185 pounds at age eleven!

After I graduated, I had trouble keeping jobs because I was constantly in the bathroom, very often had trouble concentrating, and packed on even more weight as I got older. True, there were periods of temporary weight loss, and I would usually be under 200 pounds---a reason to celebrate on my part! Unfortunately, my high carb diet took its toll, and I ended up with IBS, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Scleroderma, and Pulmonary Fibrosis--oh, and don't let me forget years of chronic depression and meds up my you-know-what.

I switched to a diet that was close to the Paleo diet about 6 years ago and it helped to a great extent. I still ate brown rice, legumes, nuts, and lots of fruit, though. My weight loss slowed, I still had mild IBS, and I still had a great deal of inflammation and breathing problems. I went from 255 down to 190 over those 6 years.

Currently, having switched to the Paleo diet a few months ago, I have gone from 190 to 168 (aiming for 140 so I can breath even easier). My BP is at 110/70, the chronic inflammation is gone (as long as I'm a good Paleo girl), the IBS has completely disappeared, my mind is much sharper,my energy level is amazing, and my need for supplemental oxygen has greatly decreased. I deal with 90% percent LESS mucus than I used to (sorry for that visual). The ONLY med in my cabinet is my inhaler. The others are long gone!

The Pulmonary Fibrosis has not progressed for a couple of years (which is very rare), and I attribute that to the massive amounts of vegetables in my diet, as well as the huge amount of healthy fats.

I have NO NEED for grains or legumes, which for me personally, are nothing but useless calories. I was "bad" last week and had a bowl of plain oatmeal (a childhood comfort food), and I felt almost drunk for hours! Drowsy, slurred speech, trouble thinking. Won't be doing that again!

I've had FIVE DECADES to personally experience the ill effects of a high carb diet, and that has come to a screeching halt thanks to finding out about the Paleo diet. The only proof I need is me! If someone has proven otherwise for themselves, well, yay for them! My concern is me. If someone doesn't believe that the Paleo diet works for a great many people, fine. So what? Should everyone find out what works for themselves? Absolutely!

Doubters and naysayers---please don't waste time asking the same question a million times in an attempt to force people into a corner until they give you the answer you've wanted to get from the very start. It reminds me of a child that keeps asking the same question because their minds aren't quite ready to wrap around the answer. Stop wasting the minutes of other people's lives and find out what works for yourself, and do it on your own time, please! Life is precious and very, very short.

2
68294383ced9a0eafc16133aa80d1905

(5795)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:19 PM

Define "bad for you?"

You can argue that unless you are consuming the most nutrient-dense AND nutrient-variable foods, you are eating stuff that is "bad" for you.

For someone with blood sugar issues or other metabolic issues, the answer to the question should be obvious...

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:31 PM

this message was brought to you Soylent red and Soylent yellow, high energy vegetable concentrates, and new, delicious, Soylent green.

1
26b0f1261d1a0d916825bd0deeb96a21

(5798)

on August 24, 2012
at 11:57 PM

By soaking, sprouting, many grains, nuts and seeds in water, you can negate the phytates and adivin (both reportedly prevent the absorption of vitamins and minerals).

1
1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

on August 24, 2012
at 11:55 PM

Grains are not bad for everyone. Yes, gluten grains are bad if you're gluten intolerant or have gluten sensitivity, but that's not grains- that's gluten. Glucose is needed for the brain and muscles to function optimally, and especially if you're an athlete or are very active, it's critical to well-being and performance. So, if grains are your only source of glucose, then they're probably more beneficial than detrimental (non gluten grains for gluten sensitive/intolerant). Just my opinion. However, there are probably better sources of glucose for the athlete, like roots/tubers- maybe even dextrose/rice syrup- but if you can't get em, I'd say choose better grains (i.e. not the neo-wheat that exists today) as opposed to zero glucose.

IF you're content with being inactive and lazy, then sure, don't eat glucose, but suffer the consequence of a lower quality of life. Or, at very least- not looking very good naked.

I think that grains only become a problem when you have one or all of the following a) gluten issues (in which case, just choose gluten free options, b) they start displacing large amounts of other food choices and/or c) when you are innactive/insulin resistant and can't use the glucose that they provide efficiently.

So, if you're a normal human being mean to do what normal humans beings are designed for- moving around, being active, thinking/problem solving- then you should be able to handle grains just fine as long as they don't displace large amounts of other nutrition foodstuffs.

NOte, I am not advocating a high carb diet, I am saying that eating grains is not inherently harmful, and the benefits of SOME glucose probably outweighs the cons of consuming a grain (anti nutrients?...which won't actually be a problem in an otherwise nutrient dense diet...or just soak/sprout them).

You mad, bro?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:03 AM

if you read my exact words and don't extrapolate, I am specifically talking about zero glucose (those that "don't eat glucose"). But you are right, it is provoking. I just get annoyed with the carb demonizing that goes on. It reminds of reckless sailor who sailed off into a stormy sky, sunk his ship and now says sailing is bad for you. It's not sailing, it's reckless sailing.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:14 AM

That is literally the exact diet that I followed throughout high school. In college I switched to strict paleo/primal by replacing the oats and sprouted grain bread with Japanese sweet potatoes.

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:47 AM

Down voted for paragraph 2. Total bullshit to say the least. Seriously...do you even know any low carbers? Most I know are lean and strong.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:55 AM

If you read my whole answer, I said that "note, I am not advocating a high carb diet."

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:57 AM

It's all good....I'll remove the downvote. Just struck me as kinda demeaning and definitely untrue to a subsection of paleo eaters.

C2ecbc6f2948c232d60a639c50b7f4f9

(504)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:56 AM

@jayjay, have you seen michael phelps diet, and the amount of carbs he eats?

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:46 AM

Down voted for paragraph 2. Total bullshit to say the least. Seriously...do you even know any low carbers? Most I know are lean and strong.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:53 AM

I am positive that every one of the people you know that is lean eats some glucose from fruit or starch. You can be low carb and eat fruit/starch, you just have to watch your portions.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:06 AM

http://www.travisstoetzel.com/paleocheat/

3846a3b61bc9051e4baebdef62e58c52

(18635)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:55 AM

Then why do you bother with that second paragraph. Sorry, but saying anyone eating VLC or LC is automatically going to be "lazy, inactive,have a low quality of life and not look good naked"....kinda provokes some of us.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:52 AM

Yeah, I am a low carber. I've been eating 150-200g protein a day and cycling my carbs in 4 day spurts with a reefed every 2 cycles (200g+ carbs). Day 1 is 75-85g, day 2 and 3 is 25-35g, and 4 is 35-45g. That's not zero carb, I'm not counting green vegetables as a carb source, but it's certainly lower carb than most.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:01 AM

if you read my exact words and don't extrapolate, I am specifically talking about zero glucose (those that "don't eat glucose"). But you are right, it is provoking. I just get annoyed with the carb demonizing that goes on. It reminds of reckless sailor who sailed off into a storm and now says sailing is bad for you- when it's being a reckless sailor that's bad for you.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:06 AM

That's a post that's very close to how I view carbs/grains in the context of a paleo diet.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:05 AM

I had to edit some grammar, same gist though.The down vote honestly doesn't bother me (it's the anonymous down voting that does). Thanks for being willing to hear my side of the story though. Look, I just don't like the demonizing of foods- virtually any food can be bad in some contexts and good (or benign) in others.

Medium avatar

(2338)

on August 25, 2012
at 10:58 PM

why does everyone refer to michael phelpes when the topic of carbohydrates comes up, like somehow he's the norm and we should all strive to be michael phelps and eat 4 subway sandwiches a day.... can it please just stop already, we know he eats a lot of food. he's a freak olympic athlete. it literally adds nothing to any conversation.

0
3c997ffae3db9464325b96979346d9e9

on August 26, 2012
at 01:57 AM

Glad you're here Steve

0
F92e4ca55291c3f3096a3d4d3d854986

(11698)

on August 25, 2012
at 09:23 PM

I am not wild about eating white rice since it's just empty calories, but I make myself eat 1/2 cup a day to help my IBS. And it does seem to help with the consistency of my number twos. But threads like this make it harder to eat it without feeling badly...

0
Fd1c5e35538fbe2ea5eccb8acd7ae546

(496)

on August 25, 2012
at 02:45 PM

I read somewhere that Asians have enlarged pancreases which helps them handle the big Carb loads

-5
59fa7cd87fb9d669adf21e5cf3e7ada5

on August 25, 2012
at 12:03 AM

A lot of these people are not even remotely sane so you have to take that into account.

F5a8a14fc6a4d33c2563d0dd3066698a

(714)

on August 25, 2012
at 01:33 PM

Ditto to foreveryoung

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on August 25, 2012
at 12:08 AM

Ad hominem .

3c997ffae3db9464325b96979346d9e9

(1290)

on August 26, 2012
at 01:57 AM

Glad you're here Steve.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!