I know this is something that most of us avoid at all costs, but I was wondering about a couple of things, and it seems we all need to argue against a variety of SAD arguments...
What is the difference, if any, between bleached and refined flours/carb?
And, upon consuming bleached flours what are the metabolic consequences? Are they processed differently?
asked byJeff__1 (15236)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on July 29, 2011
at 02:39 PM
Bleached flour is usually refined in my experience
Flour bleaching agent is a food additive added to flour in order to make it appear whiter (freshly milled flour is yellowish) and to oxidize the surfaces of the flour grains and help with developing of gluten. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_bleaching_agent
Doen't sound very good. The stuff they use for bleaching sounds pretty nasty as well.
-Organic peroxides, namely benzoyl peroxide
on July 29, 2011
at 02:49 PM
Quick wikipedia search reveals:
"Bleached flour" is any flour with a whitening agent added and is referred to as refined flour. Cake flour is high in starch and low in protein and when chlorinated (bleached) allows cakes and other baked goods to set faster, rise better, the fat to be distributed more evenly, and there is less vulnerability to collapse. There are several kinds of bleaching agents added to flour. These agents oxidize the surfaces of the flour grains and aid with developing (maturing) of gluten. Bleaching makes flour slightly acidic and the taste can be noticed. The chlorination does assist in causing the small bubbles that allow baked goods to be fluffy. Different chemicals are used for Flour treatment agents to improve color and use in baking; chlorine dioxide (unstable to be transported in the U.S.) Calcium peroxide Azodicarbonamide or azobisformamide (synthetic) Atmospheric oxygen causes natural bleaching."
Refining to produce white flour is just the process of removing the wheat bran and germ.
I really doubt there are different metabolic consequences after the consumption of bleached vs graham flour. The only applicable argument I've heard re: flour consumption is the standard nutritionist claim that whole-wheat flour still has all the nutrients contained in the wheat germ and bran and so is less nutritionally void than white flour, bleached or unbleached. OR that unbleached/graham flour is more "natural" than chemically bleached flour so it must be good, but that's fallacious logic and not a real argument.
Edited to correct grammar fail.