5

votes

Remind me why these whole grains are so bad me again?

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created April 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

  1. Endothelial dysfunction induced by acute fat ingestion in healthy adults is apparently prevented by concomitant ingestion of oats or vitamin E, but not wheat. Nutrient distribution and meal composition may have important implications for cardiovascular health.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11165454

  1. This trial suggests but does not confirm a beneficial influence of oat ingestion on endothelial function in overweight, dyslipidemic adults. Further study of this potential association is warranted.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15466946

  1. Month-long, daily supplementation with either whole-grain oat or wheat cereal may prevent postprandial impairment of vascular reactivity in response to a high-fat meal.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11676590

  1. These results suggest that intake of breakfast cereals might confer a lower risk of DM. Consumption of whole-grain products may help lower the risk of DM.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18198313

  1. The results of this longitudinal cohort study suggest that whole grain breakfast cereal consumption confers a lower risk of hypertension in middle-aged adult males.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21868140

  1. Both total mortality and CVD-specific mortality were inversely associated with whole-grain but not refined-grain breakfast cereal intake. These prospective data highlight the importance of distinguishing whole-grain from refined-grain cereals in the prevention of chronic diseases.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12600848

  1. Look at all these references in support of oats!

http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=54

Whole grains are the cause of diabetes? Nutrient deficiencies? heart disease? Really? Oh. okay. In light of all the evidence suggesting so...

P.S. I should remind you that these aren't even the highest quality whole grains one can get. When I eat whole grains I eat all FLOURLESS whole grains.

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on May 03, 2013
at 07:51 PM

I think I used to have irrational phytic acid-phobia, http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2010/04/practically-paleo-perspective-rice.html this article, though I don't agree with all of it, raises some interesting points that maybe phytic acid isn't really all that bad assuming a balanced diet.

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on May 03, 2013
at 07:36 PM

Huh, I'm actually changing my view and beginning to think whole flourless grains can be part of a healthy diet, as long as you don't eat so much of them as to displace foods that will help you meet your rda of vits/minerals and as long as you understand your body well enough to know how many carbs you need for your activity level to stay lean and fit I think you're right in that not only might they not be bad for you, but they might be a healthy addition. Even Weston price recommended whole grains (though he still grounded flour).

9215c97e4d3296f0de599ef9292cee15

on April 17, 2013
at 01:52 PM

our digestive system has more in common with a cat than with cattle.we have a short, hydrochloric acid-based digestive tract. stop trying to delude yourself into thinking it's natural for humans to eat whole grains and insoluable fiber.

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on April 16, 2013
at 07:45 PM

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2994392/ , http://www.fasebj.org/content/18/3/511.full

A2c38be4c54c91a15071f82f14cac0b3

(12682)

on April 16, 2013
at 02:46 PM

This all makes sense to me, but are there any studies showing large amounts of glutamic acid depletes taurine?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 15, 2013
at 03:09 PM

I don't think omnivores eat starch for the protein...they eat it for the starch. Meat is for protein silly :)

9a5e2da94ad63ea3186dfa494e16a8d1

(15833)

on April 14, 2013
at 08:20 PM

I don't think that eating red meat is a problem, I am skeptical of those studies too. Most of the studies that are cited include hot dogs and other processed meats as "red meat". There really is a lot of slop in these studies that most people don't realize because they see only the headlines / conclusions.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:59 PM

And about your carbs eaten with something to a balance energy. Yes, hence the recommendation for a balanced diet and balanced meals. eating grains doesn't mean you only eat grains or don't eat fat or anything like. It means you eat some whole grains...that's it.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:58 PM

Since when is insulin conflated with blood sugar. Oh yeah, everywhere. High insulin does not mean high or low blood sugar. In fact, protein spikes insulin MORE than starchy carbs do. Also, insulin sensitive muscles sop up glucose from foods without the need for your pancreas to produce copious amoutns of insulin to deal with it.

1a6ad0d62f779ca50babe92d70ea6a0c

(137)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:29 PM

With the exception they can cause and spike and fall in insulin, which is a contributing factor. Carbs are meant to be eaten with something that will prolong the energy, not by themselves.

2e6e673ce3eb647407d260d4d57a731b

(1021)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:22 PM

carbs alone wont cause diabetes

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:12 PM

But +1 because I definitely agree with pretty much the whole of what you are saying. oatmeal probably implies health conciousness and more fruits and vegetables and less red meat, eggs and butter, etc.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:10 PM

I agree definitely that correlation is not causation, but also would add that this is just a sampling and at least one of them is legitimate trial that shows them to have a beneficial results on endothelial function. The same cannot be said for butter or whole milk or even beef, when I would just as readily assume that people eating these foods are eating just as many "whole foods" as those eating packaged whole grain breakfast cereals.

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on April 14, 2013
at 05:34 PM

@Foreveryoung - I was answering your question - remind me why those whole grains are bad for us. I meant conventional whole grains, like whole grain bread, etc, not sprouted. I don't know if sprouted grains are bad for you or not. Sorry if my answer was misleading.

2e6e673ce3eb647407d260d4d57a731b

(1021)

on April 14, 2013
at 05:15 PM

i dont think GMO wheat exists yet. the wheat produced in the 1970s was hybridized

618fc5298c4a96b817c4918c795a875f

(1217)

on April 14, 2013
at 05:01 PM

Why are the Kitavans always trotted out as an example of Paleo perfection? I seem to notice that some people use the word "Kitavan" like it's magic or something...

618fc5298c4a96b817c4918c795a875f

(1217)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:57 PM

Strange logic exhibited in this answer. Obviously, tomato sauce can't be made without tomatoes but not all bread needs fermentation to be bread. And there are many traditional examples of bread-like products that were not fermented. Tortillas, middle-eastern flatbreads, unleavened breads of all types are more what the first "breads" actually looked like, not a puffy loaf of sourdough.

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10480)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:52 PM

And bread is the body of the host. When you're eating bread, you're eating SALVATION!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:50 PM

"But let's not blame the oats for the human's misuse of it." - well said and shrewd observation.

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10480)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:50 PM

They are selling books and website hits for advertising revenue. "Put down the fork and eat a little filler in an other wise nutrient dense diet" isn't the kind of advice that gets you a NY Times bestseller these days. People want specifics and scare tactics and authors want to make a buck.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:48 PM

..but bread also gives you ability to rise from the dead because Jesus ate bread!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:48 PM

Jesus ate bread. Bread gives the power to rise from the dead!

618fc5298c4a96b817c4918c795a875f

(1217)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:47 PM

And I don't think you misread anything, being grain-free is a central tenant of these ways of eating. But again, I don't eat so that I can prove someone else's theory about food and its effects on the body. If I can use their eating plan to benefit my health with a little customization, then I win. I tend to see guidelines, not hard and fast rules. If it works for me - great! If not, what will? Being able to eat grains and be in good health is great - I wish I could! You are lucky!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:46 PM

mark sisson is very adamant about removal of grains from his program. he says it is the single most important thing we can do for our health. Yes, as i mentioned the jaminet's are the least prescriptive. taubes? Not at all. Wolff? Not either. The only reason i think these people are beginning to move to more laxed stances than they were at before is because people are beginning to question more.

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10480)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:42 PM

100% of people who ate bread in studies conducted from 1870-1872 DIED. How's that for scary?!?! BREAD KILLS.

618fc5298c4a96b817c4918c795a875f

(1217)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:42 PM

@foreveryoung - we understand things differently. Sisson, Jaminet - they encourage individuals to try, to experiment, to see what "works" for them, while following the guidelines of these particular plans. Yes, there is a PLAN in place, but I find that in both cases they are there as a place to start. I'm not saying that one can go willy-nilly, but tweaking and listening to one's body and responding to those signals are part of this process, as I see it. Which is why P/P/P aren't diets, but lifestyles. I agree with you I also like Perfect Health quite alot.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:37 PM

99% of people with autoimmune disorders have eaten fast food before. 99% of people with autoimmune disorders have eaten ate meat before, 99% of people with autoimmune disorders have consumed cow's dairy before etc etc yada yada

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:31 PM

99% of people with autoimmune disorders have eaten fast food before. 99% of people with autoimmune disorders have eaten ate meat before, etc etc yada yada

2e6e673ce3eb647407d260d4d57a731b

(1021)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:30 PM

the issue of bone density sounds like something worth worrying about. i actually want grains to take up more than 6% of my diet. maybe legumes dont cause the same problems

2e6e673ce3eb647407d260d4d57a731b

(1021)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:26 PM

100% of child rapists eat vegetables. coincidence?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:25 PM

And whatever your first paragraph is supposed to mean (I think it needs some editing?) No I do not believe that is my argument. My argument is that (1) not the most nutrient dense does not mean "bad for you" (2) whole grains do not appear to be the cause of all disease (like Sisson and others argue) (3) there needs to be some serious qualifications with the arguments that we aren't adapted to grains and so consuming them is harming us (on both parts of that sentence).

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:22 PM

99% of people with autoimmune disorders have worn sandals before.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:17 PM

@ Matt- okay :)

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:15 PM

There's an environmental aspect to gene expression yes, but I wouldn't argue it plays a larger role than the genes you've inherited. Disclaimer: I am not a biologist.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:14 PM

When I read primal blueprint and Rob Wolff's website I got the very distinct impression that if I was doing some very scary, and serious harm to my body and that I would only be well if I omitted grains forever from my diet and started eating more animal fat. I have very good reading comprehension scores so I don't think I misread.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:14 PM

Agreed. If you tolerate, and enjoy, grains, eat a little. Carbohydrates-wise, I think paleo is maturing in the right direction, moving away from the VLC camp, PHD is a stepping stone/missing link to a more balanced "paleo". Now I still disagree that the studies you've posted above are somehow in conflict with paleo principes. Don't burn down strawmen.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:10 PM

"just eat real, whole foods" diet does though.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:09 PM

paleo/primal/perfect health absolutely do not customize to the individual. Primal (as outlined in Sisson's book) means less than 150 grams of carbs a day and zero grains, beans, or legumes...unless you want to become sick and insidiously obese. Paleo means no grains, beans, legumes, or dairy. Perfect health (which I like the most), the last time I checked their site (probably about a year and a half ago) also had some pretty specific recommendations- 1lb of meat a day, minimum grams of starch per day, only "safe starches"

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:09 PM

-1 because paleo/primal/perfect health absolutely do not customize to the individual. Primal (as outlined in Sisson's book) means less than 150 grams of carbs a day and zero grains, beans, or legumes...unless you want to become sick and insidiously obese. Paleo means no grains, beans, legumes, or dairy. Perfect health (which I like the most), the last time I checked their site (probably about a year and a half ago) also had some pretty specific recommendations- 1lb of meat a day, minimum grams of starch per day, only "safe starches".

3327924660b1e2f8f8fc4ca27fedf2b2

(2919)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:09 PM

But surely you agree that genetics are not static. Genes are controlled far more by environment than being born.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:45 PM

Right I forgot that felines were our closest ancestors. i would examine why that is the case. Probably because you have leaky gut or something of that sort. My guess is that you did not get it from eating an iso caloric, nutrient dense, well balanced diet that includes some carefully chosen whole grains. Just a guess.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:43 PM

right I forgot we evolved from felines.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:41 PM

themselves. .

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:41 PM

@ Matt- this is largely the point I'm trying to get at. Villifying grains (or worse yet entire macro nutrient classes) is scape goat or at least an underwhelming case. "not the most nutrient dense" does not mean "bad for you" and not good for someone with x illness/genetic disadvantage is not what we should be basing wide scale dietary recommendations on. No study says grains should be the bulk of your diet and I never knew people actually took the outdated government food recommendations at face value without actually paying attention to their own bodies and/or looking further into it for...

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:37 PM

Wolf and Sisson both lost a genetic lottery, they grew up with very dysfunctional GI systems. They're solution works for them, and a number of people with equally dysfunctional GIs, but for the bulk of the population, their extreme recommendations are unnecessary in my opinion.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:37 PM

I defnitely Do NOT eat wapf. But I do eat oatmeal occassionally and sprouted grain bread regularly. This only equals up to 5-10% of calories.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:35 PM

+1: I would like to know this as well. I imagine it is something that is highly dose dependent and dependent upon the constituents of the rest of your diet. Oats as 40,50+ percent of your diet? Yeah neither I or the studies argue for that. Oats as a serving a day, which each equals roughly 6% of calories? I doubt it.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:33 PM

I've never been a fan of villifying all grains. Rice, corn, wheat... all very different foods. And not everybody has wheat/gluten intolerance, let alone celiac.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:33 PM

@ VB- did you read my P.S. note? I aside from oats I only consume sprouted grains. I eat whole grains but haven't had flour in (in any significant amount) in about a decade.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:31 PM

VB, GMO wheat isn't widely grown.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:31 PM

@ nada- I think people like to blame something outside of themselves for their ill health. The government food pyramid made them fat. LOL Many don't like taking responsibility for their mistakes.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:30 PM

@VB, tell me, did a popsci diet originating in the 1960s discover that wheat is bad for us when we (as a species) have been consuming and thriving with wheat in our diets for thousands of years? Paleo humans knew that hemlock was bad shit, how'd they not figure out that wheat was bad as well?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:29 PM

I actually think it does. because if you're eating the same amount of calories you would probably on fruits/veg/meat as on whole grains/fruits/veges/meat you would probably end up with less magnesium, way too much bulk, and possibly too much fructose.

2e6e673ce3eb647407d260d4d57a731b

(1021)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:28 PM

paleoites need to feel like there is some big important thing to rail against. its a self-treatment for depression im guessing

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:27 PM

Otzi had akhorn wheat in his teeth. Do you eat akhorn wheat? Plus I am sure it was sprouted. Tarahumara probably soaked them for eternity. How do Huns cook their grains? They do something radical like soaking, grinding and so forth. Plus it is not GMO wheat. But I am sure you already know it.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:27 PM

But back to my original point, does replacing whole grains with fruits, veggies and meat result in a net loss of nutrition? No. Does replacing refined grains with whole grains result in a net gain of nutrition? Yes. If anything, that is what the studies you listed illustrate.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:26 PM

^ I.E. Why myself and even the AHA says "as part of a balanced diet" Not as part of diet consisting of oatmeal, lentils, and pateries and biscuits and cap n' crunch.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:24 PM

I wouldn't argue that's due to whole grains though. In fact, whole grains replacing refined grains is a step up, I would hope paleos would agree on that (probably not though, they'll invoke antinutrients ... look at white versus brown rice debate.)

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:23 PM

I agree, that nutrient density is pushed a bit to much at times, but it comes up as often as it does because the problem is when nutrient dense foods are lost for nutrient poor, not individually, but when the diet as a whole loses a significant amount of nutrition.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:18 PM

^ Since when does 100% of our diet need to be the most nutrient dense food out there? Better stop eating your tallow, coconut oil, and bacon fat. Better never pick romaine because there's kale and spinach! Better stop eating muscle meat because you could be eating liver at all of your meals!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:13 PM

okay. So you're agreeing that whole grains are not "so bad for me." Unless you're conflating "not the most nutrient dense food available" with "bad for you"

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:11 PM

is coconut oil nutrient dense? What about tallow? What about lard?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:06 PM

And prehistoric Otzi had akhorn wheat in his teeth and Tarahumara eat a lot of beans and the Huns eat a lot whole grains and are doing well too. I am not saying they are neccessary to be well...I am saying that they aren't the cause of modern disease. in activity, and nutrient poor, hyper caloric diets are. To have a nutrient dense diet does not mean that every single food you put in your mouth has to be the most nutrient dense item out there. Look at the Khun! and their honey consumption.

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:05 PM

Ok, well I need to head off now. But like I mentioned, possibly including them for some specifics (i.e. oats cholesterol) might be beneficial (plus they are tasty). But I think from a nutrition angle I think there is better stuff to eat, but if someone wanted to eat whole grains I think buckwheat would be a good place to start: http://chriskresser.com/beyond-paleo-moving-from-a-paleo-diet-to-a-paleo-template

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:03 PM

I'm not saying you should add them to your plate. I'm just saying that we need to get calories somewhere, and they don't look like a bad option at all for healthy people that consume nutrient dense and balanced diets.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:01 PM

i did watch the entire video several weeks ago. Okay. And legumes are banned on "paleo" as well. No grains, beans, legumes, and (sometiems) dairy.

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:59 PM

I am not trying to win any argument because I don't think there is one. I am not saying whole-grains are bad. I am just saying I don't see much need for adding them to our diets versus using other foods. Are you saying we should add them to our plates because they are beneficial, like supplemental foods?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:57 PM

No where in any studies does it say grains should be a staple food. No where. Stop creating straw men.

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:55 PM

Foreveryoung, I am not sure what you are arguing. Did you watch the video? I mean come on even legumes beat whole grains. I just don't see what is in grains that are better than other foods. Oats help with Cholesterol because they stimulate bile production. So eat some oats for breakfast.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:54 PM

And that chart Lalonde makes SO incredibly biased. It's just as biased as the vegan one's that he admonishes. Matt does a good job of pointing this out here http://paleohacks.com/questions/185671/its-here-mat-lalonde-2012-ahs-nutrient-density-talk-hack-what-ranking-surpris#axzz2QRjjbdso

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:53 PM

"...insinuating that grains are for the poor and the peasants" Where did I say that? I earn a System Admin salary and keep a budget, but if I needed to save even more money I would probably eat more eggs and less steak. I certainly wouldn't switch out my sweet potatoes for breakfast cereal or wheat. I would probably choose buckwheat. But honestly this would still not be my staple food, unless I was in some real trouble with money.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:53 PM

And that chart Lalonde makes SO incredibly biased. It's just as biased as the vegan one's that he admonishes. LOL that you referenced that.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:50 PM

Oh so we should make dietary recommendations based upon what's beneficial to the sick? And no where do I say pastry is good. No one says that. You and paleo conflate refined flours with whole grains constantly.

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:49 PM

It then depends on other factors like dealing with auto-immune problems. I love pastry, but is it useful to eat it? Nope. So I pretty much treat grains like alcohol.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:49 PM

I'm sorry but the rest just sounds like food elitism to me insinuating that grains are for the poor and the peasants.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:47 PM

And, as for the other authors adressing this...yes they say the same things you do about anti-nutirents and gluten. But (1) not all grains contain gluten and (2) the "anti-nutrients" (a) may have hormetic affects and (b) won't matter in a nutrient dense, balanced diet.

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:45 PM

But even if you drop the evolutionary stuff, the issue is they are still a poor choice in comparison to other foods. I think 'ancestral' diets can stand on their own without the evolutionary argument. A high nutrition, low toxic diet with good energy balance.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:45 PM

I would agree that there are problems with grains if you allow them to displace other nutrients. But then that would be an unbalanced diet, and unbalanced diets are never healthy because they're unsustainable.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:43 PM

Of virtually every diet out there, NO other diet admonishes the consumption of whole grains as much as paleo.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:42 PM

Yeah it does. Paleo is predicated on the fact that grains are not healthy because we aren't adapted to eat them. Mark Sisson openly mocks the "healthy whole grains" mantra on television.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:42 PM

Yeah it does. Paleo is predicated on the fact that grains are not healthy. Mark Sisson openly mocks the "healthy whole grains" mantra on television.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:41 PM

I think folks are fully aware that there are numerous studies out there with positive health affects with whole grains. Doesn't really say anything about paleo, does it?

Frontpage book

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

14 Answers

9
61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10480)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:47 PM

SAD advocates overestimate the importance of grains. Oooh fiber, oooh enriched with synthetic vitamins. Paleo/Primal advocates overestimate the dangers of grains. Oooh, phytic acid, oooh lectins.

Grains aren't a death sentence or the cause of disease when eaten in reasonable quantities by the average mostly-healthy person. For a person whose metabolism or digestive tract is already screwed up, or when eaten in unreasonable quantities especially mixed with sugar and other crap, it has negative effects. But let's not blame the oats for the human's misuse of it.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:50 PM

"But let's not blame the oats for the human's misuse of it." - well said and shrewd observation.

5
9a5e2da94ad63ea3186dfa494e16a8d1

on April 14, 2013
at 05:51 PM

Read through the study summaries and see if you can really agree with the conclusions.

For example they analyzed data from 10-20 thousand people and found an inverse correlation between those that ate whole-grain cereals for breakfast and those that developed diabetes or hypertension (i.e. the more grains they ate for breakfast, the less incidence of disease).

So that means that if I leave everything else about my diet and lifestyle the same, and eat a bowl of oatmeal every morning, I'll be less likely to develop diabetes and hypertension, right?

I really don't think so. Most likely there is a lot of correlation and not a lot of causation in these studies. The type of person that has whole grain cereal for breakfast is probably also the type of person that eats fruits and vegetables, less refined foods, is active, doesn't over-eat, doesn't smoke, and otherwise takes care of themselves. The fact that they eat oatmeal is most likely an indicator that they are health conscious, and so it isn't much of a surprise that they are healthier. It isn't the oatmeal all by itself, but the whole package.

Not only that but the conception of this key food (whole grain cereal) is "estimated" based on a questionnaire. How much slop is in these numbers? I would like to see the questionnaire, does it mention cereals specifically or are the people running the study just making an educated guess?

These studies produce enticing conclusions that are also very marketable (you can slap these summaries on the back of a box of Quaker oats) but I am skeptical.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:10 PM

I agree definitely that correlation is not causation, but also would add that this is just a sampling and at least one of them is legitimate trial that shows them to have a beneficial results on endothelial function. The same cannot be said for butter or whole milk or even beef, when I would just as readily assume that people eating these foods are eating just as many "whole foods" as those eating packaged whole grain breakfast cereals.

9a5e2da94ad63ea3186dfa494e16a8d1

(15833)

on April 14, 2013
at 08:20 PM

I don't think that eating red meat is a problem, I am skeptical of those studies too. Most of the studies that are cited include hot dogs and other processed meats as "red meat". There really is a lot of slop in these studies that most people don't realize because they see only the headlines / conclusions.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:12 PM

But +1 because I definitely agree with pretty much the whole of what you are saying. oatmeal probably implies health conciousness and more fruits and vegetables and less red meat, eggs and butter, etc.

5
Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:41 PM

Pulling this out of my head...

Well it's mainly from what I understand about displacing more nutritious food-stuffs: http://ketopia.com/nutrient-density-sticking-to-the-essentials-mathieu-lalonde-ahs12/

Also there are phytochemicals which may prevent the absorption of the vitamins provided by the grain. So there is an issue with bioavailability of the nutrition provided by the grains. Also these phytochemicals can alter gene signalling/messaging (something which I am actually starting to study).

Then there are the proteins such as gluten which may be a factor in various issues such a contributing to 'leaky-gut' and other auto-immune problems.

Even if you were to prepare the grains, they are still pretty low on the scale of nutritionally rich foods. I am not sure there is anything in grains that you could not get better from other food-stuffs. So though it may be true they are 'healthy' they are not more 'healthy' then getting the 'healthy stuff' from other sources with less of the toxins and issues associated with them.

That being the main point of food choice: highest nutrition, lowest toxins, bioavailability of nutrients, energy yeld per weight, and price.

If you are on a budget than perhaps going for a non grass grain would be a good thing. But certainly grass-family grains seem to be a waste of time, well unless they are milled and made into a croissant and eaten with loads of butter and double espresso once in a while

I believe pretty much every paleo/evolutionary/ancestral diet author has covered this question already though, no?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:50 PM

Oh so we should make dietary recommendations based upon what's beneficial to the sick? And no where do I say pastry is good. No one says that. You and paleo conflate refined flours with whole grains constantly.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:01 PM

i did watch the entire video several weeks ago. Okay. And legumes are banned on "paleo" as well. No grains, beans, legumes, and (sometiems) dairy.

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:59 PM

I am not trying to win any argument because I don't think there is one. I am not saying whole-grains are bad. I am just saying I don't see much need for adding them to our diets versus using other foods. Are you saying we should add them to our plates because they are beneficial, like supplemental foods?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:13 PM

okay. So you're agreeing that whole grains are not "so bad for me." Unless you're conflating "not the most nutrient dense food available" with "bad for you"

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:55 PM

Foreveryoung, I am not sure what you are arguing. Did you watch the video? I mean come on even legumes beat whole grains. I just don't see what is in grains that are better than other foods. Oats help with Cholesterol because they stimulate bile production. So eat some oats for breakfast.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:54 PM

And that chart Lalonde makes SO incredibly biased. It's just as biased as the vegan one's that he admonishes. Matt does a good job of pointing this out here http://paleohacks.com/questions/185671/its-here-mat-lalonde-2012-ahs-nutrient-density-talk-hack-what-ranking-surpris#axzz2QRjjbdso

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:03 PM

I'm not saying you should add them to your plate. I'm just saying that we need to get calories somewhere, and they don't look like a bad option at all for healthy people that consume nutrient dense and balanced diets.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:47 PM

And, as for the other authors adressing this...yes they say the same things you do about anti-nutirents and gluten. But (1) not all grains contain gluten and (2) the "anti-nutrients" (a) may have hormetic affects and (b) won't matter in a nutrient dense, balanced diet.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:57 PM

No where in any studies does it say grains should be a staple food. No where. Stop creating straw men.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:45 PM

I would agree that there are problems with grains if you allow them to displace other nutrients. But then that would be an unbalanced diet, and unbalanced diets are never healthy because they're unsustainable.

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:53 PM

"...insinuating that grains are for the poor and the peasants" Where did I say that? I earn a System Admin salary and keep a budget, but if I needed to save even more money I would probably eat more eggs and less steak. I certainly wouldn't switch out my sweet potatoes for breakfast cereal or wheat. I would probably choose buckwheat. But honestly this would still not be my staple food, unless I was in some real trouble with money.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:49 PM

I'm sorry but the rest just sounds like food elitism to me insinuating that grains are for the poor and the peasants.

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:49 PM

It then depends on other factors like dealing with auto-immune problems. I love pastry, but is it useful to eat it? Nope. So I pretty much treat grains like alcohol.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:53 PM

And that chart Lalonde makes SO incredibly biased. It's just as biased as the vegan one's that he admonishes. LOL that you referenced that.

Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

(8574)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:05 PM

Ok, well I need to head off now. But like I mentioned, possibly including them for some specifics (i.e. oats cholesterol) might be beneficial (plus they are tasty). But I think from a nutrition angle I think there is better stuff to eat, but if someone wanted to eat whole grains I think buckwheat would be a good place to start: http://chriskresser.com/beyond-paleo-moving-from-a-paleo-diet-to-a-paleo-template

3
618fc5298c4a96b817c4918c795a875f

(1217)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:58 PM

Grains may not be bad for YOU. If you find via your n=1 experimentation that grains eaten in a balanced way work for you, then great! But a barrage of links pointing to the health benefits of oats and cereals means little to those of us who DO have problems with grains - the links won't convince me as well as what happens to my body after I eat them. Even in a balanced way (although I need more discussion on what "balanced" means to you - our definitions are likely different). What I find valuable about the world of paleo/primal/perfect health eating is that we are customizing how we eat to find what is optimal for us, the individual - not the collective. While we can share experiences to give others clues and guideposts, it is unlikely that any one version of these diets will work for all of us. It looks like grains work for you. Most grains are bad for ME, as I suffer from hypothyroidism and its often attendant gluten intolerances. The simple act of removing gluten containing grains changed my health for the better. That said, I know people like being dogmatic for argument's sake - I've learned alot on this forum by reading posts that start by someone stating that THEIR diet was the BEST one, and then the ensuing dialog opened up into interesting territory. But I believe it is always good to remember that ultimately we are here to hack a community of one, ourselves.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:46 PM

mark sisson is very adamant about removal of grains from his program. he says it is the single most important thing we can do for our health. Yes, as i mentioned the jaminet's are the least prescriptive. taubes? Not at all. Wolff? Not either. The only reason i think these people are beginning to move to more laxed stances than they were at before is because people are beginning to question more.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:09 PM

paleo/primal/perfect health absolutely do not customize to the individual. Primal (as outlined in Sisson's book) means less than 150 grams of carbs a day and zero grains, beans, or legumes...unless you want to become sick and insidiously obese. Paleo means no grains, beans, legumes, or dairy. Perfect health (which I like the most), the last time I checked their site (probably about a year and a half ago) also had some pretty specific recommendations- 1lb of meat a day, minimum grams of starch per day, only "safe starches"

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:09 PM

-1 because paleo/primal/perfect health absolutely do not customize to the individual. Primal (as outlined in Sisson's book) means less than 150 grams of carbs a day and zero grains, beans, or legumes...unless you want to become sick and insidiously obese. Paleo means no grains, beans, legumes, or dairy. Perfect health (which I like the most), the last time I checked their site (probably about a year and a half ago) also had some pretty specific recommendations- 1lb of meat a day, minimum grams of starch per day, only "safe starches".

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10480)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:50 PM

They are selling books and website hits for advertising revenue. "Put down the fork and eat a little filler in an other wise nutrient dense diet" isn't the kind of advice that gets you a NY Times bestseller these days. People want specifics and scare tactics and authors want to make a buck.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:10 PM

"just eat real, whole foods" diet does though.

618fc5298c4a96b817c4918c795a875f

(1217)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:42 PM

@foreveryoung - we understand things differently. Sisson, Jaminet - they encourage individuals to try, to experiment, to see what "works" for them, while following the guidelines of these particular plans. Yes, there is a PLAN in place, but I find that in both cases they are there as a place to start. I'm not saying that one can go willy-nilly, but tweaking and listening to one's body and responding to those signals are part of this process, as I see it. Which is why P/P/P aren't diets, but lifestyles. I agree with you I also like Perfect Health quite alot.

618fc5298c4a96b817c4918c795a875f

(1217)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:47 PM

And I don't think you misread anything, being grain-free is a central tenant of these ways of eating. But again, I don't eat so that I can prove someone else's theory about food and its effects on the body. If I can use their eating plan to benefit my health with a little customization, then I win. I tend to see guidelines, not hard and fast rules. If it works for me - great! If not, what will? Being able to eat grains and be in good health is great - I wish I could! You are lucky!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:14 PM

When I read primal blueprint and Rob Wolff's website I got the very distinct impression that if I was doing some very scary, and serious harm to my body and that I would only be well if I omitted grains forever from my diet and started eating more animal fat. I have very good reading comprehension scores so I don't think I misread.

2
F92e4ca55291c3f3096a3d4d3d854986

(11698)

on April 15, 2013
at 12:58 AM

I just watched this panel discussion on gluten, definitely worth watching on this topic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5ppuzNUzsc

It doesn't address re: "whole" grains in particular, but just gluten grains period. Really good, esp Nora Gedgaudas.

2
E773ca32b29508bae2055579a26afa98

on April 14, 2013
at 06:36 PM

My healthy body reminds me everyday why I stay off grains.

2
3327924660b1e2f8f8fc4ca27fedf2b2

(2919)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:16 PM

If your argument is that neolithic people are grains and didn't suffer from health problems, well that's not true, but even if it was, the grains they were eating are literally the OPPOSITE of grains today.

They were more nutrient dense, due to better soil. They were fermented, soaked and/or sprouted. At one point in history 100% of bread was sourdough, not because the people found it necessary to ferment, but rather that's just how bread was traditionally made. Kind of like how tomato sauce is traditionally made with tomatoes.

Grains nowadays are bred to be high-yielding and have a higher gluten-content than you could find in nature 100 years ago.

Grains don't need to be GMO'd because they're already such a shitty food that man need not intervene to make it more poisonous. But we've already intervened with selective breeding of grains that have produced less-than-desirable grains.

Grains = few nutrients, many toxic compounds/antinutrients, highly-inflammatory, irritating to the digestive tract, etc.

If you have your nutrient levels and inflammation under control, you can eat well-prepared grains with no problem. But there are very few people who have the constitution to benefit from grains.

I would never try to stop someone from eating grains, because frankly I don't care to. The way I see it is: eat whatever you want, it's your medical bill.

Not-so-radical claim: 100% of people who have autoimmune disorders have consumed wheat in their life. 99% have consumed soy.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:22 PM

99% of people with autoimmune disorders have worn sandals before.

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10480)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:52 PM

And bread is the body of the host. When you're eating bread, you're eating SALVATION!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:48 PM

..but bread also gives you ability to rise from the dead because Jesus ate bread!

2e6e673ce3eb647407d260d4d57a731b

(1021)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:26 PM

100% of child rapists eat vegetables. coincidence?

618fc5298c4a96b817c4918c795a875f

(1217)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:57 PM

Strange logic exhibited in this answer. Obviously, tomato sauce can't be made without tomatoes but not all bread needs fermentation to be bread. And there are many traditional examples of bread-like products that were not fermented. Tortillas, middle-eastern flatbreads, unleavened breads of all types are more what the first "breads" actually looked like, not a puffy loaf of sourdough.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:25 PM

And whatever your first paragraph is supposed to mean (I think it needs some editing?) No I do not believe that is my argument. My argument is that (1) not the most nutrient dense does not mean "bad for you" (2) whole grains do not appear to be the cause of all disease (like Sisson and others argue) (3) there needs to be some serious qualifications with the arguments that we aren't adapted to grains and so consuming them is harming us (on both parts of that sentence).

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:37 PM

99% of people with autoimmune disorders have eaten fast food before. 99% of people with autoimmune disorders have eaten ate meat before, 99% of people with autoimmune disorders have consumed cow's dairy before etc etc yada yada

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:31 PM

99% of people with autoimmune disorders have eaten fast food before. 99% of people with autoimmune disorders have eaten ate meat before, etc etc yada yada

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:48 PM

Jesus ate bread. Bread gives the power to rise from the dead!

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10480)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:42 PM

100% of people who ate bread in studies conducted from 1870-1872 DIED. How's that for scary?!?! BREAD KILLS.

2
9215c97e4d3296f0de599ef9292cee15

on April 14, 2013
at 03:40 PM

I'm a carnivore and whole grains are like razorblades to my intestines.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:43 PM

right I forgot we evolved from felines.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:45 PM

Right I forgot that felines were our closest ancestors. i would examine why that is the case. Probably because you have leaky gut or something of that sort. My guess is that you did not get it from eating an iso caloric, nutrient dense, well balanced diet that includes some carefully chosen whole grains. Just a guess.

9215c97e4d3296f0de599ef9292cee15

on April 17, 2013
at 01:52 PM

our digestive system has more in common with a cat than with cattle.we have a short, hydrochloric acid-based digestive tract. stop trying to delude yourself into thinking it's natural for humans to eat whole grains and insoluable fiber.

2
F92e4ca55291c3f3096a3d4d3d854986

(11698)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:29 PM

My understanding is that the main argument against whole grains is they contain higher levels of anti-nutritents (phytates, lectins) which damage your intestinal lining and can cause leaky gut. But honestly, I am still not sure I believe it. I don't eat grains because they are gassy for me, but I know so many people who do eat whole grains (like my entire immediate family) who are frankly far much healthier than me, that sometimes I have a hard time believing that the grains are as bad as Sisson, Wolf etc say they are. Then I remember that those guys are smarter than me and know more about this than I do ..so then I go back to hating grains :)

If you personally don't feel whole grains are an issue for you, then maybe a WAPF (Western A. Price Foundation) approach to eating will make more sense for you. Which is basically Paleo plus properly prepared grains (ancestrally we would ferment them, sprout them etc).

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:15 PM

There's an environmental aspect to gene expression yes, but I wouldn't argue it plays a larger role than the genes you've inherited. Disclaimer: I am not a biologist.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:37 PM

I defnitely Do NOT eat wapf. But I do eat oatmeal occassionally and sprouted grain bread regularly. This only equals up to 5-10% of calories.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:37 PM

Wolf and Sisson both lost a genetic lottery, they grew up with very dysfunctional GI systems. They're solution works for them, and a number of people with equally dysfunctional GIs, but for the bulk of the population, their extreme recommendations are unnecessary in my opinion.

3327924660b1e2f8f8fc4ca27fedf2b2

(2919)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:09 PM

But surely you agree that genetics are not static. Genes are controlled far more by environment than being born.

2
D2b653e1bb95489af69ece6182abec48

(375)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:27 PM

Melissa McEwen cites this reference to claim that mesolithic oat eaters had smaller, less sturdy bones than their hunter-gatherer ancestors. I would also like to see more quantitative arguments regarding anti-nutrients, but maybe I'm just not looking in the right places. Assuming that grains do lower nutrient bioavailability, it would be nice to know the magnitude and dose-dependence of the effect for the relevant nutrients.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:35 PM

+1: I would like to know this as well. I imagine it is something that is highly dose dependent and dependent upon the constituents of the rest of your diet. Oats as 40,50+ percent of your diet? Yeah neither I or the studies argue for that. Oats as a serving a day, which each equals roughly 6% of calories? I doubt it.

2e6e673ce3eb647407d260d4d57a731b

(1021)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:30 PM

the issue of bone density sounds like something worth worrying about. i actually want grains to take up more than 6% of my diet. maybe legumes dont cause the same problems

1
Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on April 15, 2013
at 01:47 PM

The highest amino acid (by a factor of 3-10) in many grains is Glutamic Acid. Glutamic Acid and Glutamate (not to be confused with glutamine) are used almost interchangeably by scientists as their chemical structure is almost identical and can be converted from one to the other in the body. Glutamate, in its free form unbalanced by other amino acids is what seems to be the problem with MonoSodium Glutamate. This is possibly due to its' excitation properties which then require the amino acid taurine to calm it down. Over time high consumption of this amino acid, without balancing it with other complete amino acids may possibly lead to a taurine deficiency , among other things. To the extent that whole grains have a better amino acid score than white grains, whole grains are probably better, especially since I think when you use the term whole grains you are referring to things like oatmeal, which has double the amino acid score of white flours, and almost double the amino acid score of whole grain wheat flour.

  1. http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5745/2
  2. http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5744/2
  3. http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/breakfast-cereals/1597/2

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on April 16, 2013
at 07:45 PM

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2994392/ , http://www.fasebj.org/content/18/3/511.full

A2c38be4c54c91a15071f82f14cac0b3

(12682)

on April 16, 2013
at 02:46 PM

This all makes sense to me, but are there any studies showing large amounts of glutamic acid depletes taurine?

1
1a6ad0d62f779ca50babe92d70ea6a0c

(137)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:17 PM

As people have said before, they'll trust evolution over any new studies. We're still here to this day, so our ancestors must have done something right.

Some posters have already mentioned that whole grains are not the best choice nutrition wise compared to what you get from other foods. What they can cause is your insulin to spike, so without the appropriate fat source to prolong your energy (if you get it), all you end up doing is spiking and crashing..

When people eat oats, do they normally eat it with a fat source? Nobody I know I did, they just eat it plain or mixed it with fruit which can heighten the spike. Fruit by itself is a more nutritious option. Fruit however with fat to prolong the energy so it doesn't spike nor crash, is a far far more nutritious option. For me personally, I can handle dairy so I mix mine with high fat yogurt. Since I started doing that for breakfast, my fatigue and crashes subsided in the morning.

When I stopped eating rice (like I'd often have for lunch with chicken), but instead had chicken with salad and avocado, my afternoon fatigue crashes subsided as well (go figure).

The one known thing that many health experts will agree on (aside from it hereditary), is that people with diets whose insulin levels rise and crash throughout the day; have been shown in people with diabetes.

Roll this back to oats (no pun intended), and you can see where it could be a factor in diabetes due to it's nature on insulin. Oats don't carry as many nutrients as per say a bowl of fruit and yogurt, so for more bang for the buck, I choose fruit and yogurt. Yogurt and heart disease? Can't comment on that, so I have no idea if there is a correlation or not.

2e6e673ce3eb647407d260d4d57a731b

(1021)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:22 PM

carbs alone wont cause diabetes

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:59 PM

And about your carbs eaten with something to a balance energy. Yes, hence the recommendation for a balanced diet and balanced meals. eating grains doesn't mean you only eat grains or don't eat fat or anything like. It means you eat some whole grains...that's it.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:58 PM

Since when is insulin conflated with blood sugar. Oh yeah, everywhere. High insulin does not mean high or low blood sugar. In fact, protein spikes insulin MORE than starchy carbs do. Also, insulin sensitive muscles sop up glucose from foods without the need for your pancreas to produce copious amoutns of insulin to deal with it.

1a6ad0d62f779ca50babe92d70ea6a0c

(137)

on April 14, 2013
at 06:29 PM

With the exception they can cause and spike and fall in insulin, which is a contributing factor. Carbs are meant to be eaten with something that will prolong the energy, not by themselves.

0
7e1433afbb06c318c4d90860d493c49d

(5959)

on April 15, 2013
at 01:09 AM

I can't speak for what's bad for you. For me, the starch is an endocrine disruptor, and the crap quality protein is not well digested and assimilated. Sure, it could keep me alive in a famine, but suboptimal foods do not make for an optimal life.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 15, 2013
at 03:09 PM

I don't think omnivores eat starch for the protein...they eat it for the starch. Meat is for protein silly :)

0
F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:58 PM

Are there any LONG TERM STUDIES to prove that consumption of whole grains is beneficial? Long term meaning longer than one month or one year or even ten years.

Do Kitavans consume grains?

Chinese have been having white rice for over 2,000 years and they seem to be doing okay.


EDITED:

To me Paleo diet is species-specific diet. If people evolved eating grains just as they evolved eating meat, fish, vegetables and fruit, then eating grains is NOT harmful. If, however, grains is a new addition to our diet - watch out. We should not be eating grains then.

So, what do anthropologists say? Were we eating grains 100,000 years ago (because we definitely had meat, fish and veggies then) or not?

That's my answer.

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on April 14, 2013
at 05:34 PM

@Foreveryoung - I was answering your question - remind me why those whole grains are bad for us. I meant conventional whole grains, like whole grain bread, etc, not sprouted. I don't know if sprouted grains are bad for you or not. Sorry if my answer was misleading.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:06 PM

And prehistoric Otzi had akhorn wheat in his teeth and Tarahumara eat a lot of beans and the Huns eat a lot whole grains and are doing well too. I am not saying they are neccessary to be well...I am saying that they aren't the cause of modern disease. in activity, and nutrient poor, hyper caloric diets are. To have a nutrient dense diet does not mean that every single food you put in your mouth has to be the most nutrient dense item out there. Look at the Khun! and their honey consumption.

2e6e673ce3eb647407d260d4d57a731b

(1021)

on April 14, 2013
at 05:15 PM

i dont think GMO wheat exists yet. the wheat produced in the 1970s was hybridized

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:11 PM

is coconut oil nutrient dense? What about tallow? What about lard?

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:31 PM

VB, GMO wheat isn't widely grown.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:33 PM

@ VB- did you read my P.S. note? I aside from oats I only consume sprouted grains. I eat whole grains but haven't had flour in (in any significant amount) in about a decade.

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:27 PM

Otzi had akhorn wheat in his teeth. Do you eat akhorn wheat? Plus I am sure it was sprouted. Tarahumara probably soaked them for eternity. How do Huns cook their grains? They do something radical like soaking, grinding and so forth. Plus it is not GMO wheat. But I am sure you already know it.

618fc5298c4a96b817c4918c795a875f

(1217)

on April 14, 2013
at 05:01 PM

Why are the Kitavans always trotted out as an example of Paleo perfection? I seem to notice that some people use the word "Kitavan" like it's magic or something...

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:30 PM

@VB, tell me, did a popsci diet originating in the 1960s discover that wheat is bad for us when we (as a species) have been consuming and thriving with wheat in our diets for thousands of years? Paleo humans knew that hemlock was bad shit, how'd they not figure out that wheat was bad as well?

Answer Question


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