According to Mr. Cronometer.com , ounce per ounce, corn chips have less omega 6 than peanut butter or almond butter.
After 3 months of Paleo, and reading paleohacks.com each day, I still don't understand why nuts seem to enjoy a magical, wholesome and "paleo-ish" status, whereas corn chips do not.
What's going on with all the anti-chip-bigots?
Remind me why peanut butter (or almond butter), with all of its anti-nutrients and omega 6 is so much better than some corn chips? (as part of a balance diet, making sure not to over-do either).
From a N6:N3 ratio perspective, even grass fed beef has more omega 6 than omega 3. It doesn't take many nuts or chips to throw the ratio totally out of whack.
asked byCaveMan_Mike (3275)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on May 25, 2012
at 12:42 AM
Peanuts are not nuts. And many paleohackers limit even tree nuts due to n6.
Peanut butter has never been paleo as peanuts are a legume. Even if you allow some legumes, peanuts, soy beans and kidney beans have pretty strong arguments against them. For peanuts it's the aflatoxin first, followed by the high n6. (Full dislosure - I still eat peanuts from time to time.)
Some people have a hard time digesting corn, others seem okay with some corn. Corn chips are not corn. Fritos only has three ingredients: corn, corn oil, salt. The manufacturing process itself may be problematic, but as I see it, the biggest problem is the corn oil. Pretty high in n6, used to cause fatty liver in rats and to kill people (as in the Rose Corn Oil Trial). Oh, it also lowers cholesterol! Good luck with that. "Yes he is dead, but his cholesterol is amazing!"
Yeah, maybe corn chips ARE better from an n6 perspective. But neither are gonna get a lot of love around here. (And I miss them both)