I suppose we don't know if cave dwelling peoples boiled brown rice with fire back in the day, but let's assume they did not. In 2011, our world is bombarded with a barrage of sweeteners, and we all know that most do not promote healthy metabollic functioning if over consumed.
The Jaminet's from Perfect Health Diet have been praising Rice Syrups as an acceptable sweetener due to the fact that it contains virtually zero fructose and is comprised mostly of glucose sugars.
Seems to me that ingesting rice syrup wouldn't be much different than ingesting rice itself, and it may actually be beneficial for bodybuilders looking for a post workout glycogen replenishment to pack on muscle bulk.
What do you PaleoHackers think of brown rice syrups? How about white rice syrups?
asked byJack_Kronk (18452)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on March 03, 2011
at 06:43 PM
It's important to note for those who do not know, the body processes glucose and fructose differently. Here's a great lecture on that subject, describing how dangerous excessive fructose consumption could potentially be.
In my mind, brown or white rice syrup equally stand as the top sweetner for those that wish to use a sweetner. Obviously they are not paleo nor are they necessary, but I think they are the least problematic sweetner since it is basically a dextrose syrup. Dextrose is just glucose-glucose disaccharides. From what I understand, the rice used to make rice syrup is not GMO which is why I've seen an argument preferring rice syrup to plain corn syrup, which also was a dextrose syrup but is made mostly from GMO Corn. I think it is important to view sweetners as something to be consumed in extremely limited quantities as too much of anything sweet should still trigger the chemical reward pathways related to sweet tastes, which operate similar to the heroin reward response in the body (as discussed in David Kessler's great book "The End of Overeating"). In addition for people with comprimised metabolisms or diabetes, you'd want them to stay miles away from a glucose syrup. For those with healthy metabolisms and who need a sweet fix occasionally in my mind it would definitely be preferable to pretty much all other sweetners which usually have nearly half fructose at minimum: regular sugar (sucrose - glucose-fructose dissaccharide), honey (about 50.5 percent fructose), maple syrup (95 percent sucrose, 1 percent fructose, and 3 percent glucose), or agave nectar (aka hippie high fructose corn syrup - produced the same way and higher fructose than HFCS).
on March 03, 2011
at 08:08 PM
I would say that after people have endured some period of time where they have increased their insulin sensitivities, lost weight and in general recovered from the great toll taken by the SAD, a sweetener consisting of pure glucose from a grain is a far preferable route than anything "more natural" that contains large amounts of (often unbound) fructose.
That being said, I think an even better route is to never reintroduce sweets and thus never become tempted to eat them again. I'm currently eating a diet that contains nothing sweet and I find it to be quite liberating.
on March 03, 2011
at 07:03 PM
Sugar is sugar is sugar is sugar and should be limited to "treats" in my opinion.
on April 07, 2014
at 04:12 AM
I've been searching out cleaner sugar alternatives to bake with for my carb nites. So far, the best I've found are dextrose powder as a sugar substitute and brown rice syrup for honey. Dextrose syrup and white rice syrup seem hard to find in the US.
on September 02, 2013
at 06:55 PM
Based on some of the replies many are clearly not comprehending the concept of Fructose metabolism so maybe put in a few clear bullets points about that on this pages. In a nutshell folks for our purposes ; Fructose converts to triglycerides NOT Glucose.....