2

votes

why is rice ok but grains like oats aren't?

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created January 19, 2013 at 4:25 PM

i eat rice occasionally in things like broccoli and cheese casseroles but i'm just wondering why rice is promoted while oats and other grains are rejected

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on July 25, 2013
at 06:41 PM

also, while technically any chemical reaction is "processed" "Processed foods" have a specific definition that goes beyond that. Please do yourself some good and do your own research.

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on July 25, 2013
at 06:39 PM

Also, grains are full of toxins raw and cooked. Sprouting can reduce the toxins in some grains, but not others. The Paleo diet does not eschew grains because they require cooking. The concern is that most grains, and all moderns strains of wheat are highly poisonous to a large number of people despite the amount of processing that is required.

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on July 25, 2013
at 06:37 PM

haha, silly rabbit. Of course meat can be eaten raw. Have you ever had Carpaccio, Tartare, Ceviche, Sushi, Crudos, Yookhwe, Bo Tai, Gored, Carne Apache?

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10490)

on April 14, 2013
at 05:00 PM

Yeah, there are a lot of people here who are engaged in either paleo-er than thou competition or paleo police fear-mongering. Both are silly.

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10490)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:59 PM

I would downvote but I don't want to waste a point on a drive-by. If you're too lazy to provide a source or at least reasoning behind your opinion, then be too lazy to provide the opinion.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:22 PM

I don't think MOST are, but there is a sizeable portion of the population (something greater than 1% but probably less than 30%). Yesterday I came across a paper that found 10% of a healthy sample of people had IgA antibodies to gliadin. However, it's tricky to interpret because there wasn't a difference in HLA genotype between those with and those without the anti-gliadin response. Nor was there any clinical significance: those with the anti-gliadin antibodies didn't show any symptoms.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:02 PM

You read that right...oats are BENEFICIAL to diabetics. Not packaged instant oatmeal with sugar or oatmeal cooked in butter. Just oats.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:01 PM

@ unclelonghair- Sprouted grain breads and oats are modern carbs that are full of antioxidants (yes, oats are abundant in antioxidants), manganese, magnesium, fiber, selenium, and zinc. http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=54 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15466946

9a5e2da94ad63ea3186dfa494e16a8d1

(15833)

on April 14, 2013
at 11:32 AM

Aside from the fact that grains make me feel weird and screw up my digestion (though this is definitely not true of other people), modern grains are mostly empty carbs, hence are contrary to the goal of keeping carbs in check. If you have only a limited budget for carbs, why not make them nutritious?

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on April 14, 2013
at 11:31 AM

Because MOST people (as evidenced by most Paleo dieters) are gluten sensitive. So even if you're not celiac, chances are you're at least intolerant.

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on April 14, 2013
at 11:29 AM

Robb Wolf himself ate some rice pasta recently, and tweeted about it. However, that's something he does rarely, it's definitely not a staple, as in an Asian diet.

6fece842bd1bcf5724f458a302a2156e

(1169)

on April 14, 2013
at 09:48 AM

Yes and cultures use them as fillers - meat hard to come by so fill up on rice or bread. If you just have a bit - I currently have a small amount of brown basmatic rice with wild rice with my protein breakfast because I like it but I never have preferred carbs. Even as a child I would want much more of the meat but most families ration it due to cost.

6fece842bd1bcf5724f458a302a2156e

(1169)

on April 14, 2013
at 09:44 AM

I agree. Most people in the UK/US eat a very processed diet full of sugar. If they cut out the foods which are not "real foods" then even if they keep in some small portions of brown rice or their favourite carb they will still massive improve their health.

508a4ebd259022f415326f7a6baec00c

(482)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:42 AM

Sums up my eating habits perfectly. Thank you for putting it into words!

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:26 AM

I think if bread is made the way it was made 200 years ago and out of ancient grain, it is less poisonous - possibly neutral.

72cf727474b8bf815fdc505e58cadfea

on April 14, 2013
at 03:47 AM

Which particular additives do you think turn bread into pure poison?

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:27 AM

what on earth is '100% paleo'? Does one get a medal for achieving this phantasmic lifestyle? I daresay you could do with a medal dude, managing to plug your (presumably not yet existent) computer into a tree and typing from the savannah about other people's supposed failures at being '100% paleo', while still being able to hunt/gather/prepare dinner (lean animals etc). Well played...

9f54852ea376e8e416356f547611e052

(2957)

on January 19, 2013
at 11:32 PM

(White) rice is often seen as a rather benign grain by many paleo experts, including Sisson and Jaminet.

9f54852ea376e8e416356f547611e052

(2957)

on January 19, 2013
at 11:27 PM

Mark from Marks's Daily Apple has a pretty lenient view on rice as well: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/is-rice-unhealthy/

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on January 19, 2013
at 08:03 PM

The study I was referring to was done in 1977 I think, here is the link: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=1222&page=637 . It's actually a compilation of studies, but it references them. It looks like modern day DMFT values according to the UN are significantly lower also, so this data is relatively dated.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 19, 2013
at 07:46 PM

You're writing as if everyone in the world is celiac. Why?

3327924660b1e2f8f8fc4ca27fedf2b2

(2919)

on January 19, 2013
at 07:44 PM

WHITE Rice is a "safe starch." Starch is fine unless you have GI disorders.

3327924660b1e2f8f8fc4ca27fedf2b2

(2919)

on January 19, 2013
at 07:40 PM

If you're eating white rice, you're eating paleo.

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on January 19, 2013
at 07:35 PM

Really? I guess they are not as healthy as I thought they were. But is it like a recent thing or even 50 years ago they had that problem?

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 19, 2013
at 07:15 PM

Even gluten-free oats contain avenin, which is problematic for some people with celiac disease.

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on January 19, 2013
at 06:32 PM

I'll plus 1 this, but I would like to point out that the Japanese also have one of the largest rates of tooth decay in the ?world.

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on January 19, 2013
at 06:22 PM

Nicely said, +1.

F92e4ca55291c3f3096a3d4d3d854986

(11698)

on January 19, 2013
at 04:53 PM

it's promoted in the Jaminets' Perfect Health Diet, which is pretty Paleo to me.

  • 383127951e2e17f23b584cd3842bb796

    asked by

    (835)
  • Views
    87.9K
  • Last Activity
    1374D AGO
Frontpage book

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

15 Answers

8
1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

on January 19, 2013
at 05:27 PM

In my opinion, the "all grains are evil and toxic" mantra is a major fault of paleo. But, that's what makes it paleo- eliminating grains. So, if you're not doign that then technically you can't call yourself paleo.

The reason I think it's stupid is that I think most people should be following a reduced carbohydrate diet, and I am a fan of Sisson's recommendations (though not a fan of the man himself) to keep them between <= 150 grams (or <= 1g/lb of lean body mass is what I go by). When following a reduced carb diet, I think that eating certain grains like oatmeal, sprouted grain bread, sourdough rye, quinoa, brown rice, etc is not a problem because, since you're not eating too many of them in the first place, the "toxin" load won't be that great and should be something that any healthy body can easily cope with.

In other words, I think the recommendation to completely abolish all grains (even for healthy, active, metabolically fit people) is only useful in the case if you are eating a high carbohdyrate diet (like Kitava style or whatever). And, since most people shouldn't be eating a very high carbohydrate diet (and virtually a paleo guru's recommend a low carb diet for most people as well) the recommendation is just overkill, IMHO. I mean,there are PLENTY of very fit, metabolically healthy people out there who choose to consume some grains for their carb calories. The key is that they're (1) already fit/metabolically active (2) keep both carbs and overall calories in check.

If you think having a half cup of oatmeal (27 grams of carbs) everyday before you workout is going to by default make you sick and diabetic then you really have your head in the clouds.

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on January 19, 2013
at 06:22 PM

Nicely said, +1.

9a5e2da94ad63ea3186dfa494e16a8d1

(15833)

on April 14, 2013
at 11:32 AM

Aside from the fact that grains make me feel weird and screw up my digestion (though this is definitely not true of other people), modern grains are mostly empty carbs, hence are contrary to the goal of keeping carbs in check. If you have only a limited budget for carbs, why not make them nutritious?

6fece842bd1bcf5724f458a302a2156e

(1169)

on April 14, 2013
at 09:44 AM

I agree. Most people in the UK/US eat a very processed diet full of sugar. If they cut out the foods which are not "real foods" then even if they keep in some small portions of brown rice or their favourite carb they will still massive improve their health.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:01 PM

@ unclelonghair- Sprouted grain breads and oats are modern carbs that are full of antioxidants (yes, oats are abundant in antioxidants), manganese, magnesium, fiber, selenium, and zinc. http://www.whfoods.com/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=54 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15466946

508a4ebd259022f415326f7a6baec00c

(482)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:42 AM

Sums up my eating habits perfectly. Thank you for putting it into words!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:02 PM

You read that right...oats are BENEFICIAL to diabetics. Not packaged instant oatmeal with sugar or oatmeal cooked in butter. Just oats.

7
45ace03a0eff1219943d746cfb1c4197

(3661)

on January 19, 2013
at 04:37 PM

I, personally, have never seen rice promoted in a Paleo plan. It's sometimes mentioned as not so terribly bad if one needs extra carbohydrate on occasion. And even then it's only white rice, so that much of the grain is removed. Beyond that, NewPaleo's answer covers some issues with the other grains.

F92e4ca55291c3f3096a3d4d3d854986

(11698)

on January 19, 2013
at 04:53 PM

it's promoted in the Jaminets' Perfect Health Diet, which is pretty Paleo to me.

9f54852ea376e8e416356f547611e052

(2957)

on January 19, 2013
at 11:27 PM

Mark from Marks's Daily Apple has a pretty lenient view on rice as well: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/is-rice-unhealthy/

3327924660b1e2f8f8fc4ca27fedf2b2

(2919)

on January 19, 2013
at 07:40 PM

If you're eating white rice, you're eating paleo.

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on April 14, 2013
at 11:29 AM

Robb Wolf himself ate some rice pasta recently, and tweeted about it. However, that's something he does rarely, it's definitely not a staple, as in an Asian diet.

4
32be195157f00ad15a933b8bb333dcc4

(379)

on January 19, 2013
at 04:36 PM

Rice and cheese are both avoided by many paleo subscribers.

In my mind it comes down to individual reactions to foods. I was struck by how my girlfriend is allergic to many foods. Paleo avoids all of them. It seemed to track to me that paleo avoids common allergens. There's also the huge n=1 experiments to determine what foods you are sensitive to.

Re oats vs rice, I think white rice has less phytates.

3
197651282ddd8d675b974ee811d2269e

on January 19, 2013
at 04:32 PM

Rice is generally well tolerated while oats, wheat, and barley contain gluten, a highly allergenic substance. Oats do not technically contain gluten but are often contaminated since they are grown in the same fields and processed on same equipment. You can get oats that are certified gluten free but they are expensive.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on January 19, 2013
at 07:46 PM

You're writing as if everyone in the world is celiac. Why?

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 19, 2013
at 07:15 PM

Even gluten-free oats contain avenin, which is problematic for some people with celiac disease.

3eca93d2e56dfcd768197dc5a50944f2

(11697)

on April 14, 2013
at 11:31 AM

Because MOST people (as evidenced by most Paleo dieters) are gluten sensitive. So even if you're not celiac, chances are you're at least intolerant.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:22 PM

I don't think MOST are, but there is a sizeable portion of the population (something greater than 1% but probably less than 30%). Yesterday I came across a paper that found 10% of a healthy sample of people had IgA antibodies to gliadin. However, it's tricky to interpret because there wasn't a difference in HLA genotype between those with and those without the anti-gliadin response. Nor was there any clinical significance: those with the anti-gliadin antibodies didn't show any symptoms.

2
F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on January 19, 2013
at 06:21 PM

I was thinking about it for a long time. I am not sure that grains are bad. For example, Koreans and Japanese have white rice three times per day, yet they are healthy.

People who live on Ikaria eat homemade wheat bread - they are fine.

I think it is not about the grains per se, but how you cook them and what you get from them. Sweet potatoes are way more nutritious.

Bread from sprouted grains would be okay. Fermented bread too. Two weeks of fermentation would destroy all anti-nutrients as well.

Most commercially made bread with additives and preservatives is pure poison. White rice if it is organic - I am not sure.

I think reducing grains is definitely a healthy option. Not eating conventional grains would be the right thing to do. To eat rice or not - that's up to each person, depending on how they feel. As far as I know, gluten destroys your gut flora.

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on January 19, 2013
at 06:32 PM

I'll plus 1 this, but I would like to point out that the Japanese also have one of the largest rates of tooth decay in the ?world.

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on January 19, 2013
at 07:35 PM

Really? I guess they are not as healthy as I thought they were. But is it like a recent thing or even 50 years ago they had that problem?

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5

(10989)

on January 19, 2013
at 08:03 PM

The study I was referring to was done in 1977 I think, here is the link: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=1222&page=637 . It's actually a compilation of studies, but it references them. It looks like modern day DMFT values according to the UN are significantly lower also, so this data is relatively dated.

72cf727474b8bf815fdc505e58cadfea

on April 14, 2013
at 03:47 AM

Which particular additives do you think turn bread into pure poison?

F5a0ddffcf9ef5beca864050f090a790

(15515)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:26 AM

I think if bread is made the way it was made 200 years ago and out of ancient grain, it is less poisonous - possibly neutral.

1
1d0497f8781845ab371b479455bfee8e

(11157)

on January 19, 2013
at 06:35 PM

The biggest problem with grains of all stripes is that they are just (tasty) filler. Most are merely vehicles for sauces & meats. Some are nutritious, yes, but for the most part grain foods replace healthy vegetables and fruits. Think of the nutrition in a bowl of pasta vs. substituting that pasta with spaghetti squash. The first will leave you feeling bloated, has a heavy glycemic load, and increases inflammation throughout the body. The squash is packed with vitamins, high in fiber, and you end up eating several servings of veggies per meal. Plus it's naturally lower in carbs.

A piece of bread here and there or a serving of rice won't kill you (unless you're allergic to them), but I tend to think along the lines of, "What healthy foods is this cornbread/oatmeal/pasta/rice displacing?" I try to keep those cheats to 80/20.

6fece842bd1bcf5724f458a302a2156e

(1169)

on April 14, 2013
at 09:48 AM

Yes and cultures use them as fillers - meat hard to come by so fill up on rice or bread. If you just have a bit - I currently have a small amount of brown basmatic rice with wild rice with my protein breakfast because I like it but I never have preferred carbs. Even as a child I would want much more of the meat but most families ration it due to cost.

0
A7c1857ce53fb11a9351d05718c7070d

(283)

on July 25, 2013
at 06:44 PM

All interesting comments.

A paleo'ish approach that is personalized is what will be ideal for that person. There are a number of reasons that grains are not good for you regardless of if they are "paleo" or not. The "paleo" debate should not be framed by "what can we eat in it's natural state", or "what did people eat in the Paleolithic era". Paleo, Primal, Ancestral eating, as discussed and defined by the leaders in this area, is simply a way of eating that is healthful for the majority of the population, and supported by science as much as possible. The above comments are just a starting place.

Ok, now that I got that bit of a rant out of the way, grains are not healthful because they promote a large array of conditions that are detrimental to our health like gut inflammation, chronic systemic inflammation, autoimmune diseases (diabetes, MS, Crohn's disease, IBS, neurodegeneration), etc, etc. This is due to damaging proteins such as gluten (contained in wheat). All grains contain some type of protein similar to gluten, but they may not be quite as bad for us as gluten. That being said, even if you are one of those people who can eat grains with no negative effects, the other problem is that grains are not a very nutrient dense food, and you will get a way better health benefit from simply eating a more nutrient dense food like grassfed beef, pasture raised eggs, or local organic vegetables.

What about rice. White rice has had the bran (outer casing of the grain removed). This outer casing is where all of those nasty proteins live in the rice grain. Therefore, white rice is basically just straight starch. Meaning, white rice is a "safe" starch for most people to consume. However, I don't believe there are that many other nutrients in white rich other than starch. Personally I would rather go for a sweet potato, yam, squash, plantain, or any other starchy tuber that contains more vitamins than white rice. But sushi is darn good with some coconut aminos :-)

Sorry for the rant prior to the answer :-)

The perfect health diet addresses all of these issues, very educational: http://perfecthealthdiet.com/

Andy http://www.thebarefootgolfer.com/

0
2ff4c033b14e7b9c214ff33f6af018bd

on July 25, 2013
at 06:19 PM

I find the Paleo debate hilarious. The most common definition I keep coming across about why grain is not Paleo has been because it is not edible in its natural state. Well, then. Neither is meat nor poultry. I don't see folks running around eating raw meat or chicken. It has to be "processed", by cooking... pretty much what you must do to grains. So, can someone "truly" define it? Otherwise, I feel as though most people eating Paleo have no real clue what they are engaging in. Just like the Atkins diet. The world jumped on that bus without knowing where it was heading. Look at Atkins now... has transformed from its original design. I am willing to bet that Paleo is on the same track and in a matter of years, changes will surface. All I am saying is, do your own research and stop having society spoon feed you all the information.

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on July 25, 2013
at 06:41 PM

also, while technically any chemical reaction is "processed" "Processed foods" have a specific definition that goes beyond that. Please do yourself some good and do your own research.

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on July 25, 2013
at 06:37 PM

haha, silly rabbit. Of course meat can be eaten raw. Have you ever had Carpaccio, Tartare, Ceviche, Sushi, Crudos, Yookhwe, Bo Tai, Gored, Carne Apache?

3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on July 25, 2013
at 06:39 PM

Also, grains are full of toxins raw and cooked. Sprouting can reduce the toxins in some grains, but not others. The Paleo diet does not eschew grains because they require cooking. The concern is that most grains, and all moderns strains of wheat are highly poisonous to a large number of people despite the amount of processing that is required.

0
9a5e2da94ad63ea3186dfa494e16a8d1

on April 14, 2013
at 11:45 AM

As others noted, oatmeal is a grain and the premise of the Paleo diet is no grains, so you are supposed to avoid it. Like other grains, oatmeal has lectins and phytic acid, which studies have shown to cause inflammation and digestive problems in some people. It is also high in carbs and usually not high in nutrients, so really there is no point to eating it (from a Paleo POV).

Baked, rolled oats (i.e. typical Quaker oats) have very little nutrition (primarily some minerals), and a lot of fiber, though whether or not a lot of fiber is good/necessary is debatable. Most people add sugar when eating it (otherwise it tastes like cardboard) which increases the carbs and decreases the nutrition. It just isn't that good for you and I personally would rather have those calories as something nutritious. I have also found that a high-carb, sugary breakfast really screws up my metabolism and puts me on an energy roller coaster and I tend to gain weight. After eating oatmeal I am hungry 2 hours later. Others don't have this reaction but oatmeal definitely isn't for me.

There are other oatmeals such as steel-cut oats which have more of the bran intact, and when fermented, can be very nutritious. This was one of the staples of certain healthy Scottish cultures for example. However, there is a huge difference between the naturally cultivated and harvested oats that were prepared by those cultures and the sugary, baked, nutrient-free oatmeal available in supermarkets.

Rice is also a grain and should be avoided. However white rice has basically been stripped of everything that is good and bad, and is basically neutral from a nutrition perspective. It is empty calories, but is easy to digest and is harmless. It is also very widely available around the world and in take-out food. If you are trying to keep your carb intake low, it isn't going to help you at all since it's basically empty carbs. However, some people need more carbs (such as serious athletes) and white rice isn't a bad option for them.

0
5dd50f78f47b8848d93724d6eb38d4c1

on April 14, 2013
at 08:32 AM

White rice is not particularly good or bad. Oats, on the other hand are a pretty nutritious. They are cheap and tasty. Are they paleo? No, but does anyone really care anymore? They also contain different antioxidants as well as a substance called beta glucan. What's beta glucan you ask? Well it's good for a few things and it's beneficial enough for mark sisson to put into his supplements. I'd eat a bowl of oats well before I'd pay for a $129 "damage control" package.

0
Medium avatar

on January 19, 2013
at 06:49 PM

As others have said, I don't see rice "promoted" in ANY Paleo or Primal publication; instead I see it avoided.

IF your body can tolerate it AND you have stabilized your blood sugars (the most common indicator is if you've been Paleo/Primary for about 30 days and can intermittently fast without feeling weak), then I think small amounts here and there are okay (to me a "small amount" might be 1/2 cup of cooked rice, but your definition might vary). I would consider such a meal a "cheat meal" and not Paleo, but that's what the 80/20 rule is there for! :)

But if you are new to Paleo/Primal I would avoid rice altogether so that you don't push yourself over the edge and into a carb frenzy!

9f54852ea376e8e416356f547611e052

(2957)

on January 19, 2013
at 11:32 PM

(White) rice is often seen as a rather benign grain by many paleo experts, including Sisson and Jaminet.

0
88c82a46d0c35cb4a8cd41d487a2884a

on January 19, 2013
at 06:19 PM

I think the only reason that the traditional Japanese diet is high in white rice is because it is a cheap starchy high-glycemic carb that fills you up easily and gives you quick energy (if you don't stuff yourself, then you just wanna NAP!). It is otherwise pretty much a nutritionally pointless food and if combined with high dietary fat in the same meal it is a fat-making food combination for sure!

Is it Paleo? Well, ask the Japanese. They would probably say "not strictly" because it is cultivated, but they have been eating it for thousands of years as a staple. Of course, they are genetically small people and surely this has something to do with their diet over the millenia.

Food for thought :)

0
45ace03a0eff1219943d746cfb1c4197

(3661)

on January 19, 2013
at 04:38 PM

Sorry, this was a duplicate comment.

-3
88227764a863289edbd8784680db4aa1

on April 14, 2013
at 04:36 AM

Short answer, oats have anti-nutrients and rice does not. The research is out there if you care to look it up, I am just feeling a bit too lazy at the moment to provide it:)

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10490)

on April 14, 2013
at 04:59 PM

I would downvote but I don't want to waste a point on a drive-by. If you're too lazy to provide a source or at least reasoning behind your opinion, then be too lazy to provide the opinion.

-3
C16a9a0aecef02fe7beb69d330080068

(-6)

on April 14, 2013
at 02:23 AM

Simply put, rice in its natural form is not edible hence is not paleo... Rice is a grain, hence it's not paleo. Now if its acceptable in primal eating minimally ok, if you believe it's part of a healthy diet or some other diet then Great do what works for you, but If you feel you eat 100% paleo - rice isn't paleo.. If you want to eat it sometimes as a non paleo "treat" then do it. Check out Robb Wolfs website for a simple chart to follow or pick up the Paleo Solution for a more in depth explanation

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on April 14, 2013
at 03:27 AM

what on earth is '100% paleo'? Does one get a medal for achieving this phantasmic lifestyle? I daresay you could do with a medal dude, managing to plug your (presumably not yet existent) computer into a tree and typing from the savannah about other people's supposed failures at being '100% paleo', while still being able to hunt/gather/prepare dinner (lean animals etc). Well played...

61f9349ad28e3c42d1cec58ba4825a7d

(10490)

on April 14, 2013
at 05:00 PM

Yeah, there are a lot of people here who are engaged in either paleo-er than thou competition or paleo police fear-mongering. Both are silly.

Answer Question


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