0

votes

Grain free vs. whole grain

Answered on June 30, 2014
Created June 29, 2014 at 3:13 PM

I haven't touched a grain other than rice for a long time...

Any web browsing for healthy foods, disease-preventing diets, and longevity-promoting practices will turn up countless references to whole grain. It usually comes up high on any short-list of healthy foods but the paleo community completely rejects it.

Dietary studies constantly conclude that whole grains are good for you. I suspect a lot of this has to do with whole grains displacing more highly refined grains though (mainly white flower). Does anyone know of a study that compare diets high in whole grains to grain-free diets rather than the conventional alternative (basically white flower and sugary cereals)?

I'm not talking strictly about wheat so let's not get caught up on that. Whole grains vs. grain free...

7904c7276d7e48f1be887fabd263bfd9

(300)

on June 29, 2014
at 06:49 PM

Refined grains are empty calories, whole grains are not, they actually provide a pretty good spectrum of nutrients.

As far as mycotoxins go...they seem a big like the boogyman, Asprey seems a bit gullible and paranoid. ( IMO )

Although I do agree that the celiac/food sensitivity thing does need to play out a bit in the scientific community.

47cbd166d262925037bc6f9a9265eb20

(55)

on June 29, 2014
at 06:19 PM

There are also problems with mycotoxins

47cbd166d262925037bc6f9a9265eb20

(55)

on June 29, 2014
at 06:16 PM

But this sensitivity isn't easy to detect and even if one has no problem about it, they are rather empty calories compared to almost any other thing about every or almost every aspect.

7904c7276d7e48f1be887fabd263bfd9

(300)

on June 29, 2014
at 06:03 PM

It's probably worse as it pertains to celiacs and gluten. Whole grains are much more nutrient dense than refined grains though. Assuming one is not sensitive to the proteins in the grain then the whole grains should be without question far superior to refined grains, and if this was the instance I would argue that a diet with these grains would be superior to one without this restriction. ( As it would be merely arbitrary if this was the case)

It all comes back to how gluten or other proteins affect individuals or populations,I don't think there is anything else inherently 'bad' about grains.

Frontpage book

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

3 Answers

0
F291857fa12a0291688ea994343156dc

(720)

on June 30, 2014
at 06:06 AM

Cereal based diet vs paleo....

http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/3/1/39

oh, but the subjects were domestic pigs. :)

But the results seem to indicate that avoiding a cereal based diet is something worth considering.

Another way to look at it....

In the broad spectrum of stuff eat or not eat.... are there not things better than grains to eat that are not at all questionable / potentially problematic?

I ditched grains close to 100% coming up on two years and I don't miss them. My grassfed beef, pastured eggs, wild salmon, veggies & root veggies seem to filling the bill quite nicely. I very occasionally (every other month?) have some white rice or some tasting crackers but they represent a miniscule amount of calories in my diet.

0
Medium avatar

(10611)

on June 29, 2014
at 07:06 PM

It probably comes down to what you believe about phytates, which would be removed to a great extent in grain processing.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19774556/

Explore the literature on this front. The paleo pundits damn phytates as antinutrients but the science doesn't show much to support this.

The problem with grains for most people is overeating the cheap carbs. They're problematic because they digest easily, not because they destroy colons.

0
47cbd166d262925037bc6f9a9265eb20

(55)

on June 29, 2014
at 05:25 PM

To stop you thinking about it, there was a study about whole grains being worse than grains I read in Kresser's website

7904c7276d7e48f1be887fabd263bfd9

(300)

on June 29, 2014
at 06:03 PM

It's probably worse as it pertains to celiacs and gluten. Whole grains are much more nutrient dense than refined grains though. Assuming one is not sensitive to the proteins in the grain then the whole grains should be without question far superior to refined grains, and if this was the instance I would argue that a diet with these grains would be superior to one without this restriction. ( As it would be merely arbitrary if this was the case)

It all comes back to how gluten or other proteins affect individuals or populations,I don't think there is anything else inherently 'bad' about grains.

Answer Question


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