Grains are the devil

KombuchaCat

I think it depends on your personal constitution and any food allergies. If you are gluten intolerant than yes, wheat will cause your body to not absorb the nutrients in your food. However some people do just fine with grains. I think everything in moderation.

SpeSHul_SnoflEHk

Must be why my pancakes look like this.

Darn it. I was coming to post that pic.

Edited because my brain is apparently misfiring today. WTF?

ninerbuff

Grains are not really the devil i suppose, they have carbs which gives energy, I guess its just about excess. What trips me out are the phylates that block absorption of good stuff. I didnt even know those were a thing

Grains "pros" outweigh the "cons". And phytic acid isn't as bad as you're making it sound.

Antinutrients found in grains include digestive enzyme (protease and amylase) inhibitors, phytic acid, hemagglutinins, phenolic compounds, and tannins. Protease inhibitors, phytic acid, phenolic compounds, and saponins were shown to reduce the risk for cancers of the colon and breast in animals. Phytic acid, lectins, phenolic compounds, amylase inhibitors, and saponins were also shown to lower one or more of the following substances in plasma: glucose, insulin, cholesterol, and triacylglycerol (13).

In grains, protease inhibitors make up 5–10% of the water-soluble protein and are concentrated in the endosperm and embryo. According to Wattenberg (26), protease inhibitors have inhibitory actions including both suppression of the expression of neoplasia in cells already exposed to a carcinogenic agent and inhibition of tumor promotion.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/70/3/459s.full

Hear both sides of the story then make you own decision if grains are for you or not.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Once again its not how I am making it sound. I dont believe the documentary. I ate bread today, and some tiger shrimp ravioli (thats pasta, made from grains) for dinner. I do not agree with the film. I know documentaries are one sided. Be a crafty consumer, come to your own conclusions. I was just wondering how people felt about what the film said. I didnt know about phylates (now I do) and wanted more info.

Sorry didn't see a few posts down where you stated you didn't believe the author of the documentary. Hopefully the info on phytic acid (which chelates nutrients to an extent) helps clear up some of the BS that some of the anti grain proponents may tout.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

FredDoyle

paleolol

jennaworksout

all true...IMO and therefore I don not eat it.......personal choice for everyone

MinatoandClover

I'd die without grains I can't live without bread. What would I eat otherwise?

But yeah, that's some BS. There's no good reason to cut out an entire food group. They all have differing values that we need to be healthy and survive. While we can get them elsewhere, grains are probably the best source for carbs.

That, and how would you have, like, pizza and spaghetti and stuff...?

Kanuenue

That is true, civilization is probably a good thing. However says the man on the TV. In the vast timeline of human existence, grain based agriculture has only been practiced for .01%. Just before that was a peak in our species brain development and since we rely on grains in much of our food, our brain development has stagnated.

This is a unfortunate misstatement that has been promoted with the "paleo" diet trend. We has been using agriculture for out MASS food production for .01%. There have been stone tool evidence of grain consumption and dependence in our diet from 100,000 years ago, in the Middle Stone Age period which is pre-Ice Age. This is good news, showing advancements in learning, tool development, and a rather sophisticated diet plan much earlier than we had previously hypothesized.

That being said, too much sugar is an issue in modern society, but refined grains have not been available for the masses until the last 150 years. It was too expensive before that.

green_owl

i don't eat grains not because they are evil, but because i feel so much better without them and i don't have to count calories. i have tried that paleo eating. some things like 'no sugar, no grains' works for me fine, but i don't agree to avoid dairy and legumes. but it's all just my personal preference, not that i say it's right or wrong.

EricCowperthwaite

That being said, too much sugar is an issue in modern society, but refined grains have not been available for the masses until the last 150 years. It was too expensive before that.

This ... which is not to say that whole grains are bad for you, but rather that refined grains and sugars in excess are really bad. And what excess means is not well understood, but definitely far less than the 150 lbs a year that the typical American is consuming right now.

Should also note that yes, humans have been consuming grains for 100,000 years, but until the advent of agriculture somewhere around 10,000 years ago (some dispute about his, with some archaelogists going back almost 20,000 years) humans weren't able to get really large quantities of grains. The typical human couldn't get really large quantities of wheat and corn until the past 150 years, or so. And prior to the 1970's, obesity was considered a disease of the rich, not the average human. Again, correlation is not causation, but the rich were able to eat a lot of wheat and corn and the rest of us were not able to get that sort of large amounts of refined grains and sugars.

neanderthin

Ok so I was watching this documenttary on the best possible diet for a human to consume, and this guy was saying that grains in general are not meant for human consumption especially in the amounts we eat them in. Basucally he said that not only are they high in carbs, which in excess cause fat, but contain chemicals called phylates (i believe thats what it is) that actuall block absorption of other good nutriens like fiber, iron, magnesium copper and antioxidants. so eating oatmeal is actually bad for you. So when they say whole grain and good cereal grains and all that its really not good at all. What does everyone think of this?

If you get a chance you should read Denise Minger's review of the China Study which goes into quite some detail regarding grain consumption.

http://rawfoodsos.com/2010/08/06/final-china-study-response-html/

Jesiena

I don't agree. I lost a lot of weight a few years ago by cutting out meat and eating a lot of grains. I think it depends on the person really

StacyReneO

I can't do grains either, when I do - I pay for it. I get bloated, cranky, tired and just generally feel like crap. It's even worse if I do white grains...my stomach feels like it's being twisted. I would love to work brown rice back into my diet so I could at least do brown rice pasta.

anaconda469

I'd die without grains I can't live without bread. What would I eat otherwise?

But yeah, that's some BS. There's no good reason to cut out an entire food group. They all have differing values that we need to be healthy and survive. While we can get them elsewhere, grains are probably the best source for carbs.

That, and how would you have, like, pizza and spaghetti and stuff...?

Oh geeze, I love my Franz Orcha Island 9 grain bread. I agree with the above. My doctor tells me to eat Quaker Oats as it is good for my heart (heart healthy foods). I guess I will just keep plugging along, grains and all. :laugh:

happysherri

I like grains! yum :-)

KenosFeoh

I remember from anthropology classes that humans have been gathering and consuming grains, along with anything and everything else we could find to eat, since we were barely human.

EricCowperthwaite

I don't agree. I lost a lot of weight a few years ago by cutting out meat and eating a lot of grains. I think it depends on the person really

Of course each one of us is different and everyone's body metabolizes nutrients slightly differently. But the basic biological processes that our body uses to metabolize protein, carbohydrates and fats is the same from one human to another. Cutting out meat meant you cut out a lot of fat in your diet. When you consume carbs, your body produces insulin. Insulin tells your body to start storing dietary fats and oils in your fat cells for later use while burning the glucose that the carbs are converted to as you digest them. Cutting out a big chunk of fats meant your body had fewer fats to deposit as fat stores to use later on. Assuming you are not insulin resistant and/or diabetic, that meant that later on when the glucose was used up after a meal, then your body extracted the fat stores and burned them. That's the basics of how you lost weight.

You can achieve the same thing by getting rid of a lot of carbs in your diet, but continuing to eat protein and fat. Everybody is different in both how their body behaves and what their tastes and desires are. But the biological basics don't change.

rpcykp

phytic acid (fī´tik),
n a component of some high-fiber foods, including many cereal grains that may, in excessive amounts, cause constipation or interfere with the body's ability to absorb minerals.
Mosby's Dental Dictionary, 2nd edition. © 2008 Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.


I think it is all about moderation - if you eat too much of anything, then it will cause problems (same with sugars and proteins and fats, etc)