What's so special about brown rice?

Options
2»

Replies

  • Hendrix7
    Hendrix7 Posts: 1,903 Member
    Options
    The brown rice has more: Vitamins, Minerals, Protein, Fiber.

    If you think those things are NOT good for the body, then yes, I could see why you'd think white rice is better.

    And your numbers are wrong. 2g to 4g is NOT 1%, it is 100% difference.

    That would be fine if I ate rice as a source or vitamins, minerals, protein or fibre, but I don't.

    Fruits and veg are a far superior source of vits, fibre and vitamins and lean meat is a far superior source of protein.

    If you eat rice purely as a carbohydrate, there is almost zero difference between brown and white.

    Comparing the protein content of 2 different types of rice is about as irrelevant as it gets.
  • wisteri
    wisteri Posts: 14
    Options
    White rice is just brown rice with the bran polished off. This is why the water turns milky with white rice but not brown. While the bran does contain some nutrition, the biggest deal is in how your body digests it. Bran is very hard,relatively speaking so it is harder to digest brown rice. With white rice,the carbohydrates contained in the rice are easily accessible so you absorb more of them during digestion. You don't actually absorb all the nutrients from all the food that you eat, so essentially brown rice lets you eat carbs without digesting all of them.

    In general,food science is bad science because it doesn't take into account how your body uses food. More processed foods generally have more accessible sugars and carbs so our body takes in more of them. Carbs and sugars your body doesn't readily need get stored as fat. Thus, less processed is better because it is technically less nutritious, but when we live with cave man bodies built to make the most of meager nutrition in a world with an over abundance of food, that's what we need to be thin.

    If you look at the nutrition info for butter versus olive oil,you'll see that a tablespoon of each containes the same amount of calories. We now know that olive oil is better for you than butter because of the type of fat it is. The same is true for carbs and sugars. The scientists simply don't have all the answers yet. You might be interested in reading the book In Defense of Food which explains it quite beautifully.
  • msmil
    msmil Posts: 9 Member
    Options
    The most special attribute about brown rice is that it is not white. Somewhere along the way, some genius declared war on anything white... Sugar, bread, rice, flour, potatoes.. Personally, I tend to believe that a carb is a carb is a carb, and as long as you keep your correct calorie and macronutrients ratios, the source is irrelevant. This is just my opinion and it is not a popular one. But for the rice argument, the only thing I can note as being 'bad" about white is that it is higher on the GI scale, which will cause a spike and drop in bloo glucose, whereas lower GI foods keep those levels steadier.
  • marvybells
    marvybells Posts: 1,984 Member
    Options
    I love rice. I am probably in the minority here but i love it so much that I'll eat it plain. nothing on it, just rice.

    To me, brown rice does taste nuttier than white & while i prefer brown, i love them both.

    rice chex are a favorite cereal of mine & i could gobble up a pound of rice pudding in one sitting. i prefer soups with rice grains or noodles over pasta.

    Aw man, i just remembered that i have some purple sticky rice in the cabinet. it is slightly sweet and oh so tasty. In fact, it is so darn delicious my mouth is watering thinking about it. i may have to cook some up tomorrow....

    ok now i'm off to bed with dreams of rice cakes dancing in my head....
  • wisteri
    wisteri Posts: 14
    Options
    Technically that is not true. There is a big difference between simple carbs like white bread and complex carbs like vegetables. I think one of the big nutritional misconceptions is that only starchy foods contain carbs, only meats have proteins, or only animal product contain fat. The truth is these things are the building blocks of life and are found in all living things in various forms, and it really does come down to form. While the macronutrients in two things could be the same the way your body can use then will be different depending on the shape of the molecule. Digestion occurs at a molecular level, so it's all about the molecular biology.
  • sunsnstatheart
    sunsnstatheart Posts: 2,544 Member
    Options
    i don't detect a difference in taste between white rice (bland) and brown rice (bland), so if the brown rice is marginally better in nutrition, then why not choose brown rice?

    also, i buy brown rice so that racist eel above doesn't judge me.

    Some brown rice has a nuttier flavor. I like it fine..but...

    Don't mess with my white rice. That's all I'm saying :P hahahah...

    And I figure if a lot of my ancestors ate it and ended up okay....maybe I might luck out and be okay too....

    ^This. Look the entire continent of Asia eats white rice in huge quantities. Having lived in Japan for several years I can say with complete sincerity that you are going to be hard pressed to find any Japanese that are as overweight as our Western populations are, and yet Japanese guys are scarfing two to three bowls just at lunch time. I remember being looked at like I was bat **** crazy on more than one occasion when eschewing white rice "because it isn't good for you". Of course that's anecdotal. Months of reading later and I'm feeling pretty sheepish. Now, I'm not saying the Japanese diet is so much better than the American diet because that completely misses the point, just like the white rice debate does. Its calories in/calories out for weight loss and macro balance for body composition. If white rice fits into your diet and you are otherwise getting the nutrition you need then enjoy white rice.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,018 Member
    Options
    Technically that is not true. There is a big difference between simple carbs like white bread and complex carbs like vegetables. I think one of the big nutritional misconceptions is that only starchy foods contain carbs, only meats have proteins, or only animal product contain fat. The truth is these things are the building blocks of life and are found in all living things in various forms, and it really does come down to form. While the macronutrients in two things could be the same the way your body can use then will be different depending on the shape of the molecule. Digestion occurs at a molecular level, so it's all about the molecular biology.
    White bread is a complex carb.
  • Firefox7275
    Firefox7275 Posts: 2,040 Member
    Options
    I have always heard that brown rice is sooooo much better for you than white rice. But I just decided to look for myself and now I don't get where this comes from.

    I compared 100g of white and brown rice here: http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5707/2 and here: http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5722/2

    One of the big selling points I have heard about brown rice is the high fiber content, but based on these numbers it is only a 1% difference so not all that significant. The glycemic index is essentially the same. Total calories actually slightly favors the white rice (though again, it is an insignificant difference).

    The brown rice has slightly more protein, but again only a 1% difference.

    Some experts are saying that brown rice contains phytic acid that somehow interferes with the uptake of nutrients. This seems like a small strike against brown rice. Speaking of nutrients, research also tells me that while brown rice is higher in certain nutrients (e.g. selenium and manganese) white rice is higher in other important nutrients (e.g. folate and thiamine). So let's just call nutrient content a wash.

    Actually, that is my whole point: it seems like the pros and cons between the two are minor and essentially a wash. So how did brown rice get such a good rep while white rice got shoved to the curb?

    You are comparing a glutinous rice to a long grain rice! Those are different strains which behave differently during cooking and in the body due to the amylose/ amylopectin content. And you've chosen to compare cooked rice with cooked rice.One tends to be cooked until the starches start breaking down (potentially absorbs more water) the other is normally only boiled or steamed until the grains remain separate and fluffy so of course the calories will be different, there is more water in one than the other. You may as well compare apples to oranges.
  • Firefox7275
    Firefox7275 Posts: 2,040 Member
    Options
    Technically that is not true. There is a big difference between simple carbs like white bread and complex carbs like vegetables. I think one of the big nutritional misconceptions is that only starchy foods contain carbs, only meats have proteins, or only animal product contain fat. The truth is these things are the building blocks of life and are found in all living things in various forms, and it really does come down to form. While the macronutrients in two things could be the same the way your body can use then will be different depending on the shape of the molecule. Digestion occurs at a molecular level, so it's all about the molecular biology.

    Actually one of the biggest misconceptions is that white flour is simple, you are applying the classification system incorrectly. Simple = sugars complex = starches, regardless if they are whole or refined, fast or slow digested/ absorbed. Not sure you really understand what is studied in the field of molecular biology either.
  • zlauerMom
    zlauerMom Posts: 183 Member
    Options
    I'm from a long line of diabetics. So my doctor many moons ago sent me off to a nutritionist and I asked her this same question. She told me, that in calorie content there is no difference. The difference comes in the ease of access to those calories. The carbs (sugars) in white rice are readily available. The white rice is easier for your body to breakdown, causing a spike in blood sugar. Your body has to work at getting to the carbs of the brown rice. The brown rice takes longer to breakdown causing the sugars to enter the blood stream more slowly.

    If you want to get super anal about calorie consumption, the brown rice ends up being less calories overall because your body expended more calories to get at it. :smile: But the big benefit is to avoid spiking your blood sugar.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,018 Member
    Options
    I'm from a long line of diabetics. So my doctor many moons ago sent me off to a nutritionist and I asked her this same question. She told me, that in calorie content there is no difference. The difference comes in the ease of access to those calories. The carbs (sugars) in white rice are readily available. The white rice is easier for your body to breakdown, causing a spike in blood sugar. Your body has to work at getting to the carbs of the brown rice. The brown rice takes longer to breakdown causing the sugars to enter the blood stream more slowly.

    If you want to get super anal about calorie consumption, the brown rice ends up being less calories overall because your body expended more calories to get at it. :smile: But the big benefit is to avoid spiking your blood sugar.
    In the context that the rice is the only thing consumed. Dosage is more about glycemic load and in that respect has much more meaning.....unfortunately it's not taken as seriously as GI.
  • Amazon_Who
    Amazon_Who Posts: 1,092 Member
    Options
    FYI: Remember the big rice story of 2012? Arsenic in rice, in fact brown rice had higher levels. Probably not a big deal but you can reduce the risk.

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-10-03/features/ct-food-1003-rice-arsenic-cooking-tips-20121003_1_inorganic-arsenic-rice-consumption-brown-rice
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    Technically that is not true. There is a big difference between simple carbs like white bread and complex carbs like vegetables. I think one of the big nutritional misconceptions is that only starchy foods contain carbs, only meats have proteins, or only animal product contain fat. The truth is these things are the building blocks of life and are found in all living things in various forms, and it really does come down to form. While the macronutrients in two things could be the same the way your body can use then will be different depending on the shape of the molecule. Digestion occurs at a molecular level, so it's all about the molecular biology.

    Actually one of the biggest misconceptions is that white flour is simple, you are applying the classification system incorrectly. Simple = sugars complex = starches, regardless if they are whole or refined, fast or slow digested/ absorbed. Not sure you really understand what is studied in the field of molecular biology either.
    This.

    I read at least once a day in the forums that some white starch is a simple carb, and I wish I knew where this particular gem of misinformation was coming from so I could nuke it.

    ALL starches, regardless of color, or how processed they are, are complex carbs. "Simple" carbohydrates are molecules of one or two sugars linked together- sucrose, fructose, glucose, galactose, maltose, etc are simple carbs.

    Starches are chains of more than two sugars, white potatoes, white sugar, ultra super processed white flour, brown rice, whole grains, and everything in between qualifies. When you see the nutritional differences between simple and complex carbs described, white bread is still a complex carb. Your body breaks complex carbs down in to simple carbs to use.

    I feel like somehow Dr. Oz must be to blame here.
    *steps off soapbox*
  • msmil
    msmil Posts: 9 Member
    Options
    I feel like somehow Dr. Oz must be to blame here.
    *steps off soapbox*

    HA! right?!
  • rshields9093
    rshields9093 Posts: 20 Member
    Options
    I'm from a long line of diabetics. So my doctor many moons ago sent me off to a nutritionist and I asked her this same question. She told me, that in calorie content there is no difference. The difference comes in the ease of access to those calories. The carbs (sugars) in white rice are readily available. The white rice is easier for your body to breakdown, causing a spike in blood sugar. Your body has to work at getting to the carbs of the brown rice. The brown rice takes longer to breakdown causing the sugars to enter the blood stream more slowly.

    If you want to get super anal about calorie consumption, the brown rice ends up being less calories overall because your body expended more calories to get at it. :smile: But the big benefit is to avoid spiking your blood sugar.

    This was one of my reasons for posting the question originally. I was diagnosed with diabetes some months ago (which led to the lifestyle changes that led to this site in the first place) and I had also been told essentially the same thing about spiking blood sugar.

    But then I look at the GI of the two (again using the 100g of each comparison at the website linked in my OP) and white rice has a GI of 10 and brown has a GI of 11. Now perhaps I don't properly understand the GI as a concept or perhaps that website just has plain wrong information, but I am pretty sure that the difference between a 10 and a 11 GI is trivial. This is yet another reason for my confusion.

    But I certainly like the idea that Dr. Oz is to blame. :)
  • rshields9093
    rshields9093 Posts: 20 Member
    Options
    You are comparing a glutinous rice to a long grain rice! Those are different strains which behave differently during cooking and in the body due to the amylose/ amylopectin content. And you've chosen to compare cooked rice with cooked rice.One tends to be cooked until the starches start breaking down (potentially absorbs more water) the other is normally only boiled or steamed until the grains remain separate and fluffy so of course the calories will be different, there is more water in one than the other. You may as well compare apples to oranges.

    Well, I see your point, and thank you for pointing out the differences in rice type and possible water weight affecting the numbers. I had not considered that.

    So I went back to the same site and compared raw long grain white rice to raw long grain brown rice (100g each). Still nothing to get too excited about, though I see that the fiber differences are a little more pronounced now. The white has 1g fiber while the brown has 4g fiber. But on calories, glycemic index, protein, nutrients, etc. there is still only trivial differences. And since I, at least, eat rice along with other stuff that brings lots more fiber to the table, even the 3g fiber difference here seems to not matter too much.

    Of course I understand that some people prefer the taste/texture of brown rice, but my search is for a compelling reason that one should always choose brown rice based on health considerations. (I prefer the taste/texture of white rice and I think it is better at absorbing all the tasty juices from the stir fry stuff that I am eating on top of it).

Categories