Arcadian Dreamer, What’s Your Beef

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

• Tweet

With whole grains?  I have been meaning to ask ever since I saw what seemed like an unhinged take.

[Arcadian_Dreamer]

With whole grains?  I have been meaning to ask ever since I saw what seemed like an unhinged take.

My beef is not just with whole grains, but with ALL grains.

A little background lesson first. Humans have only been consuming grains for the last 10,000 years with the rise of agriculture, that seems like a long time but we have been around for much much longer as a species, as far as our bodies and genomes are concerned that is like a blip in evolutionary scale. Our guts haven't yet developed ways to fully digest grains. Remember we are a monogastric species, not ruminants with four chamber stomachs so we are at disadvantage in comparison to herbivores. Even cows struggle on an all grain diet and prefer grasses. Only birds, rodents, and some insects can safely consume grains. Contrary to popular belief, hunter gatherers were much healthier and better fed than their settled agrarian counterparts because their diets excluded grains. Check this:

Hunter-gatherers living during the Paleolithic period, between 30,000 and 9,000 BCE, were on average taller—and thus, by implication, healthier—than any people since, including people living in late twentieth-century America. Their median life span was higher than at any period for the next six thousand years, and their health, as estimated by measuring the pelvic inlet depth of their skeletons, appears to have been better, again, than at any period since—including the present day. This collapse in individual well-being was likely due to the fact that settled agricultural life is physically harder and more disease-ridden than the life of a shifting hunter-gatherer community.

Plants like all living things don't want to be consumed however unlike animals they can't run or fight back, so they developed toxic defenses against predation. Grains have the toxic anti-nutrients, lectins, gluten, and phytates

Phytic acid for example blocks mineral absorption in the intestinal tract. Think about that!

Traditional societies never ate WHOLE grains, they carefully prepared their grains, sifted it, fermented it, removed the brans, etc. Promotion of whole grains is recent western fad that has no basis in science and history.

Grains are the cause of celiac, IBS, much inflammation in the body, lead to insulin spikes,  dental caries, and cognitive retardation in the young.

We don't need grains to survive or thrive. Meat, vegetables, fruits are much healthier options.

I don't want to make it too long. There you go.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

With whole grains?  I have been meaning to ask ever since I saw what seemed like an unhinged take.

My beef is not just with whole grains, but with ALL grains.

But between whole grains and refined grains, which is preferable?  I think whole grains.  In the relevant context, you came out as if in support of refined grains.

A little background lesson first. Humans have only been consuming grains for the last 10,000 years with the rise of agriculture, that seems like a long time but we have been around for much much longer as a species, as far as our bodies and genomes are concerned that is like a blip in evolutionary scale. Our guts haven't yet developed ways to fully digest grains. Remember we are a monogastric species, not ruminants with four chamber stomachs so we are at disadvantage in comparison to herbivores. Even cows struggle on an all grain diet and prefer grasses. Only birds, rodents, and some insects can safely consume grains. Contrary to popular belief, hunter gatherers were much healthier and better fed than their settled agrarian counterparts because their diets excluded grains. Check this:

I think this is an interesting take, if a little extreme.  I think with nutrition, people can adapt over periods as short as a few generations.  That's why some people are lactose intolerant and others are not.

That bold part should be referencing whole grains.  We do just fine extracting whatever carbs we can from refined grains; in fact the problem is that we are too good at digesting refined grains.  Our inability to fully digest whole grains is actually why they are better than refined grains.  They fill us up, without the attendant problem of adding more carbs into our bodies.

Hunter-gatherers living during the Paleolithic period, between 30,000 and 9,000 BCE, were on average taller—and thus, by implication, healthier—than any people since, including people living in late twentieth-century America. Their median life span was higher than at any period for the next six thousand years, and their health, as estimated by measuring the pelvic inlet depth of their skeletons, appears to have been better, again, than at any period since—including the present day. This collapse in individual well-being was likely due to the fact that settled agricultural life is physically harder and more disease-ridden than the life of a shifting hunter-gatherer community.

There must have been advantages to agriculture and settled life that outweighed its initial baggage though.  That's why settled populations are larger than rummagers whose whole existence is dedicated to finding the next meal.  I guess you can say one or the other is harder depending on what you prefer.

Plants like all living things don't want to be consumed however unlike animals they can't run or fight back, so they developed toxic defenses against predation. Grains have the toxic anti-nutrients, lectins, gluten, and phytates

Phytic acid for example blocks mineral absorption in the intestinal tract. Think about that!

Traditional societies never ate WHOLE grains, they carefully prepared their grains, sifted it, fermented it, removed the brans, etc. Promotion of whole grains is recent western fad that has no basis in science and history.

Grains are the cause of celiac, IBS, much inflammation in the body, lead to insulin spikes,  dental caries, and cognitive retardation in the young.

We don't need grains to survive or thrive. Meat, vegetables, fruits are much healthier options.

I don't want to make it too long. There you go.

How common are these conditions?

[Arcadian_Dreamer]

But between whole grains and refined grains, which is preferable?  I think whole grains.  In the relevant context, you came out as if in support of refined grains.

Nope. I think what is playing with people's minds is the word "whole" in whole grains. Just because a grain is whole, does not mean it is good for you. Grains, yams, nuts are better eaten refined. Whole grains contain phytic acid;

Phytic acid is the principal storage form of phosphorus in many plant tissues, especially the bran portion of grains and other seeds. It contains the mineral phosphorus tightly bound in a snowflake-like molecule. In humans and animals with one stomach, the phosphorus is not readily bioavailable. In addition to blocking phosphorus availability, the "arms" of the phytic acid molecule readily bind with other minerals, such as calcium, magnesium, iron and zinc, making them unavailable as well. In this form, the compound is referred to as phytate.

I think this is an interesting take, if a little extreme.  I think with nutrition, people can adapt over periods as short as a few generations.  That's why some people are lactose intolerant and others are not.

For now there is no evidence our stomachs can break down phytic acid, it may eventually happen in a million years who knows we may develop a secondary chamber in our stomach. Also bear in mind there is a difference between animal derived foods and plant derived foods, you have bypassed the defenses of the animal (fight & flight) by the time you have access to milk and meat plants that is why animal derived foods are much easier on our digestive tracts and bodies in comparison to plant based foods.

That bold part should be referencing whole grains.  We do just fine extracting whatever carbs we can from refined grains; in fact the problem is that we are too good at digesting refined grains.  Our inability to fully digest whole grains is actually why they are better than refined grains.  They fill us up, without the attendant problem of adding more carbs into our bodies.

Of course our bodies rapidly uptake refined grains leading to rapid spikes in blood sugar and insulin levels after meals the reason I stated all grains are unhealthy. Because refined grains are bad that does not mean whole grains are the answer.

There must have been advantages to agriculture and settled life that outweighed its initial baggage though.  That's why settled populations are larger than rummagers whose whole existence is dedicated to finding the next meal.  I guess you can say one or the other is harder depending on what you prefer.

No early man was forced by necessity to settle down and do agriculture because he hunted most of the large herbivores to the brink of extinction, populations exploded early on due to the availability of easy game, leading to more animals being slaughtered until the were no more animals to be hunted leading to a collapse. This happened in America, Australia and Eurasia simultaneously. Human beings never change.

How common are these conditions?

Very common, and increasing so. The rise of auto immune diseases have been linked to grain eating, GMO grain, irradiated grains, etc.