It is currently October 15th, 2019, 11:51 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 6:23 am 
Offline
CCR Moderator & Assistant Administrator
User avatar

Joined: October 27th, 2006, 5:51 am
Posts: 2895
Location: Montreal
For xmas my wife went in to a health food store and bought me all kinds of trail food. Protein bars, energy balls, buckwheat-ginger-cinnamon mix, etc. etc. Most of it is quite good actually but what caught my eye was the length of the list of ingredients that weren't inside. Another sign of our times where everything is bad.

Back to whole grains. There are so many studies and one can always quote one or two to make a point. For instance brown rice vs. white. The phytic acid in whole grains and legumes chelates minerals and you lose them in your stool. They took a group and half ate white while the other half ate brown rice and somehow (I read the summary, not the materials and methods section) they ascertained that the white rice group absorbed more chromium than the brown rice group who purportedly lost it in their feces. Phytic acid contributes to mineral deficiency.

Anyway, the WHO considers the phytic acid in grains, nuts and legumes to be an important cause of malnutrition in developing countries and work is underway to breed varieties that have less phytic acid. You can reduce the content by soaking and tossing the water and/or by fermenting. Googling phytic acid brings up a great many hits including food forums where people discuss their various tricks for reducing PA content of foods.

Anyone interested in controlling blood sugar and/or body fat percentage would do well to consider matching their starch intake to their level of physical activity. The carbs in starch, unlike the macronutrients fat and protein, don't become an integral part of your body (just like the gas you put in your car). Carbs are fuel. However, eat more than needed and your body converts them to fat and stores it in handy locations such as your butt and around your middle, not to mention under your chin.

We are rightfully concerned about the food we eat but how does the impact stack up against the quality of the water we drink, the air we breath, the sleep we (don't) get and the way in which stress plays with our physiology?

Last thing: local versus shipped from California or S. Africa doesn't always mean more energy efficient due to soil quality, growing techniques, sunshine and something called "last mile" which means all the gas burned by people driving to and fro to the store.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 7:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: November 20th, 2014, 5:29 pm
Posts: 263
Location: Horseshoe Valley, Ontario
I raise, grow and hunt the majority of my family's food and write about it and sell the excess on my websites and we still struggle with achieving the right balance of nutrients for optimum health. I started tracking my calorie intake and output on an app called Loseit and was surprised at how much fat I still ingest, albeit high quality fat.
We firmly believe in eating as natural and organic as possible, with as much variety as possible, which includes both whole grains and processed grains with a focus on removing chemicals from our diet. Unlike the third world countries and diets mentioned above, in our countries we have access to huge variety of quality food so we don't need to overload on one particular grain or seed. With a family history of cancer, I'm hyper aware but I feel like I'm doing everything I can do to control the risk and that peace of mind is important.

_________________

Shawn http://myselfreliance.com/ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIMXKi ... q2UJePJEog



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 8:22 am 
Offline
CCR Moderator & Assistant Administrator
User avatar

Joined: October 27th, 2006, 5:51 am
Posts: 2895
Location: Montreal
Drhntr wrote:
was surprised at how much fat I still ingest, albeit high quality fat.

I would love to see your web site, what's the URL?

Last year, while training for a big hiking project I lost 25-30 lbs. with "performance based nutrition". I dropped a lot of carbs from my diet and ate a lot of fat along with a lot of protein. This provided me with long-lasting satiation and I stopped snacking. Who snacks on celery sticks? Not me! The fat I ate came from nuts, olive oil, dairy and grass-fed beef for the most part but with no small amount of fish and other meats. I think fat has been very wrongly demonized for the past 50 years. What is the brain mostly made of? What envelops every cell in the body? What is the most efficient form of fuel, calories per gram?

I sound like a fat proponent but of course we need carbs too or our bodies wouldn't break down protein and turn the carbon skeletons into sugar.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 10:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: November 20th, 2014, 5:29 pm
Posts: 263
Location: Horseshoe Valley, Ontario
I haven't been on it in awhile so I thought I'd better check and I see that the blog URL is not functioning. However, these two are still active and I plan on getting them back up and current again this winter. I'm a renewable energy developer and my work time is irregular so I occasionally have time to work on the sites.
http://greenlanefarm.ca/
http://myselfreliance.com/

I've always been a big believer in high quality protein and fat as well. I can add or subtract 10-15 lbs of weight on my body in a few short weeks by adjusting my carb intake while consuming venison, fish, grass fed beef and organic chickens, which I raise myself along with a large vegetable garden. It's part of my belief in self reliance and taking control of my family's food quality.

_________________

Shawn http://myselfreliance.com/ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIMXKi ... q2UJePJEog



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 9th, 2001, 7:00 pm
Posts: 1290
Location: Cambridge, Ontario
frozentripper wrote:
Harvard researchers and colleagues looked at data...who filled out questionnaires about their diet every two or four years from the mid-1980s to 2010.


Questionnaires? These aren't unbiased observations - most will over emphasize the good and under the bad in their diets. Is this study comparing those eating whole or "healthy" grains to those eating refined grains or to those eating no grains? Those who do eat a more healthy diet will tend to live a more healthy lifestyle and I don't believe these variables can be accurately accounted and adjusted for.

Hiker Neil wrote:
The phytic acid in whole grains and legumes chelates minerals and you lose them in your stool. They took a group and half ate white while the other half ate brown rice and somehow (I read the summary, not the materials and methods section) they ascertained that the white rice group absorbed more chromium than the brown rice group who purportedly lost it in their feces.


Grain toxins like phytates are concentrated in the bran of the rice.
Bran also concentrates the arsenic (yes ARSENIC!) in the rice. Choose white rice with a lower glycemic index like Basmati and note where it's grown if you can.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 29th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 6136
Location: Bancroft, Ontario Canada
DougB,

Quote:
Those who do eat a more healthy diet will tend to live a more healthy lifestyle and I don't believe these variables can be accurately accounted and adjusted for.


So who is making claims they have the healthier lifestyle, the whole grainers or the paleo meateaters... methinks they both consider themselves healthy so they'd both adopt and report healthy lifestyle habits. The whole grainers may have been around longer so their diet and lifestyle may have had more time to take effect (speculation only).

One of the authors in the study reported that the effects of other health variables (lifestyle, smoking, exercise, obesity, etc) on life span and disease were accounted for in the results of the Harvard study, which included 117,000 individuals studied over about 25 years. The report was published in JAMA which seems to add some credibility all things considered, and the details on how the researchers came to make their statements should be written somewhere in there (I'm not gonna take the time to plow through it).

EZ, the single serving effect on health was for servings taken on a daily basis... substituting a single serving of whole grains for a single serving of meat every day was what created the difference.

_________________
><((((º>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 1:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: February 19th, 2004, 9:53 pm
Posts: 1451
Location: Atlanta
No, it did not pertain to single servings for single individuals. The results of the study have been garbled by careless science writers, including my own source, MedPageToday from the U. of Pennsylvania Med School.

That "result" pertains to the whole group as a statistical manipulation. It certainly should not be taken to mean that someone can reduce their risk of death to zero by adding increments of raisin bran.

By the way, did you notice that it was NOT whole grains that did the trick. Grain germ had relatively little effect, but whole BRAN caused bigger improvements in outcome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 8th, 2015, 3:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: December 29th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 6136
Location: Bancroft, Ontario Canada
Well, the single serving per day, each day, grain vs meat substitution & beneficial effects thereof was what I read in the popular press reports with a quote from one of the authors stating so... but I'm not going to go searching for it again.

Never mind the popular press, here's the actual abstract from the JAMA publication, the authors seem to be clear on the association of whole grains in diet with mortality.

Quote:
Original Investigation | January 05, 2015

Association Between Dietary Whole Grain Intake and Risk of Mortality

Two Large Prospective Studies in US Men and Women

Hongyu Wu, PhD1; Alan J. Flint, MD, ScD1; Qibin Qi, PhD2; Rob M. van Dam, PhD3,4; Laura A. Sampson, RD1,5; Eric B. Rimm, ScD1,5,6; Michelle D. Holmes, MD, DrPH5,6; Walter C. Willett, MD, DrPH1,5,6; Frank B. Hu, MD, PhD1,5,6; Qi Sun, MD, ScD1,5

ABSTRACT

Importance Higher intake of whole grains has been associated with a lower risk of major chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease (CVD), although limited prospective evidence exists regarding whole grains’ association with mortality.

...

Results We documented 26 920 deaths during 2 727 006 person-years of follow-up. After multivariate adjustment for potential confounders, including age, smoking, body mass index, physical activity, and modified Alternate Healthy Eating Index score, higher whole grain intake was associated with lower total and CVD mortality...

...

Conclusions and Relevance These data indicate that higher whole grain consumption is associated with lower total and CVD mortality in US men and women, independent of other dietary and lifestyle factors. These results are in line with recommendations that promote increased whole grain consumption to facilitate disease prevention.


http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article ... id=2087877

_________________
><((((º>


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 9th, 2015, 9:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: August 11th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 5529
Location: Sunny Wasaga Beach
LRC--I wish you well in your treatment. The number of people we know who have cancer is positively scary.

I know this is a bit off topic(hey, it's the Off Topic forum!!), but lots of people seem to think that cancer is a modern disease and we would eliminate it if we eliminated modern chemicals, processed food and such. Well, it isn't and we won't. Science has established that cancer has been around forever. We tend to forget that we live on a radioactive planet and that the sun blasts more at us all day. Good healthy foods such as bananas that contain the potassium our bodies need also contain radioactive isotopes of potassium. Coffee---not such a 'good' food--contains lots as well. If we live on the Canadian Shield the rocks send some thru us. Thee list goes on and on..

The best insurance for a long life is to choose your ancestors well!! :D

_________________

Old canoeists never die---they just smell that way.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 9th, 2015, 12:10 pm 
Offline
CCR Moderator & Assistant Administrator
User avatar

Joined: October 27th, 2006, 5:51 am
Posts: 2895
Location: Montreal
Naturally occurring DNA damages arise more than 60,000 times per day per mammalian cell.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 14th, 2015, 6:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: August 11th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 5529
Location: Sunny Wasaga Beach
Try holding your breath for a while!(And don't be thinking any impure thoughts----except you, FT---I know you can't help it!! :D )

http://www.theweathernetwork.com/news/a ... cer/43644/

_________________

Old canoeists never die---they just smell that way.



Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group