Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wheat

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    I think someone should do an experiment where people who don't eat grains (eg. people on some form of the paleo diet) add whole grains to their diet for a few weeks and see if their health improves. That would probably be a better way of testing how healthy grains are than by putting people already eating grains on a diet.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by jimhensen View Post
      Think harder Jim
      Go back to the original question and try again.
      I know you can do it.
      "There are no short cuts to enlightenment, the journey is the destination, you have to walk this path alone"

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Dirlot View Post
        As I have said all along those that eat the most whole grains at the expense of refined grains are often healthier. I agree whole grains are better than refined grains. All your studies show how bad refined grains are and show that whole grains are better.
        [B]
        IF this were true, which it is not, the people that ate the least amount of grains, whether refined or whole, would be healthiest. Right? But the people that eat the most whole grains are always the healthiest. Why aren't these studies showing that people that eat the least amount of grains are healthiest?????? Please just answer that.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Ribbons View Post
          I think someone should do an experiment where people who don't eat grains (eg. people on some form of the paleo diet) add whole grains to their diet for a few weeks and see if their health improves. That would probably be a better way of testing how healthy grains are than by putting people already eating grains on a diet.
          The bias is already built into the study. A lot of people that don't eat grains do so because of problems they have with grains. It also depends what they are substituting the grains for in their diet. If they are eating grains instead of vegetables they would probably be worse off. If you eliminate one thing from your diet, you have to replace it with something else. So there are so many variables in a study like this.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Omni View Post
            Think harder Jim
            Go back to the original question and try again.
            I know you can do it.
            The study also invalidates your premise that 29% of people without celiac disease have these antibodies in their stool. Because in this study only 4 children out of 84 (and 20 of those 84 actually have celiac disease) had these anti bodies in their stool. So post up your study about the 29%.

            Obviously this proves that these antibodies in stool doesn't prove gluten sensitivity one way or the other, otherwise the celiac patients would all have it.
            Last edited by jimhensen; 07-11-2012, 07:45 AM.

            Comment


            • #51
              I have not eaten dairy and/or any type of grain in 3 weeks and have not felt this good in 12 years. Study or no study, personally I cannot process the junk and I get body inflammation. I never would have known this unless I gave it up.

              Perhaps you should go eat a loaf of bread with some ice cream and quit trolling....

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Dirlot View Post
                Actually they don't and when they do it is full of fat.
                Yes they do. If you don't believe the Italians and French eat plenty of wheat, then you are blinded by your bias.

                Do they eat as much wheat as the SAD? No, but that's a different argument. Yes, they do tend to eat their wheat with fat, but if the WHEAT is a problem, then that should be largely irrelevant. Unless your argument is that wheat is fine if you put some butter on it.

                The reality is that millions do just fine having wheat as part of the diet. Same with rice. It may bother you, but it's the truth. However, what matters is what works for YOU, and if those things don't work for you, then don't eat them. I don't eat wheat because I tend to overeat when I do. However, I have no side effects at all from eating wheat.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Dirlot View Post
                  You are jumping between grains and whole grains.

                  As I have said all along those that eat the most whole grains at the expense of refined grains are often healthier. I agree whole grains are better than refined grains. All your studies show how bad refined grains are and show that whole grains are better.
                  [B]
                  Originally posted by jimhensen View Post
                  IF this were true, which it is not, the people that ate the least amount of grains, whether refined or whole, would be healthiest. Right? But the people that eat the most whole grains are always the healthiest. Why aren't these studies showing that people that eat the least amount of grains are healthiest?????? Please just answer that.


                  Most of the studies I have seen don't change the quantity of grains just swap between refined and whole. In those few studies that do change the quantity of grains who cares who gets a bit healthier or not. As I have said whole grains are better than refined grains. Lots of mechanism are talked about like who grains pass though the system faster so there is less chance of the bad parts in grains harming you.

                  I guess you should be asking yourself how does replacing one poison with a lesser poison healthy?

                  At the risk of repeating myself, the fact is and the point you keep ignoring is:

                  Originally posted by Dirlot View Post


                  That does not mean that whole grains are good for you, only that they are better than refined grains.


                  Grains are convenient but they are tasteless, nutritionally void. There are plenty of studies showing how they are health improves by eliminating them and there is no study to show adding them to your diet has any benefit at all. Seems to me it makes much more sense to avoid them.
                  Eating primal is not a diet, it is a way of life.
                  PS
                  Don't forget to play!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by jimhensen View Post
                    I am guessing that my age (25) is keeping my numbers from being completely out of whack.
                    I KNEW it!!! Well all I can say is, when I was 25, I could eat anything too. Come back when you're 45~ when you've been assaulting/insulting your immune system for 20 more years with these grains you love so much. We'll see how you're doing then. Because I can promise you, time and age are not your friends. Especially true if you lack wisdom.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by TTBlue21 View Post
                      I have not eaten dairy and/or any type of grain in 3 weeks and have not felt this good in 12 years. Study or no study, personally I cannot process the junk and I get body inflammation. I never would have known this unless I gave it up.

                      Perhaps you should go eat a loaf of bread with some ice cream and quit trolling....
                      Just like all the vegetarians that feel so much better when they stop eating meat. Meat is poison. I wonder how much of that is placebo and how much is real.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Nady View Post
                        I KNEW it!!! Well all I can say is, when I was 25, I could eat anything too. Come back when you're 45~ when you've been assaulting/insulting your immune system for 20 more years with these grains you love so much. We'll see how you're doing then. Because I can promise you, time and age are not your friends. Especially true if you lack wisdom.
                        lol, yes, because everyone at 45 is really doing horribly eating grains.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by bob loblaw View Post
                          Yes they do. If you don't believe the Italians and French eat plenty of wheat, then you are blinded by your bias.

                          Do they eat as much wheat as the SAD? No, but that's a different argument. Yes, they do tend to eat their wheat with fat, but if the WHEAT is a problem, then that should be largely irrelevant. Unless your argument is that wheat is fine if you put some butter on it.

                          The reality is that millions do just fine having wheat as part of the diet. Same with rice. It may bother you, but it's the truth. However, what matters is what works for YOU, and if those things don't work for you, then don't eat them. I don't eat wheat because I tend to overeat when I do. However, I have no side effects at all from eating wheat.
                          And you are basing your conclusion on the Mediterranean diet I assume?

                          How is the comparison between France and Italians and SAD a different argument? It seems like a perfect comparison to make. Having travelled extensively through Italy and France I can tell you they eat very little in comparison to SAD.

                          The wheat they do eat is full of fat and is therefore very satisfying and they eat less.

                          I am well aware there are many people who eat it, I can eat it that does not mean it is good for you.

                          As I have also pointed out I believe one big problem isn't a small quantity of wheat, but the overload of wheat protein that is found in so many different foods.
                          Eating primal is not a diet, it is a way of life.
                          PS
                          Don't forget to play!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Dirlot View Post
                            Actually they don't and when they do it is full of fat.
                            Decided to research it. It appears the French actually consume quite a bit more wheat than Americans on a per capita basis. I think our refined corn, refined sugar, and refined industrial seed oil intake is much more of a problem then our wheat intake.

                            Wheat in the world - B.C. Curtis

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by jimhensen View Post
                              The study also invalidates your premise that 29% of people without celiac disease have these antibodies in their stool. Because in this study only 4 children out of 84 (and 20 of those 84 actually have celiac disease) had these anti bodies in their stool. So post up your study about the 29%.

                              Obviously this proves that these antibodies in stool doesn't prove gluten sensitivity one way or the other, otherwise the celiac patients would all have it.
                              The study you posted is irrelevant to the original question, I'm sure you can work out why, (hint:it's in the methods).
                              The question was for the OP anyway if they are really interested in educating themselves on this topic.
                              "There are no short cuts to enlightenment, the journey is the destination, you have to walk this path alone"

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by bob loblaw View Post
                                Decided to research it. It appears the French actually consume quite a bit more wheat than Americans on a per capita basis. I think our refined corn, refined sugar, and refined industrial seed oil intake is much more of a problem then our wheat intake.

                                Wheat in the world - B.C. Curtis
                                While I agree that our cumulative intake of wheat, corn, sugar, and industrial oils is excessive, does that mean we should reduce all but one of them and think that we are eating the optimal diet? One could remove grains but continue to eat sugar and still fall below the SAD intake of carbohydrate, not suffer obesity or serum glucose regulation issues... but is that the best way to eat?

                                Eating what occasionally for people who do not suffer any gastric issues may not be a big deal. But the point is that there are plenty of more nutritious options at every meal. I may not sweat having a pizza on Friday night, but the rest of the week I can find more healthful foods. Isn't that the point?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X