Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Asian Rice Diets Do Not Cause Degenerative Diseases?

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

  • Why Asian Rice Diets Do Not Cause Degenerative Diseases?

    One of the nutritional assumptions of most Paleo promoters appears to be that grains that came out of the agricultural revolution promote large carbohydrate overload. Wheat, corn, rice, oats, etc all seem to become glucose very rapidly in the gut. This stimulates large insulin responses. The sugar gets converted to the worst kind of VLDL fat. Heart disease, diabetes, weight gain, and maybe cancer all seem to correlate with these kinds of diets.

    My question is why do Asian cultures that eat primarily rice based grain diets not seem to suffer from degenerative Western diseases? Assuming the general nutritional theory behind Paleo is correct, then is maybe rice somehow different than other grains? Are there other factors that can explain away why Japanese who eat rice and fish largely avoid heart disease?

  • #2
    Originally posted by westes View Post
    My question is why do Asian cultures that eat primarily rice based grain diets not seem to suffer from degenerative Western diseases?
    That's begging the question.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by js290 View Post
      That's begging the question.
      I don't understand your point.

      Comment


      • #4
        I think that this really comes down to the health differences between eating wheat vs eating rice.

        Wheat is the worst cereal by a significant margin because of the other bad things it has going on, not purely because it is a carbohydrate. Wheatbelly is a blog devoted to the evils of just wheat, and I recommend you preuse it. The main problem is gluten (specifically, the gliadin) that does all sorts of bad things. It stimulates appetite, punches holes in your intestines and has a generally inflammatory effect that your body does not enjoy.

        Rice on the other hand is just carbohydrates. Which are fine, as long as you don't eat them to excess (i.e. in balance with the meat and veggies, not as the major part of your meal).
        Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

        Griff's cholesterol primer
        5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
        Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
        TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
        bloodorchid is always right

        Comment


        • #5
          Gee. I don't know.









          They are usually glycogen depleted before they eat it? And all the junk they aren't eating. Remember that rice is one of the better grains. Way better than GMO Round-Up ready hybrid dwarf wheat.
          Crohn's, doing SCD

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by westes View Post
            One of the nutritional assumptions of most Paleo promoters appears to be that grains that came out of the agricultural revolution promote large carbohydrate overload. Wheat, corn, rice, oats, etc all seem to become glucose very rapidly in the gut. This stimulates large insulin responses. The sugar gets converted to the worst kind of VLDL fat. Heart disease, diabetes, weight gain, and maybe cancer all seem to correlate with these kinds of diets.

            My question is why do Asian cultures that eat primarily rice based grain diets not seem to suffer from degenerative Western diseases? Assuming the general nutritional theory behind Paleo is correct, then is maybe rice somehow different than other grains? Are there other factors that can explain away why Japanese who eat rice and fish largely avoid heart disease?
            Many(most?) people on here who are not VLC eat some amount of white rice. While it is technically a grain, it doesn't really have the toxins most grains do.
            Lifting Journal

            Comment


            • #7
              I am eating a little pre-gym white rice as I type this. Mmmmm...starch.
              “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

              Owly's Journal

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by magicmerl View Post
                I think that this really comes down to the health differences between eating wheat vs eating rice.

                Wheat is the worst cereal by a significant margin because of the other bad things it has going on, not purely because it is a carbohydrate. Wheatbelly is a blog devoted to the evils of just wheat, and I recommend you preuse it. The main problem is gluten (specifically, the gliadin) that does all sorts of bad things. It stimulates appetite, punches holes in your intestines and has a generally inflammatory effect that your body does not enjoy.

                Rice on the other hand is just carbohydrates. Which are fine, as long as you don't eat them to excess (i.e. in balance with the meat and veggies, not as the major part of your meal).
                MagicMerl, I accept that wheat is inflammatory and has autoimmune issues. But I also thought that a major part of Paleo was a low carbohydrate diet, because of the damage caused by high glucose and insulin. The Asian result seems to contradict that.

                Does anyone have statistics on what percentage of calories comes from carbohydrates (of all kinds) in a traditional Asian diet that avoids Western processed foods?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Oh hey, can we have another carb war thread? Because those are awesome. </snarkiness>
                  “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

                  Owly's Journal

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by westes View Post
                    MagicMerl, I accept that wheat is inflammatory and has autoimmune issues. But I also thought that a major part of Paleo was a low carbohydrate diet, because of the damage caused by high glucose and insulin. The Asian result seems to contradict that.

                    Does anyone have statistics on what percentage of calories comes from carbohydrates (of all kinds) in a traditional Asian diet that avoids Western processed foods?
                    It was. I think most primal/paleo/whatevers, especially the young and healthy, are evolving towards macronutrient neutrality.
                    Lifting Journal

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Apex, what does macronutrient neutrality mean? If the science is that glucose creates high insulin and high VLDL levels, which in turn promotes heart disease, it shouldn't matter which carbo you take. Sugar is sugar. Some sugar (i.e., wheat) is toxic for additional reasons. But any carbo in excess would be toxic if it promotes high glucose and high VLDL?

                      Maybe the real issue here is that Asian diets keep total carbohydrates as a percentage of calories consumed at a lower percentage than a Western processed foods diet?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        You ask a question based on an assumption, then ask for data to back your assumption. Do your own research on the carbohydrate content of pre-western asian diets. Then come back if you still have a question. I suspect you won't
                        Four years Primal with influences from Jaminet & Shanahan and a focus on being anti-inflammatory. Using Primal to treat CVD and prevent stents from blocking free of drugs.

                        Eat creatures nose-to-tail (animal, fowl, fish, crustacea, molluscs), a large variety of vegetables (raw, cooked and fermented, including safe starches), dairy (cheese & yoghurt), occasional fruit, cocoa, turmeric & red wine

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Macro-nutrient neutrality means it's not fat or carbs that are the problem. It's the toxins, whether that is gluten with the bad carbs, or O6 with the bad fat. Or the constantly elevated BG from eating all the time. Etc. Anyway, if you read around the paleosphere enough, the people who eat healthy carbs tend to have lower FBG (often low 70's) than those who are VLC (often high 80's to 90's- though some have gotten way higher). Of course there are exceptions, and there are co-factors. But just eating carbs won't give you high FBG. Toxins which limit your body's ability to regulate your FBG are the issue.
                          Lifting Journal

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            there are a number of assumptions going on here - about what causes degenerative diseases (assumption: carbs), about what paleo prescribes (assumption: no carbs, or at least starch), and about asians being free of dgenerative diesease despite eating white rice (assumption: asians are free of degenerative disease).

                            back up.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by peril View Post
                              You ask a question based on an assumption, then ask for data to back your assumption. Do your own research on the carbohydrate content of pre-western asian diets. Then come back if you still have a question. I suspect you won't
                              Peril, generally when anyone asks a question, they are looking for benefit of information that other people have that they do not? What's wrong with that?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X