Resistant Starch - A Solution In Search of a Problem page 7

[Althaur]

Let me see if I can help.

Otzi, the "raw potato" you say is 78% RS from the study is actually "Native Potato Starch". That is NOT raw potato.

This is Native Potato Starch:
Production of native potato starch - Mainpage

And this:
Native potato starch

So, as you can see, it is highly processed which most likely contributes to the increase in RS as opposed to an actual potato.

[ChocoTaco369]

No one should be eating raw potatoes. They are toxic.

[otzi]

No one should be eating raw potatoes. They are toxic.

The pros and cons of munching on raw potatoes | UTSanDiego.com

It's not that bad. I think a few slices here and there will do more good than harm...

[otzi]

Let me see if I can help.

Otzi, the "raw potato" you say is 78% RS from the study is actually "Native Potato Starch". That is NOT raw potato.

This is Native Potato Starch:
Production of native potato starch - Mainpage

And this:
Native potato starch

So, as you can see, it is highly processed which most likely contributes to the increase in RS as opposed to an actual potato.

Welcome to the fray!

I have a paper somewhere that lists the RS content of various foods, and raw potato was listed at 75%, meaning 75% of the starch content was resistant starch. The 'Native' starch used in many studies is industrially processed, but not treated or heated in any way, so I think the percentage of RS in native potato starch is exactly what's in a raw potato.

If someone can find out definitively, let us know.

Anyway, this thread wasn't about that, it's about "should we go out of our way to increase the amount of RS in our diet above what we get from eating big-ass salads and nuts."

So, Private, your mission, should you accept it, is to read this Health properties of resistant starch - Nugent - 2005 - Nutrition Bulletin - Wiley Online Library , or any paper, article, or link you choose, and tell us what you think. Is RS important enough to willfully try to increase it in out diet?

[Timthetaco]

"One wonders...." is not the same thing as the butyrate doesn't get there.

The rambling blog postings you linked included this "Cells lining the colon use butyrate as a major substrate for energy production in metabolic pathways that are not fully understood". That does not say that the butyrate couldn't have gotten there though the blood stream either, only that those cells use butyrate.

Umm. Still waiting for a reason not to just eat the butter and hold the potato.

SCFAs in food are absorbed in the small intestine according to this. It's probably not unreasonable to assume one who eats a fair amount of fiber would have more butyrate available to colonocytes than someone on a low fiber diet. The interesting question to me is to what degree that difference matters in terms of colon health, if at all. You don't have to hold the butter, but the butyrate doesn't reach the colon. If it gets there by some unknown mechanism... who knows.

[Althaur]

Welcome to the fray!

I have a paper somewhere that lists the RS content of various foods, and raw potato was listed at 75%, meaning 75% of the starch content was resistant starch. The 'Native' starch used in many studies is industrially processed, but not treated or heated in any way, so I think the percentage of RS in native potato starch is exactly what's in a raw potato.

If someone can find out definitively, let us know.

Anyway, this thread wasn't about that, it's about "should we go out of our way to increase the amount of RS in our diet above what we get from eating big-ass salads and nuts."

So, Private, your mission, should you accept it, is to read this Health properties of resistant starch - Nugent - 2005 - Nutrition Bulletin - Wiley Online Library , or any paper, article, or link you choose, and tell us what you think. Is RS important enough to willfully try to increase it in out diet?

From the article you linked;

"The main step of any method to measure the content of RS in foods must first remove all of the digestible starch from the product"

This is directly above Table 2 which lists Native Potato Starch at 78.1. I still say NPS is not the same as a whole potato. But, aside from that, that number you keep quoting includes ALL RS to include the indigestible stuff that does nothing for you. What is the percentage of RS2 and RS3? Well, the same table lists the RS of a cooked then cooled potato at 3.8. I think you're misunderstanding what they are saying about RS in regards to the potato.

I also feel like the whole potato glorification is ridiculous. Eat potatoes if you like them. Inlude them in your meals if you can handle them. STOP preaching about how they are the answer to everyone's weight issues. It's ridiculous. This site is about eating healthy, NOT going on a binge to quickly lose water weight or fat because someone sees it as an excuse to eat like shit over the holidays or weekends. Really? I'll spend all weekend gorging on Mexican food, margaritas and cookies because I can eat nothing but potatoes for a week and lose it all.

Honestly, how can ANYONE think that is healthy?

I really don't give a rat's ass about RS in a potato. I eat them because I like them and I feel they have a place in a natural diet. I don't see them as a magic pill for bad decisions like so many on here seem to do now. It really is pathetic. Whole threads full of people talking about how they can't wait to eat nothing but potatoes for several days because they pigged out over the weekend.

If that comes across as being grumpy or "snarky", it was meant to be. This is a site about eating Primally. NOT binges and purges. It's a site about improving your health by eating naturally, exercising and improving your life. NOT finding that magic-pill for weight loss. Does it work for everyone. Nope! For various reasons.

[Neckhammer]

From the article you linked;

"The main step of any method to measure the content of RS in foods must first remove all of the digestible starch from the product"

This is directly above Table 2 which lists Native Potato Starch at 78.1. I still say NPS is not the same as a whole potato. But, aside from that, that number you keep quoting includes ALL RS to include the indigestible stuff that does nothing for you. What is the percentage of RS2 and RS3? Well, the same table lists the RS of a cooked then cooled potato at 3.8. I think you're misunderstanding what they are saying about RS in regards to the potato.

I also feel like the whole potato glorification is ridiculous. Eat potatoes if you like them. Inlude them in your meals if you can handle them. STOP preaching about how they are the answer to everyone's weight issues. It's ridiculous. This site is about eating healthy, NOT going on a binge to quickly lose water weight or fat because someone sees it as an excuse to eat like shit over the holidays or weekends. Really? I'll spend all weekend gorging on Mexican food, margaritas and cookies because I can eat nothing but potatoes for a week and lose it all.

Honestly, how can ANYONE think that is healthy?

I really don't give a rat's ass about RS in a potato. I eat them because I like them and I feel they have a place in a natural diet. I don't see them as a magic pill for bad decisions like so many on here seem to do now. It really is pathetic. Whole threads full of people talking about how they can't wait to eat nothing but potatoes for several days because they pigged out over the weekend.

If that comes across as being grumpy or "snarky", it was meant to be. This is a site about eating Primally. NOT binges and purges. It's a site about improving your health by eating naturally, exercising and improving your life. NOT finding that magic-pill for weight loss. Does it work for everyone. Nope! For various reasons.

^ Ditto, what he said.....

Although I actually find the analysis quite interesting so I'm not really pissed about it . Fun to look at mechanisms as long as we can keep the context of eating a healthy diet based on our shared ancestral past at the forefront. Debate is healthy, but don't lose the forest for the trees.

[otzi]

From the article you linked;

"The main step of any method to measure the content of RS in foods must first remove all of the digestible starch from the product"

This is directly above Table 2 which lists Native Potato Starch at 78.1. I still say NPS is not the same as a whole potato. But, aside from that, that number you keep quoting includes ALL RS to include the indigestible stuff that does nothing for you. What is the percentage of RS2 and RS3? Well, the same table lists the RS of a cooked then cooled potato at 3.8. I think you're misunderstanding what they are saying about RS in regards to the potato.

The RS content changes with the temperature of the potato. I know it seems magical, but it's real. The starch changes composition. Much like water and ice. If you had a bucket of frozen water, you'd say it's 100% ice, after a while in a warm room it's only 50% ice, then magically 0% ice.

I also feel like the whole potato glorification is ridiculous. Eat potatoes if you like them. Inlude them in your meals if you can handle them. STOP preaching about how they are the answer to everyone's weight issues. It's ridiculous.

I don't think they are the answer to everyone's weight issue at all. I think they are the answer to many people's weight issues, however. And they are! It's not ridiculous. What's ridiculous is the starch-fear mongering that goes on around here. Low Carb is not the answer for everyone, although many say it is.

This site is about eating healthy, NOT going on a binge to quickly lose water weight or fat because someone sees it as an excuse to eat like shit over the holidays or weekends. Really? I'll spend all weekend gorging on Mexican food, margaritas and cookies because I can eat nothing but potatoes for a week and lose it all.

If that's your takeaway...wow.

Honestly, how can ANYONE think that is healthy?

I hope no one does.

I really don't give a rat's ass about RS in a potato.

Sure seemed like you did a few posts back. I don't give a rat's ass about eating MOAR fat, so guess what, I don't post in those threads...duh...

I eat them because I like them and I feel they have a place in a natural diet. I don't see them as a magic pill for bad decisions like so many on here seem to do now. It really is pathetic. Whole threads full of people talking about how they can't wait to eat nothing but potatoes for several days because they pigged out over the weekend.

Show me one post in this thread that says that...this is an RS thread...

If that comes across as being grumpy or "snarky", it was meant to be. This is a site about eating Primally. NOT binges and purges. It's a site about improving your health by eating naturally, exercising and improving your life. NOT finding that magic-pill for weight loss. Does it work for everyone. Nope! For various reasons.

Maybe you should be a moderator. This would be an awesome site then!
Good day.

[Dirlot]

I am not sure what is being debated here. Is it whether or not this mysterious RS is necessary, or whether or not it does anything in particular? I don't eat resistant starch. I just eat food. If it has RS in it, well, who cares? That reminds me. Time to bake my breakfast potato. Why? So I can get my precious RS? Of course not, silly. I'm having a potato because it's big and I'm hungry and it'll go well with my salmon.

Exactly.

[Dirlot]

OK, I promise no more links, after this one...

All the studies you ever wanted to see on RS, find one that says it's not needed and I'll back off.

That is the same logic people use for eating whole grains.

dietary resistant starch: Topics by WorldWideScience.org

Some of the logic in those studies seem to follow along whole grains studies. IE RS improves GI response to foods...

I think I am going to stick to eating what I want and if that includes tatties then so be it.