Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61

Thread: Grains, Rice, Corn, etc. Whats their purpose...? page 3

  1. #21
    JoanieL's Avatar
    JoanieL is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    It's not the heat, it's the stupidity.
    Posts
    8,467
    Shop Now
    We are going to have to keep factory farming in order to maintain all 7 billion of us.
    Not for anything, but I think if you google the opposing view, you'll find quite a few writings on why that is not true.
    "Right is right, even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong, even if everyone is doing it." - St. Augustine

    B*tch-lite

    Who says back fat is a bad thing? Maybe on a hairy guy at the beach, but not on a crab.

  2. #22
    itchy166's Avatar
    itchy166 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    291
    Quote Originally Posted by JoanieL View Post
    Not for anything, but I think if you google the opposing view, you'll find quite a few writings on why that is not true.
    I hope you are right and I am mistaken. Time to hit the interwebs for my new homework assignment.
    "It's a great life, if you don't weaken.". John Buchan

  3. #23
    BurritoJimmy's Avatar
    BurritoJimmy is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    17
    maybe their purpose is the same as the purpose of a twinkie.

  4. #24
    heatseeker's Avatar
    heatseeker is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    593
    So you don't believe the pockets of "Blue Zones" (centenarians) around the globe, the French, the Japanese, many athletes and Olympians, and millions of others who include grains in their diet are living optimally? I disagree. I think there are many people who are living healthful and optimal lives despite grain consumption. I don't think all grain-eaters are equal, I don't think all grains are equal, either. I think it's painting with too broad of a stroke to conclude that all grain-eaters are living suboptimally. I think there are too many variables to conclude that grains are the number one reason for chronic illnesses and diseases in affluent societies. I'd put rancid high o6 seed/vegetable oils, overall low quality food/lack of nutrients, chemicals and artificial colors, preservatives, environmental pollution, stress, and prescription drugs above traditionally prepared grains as detrimental to your health.
    Whooooaaaahhhh there. I never said anything about grain being the number one reason for chronic illnesses and DOCs. You're turning this into a different topic entirely. I merely said that in my belief, from the science I've seen, people whose diets are largely made up of grains are not living optimally. It's still possible for them to be healthy, just not as healthy as they could be, not in optimal health. And what it comes down to is that a diet rich in phytic acid is not as optimal as a diet not rich in phytic acid. A high-grain diet--and we're not talking the Japanese, with 100% of the "grain" being rice, we're talking the typical large variety of wheats and grains consumed by the vast majority of the world's grain-reliant populations--is very high in phytic acid. So, yes. I believe that is sub-optimal. If you disagree, you disagree. And that's okay. It's not the end of the world to disagree with a stranger on the internet.

    Including grains is not the same as grains being the basis of your subsistence and the majority of your food intake, as is true for the world's poorer citizens, who are the people I was talking about when responding to the topic of this thread and explaining why grains have a purpose other than giving rich white people something to whine about. Also, the people I'm talking about don't eat "traditionally prepared grains", they eat hybridized, drought- and bug-resistant, super-phytic-rich Big Agra wheat made into the cheapest possible product they can get their hands on, because that's all there is, and they either eat it or starve.

    If you want to talk about pockets of centenarians and specific gene pools... and Olympians... I mean, that's just a whole different topic. An interesting one, but not what I was talking about when you initially responded. The topic of this thread is humanity on a global scale, and the purpose of grain therein, not whether select groups have the genetics to be able to handle a high-grain diet, or whether grain is the number one reason people get cavities and heart disease and other DOCs.

  5. #25
    j3nn's Avatar
    j3nn is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Manhattan, NY
    Posts
    4,087
    Quote Originally Posted by heatseeker View Post
    Whooooaaaahhhh there. I never said anything about grain being the number one reason for chronic illnesses and DOCs. You're turning this into a different topic entirely. I merely said that in my belief, from the science I've seen, people whose diets are largely made up of grains are not living optimally. It's still possible for them to be healthy, just not as healthy as they could be, not in optimal health. And what it comes down to is that a diet rich in phytic acid is not as optimal as a diet not rich in phytic acid. A high-grain diet--and we're not talking the Japanese, with 100% of the "grain" being rice, we're talking the typical large variety of wheats and grains consumed by the vast majority of the world's grain-reliant populations--is very high in phytic acid. So, yes. I believe that is sub-optimal. If you disagree, you disagree. And that's okay. It's not the end of the world to disagree with a stranger on the internet.

    Including grains is not the same as grains being the basis of your subsistence and the majority of your food intake, as is true for the world's poorer citizens, who are the people I was talking about when responding to the topic of this thread and explaining why grains have a purpose other than giving rich white people something to whine about. Also, the people I'm talking about don't eat "traditionally prepared grains", they eat hybridized, drought- and bug-resistant, super-phytic-rich Big Agra wheat made into the cheapest possible product they can get their hands on, because that's all there is, and they either eat it or starve.

    If you want to talk about pockets of centenarians and specific gene pools... and Olympians... I mean, that's just a whole different topic. An interesting one, but not what I was talking about when you initially responded. The topic of this thread is humanity on a global scale, and the purpose of grain therein, not whether select groups have the genetics to be able to handle a high-grain diet, or whether grain is the number one reason people get cavities and heart disease and other DOCs.
    Do you think people that have a diet heavy in grains are in poorer health because of grains or because of the lack of all other macro- and micronutrients? I thinks it's more of the latter. I think a very large portion of the detriment in heavy grain consumption lies in it displacing other nutrient sources. Too much of anything leads to suboptimal health. But I do not think all grain-eaters are in suboptimal health. That's just not true no matter how bad grains might be compared to other foods. There is an undetermined threshold of health and vitality that many people achieve, even with grains.
    | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

    “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

  6. #26
    drssgchic's Avatar
    drssgchic is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3,110
    Wow, three pages in and no one has pointed out that grains are the basis of a tithing/food-restricted society (because they store well) and why we can wage wars as successfully as we have (they are a cheap energy source that will keep people alive enough to fight and kill each other). /libertarian-sounding rant

    Other than that, they exist for the sole reason of propagating themselves, as others have already pointed out.
    http://cattaillady.com/ My blog exploring the beginning stages of learning how to homestead. With the occasional rant.

    Originally Posted by TheFastCat: Less is more more or less

    And now I have an Etsy store: CattailsandCalendula

  7. #27
    heatseeker's Avatar
    heatseeker is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    593
    Do you think people that have a diet heavy in grains are in poorer health because of grains or because of the lack of all other macro- and micronutrients? I thinks it's more of the latter. I think a very large portion of the detriment in heavy grain consumption lies in it displacing other nutrient sources.
    I was really not looking to get into a detailed dissection of the various reasons certain diets may or may not be bad, the facets of badness, the percentages of badness of certain parts of the diet vs. others, etc. I'm unsure why you're not able to understand that that's not what this discussion is about, and why you won't stop harping on these off-topic points you keep bringing up. I'm unsure why you keep discussing individual humans when I've said repeatedly that I was talking about the entirety of human existence as a species on this planet.

    But I do not think all grain-eaters are in suboptimal health. That's just not true no matter how bad grains might be compared to other foods.
    Cool. I disagree. I don't believe that a diet based on grains can provide optimum health. I could certainly be wrong, but at this point in my knowledge-gathering, it's what I believe. It is totally cool that we agree to disagree on this. I don't think you're stupid or evil. I simply disagree. The end.

  8. #28
    Drumroll's Avatar
    Drumroll is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,914
    Grains are intended to supply cheap, reliable calories designed to keep people clinging to life, especially in areas of the world where they can't afford things like meat reliably enough to make a sustainable percentage of their diets.

  9. #29
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,627
    Quote Originally Posted by PainTrain View Post
    If these foods are not for human consumption, then what is their purpose? Mark argues that not even cattle or livestock should be eating these items as feed, either.

    In my mind all these plants must have a purpose, but if not to be eaten, then why do they exist? What use do they have?
    What is our purpose? We seem to create exponentially more damage than the positives we provide as a species to Earth. Who says everything needs a purpose? They exist solely for themselves, just like us.
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

  10. #30
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,627
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by heatseeker View Post
    Humans may not be able to thrive at optimum health eating grains, but they can certainly survive eating grains, and for the vast majority of the world's population, it's about sheer survival. The invention of the much-villified-around-here hybridized dwarf wheat, for instance, saved billions of lives.

    I'm not judging you or anything, but it's a very sheltered, very privileged lifestyle that allows one to question why grains even exist.
    I disagree. Grain farming destroys the Earth and makes the soils unworkable for future generations. Sustainable livestock is the way to go, and it replenishes the landscape and keeps it useable. Grain farming was just cheaper and easier in the short term, and we're paying the price as a species. And not just environmentally. Just look at healthcare costs. It is bankrupting us as a nation, courtesy of giant grain, legume and seed monocrops polluting us with their lectins and oils. Our healthcare costs would be a fraction of what they are now if grain flours and polyunsaturated vegetable oils weren't found in the stores and your grocery aisles solely consisted of meats, fruits, vegetables, roots and tubers.
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •