Wholemeal and Hearthealth

I don't know what it's like in other countries but in England there is the idea presented to the public that wholemeal or wholegrain is good for heart health. I was just wondering if anybody knows where this idea come from? I don't believe this idea and assume that advertising companies twisted the truth to sell more cereal and bread, but would be interested to see how they came to their conclusions.

marcusuni said:

I don't know what it's like in other countries but in England there is the idea presented to the public that wholemeal or wholegrain is good for heart health. I was just wondering if anybody knows where this idea come from? I don't believe this idea and assume that advertising companies twisted the truth to sell more cereal and bread, but would be interested to see how they came to their conclusions.

I don't think it is that whole is heart healthy in itself neccessarily... it's just that what you're replacing by eating whole grains is potentially not heart healthy. For example, if you are eating white bread it has a higher gycemic index (GI) which would spike insulin and potentially increase fat storage. Over the long run unchecked, this is not heart healthy. White bread has now replaced pure glucose in most studies when needing to replicate the highest GI - 100.

Whole grains to not neccessarily very high in fibre, but increased fibre has the potential to lower cholesterol.

That tends to be soluble fibre and grains are higher in insoluble fibre which is more important for colon health.

But the fibre content may be partly why it is generally considered heart healthy.

What is perhaps ironic is that the folks who are concerned about grain allergies, and intestinal reactions to grains

(if they had to eat bread) may be better off eating processed white flour/bread because it has had more of the lectins processed out or partially destroyed; it is aborbed quickly, exactly what makes it more unhealthy from the heart perspective.

I think it comes from the ability of fiber to lower cholesterol. People then made the conclusion that grain=fiber=lower cholesterol=healthy....WRONG.

Grains are baaad.....

Whole grains also have certain nutrients that are good for your body, like vitamin E and iron and several other important ones which is why I have always said that grains are really not the first thing you need to freak out over. I am pretty much on rice only at this point and not every day, and I do feel quite a lot bit better even though I have always functioned well on grains.

However, many of us here are a little more familiar with some of the problems with grains, namely lectins. Here's another web page on some effects of lectins that are new to me. Basically some of the lectins in whole wheat, barley and rye can start a chain of events that leads to insulin resistance and obesity.

http://www.nakedfoodcooking.com/real-truth-healthy-grains/

Razz said:

I think it comes from the ability of fiber to lower cholesterol. People then made the conclusion that grain=fiber=lower cholesterol=healthy....WRONG.

Grains are baaad.....

Razz, you really hate grains, don't you?

I don't handle them well either, though. Not one bit.

Yeah haha there's just so little good about them One thing is handling them now, but another is how you look at age 70. I don't believe grains are the only bad thing that causes degeneration, but they certainly are a contributing factor.

Razz said:

Yeah haha there's just so little good about them One thing is handling them now, but another is how you look at age 70. I don't believe grains are the only bad thing that causes degeneration, but they certainly are a contributing factor.

I knew that mentioning grains would lead to this ...

All I can say is that I have evolved

If my body can become immune to smallpox and diptheria, I do think it can

adjust and adapt to lectins in wheat. But some people can't handle it. I don't dispute that.

If someone is concerned about it, they shouldn't eat it. However I don't feel making a blanket statement

that grains are bad is right or the right thing to do.

I've read about lectins before. One thing regarding these studies, is that quite a number of them

test pure lectins against cultured intestinal cells without undergoing pre-digestion in the mouth and intestine.

In the mouth, amylase and checking starts breaking down the majority of lectins. A stronger version of amylase

is produced by the pancreas and completes this. Instestinal mucosa secrete compounds that counteract

effects as well. So there are several layers of defense that the body has to these things.

Look, some lectins are particularly durable, and some are less so. Oat lectins are particuarly easy to break down.

(Gluten is a form of lectin). Most Celiacs can handle oats. It's debated within the community if it is even

a grain. But some people avoid it to be safe.

On the other hand bean lectins may require overnight soaking and long time cooking to break down.

Soybean lectins are particuarly durable, and red beans. So personally I do avoid these when possible.

In general proper baking and cooking cleans up wheat. Generally people don't eat raw wheat products luckilly.

(Fermenting cleans up soy as well).

So in my opinion wheat and other grains have gotten an undeserved bad rap because of this, and studies

not put into proper context.

As mentioned by Slizz, there are healthy aspects to grains. Fibre is there, especially in beans (ok not a grain I know).

That non-soluble fibre is most important for colon health. Whether it is appropriate for someone to eat (or not) should be part of an examination of their entire diet and lifestyle. It may not be the first thing on ones list that needs attention as Slizz mentioned.

So keep an open mind to the possibliity that blanket statements may be wrong. Life is sometimes not cut and dry.

FutureisNow said:

Razz said:

Yeah haha there's just so little good about them One thing is handling them now, but another is how you look at age 70. I don't believe grains are the only bad thing that causes degeneration, but they certainly are a contributing factor.

I knew that mentioning grains would lead to this ...

All I can say is that I have evolved

If my body can become immune to smallpox and diptheria, I do think it can

adjust and adapt to lectins in wheat.

I hope this is a joke because it is a complete logical fallacy. Your body did not evolve to become immune to smallpox or diptheria. Vaccination eradicated (for the most part) smallpox and diphtheria is still prevalent throughout the world. While you were likely vaccinated against Diphtheria, unless you are in the US military and have been deployed it is highly unlikely you were vaccinated against smallpox and even then, the vaccine is only good for 10 years. And if you were subjected to either of them without the vaccine, you would very likely become very ill.

Sure, maybe some people have evolved to handle grains better than others, but studies have shown that is not the majority of people. Most people would do well to restrict their intake of grains, especially if they have not been sprouted.

Nick_EOD said:

FutureisNow said:

Razz said:

Yeah haha there's just so little good about them One thing is handling them now, but another is how you look at age 70. I don't believe grains are the only bad thing that causes degeneration, but they certainly are a contributing factor.

I knew that mentioning grains would lead to this ...

All I can say is that I have evolved

If my body can become immune to smallpox and diptheria, I do think it can

adjust and adapt to lectins in wheat.

I hope this is a joke because it is a complete logical fallacy. Your body did not evolve to become immune to smallpox or diptheria. Vaccination eradicated (for the most part) smallpox and diphtheria is still prevalent throughout the world. While you were likely vaccinated against Diphtheria, unless you are in the US military and have been deployed it is highly unlikely you were vaccinated against smallpox and even then, the vaccine is only good for 10 years. And if you were subjected to either of them without the vaccine, you would very likely become very ill.

Sure, maybe some people have evolved to handle grains better than others, but studies have shown that is not the majority of people. Most people would do well to restrict their intake of grains, especially if they have not been sprouted.

Yes it is hyperbole! And I am referring to vaccination specifically.

My point is that yes the body responds to vaccination in the first place. It didn't have to but it does!

The immune function of the body is one of its most incredible capabilities. It allows it to adapt and "evolve" on the fly.

If it can do this in a matter of weeks, I am confident that it can handle a common environmental consistuent that has

been around for thousands of years. That is my analogy - and I don't claim it to be perfect - as there is always a flaw to any analogue.

When you look at actual studies, you need to examine its setup and then determine what it actually can prove. Most often media and publicity driven nutritionists will take studies out of context and ignore contridictory findings in order to promote their particular approach.

Ultimately you can choose to believe who and what you want, for how long and how seriously.

I do feel by the nature of working towards improved strength and/or hypertrophy one will increase protein, which will

by itself reduce carbs and usually grain consumption as well. If good comes out of that, so be it!

There is a lot more that could be said, but the bloggers can blog it out on the subject. A hot bath is waiting for me now,

and won't be hot for much longer