What nutrients are in whole grains that aren't in vegetables?

"Mr-Natural-Health" wrote in

Not only that, but whole-grains release antioxidants more slowly too
because they are bounded.

Only uncooked whole grains! YUK

On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:15:00 -0500, "Sherry"
wrote:

didn't die younger, with all the meats and fats (and vegetables, she loved
to garden) she ate.

That's most probably why she survived for so long. But very few has
that opportunity to produce their own vegetables and greens from own
garden. I guess maybe she didn't irrigate her garden twice daily
either? That's one of the culprits with commercial agriculture. The
plants need to be somewhat drought stressed to give us an optimum
cocktail of osmolytes (produced in plants to counteract the drought)
and antioxidants (produced in order to withstand insects and other
infections and diseases)

On 25 Feb 2006 16:43:34 -0800, wrote:

The difference isn't very relevant on my bg meter. For me the spike is
just as large, it just happens a bit later. I could accomplish the
same thing by simpling eating refined carbs a half hour later. So I
don't see a benefit for diabetics.

Experience the same, except, that since I had most of my teeth removed
in my lower jaw due to root canal infections by haemophilic
Streptococus A and they still aren't fixed, eating bread with lot of
whole cereals not only give almost the same spike but arriving some
later, the spike is extended in time for hours :-( Maybe why I
achieved diabetes I in the very beginning since even with intact
teeth, the chewing was so painful I did swallow the food very little
chewed for the last years (and a visit to a dentist to repair them
would have cost at least $20000, that is my average income totally for
2 year) (Only medical doctors are almost free. Dentists you have to
pay completely yourself after 18 year old, and they know how to make
the bill really big!!)


For non-diabetics... well, my husband grew up in a bakery and can knock
off 1/6th of a chocolate cake and his bg afterwards is still in the
70s. So... given that even a huge serving of sugar doesn't effect a
non-diabetic's bg much, I don't really see a benefit there either.

It's a sin that glucagon-alike peptides are not measured when
diagnosing a diabetes patient.
Glucagon-alike peptide is released from stomach and intestine as a
feed-forward signal to beta-cells in order to prepare the beta cells
to produce enough insulin to be released when the glucose released is
taken up in blood and distributed. It is part of a scaling mechanism
for the integrative part of blood sugar homeostasis (most probably
controlled by a PID regulative system or PI system (P- proportional
regulator, I - Integrating regulator and D-derivative regulator)

Roger Zoul wrote:
"Max C." wrote in message
oups.com...
That language seems strange to me...Sure, one can eat motor oil and die
quickly. But if one didn't over eat, got exercise regularly, ate from a
range of foods, even junk foods, then it would hard to say that food had
a
negative impact. Heck, I'm bet you could feed a person over a life time
at
MacDonalds, and provided that person didn't get fat and got exercise, I'd
bet that person could be healthy, barring some issue of genetic defect
illness. You certainly couldn't prove that eating at MacDonalds kill
him/her.

You haven't seen "SuperSize Me" have you.

Oh sure. He pigged out. No exercise, and intentially tried to hurt
himself. It proves nothing. One can do the same thing at any heathfood
store.

That would be a neat movie.

There have been a lot of "rebuttal experiments" done (see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Size_Me) which show it *is* possible
to be healthy and eat at McDonalds.

However, there are some points of "Super Size Me" that are still
valid. For one thing, Spurlock's rules about how he did his experiment
were designed to follow the habits of an "average" American, heavy-user
of McDonalds, that is, a person who doesn't excercise, sees nothing
wrong with huge "American-sized" portions, and regularly attends the
Golden Arches.

That said, I find the notion of making the effort oft "eating
healthy" at McDonalds about as sensible as trying to drink moderately
at Oktoberfest. Not a perfect analogy, but a pretty good illustration
as to why I think people interested in health should at least make it a
habit to not frequent the Golden Arches or other fast-food shacks. The
'food culture' those kind of places represent are just not good for
people trying to eat healthy. Purely my opinion.

"Ernst Primer" wrote in message
oups.com...

Roger Zoul wrote:
"Max C." wrote in message
oups.com...
That language seems strange to me...Sure, one can eat motor oil and
die
quickly. But if one didn't over eat, got exercise regularly, ate from
a
range of foods, even junk foods, then it would hard to say that food
had
a
negative impact. Heck, I'm bet you could feed a person over a life
time
at
MacDonalds, and provided that person didn't get fat and got exercise,
I'd
bet that person could be healthy, barring some issue of genetic defect
illness. You certainly couldn't prove that eating at MacDonalds kill
him/her.

You haven't seen "SuperSize Me" have you.

Oh sure. He pigged out. No exercise, and intentially tried to hurt
himself. It proves nothing. One can do the same thing at any heathfood
store.

That would be a neat movie.

There have been a lot of "rebuttal experiments" done (see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Size_Me) which show it *is* possible
to be healthy and eat at McDonalds.

However, there are some points of "Super Size Me" that are still
valid. For one thing, Spurlock's rules about how he did his experiment
were designed to follow the habits of an "average" American, heavy-user
of McDonalds, that is, a person who doesn't excercise, sees nothing
wrong with huge "American-sized" portions, and regularly attends the
Golden Arches.

Only a very few eat all their meals at McDs. Also, very few take all of
special offers they used to push (they never push these days). Also, I go
to McD 5 days a week and get coffee and sausage pattie. Others, eating the
breakfast meal, typically have a biscuit with large coke. These folks
aren't being pushed, they just don't know what to eat. I'm sure that
follows them everywhere they go including the supermarket and at home.


That said, I find the notion of making the effort oft "eating
healthy" at McDonalds about as sensible as trying to drink moderately
at Oktoberfest. Not a perfect analogy, but a pretty good illustration
as to why I think people interested in health should at least make it a
habit to not frequent the Golden Arches or other fast-food shacks. The
'food culture' those kind of places represent are just not good for
people trying to eat healthy. Purely my opinion.

Yes, it's your opinion and you're entitled to it. And if that works for
you, use it. Surely you realize that there is more than one path to success
and that any determined person can find a way though the muck. Those that
have no interest in health will find a way to be mired in muck no matter
what.

On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 23:30:19 +0100, Alf Christophersen wrote in
on
alt.support.diet.low-carb,sci.med.nutrition :

On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 17:48:31 +0100, Enrico C
wrote:

Most important (applies to all whole grains) is that whole grains
release carbohydrates far more slowly than finely ground flour.

That can be said for pasta too, even "white" pasta.

Not my experience :-( Spaghetti, even boild for 5 minutes is really
heavy on spiking my blood sugar and also keeping high for many hours,

Sorry about that. Of course, individual experience is what really
matters.

Have you tried a small dish (say 50 grams) of al dente durum-wheat
pasta, with some extra virgin olive oil, chopped vegetables and a
sprinke of lemon juice?

I was just referring to the fact that pasta is generally considered a
fairly low GI food, to the contrary of what might be expected. But,
again, you are right: individual experience is more relevant to the
individual.


http://www.glycemicindex.com/faq.htm
Q: Why does pasta have a low GI?
A: Pasta has a low GI because of the physical entrapment of
ungelatinised starch granules in a sponge-like network of protein
(gluten) molecules in the pasta dough. Pasta is unique in this regard.
As a result, pastas of any shape and size have a fairly low GI (30 to
60). Asian noodles such as hokkein, udon and rice vermicelli also have
low to intermediate GI values.

X'Posted to: alt.support.diet.low-carb,sci.med.nutrition

Ernst Primer wrote:
That said, I find the notion of making the effort oft "eating
healthy" at McDonalds about as sensible as trying to drink moderately
at Oktoberfest. Not a perfect analogy, but a pretty good illustration
as to why I think people interested in health should at least make it a
habit to not frequent the Golden Arches or other fast-food shacks. The
'food culture' those kind of places represent are just not good for
people trying to eat healthy. Purely my opinion.

I tend to agree. If I'm going to eat a burger sans bun and a salad,
there's a lot of places I can get better than McD's, including my
house.

That being said... when I was commuting over an hour each way to work,
I almost always hit a fast food drive-through on the way home when I
woked late. Cause I just was too hungry to wait an hour to get home,
and more time to cook, etc. so I ate a *lot* of Wendy's burgers wrapped
in lettuce back then.

It really depends on how your life is. Now, my life is such that I
have a big garden and a freezer full of meat and am only working
part-time. I can't imagine eating at a fast food joint several times a
week. Heck, even real sit-down meals are disappointing compared to the
home-cooked stuff I've gotten used to.

The trick is to fit a healthy diet into your own lifestyle, whatever
that is.

Enrico C wrote:
Have you tried a small dish (say 50 grams) of al dente durum-wheat
pasta, with some extra virgin olive oil, chopped vegetables and a
sprinke of lemon juice?

I've tried regular old store-bought pasta... and homemade pasta (not
made from durum wheat, just hard wheat).

If I add small amounts to say a mostly meat-and-veggie soup, it still
spikes me. So... I just stick to the meat-and-veggie soup.

I was just referring to the fact that pasta is generally considered a
fairly low GI food, to the contrary of what might be expected. But,
again, you are right: individual experience is more relevant to the
individual.

Yup. I've been diabetic a long time, well over a decade, so my
diabetes is pretty extreme... most everything carb-y spikes me.

It's not just grains. Legumes spike me too, except for those black
soybeans, which I don't much care for.

And, of course, most starchy vegetables. I can get away with a small
amount of something like rutabagas in a stew. That's about it.

When I'm sick, I can't get my bg under 200 no matter *what* I eat - or
even if I'm too sick to eat. I should probably be on insulin when I'm
ill, but I avoid discussing this with docs cause I don't wanna. Heh.

I have found, surprisingly, that stress *lowers* my bg. The only times
I've seen readings below 100 in the past couple years have been when
I've been really scared... like when I was first learning to drive a
semi and my trainer had me drive through Chicago. Chicago is very good
for my diabetes, but not so good for my adrenal gland.

On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 22:04:24 +0100, Enrico C
wrote:

Have you tried a small dish (say 50 grams) of al dente durum-wheat
pasta, with some extra virgin olive oil, chopped vegetables and a
sprinke of lemon juice?

Many years ago me think. In Norway, serving with a tomato sauce is the
tradition. (But, most also cook the pasta until nearly dissolved in
water :-( (It's damned too easy to forget it when boiling))

On 27 Feb 2006 00:12:08 -0800, wrote:

When I'm sick, I can't get my bg under 200 no matter *what* I eat - or
even if I'm too sick to eat. I should probably be on insulin when I'm
ill, but I avoid discussing this with docs cause I don't wanna. Heh.

Noone is. It's a part of the immune system needing glucose and amino
acids for the fuel of white blood cells. Glucagon and adrenaline
spikes are responsible for that. You even risk backeffects if you
increase insuline doses in order to keep blood glucose down. I never
change the dose of Insulatard when having an infection, but hospital
did when being hospitalized with 700 in CRP and 20 mmol/l BG (while
almost starving till death and extremely dehydrated due to not being
able to eat for 5 days, more or less vomiting nearly continually
(about 8 l liquid etc, a washing bucket was almost full :-(.) and
sweating a lot due to the heavy infections. (That's why I was silent
for almost a year here and not able to keep up here since)