Daily Issues | Featured Article
The Staff of Life… or the Stuff of Death?
Today I am going to touch the “third rail” of human nutrition… Grains!
On an electric railway, the “third rail” is charged with high voltage power. In other words, do not touch! But the “third rail” has also become a metaphor for ideas that are controversial, “highly charged” and “untouchable.”
When it comes to nutrition, whole grains are the third rail. Most people now understand that refined grains are not good for us. But there is still a very vocal majority who stand ready to defend whole grains from the slightest insult.
Whether it is the result of pervasive marketing or industry-influenced government propaganda, the result is the same. An entire generation has been led to believe that whole grain foods are not only nutritionally sound, they are vital to health.
The truth is that whole grains are not a health food. They are not essential in the diet. And in fact, they are mildly poisonous.
“But you need the vitamins, minerals and fiber…”
It is true that whole grain foods provide nutrients, such as vitamins B1 and B2, iron, potassium, zinc and magnesium. But so does a diet that is rich in naturally-raised meats, organic vegetables and nuts. And the latter doesn’t require you to eat a hefty serving of blood-sugar boosting carbohydrates.
Whole grains are also a source of insoluble fiber. But too much rough fiber has consequences that are just now coming to light. In a study performed at the Medical College of Georgia, the scientists who conducted the study wrote that high-fiber foods, “bang up against the cells lining the gastrointestinal tract, rupturing their outer covering.”
The study’s authors say this is a good thing, because it releases mucous and helps to lubricate the gastrointestinal tract. Other experts believe this damage is… well, damaging. I won’t delve into the myths of fiber in this essay. But if you want to learn more, check out the website GutSense.org. In any case, you can get all the fiber you need from a nutrient-rich diet of vegetables, fruits and nuts.
Take Up to 6 Inches off Your Belly in Just 10 Weeks
When the rest of the world catches up – this little-known West African herb may be celebrated as the most effective weight loss compound ever tested.
But you can use it to drop pounds – and lose inches – RIGHT NOW. There’s science that backs it up. The people in the study – which was published in the medical journal Lipids in Health and Disease – lost an average of 28 pounds and 6 inches off their belly. And they didn’t change their diet or exercise habits.
Dr. Sears’ enhanced version of this formula is ready today. It’s even more effective than the compound researchers used in the clinical tests. Click here to get started TODAY!
Whole grain foods spike your blood sugar…
As I highlighted in this message last week, whole grain foods like cereal, bread and pasta generally cause a bigger rise in blood sugar than sweet-tasting desserts and fruits.
Chronically high blood sugar and insulin levels are one of the cornerstones of degenerative disease. All animals produce insulin to some degree. Those that produce less insulin live longer than those that produce a lot. Not to mention that high insulin levels cause your body to store fat and prevent fat from being burned for energy.
The surest way to burn fat and improve your health is to consume a low-glycemic diet. And that means to reduce your consumption of carbohydrates that are rapidly converted to glucose. That includes whole grains.
But what about whole grains being toxic?
You are probably well aware of macronutrients (fats, protein and carbohydrates). And you know about micronutrients (minerals, vitamins, antioxidants and phytochemicals). But few people are aware of anti-nutrients.
Anti-nutrients are plant compounds that serve as a self-defense mechanism. They are naturally selected to ward off pests, whether those pests are insects, animals or humans. In some cases, these compounds can be acutely toxic. In other cases, they can cause problems with digestion and elimination. They can cause allergic and auto-immune reactions. And they can actually cause nutritional deficiencies.
• Some anti-nutrients attach to other nutrients, making them useless
• Others destroy enzymes needed for digestion and other functions
• Some cause nutrients to be excreted more rapidly from the body
The highest levels of anti-nutrients in the human diet are found in grains, beans and potatoes.
These are foods that our genetic Paleolithic ancestors did not consume. In fact, they are harmful (and can even be toxic) to consume without cooking, soaking, fermenting or processing them.
And even though these foods are usually prepared this way in the modern diet, the level of anti-nutrients we still consume is surprisingly high. Many experts believe this is to blame for the growing number of people with food intolerances, gastrointestinal disorders and auto-immune illness.
Some animals – including birds, rodents and various insects – have genetically adapted to consume these foods without problems. Humans, however, have not. The purpose of anti-nutrients is to ward off pests. Perhaps we should take the hint.
Stay tuned for Friday’s issue…
I will discuss some of the primary anti-nutrients – including gluten, phytates, lectins and enzyme blockers – and the health complications they can cause.
To Your Health
Editorial Director
Total Health Breakthroughs
Rate this article by clicking on the stars below.
(9 votes, average: 4.44 out of 5)
Loading ...
Had to get off grains a few years ago,, did not know how bad my grain/gluten allergies were til I came down with diverticulits,,, I am pretty well grain free now…it can be done…
Great article, puts some real data into the whole grain myth. I know of people that did really poorly on a whole grain diet. Personally, I find them difficult to tolerate often.
Thanks for the info:-)
I would give this a 5 star rating, but I was wondering if you could give me a sample menu of what I could eat, for breakfast. lunch and dinner and the foods I could eat so I could exchange them. I have a blood sugar problem and need to lose a lot of weight and could use all the help I can get,thanks From LaVerna
I read Jon Herrings last post Re: hospital food. Just a comment relating to Good Shepherd HealthCare System in Oregon switching to baby carrots instead of potatoe chips. I had heard that baby carrots are just as bad in a different sort of way because the whitish coating on the carrot is an after result of a clorine bleaching process to remove the skin on the carrots thereby contaminating the product. Any thoghts as to the validity of this????
Hi Laverna,
My wife, Kelley is developing exactly the type of diet plan and meal planning program you are looking for. She has been building this for several years and I stand amazed at what the program can do.
If you’re interested, visit HealingGourmet.com or YourPlateYourFate.com and put your name on the list. She’ll be sending an email when the program is released.
Best,
Jon
Jon,
What’s your take on sprouted grains? Specifically the sprouted grain bread sold by Food for Life (Ezekial 4:9?). It says glycemic index is 36 due to sprouting process and not using flour. Was wondering how that plays into your take on whole grains.
Thanks for the great article. Looking forward to seeing Kelley’s program when it comes out.
Ryan
There is heaps of information on the internet to show that the author of this article is only offering up an opinion and a not completely honest one at that.
The health benefits of grains like oats etc are well documented and serve a valuable part of a balanced diet. Notice I said balanced. I am not suggesting anyone eat potatoes one or more times a day nor eat only grains.
But no one should be eating red meat every day which is much more dangerous to the health.
I agree with Stephen. I’ve been involved with health education for over 30 years and I dont think you should be basing ALL your ideas on this Dr. Sears who is obviously out to make lots of money on conspiracy theories and his “just right” supplements.
What do you think is the basis of the Mediteranean diet associated with longevity besides tomatoes- Right Pasta made with grain.
How about some more discussion of the evidence?
Hello Dr Herring,
Great and wise article as usual. I am still waiting to see your promised revised “food pyramid”. Have you published already ? Have I missed it ? if so, can you please provide me with the link ? If not, can you please tell us when are you going to publish it ?
God bless you
I am interested in your book on aging. I would like to order it but if I am not satisfied with it I want to be sure that I can contact you for a refund.
What is your phone number and what is your e-mail address?
Franklyn St. Bernard
I see this claim all the time about how our paleolithic ancestors did not eat grains. However, I have never seen any paleontological evidence presented for it. In fact, I have seen scholarly articles stating that our ancestors consumed rye grass, and cooked the tops of wild wheat and oats for mush and for stuffing into bird cavities. So, where’s the proof you have for stating our ancestors did not consume grains?
Linda,
I have a project on my plate today and an unable to respond in any detail. However, Mark Sisson, author of Primal Blueprint and Dr. Loren Cordain, author of The Paleo Diet, have both addressed this issue.
From Sisson:
“There’s a big difference between suggesting grains were a significant and regular source of our ancestors’ diet 100,000 years ago and saying they were merely occasional – and probably desperation-induced – fruits of foraging labors”
Here is his full post on the matter:
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/stone-age-grains/
And here are Dr. Cordain’s comments:
This is an interesting paper ( Mercader J. Mozambican grass seed consumption during the middle stone age. Science 2009;326:1680-83) as it may push probable (but clearly not definite) cereal grain consumption by hominins back to at least 105,000 years ago. Prior to this evidence, the earliest exploitation of wild cereal grains was reported by Piperno and colleagues at Ohalo II in Israel and dating to ~23,500 years ago (Nature 2004;430:670-73). As opposed to the Ohalo II data in which a large saddle stone was discovered with obvious repetitive grinding marks and embedded starch granules attributed to a variety of grains and seeds that were concurrently present with the artifact, the data from Ngalue is less convincing for the use of cereal grains as seasonal food. No associated intact grass seeds have been discovered in the cave at Ngalue, nor were anvil stones with repetitive grinding marks found. Hence, at best, the data suggests sporadic use (and not necessarily consumption) of grains at this early date. Clearly, large scale processing of sorghum for consumption for extended periods seems unlikely.
Further, It should be pointed out that consumption of wild grass seeds of any kind requires extensive technology and processing to yield a digestible and edible food that likely did not exist 105,000 years ago. Harvesting of wild grass seeds without some kind of technology (e.g. sickles and scythes [not present at this time]) is tedious and difficult at best. Additionally, containers of some sort (baskets [not present at this time], pottery [not present] or animal skin containers are needed to collect the tiny grains. Many grain species require flailing to separate the seed from the chaff and then further winnowing ([baskets not present]), or animal skins] to separate the seeds from the chaff. Intact grains are not digestible by humans unless they are first ground into a flour (which breaks down the cell walls), and then cooked (typically in water – e.g. boiling [technology not present]) or parched in a fire which gelatinizes the starch granules, and thereby makes them available for digestion and absorption. Because each and every one of these processing steps requires additional energy on the part of the gatherer, most contemporary hunter gatherers did not exploit grains except as starvation foods because they yielded such little energy relative to the energy obtained [sic -- I think he meant expended - DM](optimal foraging theory).
If indeed the grinder/core axes with telltale starch granules were used to make flour from sorghum seeds, then the flour still had to be cooked to gelatinize the starch granules to make it digestible. In Neolithic peoples, grass seed flour most typically is mixed with water to make a paste (dough) that is then cooked into flat breads. It is highly unlikely that the technology or the behavioral sophistication existed 105,000 years ago to make flat breads. Whole grains can be parched intact in fires, but this process is less effective than making flour into a paste and cooking it to gelatinize the starch granules. Hence, it is difficult to reconcile the chain of events proposed by the authors (appearance of sorghum starch granules on cobbles or grinders = pounding or grinding of sorghum grains = consumption of sorghum). I wouldn’t hang my hat on this evidence indicating grains were necessarily consumed by hominins at this early date. To my mind, the Ohalo II data still represents the best earliest evidence for grain consumption by hominins.
Cordially,
Loren Cordain, Ph.D., Professor
Good information. But against our general belief. Probiotics are always a better alternative than Fibres, which have their own limitation , as Celiac disease, Gluten Intolerance, etc. However a lot of research work is required before jumping to Probiotics , which should be also screened, depending on individual requirement.
So, let me get this straight. The argument that Paleolithic Man did not eat grains is because he didn’t have the technology to do so. So does that mean that as we created technology to harvest and process grains, that we suddenly became less intelligent about what foods we should eat? I get that grains are pushed too heavily in our current society, but that wasn’t the case in the great societies of ancient Egypt, China, India, Greece, Rome, etc. What accounts for the inclusion of grains in their diets?
Matthew… the reason Paleolithic man did not eat grains is because we did not have the technology or the knowledge to prepare them. And they are mildly toxic if not prepared properly. Futhermore, it just required too much work, and there were much easier sources of sustenance.
As a result, our physiology developed over a period of MILLIONS of years without these foods in our diet. Here is a simple snapshot of human history:
100,000 generations of people were hunter-gatherers
500 generations have depended on agriculture
10 generations have lived since the the industrial age began
2 generations have grown up with highly processed fast foods
It is quite clear that in the historical and anthropological record that when people began to farm regularly, population growth accelerated. On the other hand, individual health deteriorated. People became shorter in stature, and skeletal evidence of nutritional stress and infection became more frequent. Countless archaeological findings show that people became smaller and frailer as a result of this new grain-fed existence.
And regarding those last two generations that have grown up on fast, processed, high-carbohydrate foods… well, just take a look around you to see where that has gotten us.
When I clicked the button to learn more …. it just came up with a lot of random letters.
Great article again, lots of basic and important information for anyone that wants to learn about nutrition.
Thanks
Alfredo E.
HMMMM, These are all interesting responses ranging from Professors to regular folk. Are we sure that amoung all the different tribes of ancient people who now make up our population base that the genetic diversity makes it impossible to state that all people are alergic to such and such a type of food? For example, alcoholics do not have the genetic enzymes required to process alcohol whereas many European people have the ability to process alcohol because of the early introduction of it into their diet. In the middle east, wine was used for drinking and or mixing with water to sterilize bacteria in contaminated water. The native people in North America however did not have to deal with contaminated water as much and therefore did not build the tolerence to alcohol as the middle east and european tribes. As most readers know, alcohol is probably the purest form of refined sugar. Alcohol has been used as a sterilizer for nearly forever, including useage in medical procedures up to this day. The theory is similar for people who had cow’s milk introduced into their ancestors’ diet, most are able to consume dairy products successfully. However, African people quite generally do not have this abilty so many are allergic to cow’s milk today. I would suggest that many people from grain growing Europe and northern Africa do have the ability to consume grain in the traditional way, i.e. flatbreads. However, North American tribes may not have this ability, for instance native people in Canada seem to have a high incidence of diabetes now. These people’s ancestors basically consumed wild game for their diet supplemented with berries and fish. The south American tribes had a different diet yet, corn and other vegetables such as potatoes, squash made the diet there. All of the above may explain why many people are intolerant to some kinds of foods and others can eat any thing they want. Best Regards, CanadaNorth