Re: Grains Good as Gold

[Guest guest]

>then consuming more

>> non problematic ones like teff, amaranth, quinoa.

>

>So, what are the non-problematic grains, aside from the ones you

>mentioned? I haven't taken grains out of my children's diet; I

>would like to cook with " better " ones though.

>

>Robin L.

Wheat, rye, and barley are the really " bad actors " . Spelt is really a form

of wheat. Corn is problematic for some folks too. The rest

of them seem ok in general, though HOW they are processed

can be important (soaking, sprouting, etc.).

I use sorghum flour for baking etc -- it works like wheat flour

but is unrelated. Buckwheat is supposed to be good too. Potato

flour is great in breads, makes them soft.

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

raw

> honey, which reportedly doesn't cause blood sugar problems.

can i ask where you got this info on raw honey. I have heard

it but could never find evidence. Think i will try an experiment

with my glucose meter.

-joe

[Guest guest]

Hey ya'll, tried the experiment, and except for one reading where I had

honey on my finger(450!), it was all within normal range after consuming

from 1-4 tbs of honey in tea or smoothies.

Michele

>From: " Joe " <jzbozzi@...>

>Reply-

>

>Subject: Re: " Grains Good as Gold "

>Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 00:18:12 -0000

>

> raw

> > honey, which reportedly doesn't cause blood sugar problems.

>

> can i ask where you got this info on raw honey. I have heard

>it but could never find evidence. Think i will try an experiment

>with my glucose meter.

>

>-joe

>

_________________________________________________________________

Create your own personal Web page with the info you use most, at My MSN.

http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200364ave/direct/01/

[Guest guest]

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 12:52:06 -0500

" Suze Fisher " <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

>>However, Dr. Price did say that the ideal group he observed consumed

>>seafood *and* grains.

>

>well, first i'm not disputing that some of the grain eating groups were

>amazingly healthy. second, i recall having this conversation a few years

>ago, and i don't remember if it was concluded that price himself said that,

>or if that was sally's interpretation of what he said. more below...

Dr. Price said that in NAPD.

>

>>

>> " Weston Price's studies convinced him that the best diet was one that

>>combined nutrient-dense whole grains with animal products, particularly

>>fish. The healthiest African tribe he studied was the Dinkas...Their

>>diet consisted mainly of fish and cereal grains. This is one of the most

>>important lesson's of Price's research--that a mixed diet of whole foods,

>>one that avoids the extremes of the carnivorous Masai and the largely

>>vegetarian Bantu, ensures optimum physical development. "

>> Nasty, Brutish and Short

>>

>>Quoted in Nourishing Traditions, page 493, second edition

>

>

>third, IIRC, he said, or sally said he said, that the dinkas were the

>healthiest because they were of a sturdier stockier build than some of the

>taller herding tribes or something of that nature. that seems like a pretty

>subjective criteria. i'm not convinced based on that, that the dinka were

>healthier than the masai or inuit or other non-grain eating groups.

Yes I raised the subjectivity issue back when this debate was going on

and no one answered me at the time. IIRC Dr. Price said they were

stronger and better proportioned physically than any of the other groups.

Since we don't know his criteria it is hard to say on the first point,

but the latter point strikes me as something which is in the eye of the

beholder. But if you like proportional development and believe that is a

sign of optimal development, then I can see why he drew that conclusion.

Most Masai I have seen look like me when its comes to chest development

- NADA, LOL!

>

>fourth, as i mentioned, ALL of these robustly healthy peoples eagerly sought

>out and consumed animal foods, while only some of them consumed grains.

>indigenous grains may have worked well for the dinkas, the swiss and some

>other groups, but that can't necessarily be extrapolated to mean they'd be

>healthy for everyone (as is clearly the case with wheat). yet, i think you'd

>agree, animal foods are not only healthy for everyone, but also *essential*

>to maintain health. that was my point.

Yup. My point was the " norm " was animal foods and grains, and that the

low grain/no grain groups were the exceptions. Having said that, one of

the *distinctives* of Price's groups was the consumption of some form of

raw animal protein on a regular basis. This certainly cannot be said of

grains. So you are very right and of course you already knew I agreed

with you 100% <g>

On the other hand, I'm not convinced of the anti-grain sentiment (and

many of the assumptions that inform or underlie the position) that many

folks seem to have. I think some grains are probably always bad, and

other grains - well it depends. Some grains are probably good for most

folks if they have access.

I also don't think that lack of domestication would have kept people

from eating lots of grains. Just as human misery is incalculable, human

ingenuity knows very few limits

Abolish the FDA!!

http://tinyurl.com/25nu8

" They told just the same,

That just because a tyrant has the might

By force of arms to murder men downright

And burn down house and home and leave all flat

They call the man a captain, just for that.

But since an outlaw with his little band

Cannot bring half such mischief on the land

Or be the cause of so much harm and grief,

He only earns the title of a thief. "

--Geoffrey Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale

[Guest guest]

>Maltose wouldn't do the damage fructose does, because it doesn't contain any

>fructose. But that's not an " or, " it's an " and. " If maltose is less

>damaging, it can still be higher glycemic. I don't have data, but I think

maltose is

>certainly considerably higher glycemic than fructose.

>

>Chris

Probably is ... it is highly addicting (man, I LOVED malted milk

balls!).

I think the issue is one we haven't brought up so far though:

OVERDOSE on blood suger. That is, pumping in too much too fast.

If you eat just a little, but high glycemic, who cares?

Case in point: maple sugar candy. I'm real sure it is high-glycemic.

But for the life of me I can't eat more than one or two

pieces. Just like I can't eat more than one apple.

I'm not sure how much malt I could eat, but when I was making

beer, I'd get real sick of " wort tasting " -- and I didn't eat all that

much of it. But many people can eat a supersized Big Gulp. Why?

They could NOT eat that much if it was maple syrup flavored,

I'd bet.

Also, if you eat a LOT of high glycemic sugars, but your glycogen

stores are empty (ala Warrior Diet) then again, no damage done ...

insulin gets produced, sugar goes into storage.

But if you eat a LOT of high glycemic sugars constantly, and

your glycogen stores are full, it has nowhere to go ... here comes

insulin resistance.

I think this is important re whole wheat ... whole wheat fills up

people faster than white flour, I'm not sure exactly why. But people

just don't eat as MUCH of it, they can't.

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

Should we go by statistics or observation? Or perhaps both. Likewise I

recently saw something on TV on one of those discovery channels (forgive my

mothers

milk brain) portraying the Masai. Again, they are subject to malaria and

parasitic infections. Tall they are with beautiful teeth, but what about the

other

factors?

Elainie

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/5/04 7:46:11 PM, deweyli@... writes:

>

> So, what are the non-problematic grains, aside from the ones you

> mentioned?  I haven't taken grains out of my children's diet; I

> would like to cook with " better " ones though.

>

> Robin L.

>

They're the ones I mentioned which are the gluten free grains .

Elainie

Also it's been my experience with 4 children that it is near impossible to

remove grain from their diets. My 2 younger ones didn't eat grain until after 2

years of age but once they are exposed to the outside world , grain enters the

picture. So in my opinion it's nice to make things for them using better

grains so they don't end up wanting junky flour products.

Elainie

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/6/04 12:16:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,

rawbabymama@... writes:

> Hey ya'll, tried the experiment, and except for one reading where I had

> honey on my finger(450!), it was all within normal range after consuming

> from 1-4 tbs of honey in tea or smoothies.

What happens when you use table sugar in the same amount?

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/6/04 2:06:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,

slethnobotanist@... writes:

> Most Masai I have seen look like me when its comes to chest development

> - NADA, LOL!

One more reason why the bench press beats the farm.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/6/04 9:05:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, zumicat@...

writes:

> Should we go by statistics or observation?

We should go by statistics based on the synthesis of the aggregate of

observations, rather than isolated observations. & amp;nbsp; In either case we're

basing

our judgment on observations, but in one of them we're taking into account the

total, rather than isolated and possibly unrepresentative observations.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Having said that, one of

>the *distinctives* of Price's groups was the consumption of some form of

>raw animal protein on a regular basis.

do you, or does anyone recall what raw animal foods were eaten by the

following groups?

1. maori

2. yukon indians

3. seminoles

4. gaelic islanders

5. melanesians

6. polynesians

7. aborigines

8. peruvians

This certainly cannot be said of

>grains. So you are very right and of course you already knew I agreed

>with you 100% <g>

it is *fun* to agree once in a while! LOL!

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

" The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

[Guest guest]

So in my opinion it's nice to make things for them using better

> grains so they don't end up wanting junky flour products.

>

> Elainie

I agree, and it's going to be such a challenge. Do any of you

already have some yummy recipes that will help keep the kids from

feeling like their missing out all the time?

Robin L.

[Guest guest]

>I agree, and it's going to be such a challenge. Do any of you

>already have some yummy recipes that will help keep the kids from

>feeling like their missing out all the time?

>

>Robin L.

You can make good waffles and freeze them, (or buy Amy's they aren't too bad).

I make cookies too. And bread. We didn't ban " grain " from our house,

just the WBR grains. My DH and daughter both slimmed down immediately

when we did that, but they don't feel deprived.

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

With table sugar I'm not sure, though when I was using it way back when my

blood sugar regularly went over 200. I compared raw honey to cooked honey,

which spikes my sugar way too high. A good after meal number for me is 140

or so. I have to find my exact numbers in the mess of papers threatening to

consume my small child. I'll get back to on that one.

take care,

Michele

>From: ChrisMasterjohn@...

>Reply-

>

>Subject: Re: Re: " Grains Good as Gold "

>Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:50:15 EST

>

>In a message dated 2/6/04 12:16:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,

>rawbabymama@... writes:

>

> > Hey ya'll, tried the experiment, and except for one reading where I had

> > honey on my finger(450!), it was all within normal range after consuming

> > from 1-4 tbs of honey in tea or smoothies.

>

>What happens when you use table sugar in the same amount?

>

>Chris

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I make brownies, cakes cookies etc.. using quinoa, amaranth and millet

flours. I used to soak all my flours but the texture came out rather gummy and

I'd

rather make things using non- glutinous flours than soak spelt etc..

Elainie

[Guest guest]

Hi Elainie -

Can you share your brownie recipe?

Nanette

> Re: Re: " Grains Good as Gold "

>

>

> I make brownies, cakes cookies etc.. using quinoa, amaranth and millet

> flours. I used to soak all my flours but the texture came out

> rather gummy and I'd

> rather make things using non- glutinous flours than soak spelt etc..

>

> Elainie

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 07:56:36 EST

zumicat@... wrote:

> The wild grains were not better than domestic. The wild were only 

>healthy for ruminants, that is one of the reasons why they were 

>domesticated. When they were domesticated they increased dramatically 

>in nutrition.

Very interesting. Do you know where I might get further info on this?

Second, grains are not the cause of a decline in health. 

>Most of the research on pre-agricultural peoples and health is based on 

>primates of some sort, not always homo sapiens and what is based on 

>humans (agricultural) has not taken into consideration- although now it 

>is getting more attention-the extreme climactic changes the early 

>agriculturists had to endure. Drought, floods and numerous other 

>problems contributed greatly to the decline in humanity in general, not 

>grains.

Again another interesting point.

There are cultures today who eat grains and vegetables as the 

>majority of their diet and thrive, Weston Price acknowledged some of 

>these people in his book. Also, more current findings are revealing 

>paleo man as not having the great health we once thought him to have. 

>Of course, that all depends on what diet paleo man was eating and that 

>all depended on where and when he lived as he too suffered many health 

>disorders just like many modern day hunter/gatherers  do today.

Any resources you recommend to pursue this line of inquiry further?

Liking

http://tinyurl.com/3d8n5

" They told just the same,

That just because a tyrant has the might

By force of arms to murder men downright

And burn down house and home and leave all flat

They call the man a captain, just for that.

But since an outlaw with his little band

Cannot bring half such mischief on the land

Or be the cause of so much harm and grief,

He only earns the title of a thief. "

--Geoffrey Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale