brighid

Whole grains are far different then processed grains as such found in white bread, etc. Nor did I say grains should be a mainstay in ones diet, but whole grains play a vital role in a balanced diet. Fiber is very important to health and whole grains such a wheat, oat, rye and bran are beneficial to a healthy diet. So, I am not exactly sure where my “wrong” statement came in. If you could state the numerous, or just a few of the numerous health problems associated with eating whole grains (as opposed to high glycemic starches such as russet potatoes, white bread and rice) that would be appreciated!

Let me edit to add – I should have worded my statement better whole grains, including whole grain pasta, rice and bread as well as legumes are important in our diets but as I clearly stated TOO much make us fat. Carbohydrates are ESSENTIAL to a balanced diet and healthy heart and brain function. Refined foods should be avoided and only ate sparingly, unlike in the American Diet that relies heavily on refined and processed food.




Brighid

[ July 25, 2002: Message edited by: brighid ]</p>

brighid

Have you heard that whole grains may help reduce the risk of heart disease and certain cancers? Whole grains are made up of all parts of the grain--the bran (or fiber-rich outer layer), the endosperm (middle part) and the germ (the nutrient-rich inner part). When grains are milled, or refined, the bran and germ portions are removed, leaving only the endosperm. By contrast, whole grain foods contain all three layers of the grain. When you eat a variety of whole grain foods, you get the nutritional benefits of the entire grain. Whole grains contain many other natural plant compounds called phytochemicals. Scientists believe phytochemicals in whole grains, together with the vitamins, minerals, and dietary fiber, may contribute to whole grains’ health benefits.

<a href="http://www.eatright.org/nfs/nfs0900b.html" target="_blank">http://www.eatright.org/nfs/nfs0900b.html</a>

B

Bokonon

I'm amazed you can generalize about vegetarians so much. All the true vegetarians I know (i.e. not the chicken and fish and red meat on Tuesdays ones) are quite healthy... even me. I am slightly overweight, but that is because I simply don't exercise. I plan on getting in an exercise regime once I'm at college. I get sick far less frequently than I did as a meat eater. My allergies have cleared up quite a bit, and I've lost a lot of weight. I take no supplements (other than Lysine for the occasional cold sore breakout) and none of the true vegetarians I know take supplements either.

brighid

Bokonon – sorry but I have to rip on you for “TRUE vegetarian” as it is too close to “TRUE Christian.” People are unhealthy for many reasons, diet being one of those reasons. Many people vegetarian and non-vegetarian don’t have a clue about nutrition and exercise and therefore suffer the consequences. If you are eating a balanced diet as a vegetarian you probably aren’t unhealthy, just as those eating a balanced diet whom eat meat are also healthy. And on an anecdotal note – there use to be a poster here who is vegetarian who posted eating pretty much cheese pizza and orange juice – NOT good and probably a heart attack, or diabetes in the making.

If you aren’t eating a B vitamin fortified cereal and you don’t eat either eggs or dairy products you may want to consider a supplement as plant sources do not have much useable B12 and deficiencies may take 3-20 years to show up. Some of the effects of B12 deficiencies aren’t pretty and although deficiency levels can be rectified some of the nerve damage cannot be. Most people should take a multi-vitamin because too often we fail to eat foods high in nutrients and if we are to believe the research about soil depletion and it’s ravaging affects on the nutrient content of food … well it could be something to consider.

I was thinking about Carl Lewis last night and did some more research on him. I wonder what sort of athletic performance he would have had if he was raised vegetarian as opposed to being raised as a meat eater (as I believe he was) and to see a comparative test on his performance, endurance, muscular development or loss once he switched – not simply anecdotal but an actual scientific study. It would also be interesting to see how his performance etc. would have rated has he maintained that diet. I know that really isn’t possible, but it sure would be interesting. Regardless, Carl Lewis is an extraordinary athlete who is incredibly genetically gifted – would love to have some of his genes

Brighid

Joyous

Claudia, I love this phrase, and I'm going to have to begin using it immediately.

JamesKrieger

Rick is correct. Ketones have a diuretic effect on the body, and thus ketogenic diets like Atkins cause rapid losses in water weight.

JamesKrieger

Brighid, that's not true. If that were true, a 175 lb person with 10% bodyfat (thus, LBM = 158 lbs) would have an RMR of approximately 7900 kcal/day.

JamesKrieger

Dr. Rick's correct here. The whole idea that "high protein diets cause kidney damage" has been extrapolated from literature on people who already have kidney problems. High protein diets will exacerbate kidney problems in people with unhealthy kidneys. However, there is no evidence that a diet high in protein will lead to kidney problems. If it did, then we would expect a high incidence of kidney problems in strength & power athletes who regularly consume high amounts of protein, yet we don't see that. There are also studies where animals have been fed high protein diets for over half their lifespan with no harmful effect on kidney function.

JamesKrieger

This is not true. There is some evidence that a ketogenic diet may have protein-sparing effects. Some bodybuilders use cyclical ketogenic diets in preparation for bodybuilding contests. Jeff Volek, PhD, has done research on ketogenic diets and found them to be effective for strength athletes looking to maintain strength while losing weight for a competition.

JamesKrieger

The relationship between the glycemic index and insulin release is not so clear cut. While I don't currently have the reference handy, a study was published a few years back in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (I think it was that journal) where the researchers established an insulinemic index (II) in response to various foods, and compared it to the GI of foods. What they found was that, the GI wasn't always related to the II. Some foods that weren't high in GI still caused large increases in insulin, and vice versa. Protien also stimulates insulin production, although it will also stimulate glucagon release (glucagon is basically insulin's opposing hormone).