Quote: (01-22-2013 05:38 PM)babelfish669 Wrote:
The major problem with modern wheat consumption isn't gluten intolerance, its the consumption of processed food (In the US these products are primarily derived from wheat, soy, and corn.) So, when you tell someone to stop eating wheat/grains, you throw out a huge chunk of the processed food categories.
I'll certainly agree that processed grains, including wheat, are a big problem in the Western diet at large... It's hard to argue anything less. But the argument that telling people to not eat any wheat ever is good because it leads them to eat less processed food is similar to arguing that people should never eat fruit because it contains mostly fructose...
There are plenty of unprocessed and minimally processed whole grain wheat products available in supermarkets, just look for this on the packaging...
Quote: (01-22-2013 05:38 PM)babelfish669 Wrote:
The second issue is that the nutrient content is lower than fruits and vegetables. When you say eat X, your also telling people to not eat Y, because there is only so much food a person to consume in a day. Generally people will prioritize certain items in their daily diet and put things such as vegetables at the very bottom. In general its better to be eating fresh produce than slices of bread. From a behavioral science standpoint if I tell people to eat more fresh produce they don't. If I tell them to stop eating bread and rice, surprise, they start eating more vegetables.
...
For the guys complaining about not getting unhumanly big on paleo, yeah that is not the point. You need to be loading on things that will make you grow -- like dairy protein and grains. In many respects, its the complete opposite of paleo.
I'm not quite sure what you're arguing, here.
Is the primary function of food not simply to impart calories?
How does eating a diet geared towards muscle gain equate to trying to become inhumanly big? : /
As if eating grains is equivalent to taking steroids or something...
An optimal diet for muscle gain and endurance training (and by proxy, a diet for optimal health, period) will have to have a pretty substantial amount of carbohydrates in it... Both for optimal glycogen function (an issue all it's own) and because, well, you have to eat SOMETHING to fill 4,000 calories a day. And, the reality is; good luck accomplishing such macro-nutrient ratios with lean meat, vegetables, and whey protein... You just can't do it.
Eating grains does not mean you will develop a micronutrient deficiency, and it doesn't even mean that you can't also eat a respectable amount of fresh fruits, vegetables, nuts, and beans.
Quote: (01-22-2013 05:38 PM)babelfish669 Wrote:
The third issue, which is a "paleo diet" issue, is nutrient absorption, which is basically that the grains interfere with the bioavailability of minerals. So, eat a few pieces of bread, take a vitamin, not all of those vitamins are going to be absorbed by your body. (Look up "phytic acid nutrient absorption" if you want to read more about this.)
Um.
It is biologically impossibly to absorb 100% of all the vitamins and nutrients that you take into your body... Ever.
Phytic acid (of which larger amounts can frequently be found in nuts and seeds than in wheat, BTW) is just one of
many known anti-nutrients; virtually anything you eat will "interfere" with the bioavailability of some vitamin/nutrient or another. Vitamins and nutrients even interfere with the bioavailability of
eachother; zinc can negatively affect magnesium and copper levels and vice versa, calcium can interfere with vitamin C absorption and vice versa... Despite being rich in a ton of nutrients and polyphenol antioxidants, the oxalates and tannins found in tea extract, chocolate, wine, and many other foods also happen to be srather strong antinutrives to a number of vitamins. There are literally more known interactions of this type than I could begin to name here, and phytic acid isn't even a particularly strong or noteworthy one; it is only through paleo blogger propaganda that phytic acid has somehow become known as this evil chemical that makes it impossible for your body to absorb dietary minerals.
Anti-nutritive factors are frankly not a major consideration in food choice... Though there are a literally almost innumerable number of antinutrients in almost
every food that we consume, the overall effect of them is very, very small, and frequently, known antinutritive factors are already accounted for in the established recommended allowances of vitamins and nutrients.
Quote: (01-22-2013 05:38 PM)babelfish669 Wrote:
If you are trying to get big, I would strongly recommend monitoring your blood pressure and blood cholesterol, especially if you have any hereditary history of heart disease. Tons of exercise and a perfectly built body often hides arteries in horrible condition. I would not sell Michael Phelps life insurance.
I'm puzzled as to why you would strongly recommend caution over cardiovascular health to the one group of people that is the least predisposed to any such risks... Until taken to IFBB competitive levels (anything is unhealthy in extremes) the bodybuilding diet and lifestyle is prettymuch the most healthy option possible.
Perhaps it would be more beneficial to strongly recommend that people who don't exercise and eat cheetos all day keep an eye on their blood pressure and cholesterol? Just a thought.