[crispytaco]

Fuck , there is rice in most delicious dishes. Spain paella, Italy risotto, Japan sushi, Chinese rice, Peru Chaufa. India basamati.... etc.... ...

[DJ-Matt]

(03-08-2017 08:49 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:46 PM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

I call bullshit on this, nothing is worse for you than High Fructose Corn Syrup.

Even Dr. Robert Lustig, the anti-sugar crusader, agrees that there is no difference in the effect sugar and HFCS has on the body. They are equally bad. He explains it in his now infamous video.

Here in this article the comparison was of a specific amount of rice to a specific amount of sugar, with supporting research.

The evidence suggests it is wise to avoid both.

I'm not going to defend sugar because he's right you should avoid HFCS (worst) and refined sugar (bad). Drink all the juice you want because natural sugars are fine for your body. I read an article where the doctor suggested no more than 50 grams of bad sugars per day, which is a hard target to hit.

[MOVSM]

(03-09-2017 10:27 AM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 08:49 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:46 PM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

I call bullshit on this, nothing is worse for you than High Fructose Corn Syrup.

Even Dr. Robert Lustig, the anti-sugar crusader, agrees that there is no difference in the effect sugar and HFCS has on the body. They are equally bad. He explains it in his now infamous video.

Here in this article the comparison was of a specific amount of rice to a specific amount of sugar, with supporting research.

The evidence suggests it is wise to avoid both.

I'm not going to defend sugar because he's right you should avoid HFCS (worst) and refined sugar (bad). Drink all the juice you want because natural sugars are fine for your body. I read an article where the doctor suggested no more than 50 grams of bad sugars per day, which is a hard target to hit.

You seem to be under impression that sugar from fruit is not bad. It is. Any sugar that contains fructose is bad, doesn't matter the source. Fructose is a toxin that destroys liver, just like alcohol. You urgently need to watch the linked video above, it explains exactly how.

For this reason, there are no good sugars. Fruit juice still has fructose in it, and no moderating fiber. Thus it is nothing more than a fruit-flavored sugared water no better than HFCS containing soda. HFCS has only 5% more fructose in it than natural sugar, and for practical purposes has exactly the same effect on the body.

[ScrapperTL]

(03-09-2017 12:16 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

(03-09-2017 10:27 AM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 08:49 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

(03-08-2017 05:46 PM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

I call bullshit on this, nothing is worse for you than High Fructose Corn Syrup.

Even Dr. Robert Lustig, the anti-sugar crusader, agrees that there is no difference in the effect sugar and HFCS has on the body. They are equally bad. He explains it in his now infamous video.

Here in this article the comparison was of a specific amount of rice to a specific amount of sugar, with supporting research.

The evidence suggests it is wise to avoid both.

I'm not going to defend sugar because he's right you should avoid HFCS (worst) and refined sugar (bad). Drink all the juice you want because natural sugars are fine for your body. I read an article where the doctor suggested no more than 50 grams of bad sugars per day, which is a hard target to hit.

You seem to be under impression that sugar from fruit is not bad. It is. Any sugar that contains fructose is bad, doesn't matter the source. Fructose is a toxin that destroys liver, just like alcohol. You urgently need to watch the linked video above, it explains exactly how.

For this reason, there are no good sugars. Fruit juice still has fructose in it, and no moderating fiber. Thus it is nothing more than a fruit-flavored sugared water no better than HFCS containing soda. HFCS has only 5% more fructose in it than natural sugar, and for practical purposes has exactly the same effect on the body.

I agree with everything stated above, however I am still not sold that Whole Fruits are bad for you.
Whole Fruits are the only carbohydrates I consume, I eat them 7 days a week, everyday.
My experience is that they boost my libido, increase my mental/physical energy, prepare me before and help me recover after hard exercise.
Also, great beach body tip: My vascularity can go from good to great within 30 minutes of ingesting pineapple or watermelon.

[MOVSM]

Fruit is certainly better than juice because it has mitigating effect of the fiber.
But consider the following:

Here's what your food would look like if it weren't genetically modified over millennia

[ScrapperTL]

(03-09-2017 12:43 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

Fruit is certainly better than juice because it has mitigating effect of the fiber.
But consider the following:

Here's What Fruits and Vegetables Looked Like Before We Domesticated Them

Okay, upon further inspection (reading that article)



There are some absolutely extreme differences in those photos.
I'm known to polish a whole watermelon off in one sitting...
Going to re-think this now.

[MOVSM]

https://jameskennedymonash.wordpress.com...al-part-4/

[DJ-Matt]

[Hell_Is_Like_Newark]

(03-09-2017 01:10 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

https://jameskennedymonash.wordpress.com...al-part-4/

Seedless watermelon were created by mutating the DNA by blasting the seeds with radiation. Mutational breeding is popular today due to the fact it doesn't have the regulatory burdens of directly editing genes (GMO).

http://jasenrosse.blogspot.com/2011/04/h...-that.html

[rudebwoy]

Nothing worse than soft drinks.

Coke has how many grams of sugar?

I have friends who are over weight and drink gallons of the crap. They switch to diet pop thinking that is a better solution.

I don't drink soda pop and I limit the Juice drinks, all garbage.

Study is BS.

[MOVSM]

I quite literally spent two pages of thread disproving this notion.
Please read the thread again, carefully.

[rudebwoy]

I read it, I base my facts on real life.

Not some study on the internet.

[Excelsior]

I switched to a low carb diet a few years back and have seen some pretty good results. Part of that process was cutting out any white rice (which I never had a ton of but did indulge in more often than necessary).

Now, I eat tons of brown rice. I mean like half a cup or more a day. I love it, and it's worked out pretty well for me physically. I don't add anything else (except occasionally some cut green beans and corn) to my meals. I pretty much stick to one specific type of rice (Uncle Ben's Whole Grain Brown) and buy it in bulk. It works.

I totally buy the notion that white rice isn't great, but I'd recommend brown rice as a part of anyone's diet.

[MOVSM]

(03-09-2017 05:15 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  

I read it, I base my facts on real life.

Not some study on the internet.

Are these real life facts documented in a non-internet study? I would like to read it, really I would. Or any argument more profound than "this study is BS. I said so."

[TravelerKai]

In China I eat white rice every single day. Everyone here does as well.

Why are they not fat like Americans?

Like Rudebwoy said, I know people that drink coke and sugary drinks every day and they are fat.

Care to explain why your study says our own observations are wrong?

[Rocha]

Conclusion: Better to drink beer than to eat rice, whole fruits and fruits juice.

[MOVSM]

The study focused on DIABETES not on obesity!!!

I hope all you here realize that you don't have to be obese to be diabetic, even if there is some correlation between the two diseases.

Everyone is hung up on the sizes. This study is from Singapore, not USA. Go find standard coke can size in Singapore (whatever it is), and compare it to standard rice bowl size in Singapore (whatever that is). Remember--the study talks about blood sugar after consumption, not what's in the can or bowl.
It is the only study I know of that compares the effect of rice on diabetes rate of different types of Asians. No one would care to do this in USA, but in Singapore it is relevant.

Back to your China. Rate of diabetes in China “explosive”. The same is with India, another rice dependent country.
And I'm sure Chinese are much fatter than they used to be. WTF is that?

Before everyone loses their shit, I'm not defending sugar. I have stated in this thread and others that it is a poison, and linked to several doctors who are beating the drums on the subject.

Also in this thread I pointed out that white (refined) rice is not a grain that is natural--it is a product of industrial revolution, which strips away the germ and bran from the grain causing a number of major, adverse impacts on health. The same thing happened to wheat in the white bread we eat in the West. Whole grains are much better for you, but we don't really eat them anymore.

Is it really too much to ask people to respond to what's written, not what they imagined?

[MOVSM]

(03-11-2017 10:03 AM)Rocha Wrote:  

Conclusion: Better to drink beer than to eat rice, whole fruits and fruits juice.

No, don't drink beer, it'll give you man tits and beer belly. Drink wine instead. And whiskey.

[PhDre]

While I believe that white rice spikes blood glucose levels higher than fruit does, I would not alter my eating habits based on this study alone - or any single study for that matter.

First of all you don't eat the rice in isolation, but accompanied by fat, protein,... which slows down the sugar absorption.

Secondly, name any single food group and you can find both advocates and opponents.
Sugar, fruit, carbs, gluten-containing grains, refined grains, unrefined grains, grains in general, salt, saturated fat, poly-unsaturated fat, dairy, meat, fatty fish, beans, nuts and seeds, nightshades, cruciferous vegetables, drinking lots of water,... The list is endless. And every point of view has some scientific studies to back up its arguments.

There are only a handful of foods that appear to be universally harmful:
- hydrogenated oils and vegetable oils
- high fructose corn syrup
- unfermented soy
- flavor enhancers, preservatives and other additives
Unsurprisingly, this is the bulk of the ingredient list of most processed food.

As for every other thing out there, try it for yourself. Your body is far better at telling you what it likes than a single, possibly incomplete, erroneous or biased study. Add or eliminate a food group for a couple of weeks and look for these signs:
- Do you sleep better or worse?
- Is your digestion better (no gas, no bloating, smooth solid dark brown stools, no foul smell, easy wiping) or worse?
- Is your body temperature higher? And does it rise over the course of a meal?
- If you lower your calories, do you drop mainly bodyfat? Or does your body temperature/energy/sleep quality/muscle mass drop while your fat mass stays relatively constant?
- If you raise your calories, do you gain energy/sleep quality/body temperature/muscle mass together with fat or do you simply get fatter without anything else?

[Rocha]

(03-11-2017 10:38 AM)MOVSM Wrote:  

(03-11-2017 10:03 AM)Rocha Wrote:  

Conclusion: Better to drink beer than to eat rice, whole fruits and fruits juice.

No, don't drink beer, it'll give you man tits and beer belly. Drink wine instead. And whiskey.

I drink a lot of wine... but can be Cognac instead of Whiskey?

[MOVSM]

Yeah. All hard liquor isn't bad. In moderation that is, not by the bottle.

[MOVSM]

So much bro science.

(03-11-2017 10:55 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

I would not alter my eating habits based on this study alone - or any single study for that matter.

This isn't a lone study. Just in this thread I gave almost ten others.

(03-11-2017 10:55 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

First of all you don't eat the rice in isolation, but accompanied by fat, protein,... which slows down the sugar absorption.

No, it doesn't. Go read Gary Taubes.
In presence of sugar in the blood, pancreas secretes insulin, which converts it to triglycerides for storage. Otherwise blood will turn acidic and you will sustain kidney damage. Insulin also locks fat cells so no fat gets out--blood sugar must be used for fuel first. Body doesn't want to convert fat into fuel when there is sugar as fuel.
Meanwhile, fat is processed in the liver, and because there is sugar in the blood it is not used for fuel but goes straight into storage.
This is why confectionery is so bad for you. Donuts and cakes will make you fat like nothing else.

(03-11-2017 10:55 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

Secondly, name any single food group and you can find both advocates and opponents.
Sugar, fruit, carbs, gluten-containing grains, refined grains, unrefined grains, grains in general, salt, saturated fat, poly-unsaturated fat, dairy, meat, fatty fish, beans, nuts and seeds, nightshades, cruciferous vegetables, drinking lots of water,... The list is endless. And every point of view has some scientific studies to back up its arguments.

This is mostly based on marxist lies, politics, and mental disease. Most of these studies are being disproven now. The original 1970 Ancel Keys seven country study on which 1972 Congressional Dietary guidelines are based is a flagrant lie. The older studies that show exactly the opposite, still stand. Starting with Brillat-Savarin and Banting all the way to Atkins, Taubes, Attia, Phiney, Volek, Lustig and others.
Then you have vegans who are mental cases who equate humans with animals. Then you have feminists who think it is wrong to eat meat because men do.
Some of these problems are not problems on their own. Salt for example--on low carb there is no problem whatsoever. But it will raise blood pressure on high carb diets.

(03-11-2017 10:55 AM)PhDre Wrote:  

There are only a handful of foods that appear to be universally harmful:
- hydrogenated oils and [expeller and hexane extracted high poly-unsaturated fat content] vegetable oils [there, fixed.]
- high fructose corn syrup
- unfermented soy
- flavor enhancers, preservatives and other additives
Unsurprisingly, this is the bulk of the ingredient list of most processed food.

As for every other thing out there, try it for yourself. Your body is far better at telling you what it likes than a single, possibly incomplete, erroneous or biased study. Add or eliminate a food group for a couple of weeks and look for these signs:
- Do you sleep better or worse?
- Is your digestion better (no gas, no bloating, smooth solid dark brown stools, no foul smell, easy wiping) or worse?
- Is your body temperature higher? And does it rise over the course of a meal?
- If you lower your calories, do you drop mainly bodyfat? Or does your body temperature/energy/sleep quality/muscle mass drop while your fat mass stays relatively constant?
- If you raise your calories, do you gain energy/sleep quality/body temperature/muscle mass together with fat or do you simply get fatter without anything else?

My shit doesn't stink, measure temperature before/after meal, own DEXA scan. Got it. And nothing else affects any of this either.

[RBerkley]

White rice is very processed & it spikes blood sugar (that's what my doctor told me), but sugary drinks is considered way worse because that sugar directly spikes blood sugar, while refined carbohydrates, while still affecting blood sugar, is considered lesser of an evil than gulping down a can of 40 gram sugar soda.

I was also told that fruits should need to limited when someone is diagnosed in "Pre-Diabetes".

Diabetes is very common in the Westernized society because of not only white rice. White bread, sugary drinks, pastries, corn syrup, GMO sugar---They all contribute to Diabetes PLUS Fatty Liver Disease.

You can even be as thin & muscular like Roosh, even young like 15 or 16 &, yet Diabetes & Fatty Liver disease will come for you. That is the scary part.

But why does God not punish Trigglypuff & those fat feminazis with Fatty Liver, Diabetes & other chronic ailments? Feminazis get so fat that Dr. Oz vilifies Roosh on his TV show.

Diabetes is incurable & increases the risk of stroke, heart disease, foot amputations, nerve damage within 30-50 years from diagnosis, even sooner, but those fat feminazis look & act healthy that they march up and down the street to attack Roosh when thousands of Asians & Orientals are in motor scooters because their feet were infected from Diabetes Foot which leads to an amputated foot.

[Dream Medicine]

MOVSM,

I thank you for this thought-provoking thread, and appreciate your inclusion of multiple sources in backing up a number of your claims.

(03-08-2017 08:49 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  

Dr. Robert Lustig... agrees that there is no difference in the effect sugar and HFCS has on the body... He explains it in his now infamous video.

This video looks interesting. I will check it out.

==========================================================

For those who are interested,

I've included the link to the full paper by Hu and colleagues (2012) "White rice consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis and systematic review", as cited in the OP's Straits Times article (2016), along with a related article also published by the Straits Times, entitled 'Asians more at risk of diabetes than Caucasians'.

I have also observed the following from a glance at the sources:

{1} The Straits Times' headline "Diabetes: The rice you eat is worse than sugary drinks" does not reflect the conclusions drawn from the paper by Hu and colleagues, which is the major source used in the main text of the Straits Times' article. The paper by Hu and colleagues does not make a direct comparison of rice and sugary drinks on diabetes outcomes.

Rather, their headline seems to reflect a stated comparison of GI, as highlighted in the accompanying infographic. While the infographic itself includes citation of another source, the 'Temasek Polytechnic's Glycemic Index Research Unit (GIRU)', I couldn't find a reference to the relative effects of white rice vs sugary beverages on diabetes/obesity on the GIRU page.

Still... I was pleased by their apparently low-GI model:



{2} The authors, and those of the secondary Straits Times article noted above, conclude that genetics are a significant factor in contributing to variance in the relationship between rice consumption and diabetes.

{3} For further, peer-based feedback on the article by Hu and colleagues, see the tab 'responses'. Some other critics of the Straits Times' article include those posted on Men's Health and the Online Citizen.

{4} Here are the conclusions from their article -

Hu, E. A., Pan, A., Malik, V., and Sun, Q Wrote:

In summary, this meta-analysis suggests that higher white rice intake is associated with a significantly elevated risk of type 2 diabetes, especially among Asian populations.

The recent transition in nutrition characterised by dramatically decreased physical activity levels and much improved security and variety of food has led to increased prevalence of obesity and insulin resistance in Asian countries.

Although rice has been a staple food in Asian populations for thousands of years, this transition may render Asian populations more susceptible to the adverse effects of high intakes of white rice, as well as other sources of refined carbohydrates such as pastries, white bread, and sugar sweetened beverages.

In addition, the dose-response relations indicate that even for Western populations with typically low intake levels, relatively high white rice consumption may still modestly increase risk of diabetes.

[stugatz]

Is there a nutritional difference between actual white rice and minute rice - as in, is minute rice far worse for you? I usually use minute rice to deep-clean my coffee grinder (really!), but occasionally eat the stuff for a snack on those days.

I was wondering, also, what counted as "white rice". I don't know if white-ish types of rice like basmati rice or jasmine rice are close enough to count, or if I should just stick to brown rice and wild rice.