In the Wheat Belly lifestyle, we avoid all wheat and grains.
But the hazards of grain consumption lie on a spectrum. Products made from modern high-yield semi-dwarf wheat are at the worst end of the spectrum, while rice is at the least harmful end.
But should we interpret this to mean that rice is benign and healthy?
Bad news huh? At least for me. I love rice. Let´s forget about the arsenium, I´m really curious about the glycemic index, all asians eat rice and they are generally not fat (maybe because of genetics) but they are also societies with people living very long.
Greetings!!
Sonnia wrote: «Let’s forget about the arsenium,…»
Well, there’s the WGA as well.
re: «…I’m really curious about the glycemic index,…»
The WB/Undoctored program doesn’t find GI (or GL: glycemic load) to be all that useful, although a GI of zero is usually OK. What we’re really interested is the actual blood sugar, pre-meal, and then 30-60 minutes after the start of the meal. Without a meter handy, a reasonable proxy for that is net carb (total_carb minus fiber_carb).
Just looking at cooked wild brown rice on one of the reference sites, it’s 21% net carb. For a one cup portion size, that would be 40 grams of net carb, or 80% of the whole day’s budget for net carbs.
re: «…all asians eat rice and they are generally not fat…»
Do the stereotypes match reality on that?
re: «…maybe because of genetics…»
If they emigrate to the US, and adopt a Standard American Diet, their health outcomes collapse to those here. If there’s a genetic factor, it’s not helping them.
re: «…but they are also societies with people living very long.»
There are other factors involved that compensate for the rice.
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
Bob:
All good points. Thank You for posting these facts. I learn so much from this blog at 99% of the time here. The 1% margin is things I already know about.
In the first paragraph, you mention “regional geology”. Would that be related to the fact that the roots of rice plants draw up arsenic from the soil? I read about this fact somewhere on the Internet, but can’t recall where I saw this fact.
Wow! Didn’t know that cocoa also pulls up a dangerous substance as well. There go the chocolate chips & anything else made from cocoa!
Makes people wonder if anything is safe to consume. I’m also beginning to wonder if these dangerous substances are in the ground due to air pollution? Eventually, anything in the air does drop down to the soil, as does rain, which also can be contaminated as well.
Scary thoughts here.
Sandra
Sandra wrote: «…you mention “regional geology”. Would that be related to the fact that the roots of rice plants draw up arsenic from the soil?»
As I understand it, rice loves to pull inorganic As out of the soil. How that As got there is a separate question. It might be local or regional natural geology, or it might be legacy pesticides (including: decades before the current operation got its Organic certification).
re: «Didn’t know that cocoa also pulls up a dangerous substance as well. There go the chocolate chips & anything else made from cocoa!»
My impression was that this was something of a surprise (to people outside the industry, anyway). It looked to me like ConsumerLab decided to test chocolates for flavanols a few years ago, and happened to test them for heavy metals as well — eye opener. Because we have no credible US standards for this problem, and lips are zipped in the industry, CL is your best bet for picking a low-CD, low-Pb choc. In that case, it appears to be more case of legacy pesticides.
re: «Makes people wonder if anything is safe to consume.»
Indeed, but it’s a pick-your-battles matter (yet even that presumes that people are aware that they are in a battle). For adults, the Undoctored and 2014+ Wheat Belly program core may be 90% of the battle. As further strategies are identified, they are added (gut flora in 2014, for example). Beyond that, we exploit our options opportunistically.
re: «I’m also beginning to wonder if these dangerous substances are in the ground due to air pollution?»
That seems to be the case for mercury (Hg) in seafood, but the rice and cacao situations don’t appear to be air-sourced. The Hg situation, by the way, is likely why the program advice on DHA & EPA is to get it from a high quality (refined) fish oil, and not actual fish.
re: «Scary thoughts here.»
ConsumerLab originally focused on testing supplements. They are now expanding their testing of actual foods. They are doing the job people mistakenly assume the FDA is doing.
The situation with rice is simple: there’s no reason to consume it in the first place, so don’t.
With cacao products, it’s a balance of benefits vs. hazards, and it depends on where you live. The EU just got a Cd standard in January 2019, and most of the products CL tested in 2017 would fail it. Either stick to tested clean products or minimize consumption.
And keep relative priorities in mind. For example, I wonder if people drinking municipal water treated with chloramine have a larger problem to address first.
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
Interestingly enough, there are heavy metal limits on animal feed, just not for humans. It is a sad state of affairs. The amount of heavy metals coming in from outside the US plus the amount that is in produce from the US is NOT controlled at all. I have seen terribly high Cd levels in California as well as arsenic, both in the water and in the soil.
What about flaxseed flour?
Alain wrote: «What about flaxseed flour?»
Golden is golden.☺
see: Wheat Belly-safe flours
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
On the As (arsenic) problem, critics have been raising concern for a couple of decades now, and so far there is still no market-wide standard for the US. The FDA mooted a proposed rule in 2016, which has now apparently floated up to Draft Guidance status, but…
• It’s only for “infant cereal”, so adult cereals, and any other rice products are still random risks (other than apple juice, which is a much lower 10 ppb).
• The 100 ppb limit may not be sufficiently low for infants.
• Even when this becomes a rule, it takes years before all new production is compliant.
This is about inorganic arsenic, which can arise from regional geology, or historical pesticide application. Buying “organic” rice does not protect you on this at all for geological As, nor for As applied prior to the organic quarantine period. Buying imported may also not protect you on this, as the Chinese limits for As are higher than 100 ppb. Price and strain don’t protect you.
Grower claims and certified analysis statements might be useful, but I have yet to see any published. As there is no case for consuming rice, the easy solution is to simply not consume it, nor any processed food-like substances containing it. Also avoid supplements and medications using rice flour as filler if you have any options (and too often, you don’t, because all the other choices have more serious problems).
If rice gets a credible market-wide standard for As contamination, it may well vanish as a cheap calorie, and survive only as a very expensive luxury carb.
Chocolate/cacao/cocoa has a similar problem by the way. If credible standards for Cd (cadmium) and Pb (lead) are ever enacted, that industry will likewise collapse. I’m only sort of surprised that the brands and products “Approved” by ConsumerLab testing don’t promote their status and raise their prices. That they don’t might be explained as: nobody in the industry wants say anything about this.
I’m not even sure that the Prop.65 lawsuit in California, which settled a year ago, has even resulted in warnings on the candy bars yet. Seen in one press report during that action: “Beckman added that no lead or cadmium was added to the cocoa or chocolate products during processing and manufacturing.” They might think that’s fooling someone, but again, the problem is what the trees are pulling out of the soil.
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
Good points, Bob, thanks