Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 5:11 PM, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote: > Probably but I suspect the nutrient benefits of many alcoholic > beverages outside of the alcohol itself is negligible on the one hand, > and cumulative on the other (like red wine). I should have said " nutrient benefits of many MODERN alcoholic beverages " and noted there is quite a bit of fruitful research on craft breweries (beer) and boutique wineries on their nutritional benefits, while still being **relatively** small in our overall diet but cumulative and thus helpful over time. I know I went through a time when the type of beer I was drinking was clearly providing something I was missing in my diet. I never quite figured out what is was, and Heidi provided a suggestion that I don't remember, but it was very interesting -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 aaaah, Heidi - anyone know what she's up to these days and how she's doing? Not sure how long I've been in this group......4 years?.....and she was one of the people I remember who was quite active and quite informative. Nanette L. Re: Re: Preparing grains On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 5:11 PM, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote: > Probably but I suspect the nutrient benefits of many alcoholic > beverages outside of the alcohol itself is negligible on the one hand, > and cumulative on the other (like red wine). I should have said " nutrient benefits of many MODERN alcoholic beverages " and noted there is quite a bit of fruitful research on craft breweries (beer) and boutique wineries on their nutritional benefits, while still being **relatively** small in our overall diet but cumulative and thus helpful over time. I know I went through a time when the type of beer I was drinking was clearly providing something I was missing in my diet. I never quite figured out what is was, and Heidi provided a suggestion that I don't remember, but it was very interesting -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 --- <slethnobotanist@...> wrote: > Lots of beers are de facto organic, but aren't labeled as such. You > have to ask to know for sure. , I found a list of organic, unpasteurized, and unfiltered beers: Wolaver's – all beers Lamar Street – Whole Foods label (brewed by Goose Island) Bison – all beers Dogfish Head (organic when ingredients available) Fish Brewery Company – Fish Tale Ales Lakefront Brewery – Organic ESB Brooklyn - (organic when ingredients are available) Pinkus – all beers s - s Organic Ale Wychwood – Scarecrow Ale I was happy to see listed the Lamar Street that I've been drinking. http://www.bestnaturalfoods.com/newsletter/organic_beer.html ========================================== Big Beer pasteurizes beers after bottling to prevent microbes from causing " off " flavors. These microbes, however, do not cause illness. Craft brewers do not typically pasteurize, and while there is little evidence to support any claims, I expect that research will ultimately reveal that unpasteurized " live " beers are nutritionally superior to pasteurized beers. The major difference between Big Beer and craft brewers, according to Quinn, extends beyond pasteurization to filtration. He says, " The big guys filter their beer to remove yeast and protein that causes the beer to cloud at lower temps, called chill haze. " But filtering the yeast removes most of the B vitamins – think brewer's yeast – and other nutrients like chromium, evidence that unfiltered beers are more nutritious. ========================================== I'll take all the nutrients I can get > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide > > Yeah but it is temperature dependent, and I'm suspicious of the > carcinogen argument, just because most of the carcinogens we are > exposed to are naturally occurring anyway. Which suggests to me the > body is more than capable of handling them in tolerable doses. I'm also not sure what happens to acrylamide during digestion. If it's broken down into harmless components, it doesn't matter how much is in the food. And yes, there's certainly no lack of carcinogens around us and in us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 > I just wonder how much fermentation actually goes on when bread is > left out for two weeks. The bread is sterilized in the oven, and then > the crust basically seals the inside, partially anyway. Sounds like something we can ask Bezian. I think you may have answered the question yourself and I vaguely recall a long ago post to that effect. Clearly, at least from the anecdotal evidence, something is going on. I found an old blog by him that looks like it hasn't been updated for a long time but I maybe I can get a hold of some of his brochures. >>> Price put a premium on freshly grinding grains, but he didn't seem to >>> think it very important to ferment them, since the biscuits he used in >>> his tooth decay reversal program for his patients were freshly ground >>> but not soaked. > >> Funny I was just writing about that in another post. Personally I >> think this is what in legal terms is known as " dicta " , i.e. >> information that is just there with no real bearing on the issue. It >> may not have adversely affected his treatment of tooth decay in young >> children, but I will side with the Swiss in terms of how to eat grains >> as a way of life. > > Price reported that some grains were fermented in some societies and > not others. For example, I'm pretty sure he wrote this about taro > root, without drawing any conclusions about the superiority of either > method. Unless I'm missing something, taro isn't a grain. I'm having a hard time remembering any grains that weren't fermented or otherwise treated, although there may have been some. > So, what does it mean if some of these groups fermented and > others didn't? Does the presence of fermentation automatically > achieve significance, despite contrary observations? I don't consider Price's studies in Cleveland contrary evidence because they strike me as too short. Perhaps fresh grains don't pose a problem to dental health short term, but maybe long term they do, and maybe they don't even cause dental problems but problems in other areas. Sir McCarrison found it was quite possible for a group to consume a nutritionally poor diet high in refined grains (rice to be exact) and have great dental health, while being beset by a host of other problems. Why don't you list the fermented versus unfermented groups so we can take a closer look. This would be helpful also because the official WAPF position is that grains should be treated in some manner before cooking. -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 , > I found a list of organic, unpasteurized, and unfiltered beers: > Wolaver's – all beers > Lamar Street – Whole Foods label (brewed by Goose Island) > Bison – all beers > Dogfish Head (organic when ingredients available) > Fish Brewery Company – Fish Tale Ales > Lakefront Brewery – Organic ESB > Brooklyn - (organic when ingredients are available) > Pinkus – all beers > s - s Organic Ale > Wychwood – Scarecrow Ale > > I was happy to see listed the Lamar Street that I've been drinking. > > http://www.bestnaturalfoods.com/newsletter/organic_beer.html Some of those beers, while organic, are pretty conventional taste wise IMO. While some of the breweries mentioned have some outstanding beers in their stable, like DogFish Head and Pinkus, both which show up regularly in my frig. > ========================================== > Big Beer pasteurizes beers after bottling to prevent microbes from > causing " off " flavors. These microbes, however, do not cause illness. > Craft brewers do not typically pasteurize, and while there is little > evidence to support any claims, I expect that research will ultimately > reveal that unpasteurized " live " beers are nutritionally superior to > pasteurized beers. The major difference between Big Beer and craft > brewers, according to Quinn, extends beyond pasteurization to > filtration. He says, " The big guys filter their beer to remove yeast > and protein that causes the beer to cloud at lower temps, called chill > haze. " But filtering the yeast removes most of the B vitamins – think > brewer's yeast – and other nutrients like chromium, evidence that > unfiltered beers are more nutritious. > ========================================== > > I'll take all the nutrients I can get LOL! I do not like unpasteurized beers (and I prefer them unfiltered). It really changes the taste and mouth feel and is totally unnecessary. Yes they require more care but whatever, to each his own <weg> My favorite beers are cask conditioned ales where pasteurization is not an issue and the full flavor of the beer is allowed to develop. The Power in the Cask: Old Ways, New Beer http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/dining/24pour.html Nothing nicer than going to a great pub and taking home a nice growler of cask conditioned or nitro-tapped ale to consume over a few day period (cheaper too). http://beeradvocate.com/articles/384 http://www.allaboutbeer.com/collect/24.3-growlers.html -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 , >> I found a list of organic, unpasteurized, and unfiltered beers: >> Wolaver's – all beers >> Lamar Street – Whole Foods label (brewed by Goose Island) >> Bison – all beers >> Dogfish Head (organic when ingredients available) >> Fish Brewery Company – Fish Tale Ales >> Lakefront Brewery – Organic ESB >> Brooklyn - (organic when ingredients are available) >> Pinkus – all beers >> s - s Organic Ale >> Wychwood – Scarecrow Ale Just to let you know, for the weight loss tip and possibly the running tip, DogFish Head's Immortal Ale or Imperial Pilsner (hard to drink a regular pilsner after one of these) will do just fine. Both of them are seasonal offerings so it will take a little planning on your part <bweg> http://www.dogfish.com/ -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 Then what is it? On Jan 23, 2009, at 10:10 PM, wrote: > I also forgot to ask whether buckwheat would be an acceptable food? > buckwheat is not a grain, right? > > thanks, Not it is not. Parashis artpages@... artpagesonline.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 Isn't the 2 weeks thing AFTER the bread is baked? On Jan 23, 2009, at 10:14 PM, Lana Gibbons wrote: I've been baking bread for many years, but most of them with plain yeast. On occasion I've used out of date yeast by mistake, and ended up raising the loaf for 2 days to get it lofty enough. So I can't help to wonder if maybe the bacteria in their sourdough produced so little CO2 that it required a 2 week ferment to become properly raised. Not to say that the long fermentation isn't a benefit, just suggesting that maybe they were doing it for texture reasons instead of health reasons and they got some unintended good effects from it. Parashis artpages@... artpagesonline.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 From my knowledge of bread...the gluten would break down within 2 weeks of fermenting, meaning that the bread would rise and then fall again because its gluten framwork would break down. So unless they fermented at very low temperatures (40-50F) I really am not sure that they fermented it for two weeks. I know there are studies proving that sourdough bread is the most digestible around 10 days after being cooked...sitting at room temperature. - > > I've been baking bread for many years, but most of them with plain > yeast. > On occasion I've used out of date yeast by mistake, and ended up > raising > the loaf for 2 days to get it lofty enough. So I can't help to wonder > if > maybe the bacteria in their sourdough produced so little CO2 that it > required a 2 week ferment to become properly raised. Not to say that > the > long fermentation isn't a benefit, just suggesting that maybe they were > doing it for texture reasons instead of health reasons and they got some > unintended good effects from it. > Parashis > artpages@... > > artpagesonline.com > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 --- <slethnobotanist@...> wrote: > Just to let you know, for the weight loss tip and possibly the > running tip, DogFish Head's Immortal Ale or Imperial Pilsner (hard > to drink a regular pilsner after one of these) will do just fine. > Both of them are seasonal offerings so it will take a little > planning on your part <bweg> > http://www.dogfish.com/ , With a brand name like Dogfish Head, a beer called Immortal Ale has got to be good! I'd love to try some. If we ever drive up to see my wife's family at Long Island, I'll have to make a detour to Rehoboth Beach, Delaware for some seafood and Immortal Ale. I'll be sure and let you know so you can join us for some free dinner and ale there. If you can't make it there, let me know whenever you're in the Austin area and I'll treat you to some local beer of your choice I found out (512) Brewing Company just went organic, but I haven't tried them yet: http://www.512brewing.com/index2.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 , > , I like organic ale. It's fermented grains and has a long > traditional history. The only organic beer I've seen so far here in > Austin is Lamar Street organic pale ale from the Goose Island Beer > Company in Chicago, which I can get at Whole Foods. I only drink a > few beers on weekends, since alcohol is potentially addicting. But I > like the rich flavor of ale. I suspect it's better in nutrients than > most other forms of alcohol. Maybe Guinness will make an organic ale > one of these days My favorite is Peak Organic. My favorite of theirs is their pale ale, although they have a few different variety ales that are also good. They are from Maine. In the last year or two, they have been spreading through MA and CT and are now avaiable at many liquor stores that do not specialize in organic. Perhaps they will make their way to TX at one point. >> So would potatoes fried in lard or butter be more acceptable than a >> grain dish? > Frying potatoes creates acrilamide, which is a suspect carcinogen that > forms when foods with protein and sugar are exposed to high heat. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide Sugar is not necessary. High-heat cooking of meat makes just as much acrylamide, but it goes unnoticed in the typical analysis because it reacts with the carnitine, destroying the carnitine in the process. Carnosine is the substance in meat that is converted to acryalmide in the absence of sugar, so both the carnosine and carnitine are destroyed while the potent toxin N-methylacrylamide is left behind: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/The_Cholesterol_Times-Issue-10.html#acryla\ mide > So, it's probably healthier to eat baked or boiled potatoes with lots > of butter and sour cream. Baking creates acrylamide, but boiling doesn't. The healthiest way to eat potatoes, I suspect, is to boil them in soups so that the nutrients do not leach out in the water. > A few people may have problems with the > glycoalkaloid poisons in potatoes, though most people seem to tolerate > the small amounts in just one or two potatoes. Most modern potatoes > have been bred to reduce the amounts of glycoalkaloids, which taste > bitter. I've read that it's best to cut out the eyes of the potatoes > to minimize the bad stuff and peeling the potato may further reduce > the nasties. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycoalkaloid > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solanine To minimize, the potatoes should be peeled, and should be thrown out if they turn green or start sprouting. They should be kept out of light, not stored in plastic bags sitting in an open space exposed to bright fluorescent lights like at the grocery store. Buying the ones in the paper bags would be smartest. The concentration in the peel and just under it is 10 times the concentration in the rest of the potato. Traditional preparation of potatoes involves peeling them for the less bitter varieties and much more extensive processing involving freeze-drying, crushing, and extended leaching for the more bitter varieties. > It's interesting that deep-frying apparently reduces the > glycoalkaloids by moving them into the frying fat, so that may be a > trade-off with the acrilamide. > Maybe potatoes should be fermented too Or just fresh, peeled, and boiled in a soup. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 , > , I like organic ale. It's fermented grains and has a long > traditional history. The only organic beer I've seen so far here in > Austin is Lamar Street organic pale ale from the Goose Island Beer > Company in Chicago, which I can get at Whole Foods. I only drink a > few beers on weekends, since alcohol is potentially addicting. But I > like the rich flavor of ale. I suspect it's better in nutrients than > most other forms of alcohol. Maybe Guinness will make an organic ale > one of these days My favorite is Peak Organic. My favorite of theirs is their pale ale, although they have a few different variety ales that are also good. They are from Maine. In the last year or two, they have been spreading through MA and CT and are now avaiable at many liquor stores that do not specialize in organic. Perhaps they will make their way to TX at one point. >> So would potatoes fried in lard or butter be more acceptable than a >> grain dish? > Frying potatoes creates acrilamide, which is a suspect carcinogen that > forms when foods with protein and sugar are exposed to high heat. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylamide Sugar is not necessary. High-heat cooking of meat makes just as much acrylamide, but it goes unnoticed in the typical analysis because it reacts with the carnitine, destroying the carnitine in the process. Carnosine is the substance in meat that is converted to acryalmide in the absence of sugar, so both the carnosine and carnitine are destroyed while the potent toxin N-methylacrylamide is left behind: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/The_Cholesterol_Times-Issue-10.html#acryla\ mide > So, it's probably healthier to eat baked or boiled potatoes with lots > of butter and sour cream. Baking creates acrylamide, but boiling doesn't. The healthiest way to eat potatoes, I suspect, is to boil them in soups so that the nutrients do not leach out in the water. > A few people may have problems with the > glycoalkaloid poisons in potatoes, though most people seem to tolerate > the small amounts in just one or two potatoes. Most modern potatoes > have been bred to reduce the amounts of glycoalkaloids, which taste > bitter. I've read that it's best to cut out the eyes of the potatoes > to minimize the bad stuff and peeling the potato may further reduce > the nasties. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycoalkaloid > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solanine To minimize, the potatoes should be peeled, and should be thrown out if they turn green or start sprouting. They should be kept out of light, not stored in plastic bags sitting in an open space exposed to bright fluorescent lights like at the grocery store. Buying the ones in the paper bags would be smartest. The concentration in the peel and just under it is 10 times the concentration in the rest of the potato. Traditional preparation of potatoes involves peeling them for the less bitter varieties and much more extensive processing involving freeze-drying, crushing, and extended leaching for the more bitter varieties. > It's interesting that deep-frying apparently reduces the > glycoalkaloids by moving them into the frying fat, so that may be a > trade-off with the acrilamide. > Maybe potatoes should be fermented too Or just fresh, peeled, and boiled in a soup. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 , > from what I've read, the main benefits from grinding fresh > grain are less oxidation of the PUFA and more phytase. I'm not sure > if the phytase is lost simply with the aging of the grains or if > grinding it to flour accelerates the loss. You also lose vitamin E and some B vitamins. If you have more phytase when freshly ground, which I suppose could be because oxidation of PUFA leads to subsequent oxidation of proteins, that it makes very much sense that yeast rising would be much more effective in neutralizing the phytate in freshly ground grain than in pre-ground flour. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 , >> I just wonder how much fermentation actually goes on when bread is >> left out for two weeks. The bread is sterilized in the oven, and then >> the crust basically seals the inside, partially anyway. > Sounds like something we can ask Bezian. I think you may have answered > the question yourself and I vaguely recall a long ago post to that > effect. Clearly, at least from the anecdotal evidence, something is > going on. I found an old blog by him that looks like it hasn't been > updated for a long time but I maybe I can get a hold of some of his > brochures. Sure, *something* happens, but that doesn't mean that something dietetically important happens, and the fact that fermentation would be inconsistent, extremely limited, and probably largely restricted to the surface makes me skeptical of its dietetic importance. >> Price reported that some grains were fermented in some societies and >> not others. For example, I'm pretty sure he wrote this about taro >> root, without drawing any conclusions about the superiority of either >> method. > Unless I'm missing something, taro isn't a grain. I'm having a hard > time remembering any grains that weren't fermented or otherwise > treated, although there may have been some. It's not a grain. The point is about the diversity of preparation methods among the groups Price studied. If taro was fermented in by one group but not by another, that suggests that its fermentation may not have been that important, or at least not essential. He observed rye consumption in one group. Had he observed it in two groups, would he have found a similar diversity as he found with taro? The fact that the Swiss had this particular practice does not ipso facto mean it was dietetically important, certain not essential. They did not impress upon Price the essentiality or even value of this practice as they impressed upon him the value of their orange butter or that other groups impressed upon him the importance of liver, shellfish, or certain anti-goitrogenic plant ashes. There are groups that extensively process millet through fermentation, leaching, and cooking. One could observe this and from it assume that millet must be ferm fermented, leached, and cooked to be rendered healthy, but one would be wrong. The fermentation and cooking both dramatically increase the food's goitrogenicity. The people who practice this suffer from widespread goiter. Parts of the region where they eat more wheat and animal protein and less millet have much less goiter. Animal experiments suggest that the least goitrogenic way to eat millet is by eating it raw and unprocessed. Whether that has its own problems, I have no idea. But the point is that just because something is traditional doesn't mean it is valuable or even not harmful. It means nothing more than that it is traditional. One must look at further evidence, like whether those groups were healthy, whether they considered the traditional food to be of importance to their health if so, and whether one can generate corroborative evidence of those beliefs if they exist. >> So, what does it mean if some of these groups fermented and >> others didn't? Does the presence of fermentation automatically >> achieve significance, despite contrary observations? > I don't consider Price's studies in Cleveland contrary evidence > because they strike me as too short. Perhaps fresh grains don't pose a > problem to dental health short term, but maybe long term they do, and > maybe they don't even cause dental problems but problems in other > areas. Sir McCarrison found it was quite possible for a group > to consume a nutritionally poor diet high in refined grains (rice to > be exact) and have great dental health, while being beset by a host of > other problems. He reversed other problems, like failing intelligence, behavior, seizures, and so on, with this diet. But my point was that after studying the Swiss directly and talking to them extensively, Price was not impressed by the importance of their " fermentation " of the bread enough to include it in his own program, whereas he was very impressed by their use of orange butter enough to go to great lengths to procure butter from distant locations and concentrate its nutrients. Price's *opinion* of course cannot be considered conclusive evidence of anything, but one would think that Price would have gotten a sense of how essential the *Swiss* considered this practice and that this sense would have influenced his opinion of how important it was. > Why don't you list the fermented versus unfermented groups so we can > take a closer look. This would be helpful also because the official > WAPF position is that grains should be treated in some manner before > cooking. Price only looked at one group consuming rye and one group consuming oats. I think if we are to make that comparison, we'd have to go outside of Price, and I don't have that data, at least right now anyway. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 , > From my knowledge of bread...the gluten would break down within 2 > weeks of fermenting, meaning that the bread would rise and then fall > again because its gluten framwork would break down. So unless they > fermented at very low temperatures (40-50F) I really am not sure that > they fermented it for two weeks. I know there are studies proving > that sourdough bread is the most digestible around 10 days after being > cooked...sitting at room temperature. Well two weeks is the time that was observed, but 10 days would be fine by me. You ought to post those studies since doesn't think much can happen after baking :-) -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 , > With a brand name like Dogfish Head, a beer called Immortal Ale has > got to be good! I'd love to try some. Yeah its good stuff. I bet its even better from the tap. > If we ever drive up to see my > wife's family at Long Island, I'll have to make a detour to Rehoboth > Beach, Delaware for some seafood and Immortal Ale. I'll be sure and > let you know so you can join us for some free dinner and ale there. LOL! I will be on the east coast a few times this year, so ya never know :-) > If you can't make it there, let me know whenever you're in the Austin > area and I'll treat you to some local beer of your choice Or maybe you might make it to the conference in Chicago this year <g> -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 > Sure, *something* happens, but that doesn't mean that something > dietetically important happens, and the fact that fermentation would > be inconsistent, extremely limited, and probably largely restricted to > the surface makes me skeptical of its dietetic importance. Well to borrow a page from Bruce, that is an ad hoc theory you got going there. It is just speculative on your part because at the moment you don't know the details of what is going on, if anything. When I said something happens I was referring to the anecdotal evidence that I have spread throughout this thread of those who have self-professed problems with wheat/gluten and then consuming two week fermented bread with no apparent problems. You are certainly welcome to your skepticism but that is about it at this point. >>> Price reported that some grains were fermented in some societies and >>> not others. For example, I'm pretty sure he wrote this about taro >>> root, without drawing any conclusions about the superiority of either >>> method. > >> Unless I'm missing something, taro isn't a grain. I'm having a hard >> time remembering any grains that weren't fermented or otherwise >> treated, although there may have been some. > > It's not a grain. The point is about the diversity of preparation > methods among the groups Price studied. No the point is about the preparation of grains among Price's groups and beyond, thus the title of this thread. It is not about the diversity of food preparation of meat and other foods. > If taro was fermented in by > one group but not by another, that suggests that its fermentation may > not have been that important, or at least not essential. Again taro is not a grain, and I don't know what groups did comparatively with its preparation. It doesn't matter in this thread because it doesn't speak to the point of grain preparation, although it may be an important point to raise in the bigger picture. I am perfect willing to accept there is a diversity of food preparation methods among Price's groups that may have absolutely nothing to do with nutrition but may just be a matter or personal preference or some other factor. Whether that is true of grains or not you haven't demonstrated. The prima facie evidence is that among Price Group's and beyond it is either prepared grains or no grains for nutritional reasons. > He observed > rye consumption in one group. Was the rye used fresh or prepared in some special way? This is the WAPF answer to that question: http://www.westonaprice.org/moderndiseases/gluten-intolerance.html Which again highlights the fact that the WAPF position is that all grains should be treated in some way before cooking and consuming. There isn't a nod at all to Weston Price's use of fresh grains with children who had dental decay in his clinic. Well somebody is wrong here or maybe both ways work, or maybe as you suggest the two week fermentation has nothing to with nutrition and a simple quick soak is enough. > Had he observed it in two groups, would > he have found a similar diversity as he found with taro? It is irrelevant for two reasons. One, taro is not a grain. Two, AFAIK, Price didn't make such observations. > The fact that the Swiss had this particular practice does not ipso > facto mean it was dietetically important, certain not essential. Now you are putting words in my mouth. I never said the Swiss practice made it ipso facto important. In fact I have gone out of my way, more so than most, throughout my time on these lists, to suggest that because a group did a certain thing, or even that Price stressed its importance, meant that it was ipso facto of dietetic importance. >They > did not impress upon Price the essentiality or even value of this > practice as they impressed upon him the value of their orange butter > or that other groups impressed upon him the importance of liver, > shellfish, or certain anti-goitrogenic plant ashes. Or it could be that for whatever reason Price did not record the value of this practice. His use of fresh grains and not fermented grains does not ipso facto reduce the dietary significance of prepared grains. > There are groups that extensively process millet through fermentation, > leaching, and cooking. One could observe this and from it assume that > millet must be ferm fermented, leached, and cooked to be rendered > healthy, but one would be wrong. The fermentation and cooking both > dramatically increase the food's goitrogenicity. The people who > practice this suffer from widespread goiter. Parts of the region > where they eat more wheat and animal protein and less millet have much > less goiter. Animal experiments suggest that the least goitrogenic > way to eat millet is by eating it raw and unprocessed. Whether that > has its own problems, I have no idea. Right. All this suggests to me, without examining the details, is that not every thing found in nature is necessarily suitable for food, and that groups by virtue of tradition don't always get it right, which despite your commentary below I have never doubted. Nor do I know how traditional the practice you mentioned above actually is, and whether a further study might shed some light on a more ancient dietary practice that countered the effects of the millet or maybe millet wasn't consumed at all. > But the point is that just > because something is traditional doesn't mean it is valuable or even > not harmful. It means nothing more than that it is traditional. Do you really think I have a problem with this argument?? > One > must look at further evidence, like whether those groups were healthy, > whether they considered the traditional food to be of importance to > their health if so, and whether one can generate corroborative > evidence of those beliefs if they exist. Really, I didn't know that :-) >>> So, what does it mean if some of these groups fermented and >>> others didn't? Does the presence of fermentation automatically >>> achieve significance, despite contrary observations? > >> I don't consider Price's studies in Cleveland contrary evidence >> because they strike me as too short. Perhaps fresh grains don't pose a >> problem to dental health short term, but maybe long term they do, and >> maybe they don't even cause dental problems but problems in other >> areas. Sir McCarrison found it was quite possible for a group >> to consume a nutritionally poor diet high in refined grains (rice to >> be exact) and have great dental health, while being beset by a host of >> other problems. > > He reversed other problems, like failing intelligence, behavior, > seizures, and so on, with this diet. I don't know that we are talking about the same Indian group that McCarrison observed, who were suffering from extensive malnutrition as a result of their largely white rice diet. No matter, my point still stands. Because Price had success reversing tooth decay among children while including fresh grains in the diet doesn't tell us anything about the impact of unprepared fresh grains on the long term health of those children simply by an examination of their teeth. > But my point was that after > studying the Swiss directly and talking to them extensively, Price was > not impressed by the importance of their " fermentation " of the bread > enough to include it in his own program, whereas he was very impressed > by their use of orange butter enough to go to great lengths to procure > butter from distant locations and concentrate its nutrients. Price's > *opinion* of course cannot be considered conclusive evidence of > anything, but one would think that Price would have gotten a sense of > how essential the *Swiss* considered this practice and that this sense > would have influenced his opinion of how important it was. Well he could have just as easily missed it, since the body of evidence beyond Price seems to suggest grain preparation, and not just freshness, is important. Price's observations, as you noted, aren't infallible at every point, and this may be one of those points. And the WAPF seems to take a contrary view to Price on this, so it does need to be flushed out. Also I don't recall Price writing of the necessity of fresh grains (please correct me if I am wrong), which suggest to me that this whole issue, for whatever reason, was simply not on his radar screen. >> Why don't you list the fermented versus unfermented groups so we can >> take a closer look. This would be helpful also because the official >> WAPF position is that grains should be treated in some manner before >> cooking. > > Price only looked at one group consuming rye and one group consuming > oats. I think if we are to make that comparison, we'd have to go > outside of Price, and I don't have that data, at least right now > anyway. Given the paucity of his observations of grain eaters, that may also further explain his why this may be an issue he simply whiffed on. -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2009 Report Share Posted January 25, 2009 On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 3:31 PM, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote: > Now you are putting words in my mouth. I never said the Swiss practice > made it ipso facto important. In fact I have gone out of my way, more > so than most, throughout my time on these lists, to suggest that > because a group did a certain thing, or even that Price stressed its > importance, meant that it was ipso facto of dietetic importance. That should read " did NOT mean that it was ipso facto of dietetic importance. " -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 3:40 PM, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote: >> Now you are putting words in my mouth. I never said the Swiss practice >> made it ipso facto important. In fact I have gone out of my way, more >> so than most, throughout my time on these lists, to suggest that >> because a group did a certain thing, or even that Price stressed its >> importance, meant that it was ipso facto of dietetic importance. > > That should read " did NOT mean that it was ipso facto of dietetic importance. " I should also note that when I went to the WAPF conference 5 years ago, I sat in a seminar where Sally put great emphasis on the two week fermentation period by the Swiss as a possible answer to the problems some people in the WAPF world were having with grains. This may have been a way to deflect some of the criticism, which I think was fairly new at the time, about WAPF ignoring the gluten issue. I don't know. She may have backed away from that stance and there certainly is no hint on the WAPF site that such is important other than their standard advice of soaking, sprouting, or fermenting grains before cooking and consuming them. -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 buckwheat is a seed. see the sidebar on p. 464 of NT. > > > I also forgot to ask whether buckwheat would be an acceptable food? > > buckwheat is not a grain, right? > > > > thanks, > > Not it is not. > Parashis > artpages@... > > artpagesonline.com > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2009 Report Share Posted January 26, 2009 and all, This is interesting. So does milling remove the bran only i wonder. I will check it out. so if wheat is milled to remove the bran, is this white flour then? So can one buy " whole " grains that are milled? Or maybe in the wheat category this is the soft white wheat? > > Milling appears to go back to ancient times, even among groups we > would consider to be eating healthy traditional diets. Thanks for these links! > > You can try to influence things at the point of sale: > http://www.wolfrivernaturals.com/high-brix-farming-and-gardening.htm > or grow your own food: http://www.highbrixgardens.com/ I contacted Bezian but was only to get his voice mail. will let you know what i find out. What might be helpful at this point is to get the info > directly from the guy everyone raves about and seems to be absolutely > nutty about fermentation: > http://www.yelp.com/biz/bezians-bakery-los-angeles > > It might be good to encourage him to share his methods, even speak at > a conference. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Sourdough I did quite a bit of reading, research and baking recently and have the following opinions: 1. Sourdough baking is an extremely complicated process, even the sourdough people have multiple conflicting opinions about every aspect of sourdough baking. This is the most helpful FAQ I found: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/food/sourdough/faq/preamble.html 2. Laurel's Kitchen Bread Book is a helpful book, although you have to understand that " The Loaf of Learning " is one of many POVs on how to bake bread. Also, with the exception of Desem, all their breads use yeast so it's not the best sourdough book. See the link above for better sourdough books. 3. As I remember from Nut. and Phys. Deg., the Swiss used community ovens and baked bread in batches for logistical, not nutritional reasons. They used sourdough because the process was developed long before commercial bakers yeast was developed. 4. I'm certainly no expert, but I'm highly skeptical that very much happens to bread after it's baked, other than drying out. Baking produces steam which should mostly sterilize it. All the various micro organisms do their work during rising. 5. Rye is a natural grain for sourdough baking. It doesn't develop gluten to nearly the extent that wheat will. (I tried making a " Loaf of Learning " using rye instead of wheat flour and it was awful.) Instead, rye has cereal gums called pentosans. The mixing and kneading techniques are completely different than gluten techniques. Long fermentation is a better technique for rising breads with pentosans. 6. A great way to learn about baking and bread is to do some reading, buy 10kg sacks of wheat, rye and spelt kernels, a grain mill, an Easy Sprouter and start sprouting and baking. This is what I did and I really learned a great deal. For example, you can make fairly light bread without yeast from 100% sprouted grains--something I've been told is impossible by professional bakers. I believe the confusion revolves around what " light " means. My breads are never as light as Food For Life's Ezekiel or Alvarado Street Bakery breads, but these are yeasted breads. Also my breads are quite a bit darker than the local organic whole grain, yeast free breads I can get around here. I asked and they still sift out some of the bran and germ to lighten the final product so you can't even trust a local, artisan, commercial baker trying to do the right thing. Rice Polishing brown rice is a time consuming, energy intensive process that traditional people would probably only engage in if it made the rice more healthful. I know this sounds contrary to our principles but consider the following: Rice bran oil goes rancid within a few hours of polishing brown rice to make white rice. This is why no one really eats rice bran traditionally. I've suspected for some time that the preceding process of de-hulling rice to create brown rice must rupture some of oil ducts in the bran which then goes rancid within a few hours. Rancid oils are dangerous right? It's possible that white rice is more healthful overall since it doesn't contain any rancid oil. The only remaining question thus is this: Is white rice, stripped of many vitamins and minerals better for you than brown rice which may contain rancid oil? I don't know the answer to this question. Perhaps traditional people already did a huge study over centuries and determined that white rice, on balance, causes less health problems than brown rice. While I agree with that everything traditional people did isn't automatically correct, this may be an example of where they got it right. This would mean that we are applying principles that apply to hull-less grains like wheat that don't have to be dehulled to a hulled grain like rice which does. Wheat bran oil may be less likely to go rancid because wheat doesn't have to be dehulled. All this is of course merely speculation. Does anyone know of any feeding studies comparing brown and white rice as part of a balanced diet? Cheers, E --- In , <slethnobotanist@...> wrote: > > , > > > From my knowledge of bread...the gluten would break down within 2 > > weeks of fermenting, meaning that the bread would rise and then fall > > again because its gluten framwork would break down. So unless they > > fermented at very low temperatures (40-50F) I really am not sure that > > they fermented it for two weeks. I know there are studies proving > > that sourdough bread is the most digestible around 10 days after being > > cooked...sitting at room temperature. > > Well two weeks is the time that was observed, but 10 days would be > fine by me. You ought to post those studies since doesn't think > much can happen after baking :-) > > > -- > " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever > spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this > administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started > -- and an enormous debt to boot. " > - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 , > 3. As I remember from Nut. and Phys. Deg., the Swiss used community > ovens and baked bread in batches for logistical, not nutritional > reasons. They used sourdough because the process was developed long > before commercial bakers yeast was developed. Except that doesn't explain the two week wait. If is right that there are studies that show that sourdough is at its most digestible after sitting 10 days at room temperature, then I'm inclined to believe this was something which was not just discovered by us " moderns " > 4. I'm certainly no expert, but I'm highly skeptical that very much > happens to bread after it's baked, other than drying out. Baking > produces steam which should mostly sterilize it. All the various micro > organisms do their work during rising. Of course we are allowed to be skeptical. but we still have a long fermentation period, and, if is right, and Bezian is right, a long fermentation period which does accomplish something, and a bunch of moderns telling us, anecdotally, that is does appear to make a difference. In other words, skepticism at this point doesn't answer our questions, and is no reason to step away from further investigation and assume it is all much ado about nothing. > 5. Rye is a natural grain for sourdough baking. It doesn't develop > gluten to nearly the extent that wheat will. (I tried making a " Loaf > of Learning " using rye instead of wheat flour and it was awful.) > Instead, rye has cereal gums called pentosans. The mixing and kneading > techniques are completely different than gluten techniques. Long > fermentation is a better technique for rising breads with pentosans. I don't know if you are just providing this as info, or suggesting that because the Swiss used rye that somehow makes a difference, but we do have studies showing that it is possible, with the right strains, to reduce the gluten in wheat by 98% in 24 hours. I wonder what the extra sitting time would do? > Rice > > Polishing brown rice is a time consuming, energy intensive process > that traditional people would probably only engage in if it made the > rice more healthful. I know this sounds contrary to our principles I don't really think so. We are not primal dieters by and large and even they alter their vegetables by juicing them. Transforming grain in my mind is no different from all the other things we do in transforming food, including cooking. The very fact we have to soak a seed or grain or cook a root vegetable means that **in principle** altering out food is not contrary to our principles. If we have to peel a vegetable like a potato to make it wholesome, how different is that from hulling a grain to make it wholesome? > but > consider the following: > > Rice bran oil goes rancid within a few hours of polishing brown rice > to make white rice. This is why no one really eats rice bran > traditionally. I've suspected for some time that the preceding process > of de-hulling rice to create brown rice must rupture some of oil ducts > in the bran which then goes rancid within a few hours. > > Rancid oils are dangerous right? Rancid PUFA's are to be avoided. > It's possible that white rice is more healthful overall since it > doesn't contain any rancid oil. The only remaining question thus is this: > > Is white rice, stripped of many vitamins and minerals better for you > than brown rice which may contain rancid oil? I don't know the answer > to this question. Perhaps traditional people already did a huge study > over centuries and determined that white rice, on balance, causes less > health problems than brown rice. I think what is evident from the literature is that white rice as part of an overall nutrient dense diet is fine. I think what is also evident from the literature is that a diet consisting mostly of white rice is dangerous, and that bran tends to be avoided. My guess is that the danger comes not from the white rice per se, but from the lack of other nutrients in the diet. It would be like trying to survive just on bananas. It is not that bananas are bad, just that they are not designed to support human health on their own. > While I agree with that > everything traditional people did isn't automatically correct, this > may be an example of where they got it right. I think they did get it right on this point. > This would mean that we are applying principles that apply to > hull-less grains like wheat that don't have to be dehulled to a hulled > grain like rice which does. Wheat bran oil may be less likely to go > rancid because wheat doesn't have to be dehulled. Not in this life :-) > All this is of course merely speculation. Does anyone know of any > feeding studies comparing brown and white rice as part of a balanced diet? I'm sure it would depend on how one is defining a balanced diet, but given the phytic acid of rice bran alone, I don't see brown rice winning that particular battle, depending on the specific variables. -- " We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before, and it does not work... I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started -- and an enormous debt to boot. " - Henry Morgenthau (FDR's Treasury Secretary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 > Baking creates acrylamide, but boiling doesn't. The healthiest way to > eat potatoes, I suspect, is to boil them in soups so that the > nutrients do not leach out in the water. > Or just fresh, peeled, and boiled in a soup. Perhaps cooking them sous vide will work as well if you don't want them in soup. I found a great recipe using potatoes and duck fat. I think I'm going to experiment with this type of cooking. Heidi writes on her blog how to do it cheaply. -- " The president addressed Congress the other day. I don't know which was scarier -- the speech, or Congress cheering him on. He invoked Lincoln. Whenever a president is going to get us in serious trouble, they always use Lincoln. " -- Victor Milson, space adviser to the U.S. president, reporting ominous news from home to his friend Dr. Heywood Floyd (who is in the vicinity of Jupiter); from the film 2010: The Year We Make Contact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 She is hanging out on some other lists. On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Nanette J. Landen <nlanden@...> wrote: > aaaah, Heidi - anyone know what she's up to these days and how she's doing? > Not sure how long I've been in this group......4 years?.....and she was one > of the people I remember who was quite active and quite informative. > > Nanette L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.