Re: plant digestibility, was Magnesium

[Guest guest]

Suze-

>In other words what is the chemical

>or physical makeup in spinach that makes you feel it's more digestible than

>wheatgrass?

The starches found in grains (and the sugars) are not particularly

digestible. For example, one of the primary end products of starch

digestion is maltose (and iso-maltose). _Breaking The Vicious Cycle_ has a

very extensive discussion of carbohydrate digestion and explains which

vegetables are safe and which should be avoided. Grass is even woodier and

less digestible than grain, and doesn't even have the calorie content since

it hasn't been bred for high energy storage. Perhaps its nutrients are

more assimilable if the grass is properly juiced or powdered, but I'd

rather get my nutrients in the forms my body is expecting and is designed

to handle.

>I don't know the precise composition of these various plants, but am

>thinking they are all cellulose, water, starch, protein and lipids. They

>*all* contain indigestible cellulose.

Well, sure, in a sufficiently abstract sense all plants have the same sorts

of components, but the particular starches, proteins, sugars, lipids, and

other chemicals, vary widely, and so do the proportions. For example,

absent other factors, a food with a tiny amount of amylopectin will be much

more digestible than a food positively stuffed with amylopectin.

>But, if I juiced the spinach, it

>would be as digestible as the powdered leaf/juice.

That's true assuming that the only variable is cellulose cell walls, but

it's also a matter of what other compounds are in there and how digestible

they are -- what sugars and starches, mainly.

>I'd also have to wonder if all of this breeding you refer to might just

>breed out some of the most important chemical components of domestic

>plants - antioxidants, that are there to protect plants from the sun's

>heat/light oxidizing their lipids, especially those high in PUFAs.

That's very possible. I'd rather avoid the newest and most modern strains

because they've all been designed for high yield and undesirable qualities

like pesticide resistance. The best heirloom varieties probably strike a

good balance.

-

[Guest guest]

> For example,

> absent other factors, a food with a tiny amount of amylopectin will

be much

> more digestible than a food positively stuffed with amylopectin.

I believe you're thinking of amylose. Amylopectin is one of the the

most easily digestible of the common starches.

[Guest guest]

>>>>The starches found in grains (and the sugars) are not particularly

digestible.

***I know. I was doing a little checking around on the net about plant

digestibility in humans and ran across this interesting article on

beyondveg:

The Late Role of Grains and Legumes in the Human Diet, and Biochemical

Evidence of their Evolutionary Discordance

http://www.beyondveg.com/cordain-l/grains-leg/grains-legumes-1a.shtml

Nothing new for you I'm sure, but I like the details provided - the

timelines, geographic specific origins of various grains and the description

of digestion problems related to grain consumption. I also found some info

related to the thread on fingernail ridges...the authors state:

" Less well-appreciated are the ability of whole grains to impair biotin

metabolism. My colleague, Bruce Watkins [Watkins 1990], as well as others

[blair 1989; Kopinksi 1989], have shown that biotin deficiencies can be

induced in animal models by feeding them high levels of wheat, sorghum, and

other cereal grains. Biotin-dependent carboxylases are important metabolic

pathways of fatty-acid synthesis, and deficiencies severely inhibit the

chain-elongation and desaturation of 18:2n6 (linoleate) to 20:4n6

(arachidonic acid). Human dietary supplementation trials with biotin have

shown this vitamin to reduce fingernail brittleness and ridging that are

associated with deficiencies of this vitamin [Hochman 1993]. "

>>>_Breaking The Vicious Cycle_ has a very extensive discussion of

carbohydrate digestion and explains which vegetables are safe and which

should be avoided.

***Well, after hearing you reference this book for the umpteenth time, I've

ordered it! Sounds good - i've been collecting books on digestion. Right now

I've got dr. byrnes' and one called " Digestive Wellness " which I like very

much. But it sounds like the vicious cycle has the type of info I'm seeking

on carbohydrate digestion. Thanks for recommending it!

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

-

[Guest guest]

>I believe you're thinking of amylose. Amylopectin is one of the the

>most easily digestible of the common starches.

Nope.

From BTVC, p29:

" Vegetables that contain more amylose than amylopectin starch are

simpler to digest, because the glucose units which make up all starch

molecules are arranged in a linear fashion in amylose starch and are

readily exposed to digestive enzymes from saliva and the pancreas. (Fig.

9.) The links holding the glucose units in these linear arrays are split

until the chains are reduced to only two chemically linked glucose

molecules called maltose. By comparison, amylopectin contains glucose

molecules which form branches (Figs. 9 and 10). When the amylopectin

molecules have been partially digested by pancreas enzymes, the fragments

remaining for the last step in digestion by the microvilli enzymes are both

maltose and iso-maltose. "

-

[Guest guest]

>

> >I believe you're thinking of amylose. Amylopectin is one of the the

> >most easily digestible of the common starches.

>

> Nope.

>

> From BTVC, p29:

>

> " Vegetables that contain more amylose than amylopectin starch

are

> simpler to digest, because the glucose units which make up all

starch

> molecules are arranged in a linear fashion in amylose starch and

are

> readily exposed to digestive enzymes from saliva and the pancreas.

(Fig.

> 9.) The links holding the glucose units in these linear arrays are

split

> until the chains are reduced to only two chemically linked glucose

> molecules called maltose. By comparison, amylopectin contains

glucose

> molecules which form branches (Figs. 9 and 10). When the

amylopectin

> molecules have been partially digested by pancreas enzymes, the

fragments

> remaining for the last step in digestion by the microvilli enzymes

are both

> maltose and iso-maltose. "

Amylose is digested more slowly than amylopectin:

" The importance of the amylose: amylopectin ratio in the postprandial

glycemic and insulinemic responses to corn was studied ... We

concluded that high amylose corn products have a potential to promote

favorably low metabolic responses and high resistant starch contents. "

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_uids=7876921 & dopt=Abstract

" The glycemic responses to bread products were reduced by the use of

ingredients with an intact botanical or physical structure or a high

amylose content or by enrichment with viscous dietary fiber. However,

the important of a moderate increase in the amylose-amylopectin

ratio ... "

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

cmd=Retrieve & db=PubMed & list_uids=8116553 & dopt=Abstract

I think this illustrates two points:

1. Its easy to come up with a plausible sounding theory, but the real

question is does the theory fit the data. It turns out that the BTVC

theory doesn't. What's really going on is that the branched chains of

amylopectin give it a more 'open' shape than the linear shape of

amylose, which allows for easier enzyme access to split off the

glucose. This theory is corroborated by the data.

2. This also illustrates the need to be cautious using sources of

info like " Breaking the Viscous Cycle " that haven't been subjected to

the peer-review process.

[Guest guest]

> " Breaking the Viscous Cycle "

Breaking the thick, gooey cycle? ;-)

[Guest guest]

> > " Breaking the Viscous Cycle "

>

> Breaking the thick, gooey cycle? ;-)

heh, now Suze will jump in and complain about how I use a's where I

should be using e's.

[Guest guest]

> " Breaking the Viscous Cycle "

>>>>Breaking the thick, gooey cycle? ;-)

***Ok, I admit - this cracked me up! But I, for one, like 's

spellings - they're very creative and never boring.

And another thing, I've often noticed that some of the smartest people are

the ones who are creative spellers...

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...

[Guest guest]

> > " Breaking the Viscous Cycle "

>

> >>>>Breaking the thick, gooey cycle? ;-)

>

> ***Ok, I admit - this cracked me up! But I, for one, like 's

> spellings - they're very creative and never boring.

>

>

> And another thing, I've often noticed that some of the smartest

people are

> the ones who are creative spellers...

Thanks, now if only I had that vote of confidance during my grade

school years, oh the trauma and self-doubt that could have been

avoided!

[Guest guest]

>>>>>heh, now Suze will jump in and complain about how I use a's where I

should be using e's.

***do tee do tee do....hm? say, , how about a few 'e's here and there?

Just not at the end of " potato " ...

Suze Fisher

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg/

mailto:s.fisher22@...