Grains: Bread Of Life, Or Cereal Killer?

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

Going Against The Grain?

In Wednesday’s newsletter, we asked you for your health-related opinion of grains (aside from any gluten-specific concerns), and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

  • About 69% said “They are an important cornerstone of a healthy balanced diet”
  • About 22% said “They can be enjoyed in moderation, but watch out”
  • About 8% said “They are terrible health-drainers that will kill us”

So, what does the science say?

They are terrible health-drainers that will kill us: True or False?

True or False depending on the manner of their consumption!

There is a big difference between the average pizza base and a bowl of oats, for instance. Or rather, there are a lot of differences, but what’s most critical here?

The key is: refined and ultraprocessed grains are so inferior to whole grains as to be actively negative for health in most cases for most people most of the time.

But! It’s not because processing is ontologically evil (in reality: some processed foods are healthy, and some unprocessed foods are poisonous). although it is a very good general rule of thumb.

So, we need to understand the “why” behind the “key” that we just gave above, and that’s mostly about the resultant glycemic index and associated metrics (glycemic load, insulin index, etc).

In the case of refined and ultraprocessed grains, our body gains sugar faster than it can process it, and stores it wherever and however it can, like someone who has just realised that they will be entertaining a houseguest in 10 minutes and must tidy up super-rapidly by hiding things wherever they’ll fit.

And when the body tries to do this with sugar from refined grains, the result is very bad for multiple organs (most notably the liver, but the pancreas takes quite a hit too) which in turn causes damage elsewhere in the body, not to mention that we now have urgently-produced fat stored in unfortunate places like our liver and abdominal cavity when it should have gone to subcutaneous fat stores instead.

In contrast, whole grains come with fiber that slows down the absorption of the sugars, such that the body can deal with them in an ideal fashion, which usually means:

  • using them immediately, or
  • storing them as muscle glycogen, or
  • storing them as subcutaneous fat

👆 that’s an oversimplification, but we only have so much room here.

For more on this, see:

Glycemic Index vs Glycemic Load vs Insulin Index

And for why this matters, see:

Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?

And for fixing it, see:

How To Unfatty A Fatty Liver

They can be enjoyed in moderation, but watch out: True or False?

Technically True but functionally False:

  • Technically true: “in moderation” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. One person’s “moderation” may be another person’s “abstemiousness” or “gluttony”.
  • Functionally false: while of course extreme consumption of pretty much anything is going to be bad, unless you are Cereals Georg eating 10,000 cereals each day and being a statistical outlier, the issue is not the quantity so much as the quality.

Quality, we discussed above—and that is, as we say, paramount. As for quantity however, you might want to know a baseline for “getting enough”, so…

They are an important cornerstone of a healthy balanced diet: True or False?

True! This one’s quite straightforward.

3 servings (each being 90g, or about ½ cup) of whole grains per day is associated with a 22% reduction in risk of heart disease, 5% reduction in all-cause mortality, and a lot of benefits across a lot of disease risks:

❝This meta-analysis provides further evidence that whole grain intake is associated with a reduced risk of coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, and total cancer, and mortality from all causes, respiratory diseases, infectious diseases, diabetes, and all non-cardiovascular, non-cancer causes.

These findings support dietary guidelines that recommend increased intake of whole grain to reduce the risk of chronic diseases and premature mortality.❞

~ Dr. Dagfinn Aune et al.

Read in full: Whole grain consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and all cause and cause specific mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies

We’d like to give a lot more sources for the same findings, as well as papers for all the individual claims, but frankly, there are so many that there isn’t room. Suffice it to say, this is neither controversial nor uncertain; these benefits are well-established.

Here’s a very informative pop-science article, that also covers some of the things we discussed earlier (it shows what happens during refinement of grains) before getting on to recommendations and more citations for claims than we can fit here:

Harvard School Of Public Health | Whole Grains

“That’s all great, but what if I am concerned about gluten?”

There certainly are reasons you might be, be it because of a sensitivity, allergy, or just because perhaps you’d like to know more.

Let’s first mention: not all grains contain gluten, so it’s perfectly possible to enjoy naturally gluten-free grains (such as oats and rice) as well as gluten-free pseudocereals, which are not actually grains but do the same job in culinary and nutritional terms (such as quinoa and buckwheat, despite the latter’s name).

Finally, if you’d like to know more about gluten’s health considerations, then check out our previous mythbusting special:

Gluten: What’s The Truth?

Enjoy!

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • Reflexology: What The Science Says
  • Women Rowing North – by Dr. Mary Pipher
    Ageism and misogyny intersect in this guidebook for women navigating life’s currents. Honest, raw, and exhorting hope, it’s a valuable read for anyone.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Rainbow Roasted Potato Salad

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    This salad has potatoes in it, but it’s not a potato salad as most people know it. The potatoes are roasted, but in a non-oily-dressing, that nevertheless leaves them with an amazing texture—healthy and delicious; the best of both worlds. And the rest? We’ve got colorful vegetables, we’ve got protein, we’ve got seasonings full of healthy spices, and more.

    You will need

    • 1½ lbs new potatoes (or any waxy potatoes; sweet potato is also a great option; don’t peel them, whichever you choose) cut into 1″ chunks
    • 1 can / 1 cup cooked cannellini beans (or your preferred salad beans)
    • 1 carrot, grated
    • 2 celery stalks, finely chopped
    • 3 spring onions, finely chopped
    • ½ small red onion, finely sliced
    • 2 tbsp white wine vinegar
    • 1 tbsp balsamic vinegar
    • 1 tbsp lemon juice
    • 1 tbsp nutritional yeast
    • 1 tsp garlic powder
    • 1 tsp black pepper
    • ½ tsp red chili powder
    • We didn’t forget salt; it’s just that with the natural sodium content of the potatoes plus the savory flavor-enhancing properties of the nutritional yeast, it’s really not needed here. Add if you feel strongly about it, opting for low-sodium salt, or MSG (which has even less sodium).
    • To serve: 1 cup basil pesto (we’ll do a recipe one of these days; meanwhile, store-bought is fine, or you can use the chermoula we made the other day, ignoring the rest of that day’s recipe and just making the chermoula component)

    Method

    (we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)

    1) Preheat the oven as hot as it goes!

    2) Combine the potatoes, white wine vinegar, nutritional yeast, garlic powder, black pepper, and red chili powder, mixing thoroughly (but gently!) to coat.

    3) Spread the potatoes on a baking tray, and roast in the middle of the oven (for best evenness of cooking); because of the small size of the potato chunks, this should only take about 25 minutes (±5mins depending on your oven); it’s good to turn them halfway through, or at least jiggle them if you don’t want to do all that turning.

    4) Allow to cool while still on the baking tray (this allows the steam to escape immediately, rather than the steam steaming the other potatoes, as it would if you put them in a bowl).

    5) Now put them in a serving bowl, and mix in the beans, vegetables, balsamic vinegar, and lemon juice, mixing thoroughly but gently

    6) Add generous lashings of the pesto to serve; it should be gently mixed a little too, so that it’s not all on top.

    Enjoy!

    Want to learn more?

    For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Pink Himalayan Salt: Health Facts

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    It’s Q&A Day at 10almonds!

    Q: Great article about the health risks of salt to organs other than the heart! Is pink Himalayan sea salt, the pink kind, healthier?

    Thank you! And, no, sorry. Any salt that is sodium chloride has the exact same effect because it’s chemically the same substance, even if impurities (however pretty) make it look different.

    If you want a lower-sodium salt, we recommend the kind that says “low sodium” or “reduced sodium” or similar. Check the ingredients, it’ll probably be sodium chloride cut with potassium chloride. Potassium chloride is not only not a source of sodium, but also, it’s a source of potassium, which (unlike sodium) most of us could stand to get a little more of.

    For your convenience: here’s an example on Amazon!

    Bonus: you can get a reduced sodium version of pink Himalayan salt too!

    Share This Post

  • Peas vs Broad Beans – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing peas to broad beans, we picked the peas.

    Why?

    Both are great of course, but…

    Looking at the macros to start with, peas have more protein and more fiber. The differences aren’t huge, but they are clear.

    In terms of vitamins, peas have more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, E, K, and choline (some with very large margins, some with small), while broad beans contain a little more vitamin C (the margin is quite narrow though).

    When it comes to minerals, peas have more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while broad beans have more sodium. So this category wasn’t close.

    Adding up the win from each of the categories makes for a clear triple-win for peas.

    Easy-peasy!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Dr. Greger’s Daily Dozen

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Reflexology: What The Science Says
  • Frozen/Thawed/Refrozen Meat: How Much Is Safety, And How Much Is Taste?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    What You Can (And Can’t) Safely Do With Frozen Meat

    Yesterday, we asked you:

    ❝You have meat in the freezer. How long is it really safe to keep it?❞

    …and got a range of answers, mostly indicating to a) follow the instructions (a very safe general policy) and b) do not refreeze if thawed because that would be unsafe. Fewer respondents indicated that meat could be kept for much longer than guidelines say, or conversely, that it should only be kept for weeks or less.

    So, what does the science say?

    Meat can be kept indefinitely (for all intents and purposes) in a freezer; it just might get tougher: True or False?

    False, assuming we are talking about a normal household electrical freezer that bottoms out at about -18℃ / 0℉.

    Fun fact: cryobiologists cryopreserve tissue samples (so basically, meat) at -196℃ / -320℉, and down at those temperatures, the tissues will last a lot longer than you will (and, for all practical purposes: indefinitely). There are other complications with doing so (such as getting the sample through the glass transition point without cracking it during the vitrification process) but those are beyond the scope of this article.

    If you remember back to your physics or perhaps chemistry classes at school, you’ll know that molecules move more quickly at higher temperatures, and more slowly at lower ones, only approaching true stillness as they near absolute zero (-273℃ / -459℉ / 0K ← we’re not saying it’s ok, although it is; rather, that is zero kelvin; no degree sign is used with kelvins)

    That means that when food is frozen, the internal processes aren’t truly paused; it’s just slowed to a point of near imperceptibility.

    So, all the way up at the relatively warm temperatures of a household freezer, a lot of processes are still going on.

    What this means in practical terms: those guidelines saying “keep in the freezer for up to 4 months”, “keep in the freezer for up to 9 months”, “keep in the freezer for up to 12 months” etc are being honest with you.

    More or less, anyway! They’ll usually underestimate a little to be on the safe side—but so should you.

    Bad things start happening within weeks at most: True or False?

    False, for all practical purposes. Again, assuming a normal and properly-working household freezer as described above.

    (True, technically but misleadingly: the bad things never stopped; they just slowed down to a near imperceptible pace—again, as described above)

    By “bad” here we should clarify we mean “dangerous”. One subscriber wrote:

    ❝Meat starts losing color and flavor after being in the freezer for too long. I keep meat in the freezer for about 2 months at the most❞

    …and as a matter of taste, that’s fair enough!

    It is unsafe to refreeze meat that has been thawed: True or False?

    False! Assuming it has otherwise been kept chilled, just the same as for fresh meat.

    Food poisoning comes from bacteria, and there is nothing about the meat previously having been frozen that will make it now have more bacteria.

    That means, for example…

    • if it was thawed (but chilled) for a period of time, treat it like you would any other meat that has been chilled for that period of time (so probably: use it or freeze it, unless it’s been more than a few days)
    • if it was thawed (and at room temperature) for a period of time, treat it like you would any other meat that has been at room temperature for that period of time (so probably: throw it out, unless the period of time is very small indeed)

    The USDA gives for 2 hours max at room temperature before considering it unsalvageable, by the way.

    However! Whenever you freeze meat (or almost anything with cells, really), ice crystals will form in and between cells. How much ice crystallization occurs depends on several variables, with how much water there is present in the food is usually the biggest factor (remember that animal cells are—just like us—mostly water).

    Those ice crystals will damage the cell walls, causing the food to lose structural integrity. When you thaw it out, the ice crystals will disappear but the damage will be left behind (this is what “freezer burn” is).

    So if your food seems a little “squishy” after having been frozen and thawed, that’s why. It’s not rotten; it’s just been stabbed countless times on a microscopic level.

    The more times you freeze and thaw and refreeze food, the more this will happen. Your food will degrade in structural integrity each time, but the safety of it won’t have changed meaningfully.

    Want to know more?

    Further reading:

    You can thaw and refreeze meat: five food safety myths busted

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Indistractable – by Nir Eyal

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Have you ever felt that you could accomplish anything you wanted/needed, if only you didn’t get distracted?

    This book lays out a series of psychological interventions for precisely that aim, and it goes a lot beyond the usual “download/delete these apps to help you stop checking social media every 47 seconds”.

    Some you’ll have heard of before, some you won’t have, and if even one method works for you, it’ll have been well worth your while reading this book. This reviewer, for example, enjoyed the call to identity-based strength, e.g. adopting an “I am indistractable*” perspective going into tasks. This is akin to the strength of, for example, “I don’t drink” over “I am a recovering alcoholic”.

    *the usual spelling of this, by the way, is “undistractable”, but we use the author’s version here for consistency. It’s a great marketing gimmick, as all searches for the word “indistractable” will bring up his book.

    Nor is the book just about maximizing productivity to the detriment of everything else; this is not about having a 25 hours per day “grindset”. Rather, it even makes sure to cover such things as focusing on one’s loved ones, for instance.

    Bottom line: if you’ve tried blocking out the distractions but still find you can’t focus, this book offers next-level solutions

    Click here to check out Indistractible, and become indeed indistractable!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Pomegranate vs Cranberries – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing pomegranate to cranberries, we picked the pomegranate.

    Why?

    Starting with the macros: pomegranate has nearly 4x the protein (actually quite a lot for a fruit, but this is not too surprising—it’s because we are eating the seeds!), and slightly more carbs and fiber. Their glycemic indices are comparable, both being low GI foods. While both of these fruits have excellent macro profiles, we say the pomegranate is slightly better, because of the protein, and when it comes to the carbs and fiber, since they balance each other out, we’ll go with the option that’s more nutritionally dense. We like foods that add more nutrients!

    In the category of vitamins, pomegranate is higher in vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, K, and choline, while cranberry is higher in vitamins A, C, and E. Both are very respectable profiles, but pomegranate wins on strength of numbers (and also some higher margins of difference).

    When it comes to minerals, it is not close; pomegranate is higher in calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while cranberry is higher in manganese. An easy win for pomegranate here.

    Both of these fruits have additional “special” properties, though it’s worth noting that:

    • pomegranate’s bonus properties, which are too many to list here, but we link to an article below, are mostly in its peel (so dry it, and grind it into a powder supplement, that can be worked into foods, or used like an instant fruit tea, just without the sugar)
    • cranberries’ bonus properties (including: famously very good at reducing UTI risk) come with some warnings, including that they may increase the risk of kidney stones if you are prone to such, and also that cranberries have anti-clotting effects, which are great for heart health but can be a risk of you’re on blood thinners or have a bleeding disorder.

    You can read about both of these fruits’ special properties in more detail below:

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: