Active No-Carber Forums

waywardsister · Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 2:15 pm Post subject: Grains and veggies

Not naysaying, just thought this was the best place to post my wonderings.

There's no doubt that people have thrived on a carnivorous diet. There's also no doubt that people have thrived on diets that included vegetation, including grains.

What I'm wondering is this - is it the foods themselves, or our modernization/preparation of them, that causes problems in some (most) people?

Personally, I can't be bothered to prepare grains in the "traditional" manner - soaking, sprouting, fermenting etc. Takes ages, and I suspect that this was only undertaken by communities that really, really needed a food source. But, populations that do this don't seem to have the same problems that we do, even when their diet is quite heavy in grains (and includes lots of fat, either from meat, lard etc or raw dairy products, eggs etc) - no diabetes or cancers or any of that other fun stuff.

Veggies too - populations that ate them (in season, of course, not year round like we do) seemed to do well particularly with fermented ones (like the contents of ruminant intestines, or things like sauerkraut etc) or well-cooked ones (ie: sunchokes roasted for hours underground)

I don't think we NEED this stuff. The long preparation for some of them suggests, to me, that they aren't necessary. Out of necessity (or curiosity, or want for variety), people figured out how to make certain plant foods edible and seemed to do just fine on them.

So I am wondering then, if it's more the industrialization of food that's the real root problem. Wheat, for example, bred to contain more and more gluten; processed convenience foods replacing whole foods; fruit bred for more sugar content. Canned beans, dried pasta, pasteurized milk, etc. And then of course basing a diet around them rather than around meats, fats, eggs and other non-industrial foods.

Thoughts?

_________________
Wheat is murder.

wifezilla · Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 3:23 pm Post subject:

I think it is some of both, but I would put more "blame" on the modernization.
_________________
http://wifezillasway.blogspot.com

adwred · Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 3:42 pm Post subject:

I believe this big time. Although I think people's focus on fermented foods is misguided. There wasn't quite so much fermentation going on (that's more of a Sally Fallon thing, than a Price thing). Fermentation was a 'when necessary' thing, generally, for preservation purposes. People weren't fermenting things willy nilly, just for the fun of it and certainly weren't eating fermented foods in copious amounts, daily, the way many WAPFers do (sucking down mass quantities of kombucha, beet kvass, kefir, sauerkraut, etc.).
_________________
I'm a vegetable-eater by proxy. I make sure to get 5-10 servings of herbivore per day.

Carnation · Top Carnivore Joined: 15 Dec 2007 Posts: 3586

I think it's true that industrial processes change foods in ways that our bodies can't recognize and/or process. Extreme heat, chemical manipulation, genetic manipultion, all produce foodstuff that nature could not. So many things that were once regarded as a godsend for price or convenience are now being revealed as nightmares to the human body.

But traditional ways of preparing and preserving grains and veg only altered foods in ways that were more in line with what nature could produce, and therefor our bodies can understand how to use the nutrients.

But definitely, just because you can derive nutrition from a grain or vegetable source, doesn't mean it's ideal. I can see that perhaps certain grain/veg foods were eaten in times of prolonged scarcity, and this, in turn, became a food which was traditionally eaten by that society, as a sort of acculturation.

SandyDown · Top Cat Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Posts: 257

Interesting Tracy, my mum always did soak any grains over night, or at least half an hour before cooking, I never bothered, even worse I tried to convice other women who do soak grains not to bother Laugh

. Also, I always ate bread when I was overseas with no problems, recently I was tempted when I went to France and even though France is still the 'West' I really didn't react badly to their croissant or crepes.. yes my glycogen got replenished, but really no bloating /gas reaction that I get when eating bread from the UK... I constantly think what happened to me? Why have I been reacting so badly to grains in the last few years (even before low carbing) and am not sure what is the problem, I mean if I was born intolerant, why does it show only a couple of years after moving to the UK? I too used to be a vegetarian continued after moving to the UK, that did cause me all kind problems (not being overweight, actually when I was a vegetarian I was skinny, its only when I started eating both meat and carbs together that I put on the weight)

Anyway I always thought it was because I am getting older Laugh

older people here in the UK are always saying their system can't tolerate food they used to eat when they were younger e.g. spicy food like curries or specific veggies (e.g. peas), which I thought was weird, but then when I started reacting badly to grains and some veggies, I assumed its because of the reasons these people told me ,... but god knows I used to have boiled rice 3 times a day, and never got bloated/gas from it... have no idea what happened to my system to reject grains so badly... and as you say on the other thread, the longer I stay LCing the more sensitive I become Sad

waywardsister · Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 1:12 pm Post subject:

Zilla, the more I read, the more I am inclined to blame modernization/industrialization. Irish (my ancestry) are renowned for gluten intolerance, but they ate tons of oats in the days of yore and weren't dropping like flies. Nor were cultures eating wheat berries, millet, buckwheat etc. I know that when ag. became a big thing ppl were shorter and suffered more health problems (ie: Egyptians) but I wonder if it was more due to grains REPLACING other foods?

SandyDown · Top Cat Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Posts: 257

Tracy, re the croissant, I wonder if its because its a very very fatty kind of bread (hopefully made with butter, but some how I doubt it as its too expensive) but perhaps its the fat in the croissant that stopped my system from reacting badly??

I love chickpeas/ humus, and if I make humus from the chickpeas that comes from a tin, I get horrid reaction. But if I soak them and make them from scratch I don't react as badly, but have to watch the portions... recently I discovered they have chickpeas in frozen bags, I tried those as well, and didn't have a bad reaction either... therefore I presume its the preservatives in the tinned foods (I hardly every eat anything tinned any longer)

ReddyMcMeaty · The Boss Joined: 20 May 2006 Posts: 5776

Found something which might explain.
_______________________________________
....There seems to be two ways of making croissants:

The first one is to make a dough (détrempe) and leave it in the fridge overnight. The next day, you incorporate the butter do the turns etc. This is the method found in Baking With Julia, The Brother Roux on Pastry and How To Bake by Nick Malgieri.

The second one, advice you to make the dough, let it rest in the fridge for an hour or so then incorporate the butter, doing the turns. This is found in Nancy Silverton’s Pastries From La Brea. Rose Levy Beranbaum in The Pie And Pastry Bible says you can leave the dough in the fridge between 2 hours or overnight.

The first method would produce a slightly more flavorful dough since the detrempe is given the chance to slowly rise overnight. Also, the long rest would ease gluten formation or relax the dough. Chilling does the same. The less the yeast and the longer the rise is always better with yeast breads in developing flavor.

.............................................................................

So MAYBE the long rest served as a soaking of sorts.
_________________
"Man lives on one quarter of what he eats. On the other three quarters lives his doctor."

wifezilla · Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 7:20 pm Post subject:

jl53563 · Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 8:17 pm Post subject:

IMO, anything that requires cooking or any significant processing in order to be edible was probably not meant to be food.

SandyDown · Top Cat Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Posts: 257

jl53563 · Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 2:02 am Post subject:

You choose to cook these thngs....it's not required for them to be edible.

waywardsister · Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:52 am Post subject:

Avalon · Top Carnivore Joined: 29 Nov 2006 Posts: 3326

adwred · Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 3:48 pm Post subject:

The celts (in Britain) have been eating oats for thousands of years. They soak them and cook them for a long time, though. None of this raw oat muesli or granola bar bullshit.
_________________
I'm a vegetable-eater by proxy. I make sure to get 5-10 servings of herbivore per day.

jl53563 · Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:17 pm Post subject:

Erasmus · Hunter Joined: 20 Feb 2008 Posts: 142

The thing with fermentation is, you have to actively try to avoid it. Left to its own devices anything with sugar and water in it will start to ferment in pretty short order. There is a fine line between useful fermentation and just plain ol' rotting. Sometimes that line is not even there. Shock

"Traditional" foods were often fermented simply because you had no choice if you were intent on keeping it around for more than a day (or hours).

Purposeful fermenting was more of a if you can't beat'em join'em situation.

-E

wifezilla · Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:39 pm Post subject:

Why in the hell was that post moved??? Geeez...it's just like home. I put something down and some goober comes by and moves it when I am not looking just to drive me crazy!
_________________
http://wifezillasway.blogspot.com

Carnation · Top Carnivore Joined: 15 Dec 2007 Posts: 3586

wifezilla · Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:18 pm Post subject:

Here it is...

"All the evidence both written and archaeological, tends to show that in Ireland prior to the potato cattle dominated the rural economy. The most recent and most detailed examination of faunal remains in Ireland has being carried out by P.J. Crabtree on animal bones from Dun Alinnne County Kildare a Bronze and Iron Age settlement. Here the great majority of the more than 19,000 bones identified belonged to cattle (54%) and pigs (36%), while sheep and goats (7%) and horses (2.5%) were poorly represented. Crabtree's analysis of the bones led her to conclude that cattle were kept in ancient Ireland primarily for dairying rather than meat as most of the cattle bones were those of calves less than six months old or elderly female animals past their milking usefulness. Meat was obviously a most important foodstuff, and the most plentiful meat was beef. Beef was not available all year round as only a limited number of cattle could be carried over the winter due to a lack of fodder therefore a cull of non-breeding animals took place in the autumn. The animals slaughtered during the cull would be old female animals, maimed, or unwanted bull calves. Beef for this reason became known in Brehon law as "winter food" as it was salted for use over the winter months and whitemeats (Cheeses and curds) were known as "summer foods" (O'Grada 1994). Large numbers of pigs and some sheep were kept by most families, the sheep were kept in open country and on the hills (as they are to this day) and were used for the production of wool. The pigs were herded in the oak forests, which covered more than a third of the land of Ireland where they were feed on the acorns that fell from the trees, and on other woodland fodder. (Cullen, L 1968)

Beef, pork, wild deer (venison) and mutton was the most common meats consumed up and until the eight century, as venison became scarce due to over hunting, beef, pork and mutton then predominated. The meat, which was usually tough, was cooked in the cauldron for many hours. Younger animals were cooked on a spit over an open fire or stone roasted, calf meat was usually spit roasted over the open fire. It appears that horses were also eaten but how widespread this practice was, is unknown (Danaher, K 1992). "

"Bread does not seem to have been eaten in large quantities, but eight types of cereals were known and distinguished by the Irish and their use varied from place to place and with one's income. Oats and barley the most common cereals were used to make a variety of breads, the seeds of which were milled in querns or hand mills. Oats, a rain tolerant cereal most suitable for the Irish climate, and barley also acted as a thickening agent in most soups and stews. Oat-meal which was much more important than wheat or bere barley as a food source was prepared in many different ways e.g. porridges, boiled in its un-ground state as a gruel or ground and boiled in fresh or sour milk, flavoured with honey and seeds, salt or herbs. Porridge was made very thick as a morning meal or almost liquid, in the liquid state it was usually eaten at night. Porridge was consumed both hot and cold (Danachair 1958).

Rye and wheat were also grown but not in large quantities; the commonest wheat bread eaten by the poor was a mixture of rye and wheat flour made into bread called Maslin which was well known throughout the Celtic world. Full wheaten breads were considered a delicacy, and the finest white flour was made into sweet cakes with eggs and honey, but was only eaten on special occasions (Danachair 1958). This type of cake was baked in different sizes and was mentioned in early Brehon Laws, the bairgin banfuine or woman's cake under these laws should be half the size or thickness of the mans cake or bairgin ferfuine which in turn was only half the size of a guests cake or bairgan indriud (O'Brien Education 1972). Scones were prepared with wheat flour and burned seaweed, sour milk and additional acid extracted from fruit, which acted as the raising agent. Drops or lumps of the mixture were wrapped in wild cabbage leaves and then baked under a cauldron over hot coals/stones until cooked. Oat bread prepared from roughly ground meal was cooked on hot stones in the hearth (fireplace); this was usually eaten with meat, or used to mop up stews/sauces. Another use for oat bread was to break it up into crumbs and put it into a mutton or beef stew to thicken it. Bread was also cooked in the cauldron over the cooling embers without a lid by placing the loaf in the oiled pot and allowing it to bake over night, a practice that is carried out in parts of rural Ireland to this day (Moreton, C 2000). In times of hardship, bread was made from peas, beans or acorn meal mixed with other grains. "

It is no longer on the site I originally got it from, but I think it was written by someone in the SCA.
_________________
http://wifezillasway.blogspot.com

Carnation · Top Carnivore Joined: 15 Dec 2007 Posts: 3586

adwred · Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 2:55 pm Post subject:

Yeah, I'm confused too.

_________________
I'm a vegetable-eater by proxy. I make sure to get 5-10 servings of herbivore per day.

Avalon · Top Carnivore Joined: 29 Nov 2006 Posts: 3326

ehem...

http://activenocarber.myfreeforum.org/ftopic2122-30.php

Yup

waywardsister · Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 1:29 am Post subject:

wifezilla · Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 3:47 am Post subject:

Yeah...it migrated over to the dairy forum. It does contain dairy info, but that wasn't why I origianlly posted it here. I put it here because of the reference to grains and veggeis being used sparingly. Well, now it is in 2 places....good info regardless of where it ends up.
_________________
http://wifezillasway.blogspot.com

jl53563 · Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 10:56 am Post subject:

Erasmus · Hunter Joined: 20 Feb 2008 Posts: 142

Only a crazy person would think that we did not eat fruit when it was available. It would have been a safe and easy meal. We like fruit. And given our nature to over "hunt", I'm sure we collected way more fruit than we could eat when it was around. So some of it would be stored, long enough for fermentation to start.

The monkey would have noticed this because the monkey likes to get stoned. Evil

Do you really think that a monkey smart enough to make hand tools would not be smart enough "brain tools"?

-E

PS. Even modern monkeys in cages make booze. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruno Grin

waywardsister · Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 8:23 pm Post subject:

Apparently lots of animals and insects like to tie one on now and then by eating fermented fruit Smile

I agree - we'd eat fruit. I think we'd eat whatever we found in our environments that didn't make us sick.

I think ppl sometimes get a little too bogged down in what paleo folk ate or didn't eat. There's a debate on the paleo listserv about tubers. IMO, if paleo dude found a potato that had been sitting in hot ashes awhile, he'd have eaten it. He wouldn't have made it the basis of his diet or anything, but he'd eat it. If it sat well with him, he'd eat one again next time he found one. If not, he wouldn't. Or he'd fuck with it and figure out how to make it more edible. (Okay - the dudette would. Dude would be hanging out with his buddies eating rotten apples and telling mammoth tales)
_________________
Wheat is murder.

adwred · Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 8:28 pm Post subject:

I once saw a picture on the internet of a guy with his dick stuck in a watermelon! My point being, that it's amazing what people will do when in an experimental mood. Yup

_________________
I'm a vegetable-eater by proxy. I make sure to get 5-10 servings of herbivore per day.

waywardsister · Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 8:49 pm Post subject:

That image will be in my head for the rest of the week.

(Red, we need to talk about your web surfing habits)

_________________
Wheat is murder.