Joined
·
6,009 Posts
I was looking for information on antinutrients and came across this:
http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/132/3/495S
Quote:
and
Quote:
and
Quote:
I'm very interested in the whole issue of antinutrients. For one thing, I would like to see evidence that soaking grains and legumes actually does cause a reduction in antinutrients, without also reducing nutritional value. Where might I find information like that - and I mean a real evaluation of soaked vs. unsoaked foods?
Has anyone ever looked into the "paleofood" diet? They recommend strictly avoiding all grains and legumes, due to antinutrient content. However, they allow all nuts, except peanuts obviously, with no special preparation requirements. Sally Fallon says nuts should be soaked. I read a lot about this diet a few years ago, so it's interesting to see the differences between it and the NT diet, when they both make mention of antinutrients, kwim?
Oh, I almost forgot that I also read this:
Quote:
http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocente...ls/phosphorus/
Now I know we don't need more phosphorous in our diet, but wouldn't this also mean that the yeast has broken down the phytates enough to make other nutrients more bioavailable? Wouldn't it mean that a little yeasted whole grain bread, even if it isn't sourdough, isn't so bad for you after all?
I've been mulling over these things for a while now, trying to reconcile the differences between NT and the paleolithic diet, as well as to find evidence to support all of the claims in NT. We eat almost all sprouted or soaked grains and nuts, but I'm really wondering if that's as necessary or beneficial as she claims it is. I need some help figuring this out.
![]()
http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/132/3/495S
Quote:
| Additionally, some of the antinutrients, such as phytate and polyphenols, may play important beneficial roles in human diets by acting as anticarcinogens or by promoting health in other ways, such as decreasing the risk of heart disease or diabetes |
Quote:
| For example, Table 3lists some data reported by Morris and Ellis from a study with humans fed either low- or high-phytate muffin diets. As expected, the subjects fed the dephytinized muffins remained in positive Fe balance for the entire period that they were fed the dephytinized muffins. Interestingly, subjects fed the high-phytate diet during the first 5 d were in negative Fe balance (as expected), but by study d 10, these same subjects demonstrated positive Fe balances (which was not expected), suggesting that there must have been some adaptation to the high-phytate meals in these test subjects. Others have reported similar results from balance studies to those of Morris and Ellis |
Quote:
| They studied the effects of phytate on Zn homeostasis in four groups of children: two groups recovering from tuberculosis were fed high-phytate and low-phytate diets and two groups that were well but in the hospital for elective surgery and other treatments were fed high-phytate and low-phytate diets. As expected, in the children recovering from tuberculosis fed meals high in phytate, fractional Zn absorption, total Zn absorption and net Zn absorption were significantly reduced, while endogenous fecal Zn decreased compared with those fed low-phytate diets. However, unexpectedly, for the well children fed a high-phytate diet, more phytate had no effect on fractional Zn absorption, while total Zn absorption and net Zn absorption were higher, compared with well children fed the low-phytate diet. A major difference between the recovering children and the well children was the fact that the recovering children had received four potent antibiotics for over 60 d, whereas the well children received none. This suggests that the activity of microorganisms in the gut may have a large influence on the effects of phytate in meals on Zn bioavailability. Possibly, certain microorganisms in the gut may have active phytases that hydrolyze phytate making it inactive toward Zn absorption from the gut. |
Has anyone ever looked into the "paleofood" diet? They recommend strictly avoiding all grains and legumes, due to antinutrient content. However, they allow all nuts, except peanuts obviously, with no special preparation requirements. Sally Fallon says nuts should be soaked. I read a lot about this diet a few years ago, so it's interesting to see the differences between it and the NT diet, when they both make mention of antinutrients, kwim?
Oh, I almost forgot that I also read this:
Quote:
| Only about 50% of the phosphorus from phytate is available to humans because we lack enzymes (phytases) that liberate it from phytate (9). Yeasts possess phytases, so whole grains incorporated into leavened breads have more bioavailable phosphorus than whole grains incorporated into breakfast cereals or flat breads (2). |
Now I know we don't need more phosphorous in our diet, but wouldn't this also mean that the yeast has broken down the phytates enough to make other nutrients more bioavailable? Wouldn't it mean that a little yeasted whole grain bread, even if it isn't sourdough, isn't so bad for you after all?
I've been mulling over these things for a while now, trying to reconcile the differences between NT and the paleolithic diet, as well as to find evidence to support all of the claims in NT. We eat almost all sprouted or soaked grains and nuts, but I'm really wondering if that's as necessary or beneficial as she claims it is. I need some help figuring this out.
