Grains a Good Thing: Bound antioxidant phytochemicals in grains survive intact long enough to reach

Discussion in 'Food and nutrition' started by Mr-Natural-Health, Feb 26, 2006.

  1. J Agric Food Chem. 2002 Oct 9;50(21):6182-7.

    Antioxidant activity of grains.

    Adom KK, Liu RH.

    Department of Food Science, Cornell University, Stocking Hall, Ithaca,
    New York 14853-7201, USA.

    "Epidemiological studies have shown that consumption of whole grains
    and grain-based products is associated with reduced risk of chronic
    diseases. The health benefits of whole grains are attributed in part to
    their unique phytochemical composition. However, the phytochemical
    contents in grains have been commonly underestimated in the literature,
    because bound phytochemicals were not included. This study was designed
    to investigate the complete phytochemical profiles in free, soluble
    conjugated, and insoluble bound forms, as well as their antioxidant
    activities in uncooked whole grains. Corn had the highest total
    phenolic content (15.55 +/- 0.60 micromol of gallic acid equiv/g of
    grain) of the grains tested, followed by wheat (7.99 +/- 0.39 micromol
    of gallic acid equiv/g of grain), oats (6.53 +/- 0.19 micromol of
    gallic acid equiv/g of grain), and rice (5.56 +/- 0.17 micromol of
    gallic acid equiv/g of grain). The major portion of phenolics in grains
    existed in the bound form (85% in corn, 75% in oats and wheat, and 62%
    in rice), although free phenolics were frequently reported in the
    literature. Ferulic acid was the major phenolic compound in grains
    tested, with free, soluble-conjugated, and bound ferulic acids present
    in the ratio 0.1:1:100. Corn had the highest total antioxidant activity
    (181.42 +/- 0.86 micromol of vitamin C equiv/g of grain), followed by
    wheat (76.70 +/- 1.38 micromol of vitamin C equiv/g of grain), oats
    (74.67 +/- 1.49 micromol of vitamin C equiv/g of grain), and rice
    (55.77 +/- 1.62 micromol of vitamin C equiv/g of grain). Bound
    phytochemicals were the major contributors to the total antioxidant
    activity: 90% in wheat, 87% in corn, 71% in rice, and 58% in oats.
    Bound phytochemicals could survive stomach and intestinal digestion to
    reach the colon. This may partly explain the mechanism of grain
    consumption in the prevention of colon cancer, other digestive cancers,
    breast cancer, and prostate cancer, which is supported by
    epidemiological studies."

    PMID: 12358499
    http://naturalhealthperspective.com/food/whole-grains.html
    --
    John Gohde,
    Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

    The nutrition of eating a healthy diet is a biological factor of the
    mind-body connection. Now, weighing in at 18 web pages, the
    Nutrition of a Healthy Diet is with more documentation and
    sharper terminology than ever before.
    http://naturalhealthperspective.com/food/
     
    Tags:


  2. Joe

    Joe Guest

    "Mr-Natural-Health" <[email protected]> wrote in
    message news:[email protected]
    >J Agric Food Chem. 2002 Oct 9;50(21):6182-7.
    >


    SNIP! See ya tomorrow spammer

    --
    Joe W
    T2 Nov '05
    30mg Actos, 3gr(1/2 tsp or 500mg pill) Cinnamon, Diet(>100 carbs) &
    30 minute walk(everyday) & BowFlex 3x/week
    *****Diabetes, be proactive, not reactive.*****
     
  3. Cubit

    Cubit Guest

  4. DB

    DB Guest

    "Mr-Natural-Health" <[email protected]> wrote in

    > Why don't you ask around who Mr. Iron is and how long he has been
    > posting his crap?


    Mate, I really don't care, you are just not interesting anymore and this is
    getting really boring.

    Is your life so empty that you have to find entertainment on a USENET forum?
     
  5. DB wrote:
    > "Mr-Natural-Health" <[email protected]> wrote in
    >
    > > Why don't you ask around who Mr. Iron is and how long he has been
    > > posting his crap?

    >
    > Mate, I really don't care, you are just not interesting anymore and this is
    > getting really boring.
    >
    > Is your life so empty that you have to find entertainment on a USENET forum?


    Whose life is boring? Maybe you should try eating more food in order
    to make your pain go away?

    Ha, ... Hah, Ha! Get a hobby. Get a life!
     
  6. DB

    DB Guest

    "Mr-Natural-Health" <[email protected]> wrote in
    message
    >
    > Ha, ... Hah, Ha! Get a hobby. Get a life!


    LOL, this moron is trying to push a low fat solution on a high fat forum and
    he's telling me to get a life! LOLOLOLOL
     
  7. Joe

    Joe Guest

    "DB" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > "Mr-Natural-Health" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > message
    >>
    >> Ha, ... Hah, Ha! Get a hobby. Get a life!

    >
    > LOL, this moron is trying to push a low fat solution on a high fat forum
    > and he's telling me to get a life! LOLOLOLOL


    LOL Yea, Mr Whole-grain only has half a brain.

    >

    --
    Joe W
    T2 Nov '05
    30mg Actos, 3gr(1/2 tsp or 500mg pill) Cinnamon, Diet(>100 carbs) &
    30 minute walk(everyday) & BowFlex 3x/week
    *****Diabetes, be proactive, not reactive.*****
     
  8. dorsy1943

    dorsy1943 Guest

    I didn't know this was a high fat forum. While I eat a mediterranean
    type diet and use olive oil and fatty fish, I didn't realize that this
    forum was not for people with an opposite view. Ornish and Pritikin
    seem to have gotten very good results with their diets although
    exercise plays a prominent part in their eating plans. I have to admit
    that I eat whole grains and think they are an important part of my
    diet. But so are fish and olive oil and occasional chicken and turkey.
    I think the Atkins diet is dangerous to one's health but like to read
    information about it. Who knows? Maybe I will change my mind about
    it. It wouldn't be the first time. Is it just one person's opinion
    that this is only a high fat forum or do most people agree with this?
    Was this forum originally meant to be a high fat forum?

    Dolores
    Dolores
     
  9. dorsy1943 wrote:
    > I didn't know this was a high fat forum. While I eat a mediterranean
    > type diet and use olive oil and fatty fish, I didn't realize that
    > this forum was not for people with an opposite view. Ornish and
    > Pritikin seem to have gotten very good results with their diets
    > although exercise plays a prominent part in their eating plans. I
    > have to admit that I eat whole grains and think they are an important
    > part of my diet. But so are fish and olive oil and occasional
    > chicken and turkey. I think the Atkins diet is dangerous to one's
    > health but like to read information about it. Who knows? Maybe I
    > will change my mind about it. It wouldn't be the first time. Is it
    > just one person's opinion that this is only a high fat forum or do
    > most people agree with this? Was this forum originally meant to be a
    > high fat forum?


    You're cross-posted to about 6 groups. So far as I know, none of them are
    "high fat forums", especially the diabetes groups I'm seeing it on.
     
  10. Noway2

    Noway2 Guest

    dorsy1943 wrote:
    > I didn't know this was a high fat forum. While I eat a mediterranean
    > type diet and use olive oil and fatty fish, I didn't realize that this
    > forum was not for people with an opposite view.


    A mediterranean diet isn't necessarilly an opposite view. This is a
    Low Carb newsgroup and for many of the regulars here the choice to go
    LC has been a miracle of a decision. From what I know about a
    mediterranean diet I would guess that much of your philosophy agrees
    with the concensus with the possibility of pasta being an exception.
    That being said, if you stick around long enough you will probably find
    that the regulars are generally quite accepting of others views. The
    problem is that for some reason this group tends to attract a lot of
    Trolls who do nothing but attempt to stir things up.

    > Ornish and Pritikin
    > seem to have gotten very good results with their diets although
    > exercise plays a prominent part in their eating plans.


    Does here too. As far as Ornish and Pritkin their plans do work for
    some individuals and for those it works quite well. For others, myself
    included, attempting to eat a low fat high carbohydrate diet does
    nothing but put us off the binging cliff. We have found that our own
    body chemistry is such that it doesn't work. I tend to agree with
    Atkins when he said in his book that Ornish and Pritkin are to be
    commended because they are attempting to do something about a "growing"
    problem. In his own book he says that they have acchieved successfully
    results., but their plan doesn't work for everyone and for that matter
    niether does LC.

    > I have to admit
    > that I eat whole grains and think they are an important part of my
    > diet. But so are fish and olive oil and occasional chicken and turkey.
    > I think the Atkins diet is dangerous to one's health but like to read
    > information about it. Who knows? Maybe I will change my mind about
    > it. It wouldn't be the first time.


    Why do you believe that it is dangerous? Reading this group alone will
    provide you with a lot of testimonials from individuals who's health
    has improved dramatically, according to their doctors. Is it dangerous
    because it allows consumption of saturated fat? Recent studies are
    (finally) proving that saturated fat isn't the nemesis that it was
    ASSUMED to be.

    > Is it just one person's opinion
    > that this is only a high fat forum or do most people agree with this?
    > Was this forum originally meant to be a high fat forum?
    >
    > Dolores
    > Dolores


    LC is not Low Fat and if it is not Low Fat there may be a natural to
    call it High Fat. Of course this idea will put fear into many because
    they have been successfully brain washed that low fat is the only
    healthy option. Many beginners think that the only things you can eat
    are meat, eggs and cheese. While this is probably how many begin
    after a short while you learn to include a wider variety of foods. A
    common statement is that after getting used to LC that you start eating
    a hell of a lot more vegetables and some fruits, nuts, seeds, etc. All
    of these healthy items are taking the place of what was predominantly
    processed carbohydrates and sugar. As far as being "high fat" when
    one considers the percentage of calories that come from fat, yes it is
    probably a 'high fat' diet. However, the amount total fat that is
    consumed is quite often no higher than it was prior to going LC/
     
  11. Enrico C

    Enrico C Guest

    On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 08:28:50 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote in
    <news:[email protected]> on
    alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diet.paleolithic,alt.health.diabetes,misc.health.diabetes,sci.med.nutrition
    :

    >> most people agree with this? Was this forum originally meant to be a
    >> high fat forum?

    >
    > You're cross-posted to about 6 groups.


    Indeed. I am reading this thread on sci.med.nutrition


    > So far as I know, none of them are
    > "high fat forums", especially the diabetes groups I'm seeing it on.


    I guess Dorsy was referring to the low-carb group.

    I looked up Google Groups for the charter of
    alt.support.diet.low-carb.

    It just says:

    |Charter: This group is for the discussion of low-carbohydrate weight
    |loss plans, and for providing emotional support to others who follow
    |those plans.


    BTW, how "low" is "low-carbohydrate"?

    X'Posted to: alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diet.paleolithic,alt.health.diabetes,misc.health.diabetes,sci.med.nutrition
     
  12. Carmen

    Carmen Guest

    Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    > DB wrote:
    > > "Mr-Natural-Health" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > >
    > > > Why don't you ask around who Mr. Iron is and how long he has been
    > > > posting his crap?

    > >
    > > Mate, I really don't care, you are just not interesting anymore and this is
    > > getting really boring.
    > >
    > > Is your life so empty that you have to find entertainment on a USENET forum?

    >
    > Whose life is boring? Maybe you should try eating more food in order
    > to make your pain go away?


    Hello again John! I see you're still with us in ASDLC. That tells me
    you've decided that you're ready to make a change. I'm sure you'll
    find plenty of support as you abandon some of the not-so-healthy
    aspects of your "whole grain". From now on you can count on me (and
    I'm sure others will jump in as well) to take an active hand in guiding
    you along.

    Okay, first things first. You aren't overweight so this process is
    going to be primarily about eating healthier for you. Step one is the
    painful one. You're going to have to get rid of the junk food
    masquerading as whole grain in your kitchen. Granola bars - big no-no.
    Yes, they're "whole grain". They're also sugar-laden crap. Throw
    them all out. Same with granola and muesli if it's sweetened. Rice
    cakes, puffs, popcorn, all go in the garbage. If the label has added
    sugars they're crap. Honey, molasses, it doesn't matter what they call
    it - it's crap. Good luck!

    Carmen
     
  13. Noway2

    Noway2 Guest

    Enrico C wrote:
    > On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 08:28:50 -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote in
    > <news:[email protected]> on
    > alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diet.paleolithic,alt.health.diabetes,misc.health.diabetes,sci.med.nutrition
    > :
    >
    > >> most people agree with this? Was this forum originally meant to be a
    > >> high fat forum?

    > >
    > > You're cross-posted to about 6 groups.


    It was Mr. Natural that cross posted the original message to all the
    groups, probably in a desperate effort to show off his ignorance. For
    some reason, he seems to be Trolling on the LC newgsgroup recently and
    apparently he is unhappy that he isn't able to get everyone to see the
    "whole grain light" so he is probably branching out to the paleolithic
    and diabetes groups and throwing in the sci.med.nutrition for good
    measure.

    > Indeed. I am reading this thread on sci.med.nutrition
    >
    >
    > > So far as I know, none of them are
    > > "high fat forums", especially the diabetes groups I'm seeing it on.

    >
    > I guess Dorsy was referring to the low-carb group.
    >
    > I looked up Google Groups for the charter of
    > alt.support.diet.low-carb.
    >
    > It just says:
    >
    > |Charter: This group is for the discussion of low-carbohydrate weight
    > |loss plans, and for providing emotional support to others who follow
    > |those plans.
    >
    >
    > BTW, how "low" is "low-carbohydrate"?
    >


    It is as low as it needs to be for the individual, is determined on an
    individual basis, and is a real "Your Milage May Vary" topic. There is
    no "magic" number such as under 30% or 10% like is common with low fat,
    with the exception of Atkin's recommendation that you start out at
    under 20g of carbohydrates per day as his (experimental) experience
    showed that this level was affective for 95% of the poeple.
     
  14. "dorsy1943" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >I didn't know this was a high fat forum. While I eat a mediterranean
    > type diet and use olive oil and fatty fish, I didn't realize that this
    > forum was not for people with an opposite view. Ornish and Pritikin
    > seem to have gotten very good results with their diets although
    > exercise plays a prominent part in their eating plans. I have to admit
    > that I eat whole grains and think they are an important part of my
    > diet. But so are fish and olive oil and occasional chicken and turkey.
    > I think the Atkins diet is dangerous to one's health but like to read
    > information about it. Who knows? Maybe I will change my mind about
    > it. It wouldn't be the first time. Is it just one person's opinion
    > that this is only a high fat forum or do most people agree with this?
    > Was this forum originally meant to be a high fat forum?


    Since you're cross-posting to about half a dozen
    newsgroups, how can anyone answer your
    question?
     
  15. Ernst Primer

    Ernst Primer Guest

    Carmen wrote:
    > Mr-Natural-Health wrote:
    > > DB wrote:
    > > > "Mr-Natural-Health" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > > >
    > > > > Why don't you ask around who Mr. Iron is and how long he has been
    > > > > posting his crap?
    > > >
    > > > Mate, I really don't care, you are just not interesting anymore and this is
    > > > getting really boring.
    > > >
    > > > Is your life so empty that you have to find entertainment on a USENET forum?

    > >
    > > Whose life is boring? Maybe you should try eating more food in order
    > > to make your pain go away?

    >
    > Hello again John! I see you're still with us in ASDLC. That tells me
    > you've decided that you're ready to make a change. I'm sure you'll
    > find plenty of support as you abandon some of the not-so-healthy
    > aspects of your "whole grain". From now on you can count on me (and
    > I'm sure others will jump in as well) to take an active hand in guiding
    > you along.
    >
    > Okay, first things first. You aren't overweight so this process is
    > going to be primarily about eating healthier for you. Step one is the
    > painful one. You're going to have to get rid of the junk food
    > masquerading as whole grain in your kitchen. Granola bars - big no-no.
    > Yes, they're "whole grain". They're also sugar-laden crap. Throw
    > them all out. Same with granola and muesli if it's sweetened. Rice
    > cakes, puffs, popcorn, all go in the garbage. If the label has added
    > sugars they're crap. Honey, molasses, it doesn't matter what they call
    > it - it's crap. Good luck!
    >
    > Carmen


    Ha! Good post.
     
  16. "dorsy1943" <[email protected]> writes:

    > I didn't know this was a high fat forum.


    Which one? You're posting to several.

    > While I eat a mediterranean type diet and use olive oil and fatty
    > fish, I didn't realize that this forum was not for people with an
    > opposite view. Ornish and Pritikin seem to have gotten very good
    > results with their diets although exercise plays a prominent part in
    > their eating plans.


    I wouldn't consider exercise to be part of an eating plan at all. You
    can have an eating plan and an exercise plan (or one and not the
    other), and there's no relationship between the two except what you
    make up in your own mind.

    > I think the Atkins diet is dangerous to one's health but like to
    > read information about it.


    You haven't studied it yet, but you already think it's dangerous.
    Interesting.


    --
    Aaron -- [email protected] -- 285/245/200
    http://360.yahoo.com/aaron_baugher
     
  17. dorsy1943

    dorsy1943 Guest

    Re: cross posting. Being computer illiterate and a former web tv user,
    I wouldn't know how to cross post, but when I replied to the person who
    criticized someone for being a moron because he is posting on a high
    fat group, my computer screen said I had posted to several different
    groups. If that is bad, I do not know how to correct it since I just
    click on the word reply at the bottom of the posts.

    In the late nineties, I had web tv and I remember there were many
    debates on sci.med.nutrition about high carb vs low carb but I don't
    ever remember that it was considered a low carb, high carb or high fat
    group. That's why I wanted to know if things had changed over the
    years to a high fat forum as DB said it is.

    Dolores
     
  18. Carmen

    Carmen Guest

    dorsy1943 wrote:
    > Re: cross posting. Being computer illiterate and a former web tv user,
    > I wouldn't know how to cross post, but when I replied to the person who
    > criticized someone for being a moron because he is posting on a high
    > fat group, my computer screen said I had posted to several different
    > groups. If that is bad, I do not know how to correct it since I just
    > click on the word reply at the bottom of the posts.


    When using Google, don't use the "Reply" at the bottom of the message.
    Use the "Reply" at the top, in the heading. It will give you more
    options. One of them is you'll be able to see (and remove or add)
    groups in the "To" header. The groups are separated by commas, so just
    remove all but the one you want to reply to.

    Carmen
     
  19. Carmen wrote:
    > dorsy1943 wrote:
    > > Re: cross posting. Being computer illiterate and a former web tv user,
    > > I wouldn't know how to cross post, but when I replied to the person who
    > > criticized someone for being a moron because he is posting on a high
    > > fat group, my computer screen said I had posted to several different
    > > groups. If that is bad, I do not know how to correct it since I just
    > > click on the word reply at the bottom of the posts.

    >
    > When using Google, don't use the "Reply" at the bottom of the message.
    > Use the "Reply" at the top, in the heading. It will give you more
    > options. One of them is you'll be able to see (and remove or add)
    > groups in the "To" header. The groups are separated by commas, so just
    > remove all but the one you want to reply to.
    >
    > Carmen


    Click on the "Show Options" then the "Reply".

    Just to clarify.

    TC
     
  20. Enrico C wrote:
    > Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
    >
    > > So far as I know, none of them are
    > > "high fat forums", especially the diabetes groups I'm seeing it on.

    >
    > I guess Dorsy was referring to the low-carb group.
    >
    > BTW, how "low" is "low-carbohydrate"?


    Depends on the plan and on the individual. Generally 100 grams per
    day per less will count as low carb by most but some chose lower
    boundaries.

    Also, since Atkins as the actual directions go is a process that is
    custom tuned based on the body's actual reactions, the final carb
    level a person ends up at might not even count as low carb or
    miht be as low as 15 grams per day. It varies that much from
    person to person, though either extreme is rare. It really follows
    the usual bell-shaped curve with losing centered near 50 and
    maintenance centered near 100.

    So for an encore will Mr Natural ignore the high rate of lactose
    intolerance worldwide and go on a campaign about how wonderfull
    dairy must automatically be to every human on the planet? ;^)
     
Loading...