grains and beans

patrick said:

Saw somewhere a claim that grains and beans are not a
natural food. These are claimed to be only recent foods in
evolutionary terms.And that is why they are cooked because
of so much indigestible fibre.

Could this be true?

Only if you define "natural" in an unnatural way.

oh gee! thanks for that.

patrick "anon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:2004032418554150073%anon@anoncom...

Quoted message said:

patrick said:

Saw somewhere a claim that grains and beans are not a
natural food. These are claimed to be only recent foods
in evolutionary terms.And

that is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

why they are cooked because of so much indigestible
fibre.

Could this be true?

Only if you define "natural" in an unnatural way.

patrick said:

oh gee! thanks for that.

I mean, really...what the hell did you expect? "Beans
aren't a natural food?" Sounds like the same [censored] that the
raw-food faddists are pushing. Eat beans, don't eat beans.
Who cares if they fit somebody's arbitary definition of
"natural"? They're a hell of a lot better for you than the
[censored] that most Americans are stuffing themselves with on a
daily basis.

I know nothing about this subject. The subject being 1.
which foods were in the diet of humans throughout human
evolution 2. How well and how quickly humans adapt to a
particular new food source. So it could make a huge
difference how natural a food source is this sense.

For example alcohol: some races have not adapted yet to its
consumption AFAIK because thay were never exposed to it. and
others have.

I was looking perhaps for some usefull information on all
this. not a smartass comment.

patrick

"anon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:2004032507193350878%anon@anoncom...

Quoted message said:

patrick said:

oh gee! thanks for that.

I mean, really...what the hell did you expect? "Beans
aren't a natural food?" Sounds like the same [censored] that the
raw-food faddists are pushing. Eat beans, don't eat beans.
Who cares if they fit somebody's arbitary definition of
"natural"? They're a hell of a lot better for you than the
[censored] that most Americans are stuffing themselves with on a
daily basis.

In article <[email hidden]>,

patrick said:

Saw somewhere a claim that grains and beans are not a
natural food. These are claimed to be only recent foods in
evolutionary terms.And that is why they are cooked because
of so much indigestible fibre.

Could this be true?

It depends on how you define natural. Compared to their wild
ancestors or related species, domesticated grains and beans
are generally larger, higher in digestible nutrients and
lower in toxic and unpleasant tasting components. Five to
ten thousand years of farmers selecting the best seed to
plant next year has accomplished this.

Grains and beans are generally cooked to make them easier to
chew and to convert the starch to a more digestible form.
Cooking also deactivates some toxic compounds. Soybeans are
a particular case of that, but some other beans grown in
tropical areas also need to be cooked to be destroy
components that interfere with digestion.

That said, a bowl of cooked brown rice or cracked wheat or
oat porridge is a lot closer to a wild or "natural" food in
nutritional value than a doughnut or slice of white bread.

Note also that "nature" has not optimized plants for value
as human food so there's no reason to regard undomesticated
grains and beans, with all their feeding deterrents and
inhibitors of digestion, as superior to crop plants
nutritionally. It's in the plant's interest to make its
seeds inedible, and our ancestors have put millenia of
selective breeding into getting around that.

On 2004-03-25 08:16:00 -0500, "patrick" <[email hidden]> said:

Well, you could've asked your question a lot more precisely
than you did.

Quoted message said:

I know nothing about this subject. The subject being 1.
which foods were in the diet of humans throughout human
evolution 2. How well and how quickly humans adapt to a
particular new food source. So it could make a huge
difference how natural a food source is this sense.

For example alcohol: some races have not adapted yet to
its consumption AFAIK because thay were never exposed to
it. and others have.

I was looking perhaps for some usefull information on all
this. not a smartass comment.