On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 17:04:10 EST, Judy Genova <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>According to Amadeus's theory, wouldn't they be fat because their sole
>source of grain is refined?

White rice seems to be different than other refined items.
For two reasons.
1. rice has it's protein part also in the white variety.
In rice the protein is distributed also inside the grain.
This is different to other grains (particularly wheat) which has it's
protein only outside and inside there's only starch.
Maybe other important items are inside the white rice as well.
2.white rice is always vitaminized with b-vitamins - particularly thiamin
(required for pyruvate dehydrogenase).
Thiamin is only in the silver skin, which is removed in white rice.
But all white rice has thiamin added - and this IMO is the main bottleneck
of carbohydrate processing.
(after introduction of unvitaminized white rice by colonialists many poeple
died of beri-beri - that has been solved by the vitamin-enforcing)

>One thing they will all tell me, brown rice doesn't exist in their cuisine.
>For one thing, it is too expensive and hard to find because it has to be
>imported!  For another thing, no one likes the taste!  So much for whole
>grains.....

I think the brown varieties (of rice and other grains) are less popular,
because they contain the problematic stuff - like lectins.
People feel this.
To eat these grains - as was done for several thousands of years after the
neolithic transition - requires the proper processing.
Particularly by germination.

Nowadays the traditional processings are hardly ever found.
Bread of wheat or rye is make with yeaast (quick) instead of sourdough (slow
but detoxificating).

Detoxification techniques are usually not only in neolithic times, but also
in paleolithical times. Soaking of oakseed for example.
Cooking of various items, including meat. For meat of course it was not for
detoxifiating of antinutrients but against parasites and as a digestion aid.


regards, Amadeus