On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 10:34:55 EST, S C <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >I think that root vegetables and rhizomes differ from starchy tubers in the >amount and type of carbohydrate the contain. I can't be sure about every >vegetable out there, but I know that beets for one contain sucrose--a >disaccharide. That's easier to digest than starch (amylose or amylopectin). >Also, roots tend to be much lower in carbohydrates than starchy tubers. We have a very good description of Australian Aboriginal Plant foods from Brand-Miller/Holt, Nutrition research reviews 1998. It contains a lot of data on the roots, tubers, bulbs (alongside with fruits seeds legumes vegetables flowers) these people eat. And comparisons with today's cultivated items. As a rule of thumb the nature have more fiber,less carb,more protein, like: fiber carb protein cultivated r. 2+-1 21+-27 1+-1 nat.roots 8+-7 17+-13 2+-3 nat.tubers 6+-4 22+-12 2+-2 nat.bulbs 8+-6 38+-23 2+-1 cultiv.grain 10+-4 72+-2 11+-2 nat.seeds 18+-16 45+-22 12+-8 A cooked ordinary potatoe has about 17% carb, a sweetpotatoe 22%. Seeds/Grains have very much more carb, both natural and cultivated. That's a slight increase in carb in cultivated items, but not very much. Very much higher is the fiber part in natural items. A similar tendency is also found in Nuts, Seeds, pith,stalk,buds and legumes if you compare the natural items with their cultivated counterparts. regards, Amadeus S. > >> It's true that [Cordain says in his paleo diet book to avoid starchy tubers >and eat only honey as a sweetener], but unfortunately he offers no plausible >paleo-based justification for the restriction. > >It's true that Cordain offers no paleo-based justification for this, or for >many of his other pronouncements. This is what bothered me most about his >book. But I think there is some evidence that our ancestors didn't eat a lot >of starch. > >Our bodies don't well tolerate a very high carbohydrate diet. All kinds of >problems follow from this--rampant bowel disease (this is a very widespread >problem), insulin resistance, etc., etc. This tends to suggest that we >evolved on a diet that was moderate in carbohydrates (that is to say, much >lower than the standard American diet), and this is the opinion of most paleo >nutritionists. > >Starchy tubers and grains are the main source of polysaccharides in the >modern diet, and they are also almost pure carbohydrate. If these foods were >as widely available in paleo times as they are today, then the paleo diet >would have been much higher in carbohydrates than it apparently was. There >is fairly broad agreement that paleo people didn't eat grain. Just the fact >that we are not designed to eat a very high carb diet tends to suggest that >starchy tubers also played a small role. Many starchy tubers also need >cooking to be edible, which is another point against them.