Talk:Whole grain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Plants (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Food and drink (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
 

Unencyclopedic Content[edit]

I removed the phrase "Wholegrains are good for you and they make your body work well.". It may be true, but statements like that just do not belong on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GitarooMan (talkcontribs) 03:46, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Whole wheat[edit]

While you are correct about the shelf life of whole wheat flour, you were wrong about the thought that whole wheat isn't whole grain.

whole wheat definitely is whole grain. meredith mary were here<333

Please read my article for more information. jamesccostello@gmail.com

As discussed in the "Identifying whole-grain products" section, whole wheat isn't necessarily whole grain in Canada (but it is in the U.S.). --Rbkfcva (talk) 23:31, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Cleanup[edit]

Good evening folks, I've been assigned by the cleanup taskforce to help clean this up. Grandwazir 22:55, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Recent additions[edit]

I have removed the following material until it is rewritten to conform to a higher standard of quality.

Snooping out Whole Wheat from White Wheat[edit]

I help make and sell bread in great Harvest of Thousand Oaks, so maybe I can help clarify this for everyone. Determining whether something is whole grain or not is a slightly complicated process.

As dorierez said in her discussion, the shelf life does only last about 48-72 hours before losing flavor and nutrients. In Great Harvest, we use the whole grain flour within 36-48 hours after we mill it. otherwise as dorierez said, it would go rancid and lose many of the nutrients and flavor. When used quickly after milling, whole wheat bread can have a much better taste than white bread.

What dorierez said about whole wheat not being whole grain is untrue. 'Whole wheat' is always whole grain. 'wheat' is questionable.

Before we begin, you must know what wheat is. Wheat is the kernel that grows on the wheat stalk. It is a type of grain, and as long as the entire grain is used in the milling process it is 'whole grain flour'. However, if a part of the grain is removed, then it is 'white flour' regardless of whether it is bleached or unbleached.



If a label just says "wheat" it may or may not be whole grain. But if you look for the term "Whole Wheat" or "Whole Grain", you insure that it is whole grain. But looking for these alone only ensures that it is PART whole wheat, which means some white flour may or may not be in there too.

To ensure that the flour in a product is 100% whole grain, look for these common items: "enriched flour", "Unbleached flour", or "white flour". If none of these are on there, then it is 100% whole grain.

Another thing to watch out for is don't let the color of the bread fool you. Often times larger bakeries will use molassas, brown sugar, and coloring to make a bread look like its whole wheat.



If the label says "100% whole grain" then you can be sure that it is entirely whole grain(and you dont need to look up the ingredients).

Just recently though the Whole Grains Council has been issuing these stamps to any company which wishes to use them. Here is what they mean:

File:Http://wholegrainscouncil.org/img/stamp good.gif This stamp indicates 8-15 grams of whole grain. ( 1/2 serving )

File:Http://wholegrainscouncil.org/img/stamp excellent.gif This stamp indicates 16 or more grams of whole grain. ( 1 serving )

File:Http://wholegrainscouncil.org/img/stamp 100excellent.gif This stamp indicates 16 or more grams of whole grain and 100% whole grain. (No white wheat)


When searching for Whole grain foods, it is best to look for these labels.

For more information on these stamps, visit the whole grain coucil's website at http://wholegrainscouncil.org/WholeGrainStamp.html[1].

I hope this cleared up a few things for everyone.

Crude language[edit]

removed crude language that is not necessary [user: canuk72 Jan 3, 2007 2pm]

Colonoscopy and Whole Grains[edit]

I turned 50 recently and had a colonoscopy, because Katie Couric had one. They found a polyp and removed it, and afterwards my doctor advised me to eat whole grain bread. I do and I also eat rice bran, freshly ground flax seed power and drink green tea, because they are also supposed to be healthful.204.80.61.10 18:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)Bennett Turk

contradiction?[edit]

Currently this article claims "carbohydrates from whole grains are digested and enter the bloodstream more slowly (as measured by the glycemic index). ... When searching for whole-grain foods, it is important to note that any products made with flour can have the same effect on blood sugar, whether the flour is produced from whole grains or not."

So which is it?

  • Do whole grain foods have the same effect on blood sugar (the same glycemic index) as refined grains?
  • Do whole grain foods enter the bloodstream more slowly, leading to a lower glycemic index?

--68.0.124.33 (talk) 02:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

When bakers make white flour, they have to remove the husk (Unfortunately, when they remove the husk, they remove most of the wheat germ's nutritional value. Hence, they must "enrich" the white flour with nutrients to replace all the nutrients that were stripped away with the husk!)
When your body digests whole grain wheat, it has to work its way past the husk in order to get to the starchy kernel (Contrast that to enriched flour, where the starchy kernel is absorbed almost immediately.) Your blood sugar rises much more slowly after consuming whole grain wheat than it does after consuming enriched grains. You don't get the spikes in blood sugar that you do after eating white flour. -- LizFL (talk) 18:12, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't it depend on if it's flour? How would the husk protect the starchy innards if its all ground up into a fine powder? Vyroglyph (talk) 10:06, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

"Why do many high-fibre foods still have a high GI value?" -- http://www.glycemicindex.com/faq_java2.htm#4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamahome02000 (talkcontribs) 18:39, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Identifying whole-grain products[edit]

This section seems to be very useful, but it deals with US laws and regulations only (that's obvious from the cited sources). I will mark it as US-centered in hope to attract attention from editors who can provide information about regulations in other parts of the world as well. Pbosakov (talk) 15:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I question the accuracy of the statement, "Typically, if the ingredient lists 'whole wheat,' 'whole meal,' or 'whole corn' as the first ingredient, the product is a whole-grain food item." There are probably many multi-grain items (7-grain breads, for example) that may meet the "first ingredient" criterion but contain very little whole grain. Also, why were "whole wheat," "whole meal," and "whole corn" singled out? What if the first ingredient were brown rice? --Rbkfcva (talk) 12:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if the 7-grain bread is a good example because most breads of this type list white flour (or unbleached white flour or wheat flour, etc) as their first ingredient. However, I could envision circumstances in which the challenged statement is untrue in the other extreme; i.e. a 7-grain bread that is 30% white flour and, say, 10% each of seven different whole grains. It is thus 70% whole grain but the white flour would by law (at least in the US) be listed first. In any event, since the statement is unsourced it may very well be original research anyway and I feel we should best remove it. Cheers, Dusty|💬|You can help! 16:10, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I think that the statement "In Canada, it is legal to advertise any food product as 'whole wheat' with up to 70% of the germ removed" is misleading. The reference cited (the article from Rosie Schwartz) says that "whole wheat products typically have about 70% of the wheat's germ removed." It doesn't say that 70% is the legal limit for whole wheat. Canadian Food and Drug Regulations, referenced in the "Canadian standards of identity" section of the Wiki article, say that "up to 5% of the kernel can be removed...." Since 3% of whole grain wheat is the germ, can't whole wheat flour in Canada have 100% of the germ (and 2% of the bran) removed? I'd like to point out that I live in the U.S. and I am unfamiliar with Canadian regulations. --Rbkfcva (talk) 03:32, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Whole Grains vs Whole Grain Products[edit]

This article on whole grains is misleading and wrong. Dr Andrew Weil

http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/TIP03064/Easy-Way-to-Cook-Whole-Grains.html

would contend that whole grains are just that...whole. He defines whole grains as seeds that are not pulverized. Therefore, flour, even whole wheat flour, would not be a whole grain but a whole grain PRODUCT. Whole grains and the use thereof is not the topic of this article. Dangnad (talk) 23:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Different posting below[edit]

I'm coming back 8 yrs later to put a header between my original posting above and the one below which didn't have a header Dangnad (talk) 02:28, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

" Keeping grains as close to their original form as possible slows or prevents the digestion of starch, and a slower digestion is responsible for preventing spikes in blood sugar" Really, there is little difference in blood sugar "spiking" given with food having a Glycemic Index of 100 or say 50.ALL digestible carbohydrates raise blood glucose levels some 30 to 60 minutes after eating. The level of elevation is the only difference observed- see Hughes at ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/49/4/658. The major problem is that excessive consumption of carbohydrates, especially by pre-diabetic and diabetic patients, can lead to an increase risk in cardiovascular disease- see The New England Journal of Medicine, January 17, 2008. The role of glycated hemoglobin in CVD is at last being recognized, see Wikipedia Glycosylated_hemoglobin ." Persistent elevations in blood sugar (and therefore HbA1c) increase the risk for the long-term vascular complications of diabetes such as coronary disease, heart attack, stroke, heart failure, kidney failure, blindness, erectile dysfunction, neuropathy (loss of sensation, especially in the feet), gangrene, and gastroparesis (slowed emptying of the stomach)." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.172.116.105 (talk) 21:23, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Correlation vs Causation?[edit]

In the 2002 study, was there anything to suggest that whole grains were a cause of the positive health effects? People who are choosing to eat whole grains are probably the ones who are paying a lot of attention to what they are eating. They probably eat other health food too. Could that explain the association?Vyroglyph (talk) 10:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Negligible health benefits.[edit]

Reading the cited articles, it doesn't seem to me that the differences between eating a lot of whole or refined grains is that significant.

In reference 8 for instance, there was an average of .01 difference in the waist to hip ratio, and a .5 difference in the BMI. So yes, that's a reduction in obesity. But it seems to me to be extraordinarily negligible. Shouldn't the Wikipedia article take that into account?

24.60.128.234 (talk) 13:28, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Completely agree with this statement. The glycemic index in general is often abused and many fallacious statement are made based on it such as the health benefits. In a real world situation the effects of insulin is negligible

. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.190.22.61 (talk) 12:13, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Compared to not eating ANY Grain at all?[edit]

Not eating grain is NEVER addressed. A grain free diet is NEVER compared to a whole grain or refined grain diet. That is not science. A small knife would is generally less fatal than a gunshot wound to the head; This does not mean a knife wound is therefore good for you. Saying whole grains are good for you because they're less harmfull than refined grains is like saying you can make a cigarette good for you by putting on a filter.

One can get a lot of fiber from berries, vegetables, nuts, almonds, peanuts, beans, peas...

ee1518 (talk) 08:09, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

We do not compare a diet rich in whole grains to a grain-free diet for the same reason we don't compare it to a diet with no food whatsoever (breatharianism). While we have reliable sources comparing a diet rich in whole grains to a diet with refined grains, we do not have reliable sources comparing it to either of the fringe diets. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:53, 11 January 2015 (UTC)