[Discussion] going against the grain: theory vs bloodwork of (pseudo)grains' antinutrient effects

Using wild rice as an example of a pseudograin considered relatively healthy, this article discusses the issue and links to further good reads from the paleosphere: http://www.surepaleo.com/is-wild-rice-paleo/

As a nutritionist I favour a nutrivore/ancestral diet (big fan of Kresser, Masterjohn, Wolf, Patrick) but I’ve noticed that in clients I had to put on an AIP/elimination diet, upon reintroducing first basmati and then red/black/wild rice (as they could not handle any tubers yet) into their diet as a primary source of carbohydrates and monitoring their bloodwork for mineral levels throughout, there was no discernable reduction one would expect from the supposed binding of minerals by antinutrients, specifically phytate.

I’d like to delve deeper and discuss whether any of you have monitored your mineral levels on/off grains/antinutrient foods (putting aside the reduction by soaking as a factor for now), as I wonder whatever amount is bound by antinutrients is overcompensated for by those (pseudo)grains rich in minerals like black & wild rice.

I’m not questioning any other harmful effects of grains with this post, just focusing on this singular aspect btw.

submitted by /u/otakumuscle
[link] [comments]

from paleo diet https://ift.tt/2P4FY81
via IFTTT