Effects Of Wheat and appetite stimulant on... - Weight Loss NHS

Weight Loss NHS
90,986 members48,189 posts

Effects Of Wheat and appetite stimulant on the human body

Hello

Just joined and looking at eating healthy.. hAving read Wheat Belly I have found it interesting on the subject of wheat effects on the human body and that it is s appetite stimulant .. but general advice days to eat whole grains ? Why is this ?

Thanks

15 Replies
oldestnewest

I’m not a nutritionist or medically trained but this is my understanding. Refined carbs such as potatoes, white rice and white wheat flour are translated into glucose very quickly in the bloodstream. The Awful Toad (a community member) can explain properly how this works in the body but when that wheat glucose is used up quickly, it sends our blood sugar levels crashing down and we are very hungry again. Fat, such as a lashing of butter on the wheat toast or deep fat frying the potatoes into chips, slows down the absorption so there is less blood sugar oscillation. It’s all made worse by the fact that the wheat variety we eat in the West has been refined for modern palates so it has little protein & is all fluffy carb. Even brown/whole meal bread isn’t that much better because proportionately the refined white flour dominates. Ancient grains, such as spelt and rye, are much less modified plants and so have more protein & cause less blood sugar & hunger dramas. I cook a lot with spelt & it behaves very like white flour. I make my own bread in a machine with spelt & a bit of rye & it’s yummy. I don’t have it loads because it’s so nice I eat too much, but it’s good for both digestion & blood sugar. Note if you see rye and or spelt bread & crackers in the shop, check the ingredients to see whether it’s not mostly wheat with just a sprinkling of the better grains. Also, sourdough is supposed to be slower release energy than wheat, something to do with the fermenting process. Buckwheat, quinoa & Freekah are also good slow release carbs. I make buckwheat salads & buckwheat pancakes from the flour.

4 likes
Reply

Tagging TheAwfulToad 😊

Reply

Hello

Many thanks for your reply it really is appreciated

Fitball

1 like
Reply

Hello and welcome to the forum Fitball

This is a peer to peer support group and non of us are qualified to give nutritional advice I’m afraid.

You will have been given links to our Pinned Posts in your Welcome message when you first joined, please read them carefully, especially the Welcome Newbies and the Security Post as I notice you have left your post unlocked. This is a very busy forum with lots going on but feel free to ask if you have any questions 😊

Best Wishes in your weight loss journey

Indigo 😊

Reply

Hi many thanks for your reply

Reply

Hi, Hidden, Welcome.

I expect that TheAwfulToad will clarify.

"General advice" is decades out of date, and is orchestrated by "King Corn". I think the problem really got bad after the 1970s? Ancel Keys "Study" which used data from countries whose data could be "interpreted" to support a high carbohydrate grain diet.

I used to regard rice and maize as healthy, gluten-free alternatives to wheat...

All modern grains have a high Glycaemic Index (GI) - even "whole grain" before they are refined and processed.

Anything with a high GI is rapidly absorbed and turned into Glucose, which stimulates the release of insulin, which turns off fat burning and turns on fat storage... and, as you say, stimulates the appetite.

Maize (aka corn) is, in some respects, actually worse than wheat because the carbs in maize are, I think, almost half fructose. Maize is a large proportion of the typical American diet.

Fructose (as found in fruit) is "good food" in moderation, but I believe that it can only be converted in the liver - and will overload the liver and will overload the liver if it forms a high proportion of your energy intake for decades. Apparently, normal table sugar is 50% fructose, but High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) is 55% to 90% fructose.

For breakfast I eat grain-free buckwheat-based muesli.

Potatoes also have a high GI... but we need some energy some somewhere and I do not know of any inexpensive sources of energy.

The Low-Carbohydrate, High-Fat (LCHF) diet is good - and many members here use it, see the forum here on Health Unlocked.

The Keto diet is even more restrictive on carbohydrate than LCHF... but very good for treating type 2 Diabetes and some other diseases.

2 likes
Reply

Hi many thanks for your reply

Reply

A fascinating set of responses. Can I also add my pennyworth that over the last 30 years or so, scientists working for farming industries have toughened up strains of wheat to make them more resistant to climate and soil conditions. This is great for helping to protect crops from disease and climatic extremes but not so hot - I'm guessing - for the digestive system, which sometimes struggles to process GM - affected foods.

Auld Betty may be Up a Certain Creek with No Paddle on this one, but I'd bet my bottom dollar that our digestive systems are trying to cope with stuff nature didn't intend for us.

BB x

1 like
Reply

Oh yes. Lots of people think they have an issue with gluten, which other people scoff at, but it’s probably the refined rubbishy wheat.

Reply

Hi, Slim_for_good

I am gluten intolerant, and I am also intolerant of "gluten-free" bread and oats.

I think that, to some extent, it is the way they now cook bread. I think I am less intolerant of "artisan" bread, which, I think, is cooked for longer.

1 like
Reply

But I don’t want to denigrate proper gluten allergies (crohn’s disease?), I have friends whose 2 small children nearly died of it before diagnosed, even one crumb of toast means they are hospitalised...

Reply

Hi, BerlinBetty

"They" have been genetically modifying plants for millennia, by cross-breeding and selection.

If GM lets them use less fungicide, or grow oranges farther North, is that good?

Generally, plants have been selected and bred to yield more energy and less fibre.

I think that we have not been bred to eat grains.

Reply

Then Jesus got it wrong and should have been handing out handfuls of quinoa rather than loaves to complement the fish...

But seriously, there is surely a difference between selecting and contriving specialist strains - practised as you say over many generations - and interfering chemically with grains to lessen their vulnerability. Toughened strains make for toughened digestive process. For countries in deep trouble about feeding their people this is laudable and necessary but I'm afraid the profit motive pertains here, as it does so often where large numbers of potential customers are concerned. And we are a soft lot here in the better off parts of Europe.

BB

Reply

I think modern apples have thicker skins - to make them more resistant to fungi - but would it make them better for us, with more fibre and minerals?

Reply

Really good question, S11m ! Haven't you noticed also how much sweeter most commercially produced apples are nowadays? Pink Lady are possibly the worst, basically sweeties on stalks.

When I was a nipper in East Barnet we had an apple tree in our garden. I think it was a cox orange pippin but cannot swear to that. The apples were crisp and juicy, the flesh hardish and slightly tart. I struggle to find apples like that in shops nowadays; I'm not sure they would market sufficiently. I seem to remember a significant skin? My father used to peel them in one go with a dessert knife, then rebuild the skin as if it had the apple in it, which as a child I thought a wonderful trick.

He was never one for too much fibre, or what they used to call roughage. I'm sure he would have been better off eating the peel, rather than making a party trick out of it!

x

1 like
Reply

You may also like...