Submitted by giuliomagnifico t3_z2vby0 in science
Highly processed being cheez whiz? Quaker instant oatmeal is "processed" food but is actually quite good for you. People need to question the rhetoric used.
It's kind of one of these things where they throw a word out and don't really think how broad a term they're using.
Cocoa cola is processed. Steel cut oats are also processed. So is chicken breast and broccoli florets
Thank you for saying what I attempted with greater eloquence.
I'm just mad that someone out there coined the term "organic food" and people accept it without much question.
I should damn well hope your food is organic.
Would you like some silicon puffs?
Found my new Kickstarter
A zero calorie inorganic snack
It would, however, be non-gmo!
[removed]
Someone linked to the processed feed used. It's just sugar.
[removed]
Someone is going to use this study to promote eating more corn or wheat.
"Whole grain food protects against disease!"
Well whole grains are better than bleached breads and Oatmeal is an excellent meal to have at least twice a week or more.
Whole gran corn or wheat is not bad for you as long as you're minding your macros
Diets rich in whole grains are associated with reduced incidence of type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, and colorectal cancer
Randomized controlled trials of increasing whole-grain intakes have demonstrated their potential to improve glycemic control, body weight, the lipid profile, and other cardiometabolic risk factors in adults with diabetes (2).
CONCLUSIONS
Consuming whole-grain foods over 2 weeks improved measures of glycemia in free-living adults with type 2 diabetes compared with an equivalent amount of whole-grain foods that were finely milled. Dietary advice should promote the consumption of minimally processed whole grains.
https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/43/8/1717/35554/Whole-Grain-Processing-and-Glycemic-Control-in
Whole grains and risk of T2D: Dose–Response Meta-analysis
Each additional 50 grams WG consumption per day was associated with a 23% reduced risk of T2D.
60 grams WG intake per day would give the highest benefit to prevent T2D ...
In conclusion, a high intake of WG was associated with a lower risk of T2D. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our results.
Consumption of whole grains and risk of type 2 diabetes: A comprehensive systematic review and dose–response meta‐analysis of prospective cohort studies
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/fsn3.2811
Cereal grains and legumes in the prevention of coronary heart disease and stroke: a review of the literature
Abstract
A number of reviewers have examined studies investigating the relationship between coronary heart disease and stroke prior to 2000. Since then, several key studies have been published. Five studies have examined the relationship between wholegrain consumption, coronary heart disease (CHD) and cardiovascular (CVD) disease and found protection for either or both diseases.
The researchers concluded that a relationship between wholegrain intake and CHD is seen with at least a 20% and perhaps a 40% reduction in risk for those who eat wholegrain food habitually vs those who eat them rarely.
Notwithstanding the fact that fibre is an important component of wholegrains, many studies have not shown an independent effect of fibre alone on CHD events. Thus in terms of CHD prevention, fibre is best obtained from wholegrain sources.
Wholegrain products have strong antioxidant activity and contain phytoestrogens, but there is insufficient evidence to determine whether this is beneficial in CHD prevention...
Promotion of carbohydrate foods should be focused on wholegrain cereals because these have proven to be associated with health benefits.
Recommendation: Carbohydrate-rich foods should be wholegrain and if they are not, then the lowest GI product available should be consumed. Glycemic index is largely irrelevant for foods that contain small amounts of carbohydrate per serve (such as most vegetables).
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16670693/
Association of whole grains intake and the risk of digestive tract cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Open Access
Published: 03 June 2020
Abstract
Background
Several epidemiological studies have investigated the association between whole grains intake and digestive tract cancer risk; however, the results are still controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the association.
Methods
Studies published before March 2020 were searched in database and other sources. The risk ratio (RR) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled using fix or random-effects models.
Results
This meta-analysis included 34 articles reporting 35 studies, 18 studies of colorectal cancer, 11 studies of gastric cancer and 6 studies of esophagus cancer, involving 2,663,278 participants and 28,921 cases.
Comparing the highest-intake participants with the lowest-intake participants for whole grains, we found that the intake of whole grains were inversely related to colorectal cancer (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.84–0.93, P < 0.001), gastric cancer (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.53–0.79, P < 0.001), esophagus cancer (RR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.44–0.67, P < 0.001), respectively.
Conclusion
This meta-analysis provides further evidence that whole grains intake was associated with a reduced risk of digestive tract cancer. Our result supports the dietary guidelines that increase whole grains intake to reduce the risk of digestive tract cancer.
https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12937-020-00556-6
Right? I've had this general notion that half the posts in r/science are attempts at social engineering. This post makes no sense since grain-based diets are by nature processed because human bodies can't digest most grains without processing. It's like an effort to redefine terms so people won't connect grain-based with processed even though it literally has to be processed to be grain-based.
Agreed. Sometime an honest criticism elicits knee jerk reactions if the group disapproves. Does processed connote a process or an added ingredient, and if a process does that differentiate between a mechanical grinding and a smoking/curing process.
[removed]
Think before opening your mouth once.
[removed]
Check out this article on the different kinds of processed foods.
It's the ultra processed foods we got to be concerned about. Group 4
https://www.verywellhealth.com/defining-ultra-processed-foods-is-debated-5509462
I was reading a package of ramen the other day and its first ingredient was pure gluten.
gluten is delicious
….and…..? Gluten is just the naturally occurring protein in certain grains. It’s nutrient rich and protein packed. There’s nothing bad about it whatsoever, in moderation of course like everything else, unless you have Celiac’s. Too bad the word alone has been demonized due to fad diets.
[deleted]
Psychosomatic? And why now? Again, it’s certainly “on trend.” 10+ years ago were people saying the same? Definitely not downplaying real symptoms but just because patients come in mentioning a symptom doesn’t mean it’s always what they think it is. There’s so much mis/overdiagnosis or self diagnosis happening now. And a LOT can affect the digestive system. Stress, anxiety, alcohol, meds, hydration, hormones, activity levels, fiber/lack there of, family history, plus a lot more. Also, maybe different types of the same food or how it’s prepared makes a difference to someone (as it does for me and my lab tested allergies) A gastroenterologist and allergists would be the best to consult to dig deeper.
[deleted]
> Quaker instant oatmeal is “processed” food but is actually quite good for you
Source?
My cardiologist
Does your cardiologist happen to wear a wideawake hat and bear an uncanny resemblance to William Penn?
Not sure of your reference but he is former head of cardiology for Bethesda who retired from the military medical field and became head of cardiology for University of Arizona where I met him and chose him as my Cardiologist when an aneurysm was discovered on my Ascending Abdominal Aorta. And Oatmeal is considered one of the best foods for lowering cholesterol (not really an issue for me) and for maintaining plasticity of inner walls of arteries and veins by aiding on the prevention of hardening and plaque. So thank you but I'll stick with his medical experience.
He likely didn't recommend Quaker oatmeal. Instant oats are nearly as bad as wheat flour from a glycemic perspective. He was probably recommending a gruel of steel-cut oats with a tiny dab of butter and a pinch of salt for palatability. No self-respecting doctor would recommend Quaker oats, they're just about the worst possible way to consume oats, health-wise.
I'd rather die of heart disease than routinely eat steel cut oats. I'll eat chicken breast, broccoli, and rice every day of the week but I abhor steel cut oats.
First off, you’re in /r/science. If you want to make claims, be ready to cite them without getting snarky with people, particularly if you aren’t actually educated on the topic.
Second, the cholesterol-lowering effect sometimes seen in research involving oatmeal is from soluble fiber. Guess how many grams of soluble fiber are in each 20g-carbohydrate packet of Quaker instant oatmeal? I’ll give you a hint: it’s less than 2g and more than 0g. This is a minuscule amount.
> and for maintaining plasticity of inner walls of arteries and veins by aiding on the prevention of hardening and plaque
Cardiovascular disease is the number one cause of death in the developed world. If this statement was true, Quaker would be preaching it 24/7 on every advertising channel they could get their hands on. Alas, they are not.
Well I have other sources of necessary nutrients, vitamins, minerals, but you do know that Oats, Rye, Flax are still much better than Wheat and definitely better than Corn, but that doesn't stop Wheat and Corn from being grown in greater quantities world wide than any of the healthier grains. Anyway I'll stick with my Cardiologist and my Oncologist at Ironwood Cancer Research Center because they've been correct through all of my treatments thus far to cure my Lymphoma faster than the first quacks at Banner (Who I will never go to again) who I got stuck with, and that was 7 years ago.
> Anyway I’ll stick with my Cardiologist and my Oncologist at Ironwood Cancer Research Center because they’ve been correct through all of my treatments thus far to cure my Lymphoma faster than the first quacks at Banner (Who I will never go to again) who I got stuck with, and that was 7 years ago.
Cool. I don’t care. You making conclusive claims in a subreddit that requires you to cite claims.
[removed]
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments