Starch: The Great Mystery

[raypeatclips]

honestly who cares if you eat starch or not, if your blood work is still really good, you have high testosterone and low estrogen and low prolactin and you eat starch, then it doesn't matter and it's not effecting you, if it is effecting you then don't eat it

You're missing the important part that somebody has to be right and someone else has to be wrong.

 

[YourUniverse]

You're missing the important part that somebody has to be right and someone else has to be wrong.

People are on this forum learning to better their health through a Peat prism, it would be helpful to know what the locus of that prism thinks about health, to begin with, right?

 

[raypeatclips]

People are on this forum learning to better their health through a Peat prism, it would be helpful to know what the locus of that prism thinks about health, to begin with, right?

Oh yeah sure, I was only joking. This forum will never totally agree on starch (or masturbating) though, so best to make your own decisions. Looking forward to the next starch thread in a few weeks time, this ones been good!

 

[mayweatherking]

You're missing the important part that somebody has to be right and someone else has to be wrong.

ya for real... lol i think your clip pretty much summed this up

 

[Mossy]

To echo what has already been mentioned, but it does seem to hold true for me -- metabolic predisposition, due to genetics and heritage, seems to be the greatest factor in one's tolerance of starch.

It's the starch that seems to have been a very probable contributor/catalyst in the downturn of my health. I feel that psychological stress was the greatest factor; but, should I have not had that coupled with a diet contrary to my genetics/upbringing, maybe I could've endured better. The high-starch item, which prior to my habitual consumption of it, I never had once in my life, nor was it ever in the diet of my mother's or father's families, was plantain.

The more Peaty version of plantain (if there is one), is sweet plantain, which is called "maduros", where you allow the fruit to get as ripe as possible, almost until it looks rotten brown, like an over-ripe banana. I'm guessing, this may even be Peat-approved, and may have kept me in better health, had I only eaten it this way--and only used coconut oil to cook it in. The other way to cook it, called "tostones", it needs to be green and starchy, which makes it crispy. Not to mention, unless you make it yourself, it will be cooked using PUFA. This may have been my demise. This, along with fried yucca, also starchy. I basically consumed a lot of fried starch with these foods.

 

[raypeatclips]

To echo what has already been mentioned, but it does seem to hold true for me -- metabolic predisposition, due to genetics and heritage, seems to be the greatest factor in one's tolerance of starch.

It's the starch that seems to have been a very probable contributor/catalyst in the downturn of my health. I feel that psychological stress was the greatest factor; but, should I have not had that coupled with a diet contrary to my genetics/upbringing, maybe I could've endured better. The high-starch item, which prior to my habitual consumption of it, I never had once in my life, nor was it ever in the diet of my mother's or father's families, was plantain.

The more Peaty version of plantain (if there is one), is sweet plantain, which is called "maduros", where you allow the fruit to get as ripe as possible, almost until it looks rotten brown, like an over-ripe banana. I'm guessing, this may even be Peat-approved, and may have kept me in better health, had I only eaten it this way--and only used coconut oil to cook it in. The other way to cook it, called "tostones", it needs to be green and starchy, which makes it crispy. Not to mention, unless you make it yourself, it will be cooked using PUFA. This may have been my demise. This, along with fried yucca, also starchy. I basically consumed a lot of fried starch with these foods.

This is the thing, and my issue with the label "starch." According to cronometer per 1 medium plantain (it is also labelled a fruit on wikipedia) it has 26.9g sugar, 26.1g starch. Is that really starch? It technically has more sugar than starch, although they are basically equal. Also, the plantain, closely related to banana, may contain serotonin itself which Peat has mentioned, and (the banana) can have effects in susceptible people. If you were eating a decent amount of this, or with this as a staple, it might not be too far-fetched to consider the serotonin was having a big effect. Also with the banana (and I'm guessing plantain) is the chitinase allergens that Peat has spoken about before, which can seriously effect people. With taking all this into account, I find it hard to believe that "starch" is what caused you issues, when you were eating a fruit with a reputation for allergenicity that has more sugar than starch.

 

[Mossy]

This is the thing, and my issue with the label "starch." According to cronometer per 1 medium plantain (it is also labelled a fruit on wikipedia) it has 26.9g sugar, 26.1g starch. Is that really starch? It technically has more sugar than starch, although they are basically equal. Also, the plantain, closely related to banana, may contain serotonin itself which Peat has mentioned, and (the banana) can have effects in susceptible people. If you were eating a decent amount of this, or with this as a staple, it might not be too far-fetched to consider the serotonin was having a big effect. Also with the banana (and I'm guessing plantain) is the chitinase allergens that Peat has spoken about before, which can seriously effect people. With taking all this into account, I find it hard to believe that "starch" is what caused you issues, when you were eating a fruit with a reputation for allergenicity that has more sugar than starch.

Appreciate the input.

I think all of what you say is fair, and it would be too simplistic, and maybe just outright inaccurate, to say that I know starch caused my issues. But, I do feel, from a technical sense, it's definitely possible that it was a major contributor to the disruption of a predisposed system. By technical, I mean like an engine that was never designed to run via a particular fuel/additive it then had to deal with, and could have been hindered by it--anywhere from minor to serious--and on multiple levels, such as allergenic (as you say), in addition to just processing the components.

As for the sugar cancelling out the starch, maybe that would be the case if eaten in a balanced state, but maduros are clearly more sugary, and tostones clearly more starchy. But, indeed, there are many factors. I do know that currently I don't deal well with starch, which is what lead me to look back and make an educated guess. But, the biggest factor in me considering this starch as a factor is the volume -- I ate them most days, and sometimes several times a day.

 

[Mossy]

Appreciate the input.

I think all of what you say is fair, and it would be too simplistic, and maybe just outright inaccurate, to say that I know starch caused my issues. But, I do feel, from a technical sense, it's definitely possible that it was a major contributor to the disruption of a predisposed system. By technical, I mean like an engine that was never designed to run via a particular fuel/additive it then had to deal with, and could have been hindered by it--anywhere from minor to serious--and on multiple levels, such as allergenic (as you say), in addition to just processing the components.

As for the sugar cancelling out the starch, maybe that would be the case if eaten in a balanced state, but maduros are clearly more sugary, and tostones clearly more starchy. But, indeed, there are many factors. I do know that currently I don't deal well with starch, which is what lead me to look back and make an educated guess. But, the biggest factor in me considering this starch as a factor is the volume -- I ate them most days, and sometimes several times a day.

P.S. I should clarify: currently, I do crave starch, and feel good after initially eating it--but once the processing starts, it's trouble.

 

[jzeno]

Wanted to add this.

Thought it's relevant to the conversation

 

[Mufasa]

I eat around 500 gram of sourdough whole grain wheat bread daily. I try to eat 500g to 1000g fruit next to that, but only fruits or fruit juices just cannot give me enough carb to meet my energetic needs.

 

[Vinero]

I eat around 500 gram of sourdough whole grain wheat bread daily. I try to eat 500g to 1000g fruit next to that, but only fruits or fruit juices just cannot give me enough carb to meet my energetic needs.

Yeah starch is awesome.

 

[jzeno]

In another popular video on YouTube Dr. McDougall promotes the benefits of salt, but what he labels as the enemy is things like meat, bacon, and cheese--animal products I guess. What's weird is we've been eating these--maybe not at current levels--but we've been eating these for eons and quite a while in the USA. I personally don't think well-cooked starch are to blame, neither do I think animal foods are to blame. Salt intake has varied over time with different results.

I'm beginning to think that more and more it really simply is just a combination of declining saturated fat intake and replacing them with PUFAs.

Ray says well-cooked starches aren't preferred, but obviously they are central to civilization--bread, rice, potatoes, corn, squash etc. Our bodies preferably burn glucose. And who doesn't crave starch? Potatoes, french fries, pizza, bread, dough, etc. Animal foods are good, too, but maybe not in the quantity that we eat them today and not in the quality that most of us have access to. Salt is still debated because some people eat very little and some eat quite a bit and the kidneys are able to filter it out if they are healthy. On the other hand, Dr. Gerson was able to help cure cancer by specifically limiting salt and increasing Potassium. Dr. McDougall also calls the practice of giving "Good" PUFAs (Omega 3s and 6s) to cancer patients, dangerous (source: The McDougall Newsletter June 2002 - Health Myths Omega 3).

On McDougall's diet website he also does not promote any oils whatsoever: Free McDougall Program: Foods not allowed | Dr. McDougall's Health & Medical Center

So what we can agree is: PUFA is most certainly dangerous. And maybe the recent decline in health in the USA and world is due to increased PUFA consumption. I don't think it's due to starches, I don't think it's due to animal foods (though we could probably increase the quality and decrease our consumption quantity), and I'm not sure about how much salt is healthy because there's so much information that says some salt is good, lots of salt can even be good, but I have no idea where to draw the line.

Point being, I think that really these other issues--salt, starch, animal foods--are not nearly as important as PUFA. I think that is the primary culprit. I think if you can eliminate PUFAs, then you're well on your way to the right path. After that, salt intake may need to be individualized. I think animal foods are necessary--but not in huge amounts. Milk, cheese, eggs, and some meat and organ meat are good for us--though quality is declining. I think starches are more important than Dr. Peat lays out because as Dr. McDougall explains, it is the most reasonable food source for man. We can't get OJ year round unless you want to live with DurianRider on the equator (and no one wants to hang out with that guy); we can't have fresh milk year round; we can't get animal meat year round, etc. Today we can do all that stuff and especially when we preserve the food (sausage, cheese, etc.), but that's just because we're very efficient, but reasonably speaking, the most reasonable food source for modern civilization is starch combined with sugars and proteins and some saturated fats from a variety. If you look at our history, it is only very very recently we started to introduce these "health" foods in the form of vegetable oils--PUFAs. They're cheap and efficient, but deadly, as we can see.

So while I disagree with Dr. McDougall on animal foods--I think they have a time and place in limited amounts--I think that his stress on starches is probably more efficient and reasonable than some of Dr. Peat's suggestions (Who thinks it's reasonable to be asked to live on milk and OJ?). They both agree on PUFAs, and they both seem to agree on salt (suggesting more than WHO and the USA Gov), they seem to agree on animal foods as Dr. Peat says too much can be bad and also says lots of meat are dangerous and full of PUFA (pork, chicken) and they seem to slightly disagree on starches.

I agree PUFAs are dangerous--and I have Dr. Peat to thank for that revelation--, I think animal foods are necessary in limited amounts and with some restrictions, I think salt is still up for grabs and I have no idea how much to recommend as of yet, and I disagree with Dr Peat on starches in that I think getting a good portion of your calories from starches on a regular basis is more reasonable than some of the alternatives he suggests (milk, OJ, cheese, eggs).

When it comes down to it, it's just unreasonable to suggest someone eat a diet mostly of milk and fruit juice because only until maybe the last 40 to 50 years have we been able to achieve that high level of efficiency that we can provide both of these year round. It just seems to make much more sense to promote starches eaten safely, ie, well-cooked and maybe with saturated fats, too.

 

[jzeno]

Wanted to add this quote from Dr. Peat:

>The experiments of Bernardo Houssay (1947 Nobel laureate) in the 1940s, in which sugar and coconut oil protected against diabetes, followed by Randle's demonstration of the antagonism between fats and glucose assimilation, and the growing recognition that polyunsaturated fatty acids cause insulin resistance and damage the pancreas, have made it clear that the dietetic obsession with sugar in relation to diabetes has been a dangerous diversion that has retarded the understanding of degenerative metabolic diseases.

Glycemia, starch, and sugar in context

 

[danishispsychic]

for me starch is something that i crave in spurts. like today- we ate bacon and waffles for breakfast, pasta for lunch and dinner. prob this week will be back to " normal " eating- i think there is a lot of merit to intuitive eating even with low pufa / peat-ish guidelines. i notice that i sleep in way later having organic spaghetti with butter or vodka sauce and parm cheese for dinner. somehow i cant digest any animal protein mixed it . ( food combining ? ) today was starch alllll day.

 

[Captain_Coconut]

Starch always gives me better energy levels and body temperatures than fruit. After much experimentation I find I agree best with getting my carbs half from starch and half from sugars. I tried for many months to break through with a low starch high sugar diet but it just never clicked. I think the prebiotic nature of starch is ultimately a good thing, so long as it is consumed with nutrient dense / high flavonoid foods, which naturally encourage the helpful bacteria. As for PUFA being the enemy, I agree when it comes to industrial oils, yet pufa from seeds and plants in their whole form is almost always accompanied by many other things which offset most if not all of the potential damage isolated pufa could inflict. Same can be said for fish: iodine and choline and betaine goes a long way to offset the pufa content. I think the RP mentality throws the baby out with the bath water, and then stresses the importance of supplementing with vitamin E for instance - something we would get plenty of in things like nuts or whole grains... Then there is the betaine and choline that comes packed in many of these foods, and the zinc and copper, the other fat solubles, b vitamins, magnesium potassium etc etc etc, and the iron chelating phytic acid. Vegetable cooking oil on the other hand is basically nutritionally devoid, a bunch of pufa with an insufficient amount of vitamin e , because cooking at high heat destroys the vitamin e content of oils.

This blog sums things up well:
Frying Does not Just Oxidize Oils, It will Also Decimate the Tocopherol & Tocotrienol Content of the Oils and Can Thus More Than Double the Oxidative Burden on Your Body - SuppVersity: Nutrition and Exercise Science for Everyone

If you are living mainly off of milk and oj if you do not supplement often or make absolutely certain you eat your liver once a week you will eventually develop deficiencies. Where as simply accepting more starchy foods and ocassional pufa foods (nuts, not potato chips) it is much harder to get out of balance nutritionally. I think all this blame on pufa should really be placed more specifically on processed / convenience foods / cooking with industrial oils, consumption of these has gone up lock step with global health deterioration... Peanuts have long been a staple of the North American diet, long before cooking with lard fell out of fashion and long before cholesterol was vilified. When we look at per capita oil consumption and try to correlate it to health data, this is not distinguishing the whole food pufa. I think if one were to look at historical whole food pufa consumption a very different story would emerge.

 

[sunraiser]

Starch always gives me better energy levels and body temperatures than fruit. After much experimentation I find I agree best with getting my carbs half from starch and half from sugars. I tried for many months to break through with a low starch high sugar diet but it just never clicked. I think the prebiotic nature of starch is ultimately a good thing, so long as it is consumed with nutrient dense / high flavonoid foods, which naturally encourage the helpful bacteria. As for PUFA being the enemy, I agree when it comes to industrial oils, yet pufa from seeds and plants in their whole form is almost always accompanied by many other things which offset most if not all of the potential damage isolated pufa could inflict. Same can be said for fish: iodine and choline and betaine goes a long way to offset the pufa content. I think the RP mentality throws the baby out with the bath water, and then stresses the importance of supplementing with vitamin E for instance - something we would get plenty of in things like nuts or whole grains... Then there is the betaine and choline that comes packed in many of these foods, and the zinc and copper, the other fat solubles, b vitamins, magnesium potassium etc etc etc, and the iron chelating phytic acid. Vegetable cooking oil on the other hand is basically nutritionally devoid, a bunch of pufa with an insufficient amount of vitamin e , because cooking at high heat destroys the vitamin e content of oils.

This blog sums things up well:
Frying Does not Just Oxidize Oils, It will Also Decimate the Tocopherol & Tocotrienol Content of the Oils and Can Thus More Than Double the Oxidative Burden on Your Body - SuppVersity: Nutrition and Exercise Science for Everyone

If you are living mainly off of milk and oj if you do not supplement often or make absolutely certain you eat your liver once a week you will eventually develop deficiencies. Where as simply accepting more starchy foods and ocassional pufa foods (nuts, not potato chips) it is much harder to get out of balance nutritionally. I think all this blame on pufa should really be placed more specifically on processed / convenience foods / cooking with industrial oils, consumption of these has gone up lock step with global health deterioration... Peanuts have long been a staple of the North American diet, long before cooking with lard fell out of fashion and long before cholesterol was vilified. When we look at per capita oil consumption and try to correlate it to health data, this is not distinguishing the whole food pufa. I think if one were to look at historical whole food pufa consumption a very different story would emerge.

I pretty much share your sentiments.

Even so, above and beyond any rational or anecdotal reflections, I literally can't get joy from eating without starch. It's completely satisfying to me.

I suppose it shows the differences in our make ups and the need for dietary diversity.

The thought of consuming mostly fruit and sugar is unappetising and almost sickly from my perspective!

 

[Runenight201]

Starch is a suboptimal food choice for suboptimal conditions. Every time I begin to eat starch again, after thinking I need it, i always pay for it. If I were in a starvation situation I’d turn to starch for food, but in our relatively modern context its entirely possible to get by on meat, eggs, fruit, sugar, and vegetables.

Every time I think I need starch, I really just need salt and some veggies. Next time any of y’all have a starch craving, try eating a veggie soup instead and see if it completely goes away.

 

[Memento]

Things that I've found helpful with digesting starchy foods is skipping milk, baking potates instead of boiling, carrot juice (likely highly antibacterial?) and taking vitamin C to bowel tolerance. No more bloating but I could still work on improving transit time. I can eat up to 2-3kg of potatoes in a day..

 

[Captain_Coconut]

Things that I've found helpful with digesting starchy foods is skipping milk, baking potates instead of boiling, carrot juice (likely highly antibacterial?) and taking vitamin C to bowel tolerance. No more bloating but I could still work on improving transit time. I can eat up to 2-3kg of potatoes in a day..

Yea, vitamin C helps a lot I have noticed this too. Eating other fruits or vegetables in the same meal as the starch certainly helps too. I find onions to help a lot here. Starch alone or with meat or fat but no additional vegetables does not agree so well with me, it does cause more bloating then, but meat or fat alone would do this to me too. I think it boils down to eating foods that stimulate the release of digestive enzymes, spices, flavonoids, bitter foods etc.

 

[Vinero]

Yea, vitamin C helps a lot I have noticed this too. Eating other fruits or vegetables in the same meal as the starch certainly helps too. I find onions to help a lot here. Starch alone or with meat or fat but no additional vegetables does not agree so well with me, it does cause more bloating then, but meat or fat alone would do this to me too. I think it boils down to eating foods that stimulate the release of digestive enzymes, spices, flavonoids, bitter foods etc.

Starch with meat is basically what my diet is now. I disagree it causes bloating. Many bodybuilders and athletes eat like that too. White rice + turkeybreast, or potatoes + steak is a typical meal for me.