Persorption Of Starch?

Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
brandonk said:
leave tiny particles as end-products of their digestion that can be persorbed through the intestine, lodge in the tissues, and in theory result over time in many degenerative diseases from atherosclerosis to alzheimer's.

Do you have any studies to back those claims? Any human studies? Rats don't know how to cook starch. They also don't produce as much amylase as humans.

That's called leaky gut and it's bacteria that can lead to sepsis that is the problem.

The gut is designed to keep things out. It is extremely efficient at this. Drug smugglers swallow all kinds of things including plastics and other things that they then poop out. They don't die from plastic particles "leaking" through the gut. Babies also swallow many foreign non-food things and its the same.

Starch is broken down into sugar in the gut. The other fiber that was in that starch food is then moved through the gut like any other fiber. The starch is converted into sugar which is glucose for the bloodstream, not "leaked" through.

High-starch eating cultures are a clear example of it working. The claim that starch particles can be persorbed applies to someone with an extremely impaired intestine. This kind of person will have trouble eating anything.
 

brandonk

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
145
Westside PUFAs said:
brandonk said:
leave tiny particles as end-products of their digestion that can be persorbed through the intestine, lodge in the tissues, and in theory result over time in many degenerative diseases from atherosclerosis to alzheimer's.

Do you have any studies to back those claims? Any human studies?
I'm just saying what I'm pretty sure you already know, since you are among the most avid students of Ray Peat's work I've come across. Kudos to you for that. Here (as you likely know) is what seems to be in Ray Peat's work:
http://raypeat.com/articles/nutrition/carrageenan.shtml
http://www.functionalps.com/blog/2014/0 ... -starches/

For obvious political and industrial reasons, there is little or no research on persorption of starch, in the same way there's little research on the deadly effects of PUFAs or radioactive isotopes from nuclear energy. The corporate state depends on starch and PUFAs for its processed food in the same way it depends on radioactivity for energy and weapons. If the research ever showed how dangerous these things are, the public might demand better.

I see that in fairness to Ray Peat, he does have a few studies he's mentioned, linked at the end of this post interview:
viewtopic.php?style=26&f=9&t=6718
 
OP
Westside PUFAs
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
brandonk said:
post 116543 I'm just saying what I'm pretty sure you already know, since you are among the most avid students of Ray Peat's work I've come across. Kudos to you for that. Here (as you likely know) is what seems to be in Ray Peat's work:
http://raypeat.com/articles/nutrition/carrageenan.shtml
http://www.functionalps.com/blog/2014/0 ... -starches/

For obvious political and industrial reasons, there is little or no research on persorption of starch, in the same way there's little research on the deadly effects of PUFAs or radioactive isotopes from nuclear energy. The corporate state depends on starch and PUFAs for its processed food in the same way it depends on radioactivity for energy and weapons. If the research ever showed how dangerous these things are, the public might demand better.

I see that in fairness to Ray Peat, he does have a few studies he's mentioned, linked at the end of this post interview:
viewtopic.php?style=26&f=9&t=6718


I know Peat's view. I was just asking you if you had anything else on the subject.

From that Peat article:

"Volkheimer found that mice fed raw starch aged at an abnormally fast rate, and when he dissected the starch-fed mice, he found a multitude of starch-grain-blocked arterioles in every organ, each of which caused the death of the cells that depended on the blood supplied by that arteriole. It isn’t hard to see how this would affect the functions of organs such as the brain and heart, even without considering the immunological and other implications of the presence of foreign particles randomly distributed through the tissue." - RP

An example of mice force-fed raw, uncooked starch is not the same as a high amylase-secreting human eating cooked starch.

I'm not sure why Such_Saturation put the word "wrote" after their names because it was an audio interview, not a paper, but I find this part of the podcast interesting:

"Ray Peat wrote:
Yeah, and having the digestive enzymes being produced abundantly that requires a total good nutrition, good thyroid function and so on

Sarah Murray wrote:
Because if you have low thyroid function don't you have low hydrochloric acid and it's hard for you to start breaking down the food?

Ray Peat wrote:
All of the little glands in the digestive system slow down, don't produce as many enzymes

Sarah Murray wrote:
your liver won't produce the same amount of bile, and

Ray Peat wrote:
Yeah

Sarah Murray wrote:
Well and also, you know, soaking of grains, you know and in Mexico, for thousands of
years corn has been

Ray Peat wrote:
Yeah even in my parents' and grandparents' generation, the way bread was made was completely different, and letting it rise for eight or ten hours, letting the dough, adding sugar, balloon, the yeast grow, the slow leavening process of using wheat or other grains activated enzymes that broke down the starches, turned them into sugar, let the yeast grow, and activated enzymes that broke down the gluten, and the combination of the carbohydrate, the sugar's energy and the amino acids liberated from breaking down the gluten produced new proteins, so that the slow leavening actually can increase the protein by 100 or 200%."

I think that's pretty telling. Don't forget the nuance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mujuro

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2014
Messages
696
I forget who it was I was talking to in chat about this. It might have been you Westside. I recall the discussion of water-cooked starches vs dry starches and there being almost no persorption of the former due to the gel-like consistency when they are cooked in water. The attraction of water molecules to the starch granules may be what prevents the persorption.
 
OP
Westside PUFAs
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
There's no such thing as "dry cooked" starch because they are either cooked by water (steamed/boiled) or by oil (fried). Either way, when consumed, amylase with starch the digestion process. The gelatinization of starch is the natural way we've done it since evolving in the African Congo. If by dry starch you mean things like crackers, those are flour products cooked in fat. The baking of flour in bread still involves water.
 

kitback

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
46
I have noticed that with oats. Oats that have not been soaked or cooked in liquid tear up my gut, such as granola or oatmeal cookies. But I do OK with well cooked oatmeal or oats added to a bread or muffin recipe
 

brandonk

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
145
Westside PUFAs said:
post 116544
brandonk said:
post 116543 I'm just saying what I'm pretty sure you already know, since you are among the most avid students of Ray Peat's work I've come across. Kudos to you for that. Here (as you likely know) is what seems to be in Ray Peat's work:
http://raypeat.com/articles/nutrition/carrageenan.shtml
http://www.functionalps.com/blog/2014/0 ... -starches/

For obvious political and industrial reasons, there is little or no research on persorption of starch, in the same way there's little research on the deadly effects of PUFAs or radioactive isotopes from nuclear energy. The corporate state depends on starch and PUFAs for its processed food in the same way it depends on radioactivity for energy and weapons. If the research ever showed how dangerous these things are, the public might demand better.

I see that in fairness to Ray Peat, he does have a few studies he's mentioned, linked at the end of this post interview:
viewtopic.php?style=26&f=9&t=6718


I know Peat's view. I was just asking you if you had anything else on the subject.

From that Peat article:

"Volkheimer found that mice fed raw starch aged at an abnormally fast rate, and when he dissected the starch-fed mice, he found a multitude of starch-grain-blocked arterioles in every organ, each of which caused the death of the cells that depended on the blood supplied by that arteriole. It isn’t hard to see how this would affect the functions of organs such as the brain and heart, even without considering the immunological and other implications of the presence of foreign particles randomly distributed through the tissue." - RP

An example of mice force-fed raw, uncooked starch is not the same as a high amylase-secreting human eating cooked starch.

I'm not sure why Such_Saturation put the word "wrote" after their names because it was an audio interview, not a paper, but I find this part of the podcast interesting:

"Ray Peat wrote:
Yeah, and having the digestive enzymes being produced abundantly that requires a total good nutrition, good thyroid function and so on

Sarah Murray wrote:
Because if you have low thyroid function don't you have low hydrochloric acid and it's hard for you to start breaking down the food?

Ray Peat wrote:
All of the little glands in the digestive system slow down, don't produce as many enzymes

Sarah Murray wrote:
your liver won't produce the same amount of bile, and

Ray Peat wrote:
Yeah

Sarah Murray wrote:
Well and also, you know, soaking of grains, you know and in Mexico, for thousands of
years corn has been

Ray Peat wrote:
Yeah even in my parents' and grandparents' generation, the way bread was made was completely different, and letting it rise for eight or ten hours, letting the dough, adding sugar, balloon, the yeast grow, the slow leavening process of using wheat or other grains activated enzymes that broke down the starches, turned them into sugar, let the yeast grow, and activated enzymes that broke down the gluten, and the combination of the carbohydrate, the sugar's energy and the amino acids liberated from breaking down the gluten produced new proteins, so that the slow leavening actually can increase the protein by 100 or 200%."

I think that's pretty telling. Don't forget the nuance.
I don't know whether the mouse and the human are the same. I suppose a corporate statist would argue against Ray Peat that, in the absence of studies, there is some safe level of persorbed starch, PUFAs and radioactivity. I am not inclined to rely on such self-interested claims.

Such Saturation talks more about understanding persorption in his followup posts to the Ray Peat interview (persuasively, I think):
viewtopic.php?style=26&f=9&t=6718

But yes, I think Ray Peat has said well-cooked apples or pears without the peels are probably OK in moderation. Very ripe fruit has much less starch, and if fruit pectin cooks long enough, it breaks down into something that is not really starch anymore.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
Westside PUFAs
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
kitback said:
post 116548 I have noticed that with oats. Oats that have not been soaked or cooked in liquid tear up my gut, such as granola or oatmeal cookies. But I do OK with well cooked oatmeal or oats added to a bread or muffin recipe

Oats are naturally high in fat and protein. They are a unique food similar to milk in that they have all three macronutrients. They also have minerals.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
Westside PUFAs said:
post 116534 Flour products should not be called "carbs" because they are usually cooked in fat such as donuts cooked in oil/butter and many also have fat or protein added to the flour products after cooking.

I like your list of starch sources, and I think you have a point that flour has some significant differences from other starch sources. But I disagree with this. Just because many people eat things made of flour and fat doesn't stop the flour being a source of starch. The OP didn't ask only about pure starches.

Also, even if they are the minority, some people eat bread etc with low fat accompaniments. On the rare occasions I bake bread, it is with white flour and less than 5g fat to lubricate the dish. People here are mostly probably able to figure out that if they put butter or cheese on their bread, or their donuts or battered fish are deep fried, their sandwich etc now also contains fat a well as starch. I know people who sometimes want jam or honey or marmite on their sandwiches, but no butter (I've even done it myself on occasion).

Polenta and pasta and no doubt other flour products can and sometimes are eaten with low fat sauces etc too.

Westside PUFAs said:
post 116544 An example of mice force-fed raw, uncooked starch is not the same as a high amylase-secreting human eating cooked starch.
I agree. There is a big difference between raw starch and starch that is gelatinised by thorough wet cooking - gelatinised starch has quite different physical properties, including being both softer and larger particles.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

brandonk

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
145
tara said:
post 116554
Westside PUFAs said:
post 116534 Flour products should not be called "carbs" because they are usually cooked in fat such as donuts cooked in oil/butter and many also have fat or protein added to the flour products after cooking.

I like your list of starch sources, and I think you have a point that flour has some significant differences from other starch sources. But I disagree with this. Just because many people eat things made of flour and fat doesn't stop the flour being a source of starch. The OP didn't ask only about pure starches.

Also, even if they are the minority, some people eat bread etc with low fat accompaniments. On the rare occasions I bake bread, it is with white flour and less than 5g fat to lubricate the dish. People here are mostly probably able to figure out that if they put butter or cheese on their bread, or their donuts or battered fish are deep fried, their sandwich etc now also contains fat a well as starch. I know people who sometimes want jam or honey or marmite on their sandwiches, but no butter (I've even done it myself on occasion).

Polenta and pasta and no doubt other flour products can and sometimes are eaten with low fat sauces etc too.

Westside PUFAs said:
post 116544 An example of mice force-fed raw, uncooked starch is not the same as a high amylase-secreting human eating cooked starch.
I agree. There is a big difference between raw starch and starch that is gelatinised by thorough wet cooking - gelatinised starch has quite different physical properties, including being both softer and larger particles.
More information on the dangers of starch and cellulose particles is here:
http://www.functionalps.com/blog/2011/10/22/3169/
http://glutinousthoughts.blogspot.com/2 ... tarch.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... 9-0214.pdf
http://www.old-herborn-university.de/pu ... icle_2.pdf
Pathologe 1993 Sep;14(5):247-52
[Persorption of microparticles]. [Article in German]
Volkheimer G.

Solid, hard microparticles, such as starch granules, pollen, cellulose particles, fibres and crystals, whose diameters are well into the micrometre range, are incorporated regularly and in considerable numbers from the digestive tract. Motor factors play an important part in the paracellular penetration of the epithelial cell layer. From the subepithelial region the microparticles are transported away via lymph and blood vessels. They can be detected in body fluids using simple methods: only a few minutes after oral administration they can be found in the peripheral blood-stream. We observed their passage into urine, bile, cerebrospinal fluid, the alveolar lumen, the peritoneal cavity, breast milk, and transplacentally into the fetal blood-stream. Since persorbed microparticles can embolise small vessels, this touches on microangiological problems, especially in the region of the CNS. The long-term deposit of embolising microparticles which consist of potential allergens or contaminants, or which are carriers of contaminants, is of immunological and environmental-technical importance. Numerous ready-made foodstuffs contain large quantities of microparticles capable of persorption.

PMID: 8415433

Med Hypotheses 1991 Jun;35(2):85-7
Persorption of raw starch: a cause of senile dementia?
Freedman BJ.
Intact starch granules in food can pass through the intestinal wall and enter the circulation. They remain intact if they have not been cooked for long enough in the presence of water. Some of these granules embolise arterioles and capillaries. In most organs the collateral circulation suffices for continued function. In the brain, however, neurones may be lost. Over many decades the neuronal loss could be of clinical importance. To test this hypothesis, there is a need to examine brains for the presence of embolised starch granules. Examining tissues polariscopically clearly distinguishes starch granules from other objects of similar appearance.

PMID: 1890981

Nahrung 1976;20(5):495-8
[Safe use of microcrystalline cellulose in low-calorie foods]. [Article in German]
Seidemann J. The problems arising in using microcrystalline cellulose in the food industry are outlined. Like starch granules, microcrystalline cellulose is also persorbed by the human and animal organism. As long as the problem persists whether persorption is a normal, everyday process or a process which is detrimental in the long run, the statement that the use of greater amounts of microcrystalline cellulose for foods and pharmaceutical products is absolutely safe should be carefully examined.

PMID: 785264

Kitasato Arch Exp Med 1990 Apr;63(1):1-6
[The Herbst-Volkheimer effect]. [Article in German] Prokop O. Institut fur Gerichtliche Medizin des Bereichs Medizin (Charite) der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, DDR.
More than 150 years ago the foundations were laid for the so-called HERBST effect which was subsequently forgotten. In the sixties the phenomenon was rediscovered by VOLKHEIMER at the Charite Hospital in Berlin and then reviewed through many experiments and publications. What is meant by the HERBST effect? If an experimental animal or even human being is given a larger amount of maize starch or also biscuits or some other products containing starch, starch bodies can be detected rapidly in venous blood already after minutes or half an hour later and in the urine after one hour and later. The term "persorption" has been coined for this interesting phenomenon. It is indeed surprising that it has met with so little attention. As a matter of fact, it constitutes the basis for our understanding of peroral immunization and of allergies. In the same way, feeding of carbon particles results in their appearance and detection in blood, kidney and urine. The same result is obtained by the intake of diatoms and what is even more important with meat fibres. I hope you are aware of the implications. When Professor NAGAI stayed in Berlin, we tried to receive the phenomenon. Since only a few cell nuclei are necessary for "genetic fingerprinting" we thought that after intake of 200 or 400 g of raw meat the type of food eaten could be determined from the urinary sediment by means of the fingerprint method which would be of forensic significance. Therefore, we eat meat and raw liver and examined the urinary sediment..(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
From what I can see in a review of this literature there is considerable evidence that persorption does occur in humans, and all other animals studied, and no reason to conclude that cooking, gelatinization or digestive enzymes would prevent it.

I hope everyone takes these warnings very seriously. Especially if you are suffering from headaches or mood or attention disorders, you may want to consider that these symptoms may be associated with persorption and "allergies" that are the body's response to the small particles.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
brandonk said:
post 116570 From what I can see in a review of this literature there is considerable evidence that persorption does occur in humans, and all other animals studied, and no reason to conclude that cooking, gelatinization or digestive enzymes would prevent it.
I agree that there is significant evidence of potential problems arising from persorption of intact starch granules (and micrcrystaline cellulose and carbon such as activated charcoal, etc), and that it's a factor worth considering when making food choices.

Freedman BJ said:
post 116570 Intact starch granules in food can pass through the intestinal wall and enter the circulation. They remain intact if they have not been cooked for long enough in the presence of water.
I think this explicitly distinguished raw or dry starch from thoroughly wet-cooked starch.

Volkheimer said:
post 116570 Solid, hard microparticles, such as starch granules, pollen, cellulose particles, fibres and crystals, whose diameters are well into the micrometre range, are incorporated regularly and in considerable numbers from the digestive tract.
Again, explicitly refers to solid, hard particles. I don't think well-cooked pasta or rice or rolled oats or well boiled potatoes, or starches thickening soups and stews are in this category.

Kitasato Arch Exp Med 1990 Apr;63(1):1-6 said:
post 116570 If an experimental animal or even human being is given a larger amount of maize starch or also biscuits or some other products containing starch, starch bodies can be detected rapidly in venous blood already after minutes or half an hour later and in the urine after one hour and later.
This could well be hard, dry starch, not well-cooked soft starch.

I do suffer headaches and other possibly related issues, and I do take the persorption risk as relevant. Personally, I've generally preferred my starches well-cooked and soft, and these days I seldom eat the dry variants.

brandonk said:
post 116570 The same result is obtained by the intake of diatoms and what is even more important with meat fibres.
First time I've seen reference to this issue in relation to meat fibres, though. :(
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tara

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
10,368
brandonk said:
post 116538 Apart from perhaps well-limed corn, starches, whether solid or liquid (such as corn or rice syrup), leave tiny particles as end-products of their digestion that can be persorbed through the intestine, lodge in the tissues, and in theory result over time in many degenerative diseases from atherosclerosis to alzheimer's.
I don't think this is correct. I think the process of producing syrup breaks down the solid persorbable particles into something more liquid that does not pose this particular risk.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

brandonk

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
145
Suikerbuik said:
I cannot see it unfortunately, but think I can/could feel it. This was all before I started taking thyroid (clinically tested hypothyroid) and at the time tests seemed to indicate an increased permeability. In that time, because of the hype, I tried raw potatoe starch a few times. Apparently each single time I tried it, kidney inflammation became a real issue, gradually reducing only after quitting the starch. I didn't know about Peat and his concerns about persorption. However, the same thing happened when I introduced AC and after some research it became obvious that charcoal is also easily persorbed, especially in a weakened gut.
Recently, I think Ray Peat has written in email to some here that granular charcoal about a millimeter in size or so may not have the risk of persorption that he thinks powdered charcoal would have, which is likely to be less than 1/10th of a millimeter.

Separately, I think he's written that raw carrot that is grated long and thin like angel hair and button mushrooms boiled for an hour or more have a good effect, absorbing estrogen and other toxins, that is similar to charcoal.

I feel I should not opine on whether cooking reduces the risk of persorption, because I can find no evidence (and intuitively it seems unlikely) that all starch particles would be removed or broken down, no matter how numerous or small. I did see a putative quote from Ray Peat, on the functionalalps.com page I linked above, that sometime ago he stopped eating all starch, even the limed corn, because of the risk of persorption. When I saw this, I stopped eating all starch, too, admittedly with some difficulty since starch is in so many foods.
 
OP
Westside PUFAs
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,972
brandonk said:
post 116570 From what I can see in a review of this literature there is considerable evidence that persorption does occur in humans, and all other animals studied, and no reason to conclude that cooking, gelatinization or digestive enzymes would prevent it.

Especially if you are suffering from headaches or mood or attention disorders, you may want to consider that these symptoms may be associated with persorption and "allergies" that are the body's response to the small particles.

Sigh. Here we go again.

14tlmdl.jpg


brandonk said:
post 116570I hope everyone takes these warnings very seriously.

You're fear mongering. This is a non-issue. No one eats raw starch, except for Peat folk who eat raw carrot, which has raw starch, is that persobed too? No.

Did you read the comment someone left on the blog link you posted?

"I researched this awhile back and thought I would share my notes, in case this actually were to concern anybody…

Volkheimer used 200g of potato starch to cause embolisms in his subjects. Think about that for a moment. That’s an enormous dose of starch granules. Even people who eat raw potato starch—for the resistant starch—rarely consume more than 40-50g per day. And it would be a challenge to eat more than 8-12g of starch granules in a day from food.

Volkheimer believed that persorption was some kind of flaw in the gut that allowed starch granules to leak through. And if starch granules that were larger than a red blood cell (6-8 microns in diameter) could get stuck in the blood vessels and cause blockages and embolisms. This was theorized because some blood vessels are so tiny that the red blood cells must travel single-file to pass through. However, it’s highly unlikely that the lymph and blood vessels are not prepared to handle such intrusions. If not, I doubt our species would have been able to tolerate Underground Storage Organs (USOs). Furthermore, it’s well recognized that the liver is specifically designed to filter such particles from the blood.

If we are going to worry about starch granules—which are often larger than the diameter of a red blood cell—then we must also worry about anything else that fits this criteria:

Activated charcoal, has a particle size range of 1-150 microns, and seems to have the ability to detoxify the blood. These are surely persorbed as Volkheimer specifically mentions “charcoal” being persorbed in his subjects.

As pointed out, above, carrots have a starch granule size of 4-26 microns, and should therefore cause embolisms according to Volkheimer.

Raw unfiltered honey, contains pollen that range from 2.5 to 1,000 microns! Most honey producers will filter the pollen out their honey with sieves that range from 50 microns (heavily filtered) to 600 microns (lightly filtered). But, as we know, Hunter Gatherer populations tend to eat a lot of honey and they didn’t filter their honey with modern sieves. So, I can imagine lots of large and small pollen getting persorbed by Hunter Gatherers every day.

It would seem that persorption probably isn’t some kind of design flaw in our bodies. Combine that with the practice of geophagy (eating dirts and clays) and you get the picture that these particles are probably supposed to temporarily roam through our blood vessels. Persorption appears to be an intentional mechanism with a purpose.

Obligate carnivores consume raw meat, which is rich in glycans (glycolipids, glycoproteins, etc.), which is what we know of as animal fiber. Animal fiber is persorbed as well, and likely has a very wide range. Some of these glycans are probably used throughout the body. In fact, any fiber particle that is eaten from any food will surely become persorbed in the same manner.

Glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) from blueberries literally get transported to your blood vessels and play a role in maintaining their health. Without persorption, there would be no way for GAGs to contribute to the health of blood vessels...."

Moreover, if this was such an issue, how do you explain of the following:

The fact that cultures such as West Africa hold the starchy yam in high regard:

"The New Yam Festival of the Igbo people is an annual New yam harvest festival by the Igbo people held at the end of the rainy season in early August. The Iwa ji festival (literally "new-yam eating") is practiced throughout West Africa (especially in Nigeria and Ghana) and other African countries and beyond, symbolizing the conclusion of a harvest and the beginning of the next work cycle. The celebration is a very culturally based occasion, tying individual Igbo communities together as essentially agrarian and dependent on yam."

"Yam is the main agricultural crop of the Igbos and also the staple food of our people. The New Yam Festival known as ‘Iwa-Ji’ or ‘Iri-Ji’ is a celebration depicting the prominence of yam in the social-cultural life of our people. Giving God thanks - During the festival we thank God for the arrival of the new harvest of yams and perform traditional rites to declare the new yam fit for general consumption. It presents the right conditions for all and sundry, family and friends to come together and demonstrate their commitment and solidarity to the local community"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/birmingham/content ... ture.shtml

Do you really think they would feel that way if the starch from the yams was causing lymph blockage persorption and strokes?

You're completely ignoring the caloric engine of civilization of past and present. Most people in these countries today: India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Philippines, Thailand, Burma, Malaysia, Cambodia, Laos, The Koreas, Japan, and China consume high amounts of starch in the form of rice, grains, and legumes. Population growing. Again, how could they do so if persorption was an issue? How could billions of people get along day to day eating such high amounts of starch?

Also, the history of starchy millet goes way back:

"Our research indicates that the earliest significant common millet cultivation system was established in the semiarid regions of China by 10,000 cal yr BP, and that the relatively dry condition in the early Holocene may have been favorable for the domestication of common millet over foxtail millet. Our study shows that common millet appeared as a staple crop in northern China ≈10,000 years ago, suggesting that common millet might have been domesticated independently in this area and later spread to Russia, India, the Middle East, and Europe. Nevertheless, like Mesopotamia, where the spread of wheat and barley to the fertile floodplains of the Lower Tigris and Euphrates was a key factor in the emergence of civilization, the spread of common millet to the more productive regions of the Yellow River and its tributaries provided the essential food surplus that later permitted the development of social complexity in the Chinese civilization."

http://www.pnas.org/content/106/18/7367.full

Also,

Our data indicate that routine processing of a selected group of wild cereals, combined with effective methods of cooking ground seeds, were practiced at least 12,000 years before their domestication in southwest Asia."

Also, the history of Maize:

"Cradle of Maize Domestication."

Early Diversification. In addition to the single maize domestication from ssp. parviglumis, the phylogenies and PCA reveal the geographic diversification of the native landraces of maize. The basal maize types in both phylogenies (Fig. 2) are those from the Mexican highlands, and it is these types that overlap with ssp. parviglumis in the PCA (Fig. 3). This result places the early diversification of maize in the highlands between the states of Oaxaca and Jalisco. In this regard, it is striking that the oldest known archaeological maize is from the highlands of Oaxaca (24) and remarkably the basal-most maize in Fig. 2b is from Oaxaca. This result presents an enticing correspondence between genetic and archaeological evidence, and calls for further botanical and archaeological exploration in this region. Among archaeologists, there have been two models for the early diversification of maize. According to one, because the oldest directly dated fossil maize comes from the Mexican highlands, then the early diversification of maize occurred in the highlands with maize spreading to the lowlands at a later date (25, 27). The second model interprets maize phytoliths from the lowlands as the oldest maize, and accordingly places the early diversification of maize in the lowlands (28). Our data suggest that maize diversified in the highlands before it spread to the lowlands.

Spread of Maize over the Americas. From an early diversification in the Mexican highlands, the phylogenies and PCA suggest two lineages or paths of dispersal. One path traces through western and northern Mexico into the southwestern U.S. and then into the eastern U.S. and Canada. A second path leads out of the highlands to the western and southern lowlands of Mexico into Guatemala, the Caribbean Islands, the lowlands of South America, and finally the Andes Mountains."


"We report starch grain and phytolith data from the Xihuatoxtla shelter, located in the Central Balsas Valley, that indicate that maize was present by 8,700 calendrical years ago (cal. B.P.). Phytolith data also indicate an early preceramic presence of a domesticated species of squash, possibly Cucurbita argyrosperma. The starch and phytolith data also allow an evaluation of current hypotheses about how early maize was used, and provide evidence as to the tempo and timing of human selection pressure on 2 major domestication genes in Zea and Cucurbita. Our data confirm an early Holocene chronology for maize domestication that has been previously indicated by archaeological and paleoecological phytolith, starch grain, and pollen data from south of Mexico, and reshift the focus back to an origin in the seasonal tropical forest rather than in the semiarid highlands."

http://www.pnas.org/content/106/13/5019.lon

Also,

Study with 166 references:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/682587

"We propose that plant foods containing high quantities of starch were essential for the evolution of the human phenotype during the Pleistocene. Although previous studies have highlighted a stone tool-mediated shift from primarily plant-based to primarily meat-based diets as critical in the development of the brain and other human traits, we argue that digestible carbohydrates were also necessary to accommodate the increased metabolic demands of a growing brain. Furthermore, we acknowledge the adaptive role cooking played in improving the digestibility and palatability of key carbohydrates. We provide evidence that cooked starch, a source of preformed glucose, greatly increased energy availability to human tissues with high glucose demands, such as the brain, red blood cells, and the developing fetus. We also highlight the auxiliary role copy number variation in the salivary amylase genes may have played in increasing the importance of starch in human evolution following the origins of cooking. Salivary amylases are largely ineffective on raw crystalline starch, but cooking substantially increases both their energy-yielding potential and glycemia. Although uncertainties remain regarding the antiquity of cooking and the origins of salivary amylase gene copy number variation, the hypothesis we present makes a testable prediction that these events are correlated."

"We agree with Wrangham (2009) that the reduction in gut size is more likely to have occurred due to a gradual replacement of fibrous plants by higher energy-yielding plant foods, including starchy tubers."

"We contend that in terms of energy supplied to an increasingly large brain, as well as to other glucose-dependent tissues, consumption of increased amounts of starch may have provided a substantial evolutionary advantage to Mid-to-Late Pleistocene omnivorous hominins."

"However, we propose that high-starch plant foods would have been a plentiful, reliable, and important part of the diet."

"The rapid growth in hominin brain size during the Middle Pleistocene will have required an increased supply of preformed glucose. Such increased demands can be met through a range of biologically and culturally driven dietary adaptations. Noting that there is considerable overlap in date estimates for the origins of controlled fire use and the origins of AMY1 CNV, we hypothesize a gene-culture coadaptation scenario whereby cooking starch-rich plant foods coevolved with increased salivary amylase activity in the human lineage. Without cooking, the consumption of starch-rich plant foods is unlikely to have met the high demands for preformed glucose noted in modern humans. Likewise, the improved accessibility of starch to α-amylases through cooking would, in turn, have led to an increased advantage for high levels of salivary amylase expression, particularly in infants. Carmody and Wrangham (2009) highlight the increased speed of digestibility and consequent energy gain provided by starch that has been thermally processed; however, AMY1 expression is also required for this to be effective. In addition to the increased energy availability from starch, other advantages of the coevolution of cooking and AMY1 expression include a reduction in chewing time, increased palatability and digestibility of polyphenol-rich plant foods, and improved reproductive function; a reliable supply of glycemic carbohydrate is likely to have sustainably supported fetal growth, provided the extra caloric intake needed during lactation, and improved infant survival. The regular consumption of starchy plant foods offers a coherent explanation for the provision of energy to the developing brain during the Late Pliocene and Early Pleistocene while the development of cooking, and a concomitant increases in salivary amylase expression, explains how the rapid increases in brain size from the Middle Pleistocene onward were energetically affordable."

Also, high starch eaters here, links to the references are in the book: Whitten, Ari; Smith MD, Wade (2015-02-05). The Low Carb Myth: Free Yourself from Carb Myths, and Discover the Secret Keys That Really Determine Your Health and Fat Loss Destiny (Kindle Locations 2373-2390). Archangel Ink. Kindle Edition.

"The Tukisenta tribe in New Guinea: According to Trowell and Burkitt in their book Western Diseases, the Tukisenta ate a diet consisting mostly of sweet potatoes, which was a whopping 94% carbohydrate. The men ate about 2,300 calories each day and the women ate about 1,770 calories each day. The scientists who went to study this tribe found them to be fit, lean, and muscular.

The population of the West Nile district in Uganda during the 1940s: The diet of this population consisted almost entirely of foods extremely rich in carbohydrates: cassava, bananas, millet, corn, lentils, peanuts, and vegetables. According to Trowell and Burkitt, despite a constant abundance of food, “in the 1940s it was quite unusual to see a stout man or woman.” Trowell and Burkitt also noted that the only overweight people in the area were affluent people who deviated from the traditional starch-based diet.124 This same trend has been noted in countless societies in Africa. Nearly the entire continent of Asia during the 20th century: China, India, Japan, Taiwan, and many other countries in Asia eat traditional diets extremely high in carbohydrates. They are largely based on white rice, as well as root vegetables along with some fruit. Yet, up until the Westernization of these countries and incorporation of processed foods into their diet, overweight and obesity were nearly unheard of in these populations. Traditional Chinese, Japanese, and Southern Indians were among the leanest people on the planet.125

Kitava: Up until very recently—the 1990s—the people of the South Pacific island of Kitava had not been influenced by the Western diet and had continued eating the traditional diet that they’d eaten for centuries. Dr. Staffan Lindeberg researched this population heavily during the 1990s and found that their diet consisted mostly of taro, sweet potatoes, cassava, fruit, coconut, and seafood. They ate about 50g a day of unrefined sugar from fruit. Their diet came in at a whopping 69% carbohydrate. Lindeberg found that there were literally no cases of overweight or obesity on the entire island! The lone individual who was slightly overweight had left the island for several years to go live in the city. You may also be interested to know that their fasting insulin level (a measure of insulin resistance and diabetes) was extremely low, and that diabetes and heart disease were unheard of on the island. A diet that is 69% carbohydrates and not a single person on the island has diabetes, and not a single person was even overweight, let alone obese. Lindeberg’s excellent research on the Kitavans makes it very clear that large consumption of carbohydrates does not cause overweight and obesity. 127

Kuna: The Kuna population off the coast of Panama eats a carbohydrate-based diet that is centered around plantains, corn, cassava, kidney beans, coconuts, a variety of fruits, wild game, seafood, and chocolate. They also consume a significant amount of processed white sugar, for a total of 77 grams of sugar (unrefined and refined) per day, in addition to all the other carbohydrate-rich staple foods they consume daily. This population tends to be quite lean.128

Ewe Tribe in West Africa: The Ewe tribe in Togo, Africa, eats a diet composed almost entirely of starchy tubers. 339 This population eats a diet of essentially nothing but starchy tubers—about 84% carbohydrate—and is extremely lean. 129

Tarahumara Indians of Mexico: This group—which is related to the Pima Indians—eats a traditional diet of mostly corn, beans, rice, potatoes, and squash, and has an extremely low incidence of type II diabetes. Their diet is 12% fat and over 75% carbohydrate.131

The Okinawans: They eat a diet made up of a whopping 85% carbohydrates (9% protein, 6% fat), mainly from starchy sweet potatoes, and had minimal incidence of diabetes prior to Westernization.226

The Hadza of Tanzania: This population eats a diet of mostly carbohydrates. They get their carbohydrate from starchy tubers and consume a large portion of it from sugar-rich foods like honey, baobab fruit, and berries.228 They have virtually no type II diabetes or insulin resistance.

The Pima Indians: The Pima Indians are a famous group within the obesity research community, largely because obesity rates are so incredibly high. But there’s also something else interesting about this group—only about half of the Pima Indian population has a tendency to become obese. You see, as the United States defined its borders, the Pima Indian population—which was on the border of New Mexico in the United States and Mexico—got divided. Subsequently, after a drought of the Gila River, the US Pima Indians suffered famine and were rescued by government rations, which consisted of various processed foods and things like canned meats, white flour, vegetable oils, sugar, hydrogenated lard, and other canned foods. They subsequently became obese and have remained that way ever since. However, the Pima Indians on the Mexican side of the border that have largely remained on their traditional diet—which is lower in fat and significantly higher in starchy carbohydrates—have dramatically lower rates of diabetes and obesity. So let me summarize. These two population groups share the same genetics. The US Pima Indians have the highest obesity rates in the world (about 70%) while the Mexican Pima Indians have under 10%. Same genetics, but totally different rates of obesity. The Spanish were the group who first made contact with the Pima Indians back in 1539, and like all groups around the world on their traditional diet, the Spanish found them to be extremely lean and healthy. The traditional Pima diet was a high-carbohydrate diet consisting of beans, corn, and squash, with wild fish, game meat, and plants. “Researchers at the NIDDK in Phoenix have estimated that the traditional Pima diet took about 70 percent of its calories in the form of carbohydrates, 15 percent in protein, and 15 percent in fat. By the 1950s, the proportions had changed to 61 percent carbohydrate, 15 percent in protein, and 24 percent in fat. In 1971 it was 44 percent carbohydrate, 12 percent protein, and 44 percent fat – a tripling of the fat content.”126 During the span of time where they became the most obese population on Earth, carbohydrate content decreased dramatically and fat content of their diet tripled—clearly demonstrating that carbohydrates are not the source of obesity. The Pima Indians do not in any way show us that “carbohydrates make you fat.” They show us that a diet based on processed foods makes you fat.

If eating carbohydrates is the cause of insulin resistance/type II diabetes, how is it that numerous populations around the world who eat far more carbohydrates than the paltry 50% of daily calories that Americans eat have dramatically lower incidences of type II diabetes? How is it that populations that eat almost nothing but insulin-spiking carbohydrates all day, every day for six or seven decades have negligible to nonexistent rates of type II diabetes? This simple fact is our first clue that insulin resistance is not simply a matter of eating carbs (or things that spike insulin)."
 
Last edited by a moderator:

brandonk

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
145
tara said:
post 116578
brandonk said:
post 116538 Apart from perhaps well-limed corn, starches, whether solid or liquid (such as corn or rice syrup), leave tiny particles as end-products of their digestion that can be persorbed through the intestine, lodge in the tissues, and in theory result over time in many degenerative diseases from atherosclerosis to alzheimer's.
I don't think this is correct. I think the process of producing syrup breaks down the solid persorbable particles into something more liquid that does not pose this particular risk.
It's not my area of expertise. As I understand it Ray Peat has said the risk of high fructose corn syrup and rice syrup comes from persorbed particles left by the manufacturing process. But you may know his work better than I do, since I've only been introduced very recently.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Nov 26, 2013
Messages
7,370
Ray Peat tried it with his students and found starch particles in their blood what's up with that :ss2
 

brandonk

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
145
Westside PUFAs said:
post 116640
brandonk said:
post 116570 From what I can see in a review of this literature there is considerable evidence that persorption does occur in humans, and all other animals studied, and no reason to conclude that cooking, gelatinization or digestive enzymes would prevent it.

Especially if you are suffering from headaches or mood or attention disorders, you may want to consider that these symptoms may be associated with persorption and "allergies" that are the body's response to the small particles.

Sigh. Here we go again.

14tlmdl.jpg


brandonk said:
post 116570I hope everyone takes these warnings very seriously.

You're fear mongering. This is a non-issue. No one eats raw starch, except for Peat folk who eat raw carrot, which has raw starch, is that persobed too? No.
I'm sorry I mistook you as asking for studies that showed that persorption occurs in humans, and not just mice. I looked briefly, and did find a line of recent studies cited in the abstracts I quoted that do show that. These studies show that over time there is a risk or likelihood that persorbed particles will build up in the tissues, no matter where you live or which anonymous commenter on a blog you happen to be.

I don't think Ray Peat is fear-mongering, he's just making the simple point that if starch is the only food you can find to subsist on, then of course you should eat it rather than starve (along with saturated fat to decrease the persorption).

But if you can find other food that is low PUFA, low tryptophan/methionine/cysteine/arginine, and starch-free, which provides a balance of vitamins and minerals (such as ripe fruit, non-fat cheese made without GMO enzymes and coconut oil, and perhaps an egg or occasional shellfish), then you will likely be better off eating that, especially as you age and become more susceptible to the effects of degenerative disease.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom