Potato = Good

[michael94]

keep the starch from bursting? could you explain

 

[mt_dreams]

keep the starch from bursting? could you explain

westside started a thread about someone who has some theories on the subject. if you read through the thread, as well as Natalie's short baked vs boiled article on her website, you will get a sense of the theory.

Natalie Zimmerman: "The Woefully Misguided War On Carbohydrates"

 

[tca300]

It took me about 1 month of no starch before I didn't crave it anymore. Now it grosses me out. A month ago I ran out of fruit, and being 45 min from the nearest store I boiled up a few of my wifes potatoes to eat with some milk. Within 10 minutes my nose was plugged, and my stomach was upset. As long as I have access to fruit, I will never eat starch again. So more for you guys. I asked Ray a few weeks back if he thinks nowadays that certain types of cooked starch, boiled etc... were beneficial and if he eats any.

" When a non-starchy fruit is available I think it’s always preferable to starch. Alkali-processed corn is the only kind that I’m willing to eat, and seldom that (e.g., corundas made with wood ashes)." - Ray Peat

 

[m_arch]

There have been various discussions on this forum regarding personal problems from getting all glucose and fructose, or the vast majority, from solely fruit, milk and table sugar.

I've tried this 'optimal' protocol, and instinctually cannot continue. A day without rice, potatoes or wheat is just a bad day for me. I much prefer potatoes to rice, and in turn rice to wheat, but I'd have any of them over none at all.

There are a couple of arguments generally brought up:

1. I should push on through. It's just part of the adaptation process, and I'll look back at my starch eating days with a chuckle. I'm living the zero-starch American Dream, and oh boy I feel sorry for my Soviet comrades who didn't have the grit to escape their repressive starchy prisons. I'm now burning energy perfectly, my CO2 production is vastly improved from high fructose consumption, and all my health and psychological problems have disappeared from my hard-fought campaign to obliterate endotoxin from my gut. I've reached the Peat nirvana, I am Adam.

2. You are doing it wrong. You need to add more liver, or oysters, or lightly blanched collard greens, or take 12 grams of salt with your freshly juiced perfectly ripe oranges. Or whatever.

Anyways, I just think people are far too focused on this high sugar scenario. I understand the argument against starches, and wheat is definitely bad news to some degree, rice tastes dull, but edible. Well cooked potatoes however, are essential I believe.

It could well be that living in Britain and being able to get naturally grown Jersey Royal new potatoes significantly improves the biological effects of the food. I'm not sure.

It started with me feeling like I was somewhat better following the various protocols subscribed (high coffee consumption, l-theanine, limited meat consumption, zero pufa, low fat in general, fruit and dairy daily, soft drinks, aspirin etc etc.)

But as time went on I was putting on weight, and generally my gut health was getting worse. I was putting on abdominal fat, and no, it wasn't because I was consuming too much fat, or that I couldn't handle the change in energy utilisation (I'm a young male with no previous health complications).

So I decided to lean into 'the potato diet'. From the first bite of well cooked potato I knew this is what I needed. My guts cleared up, I dropped water weight initially, but then it sustained, I was happier, and getting healthier. I still consume a lot of skimmed milk, lean meats, eggs, tropical fruits etc. But I crave nothing more that a big bowl of potatoes, with a stocky meaty stew, or something similar, almost as a condiment.

It warms me up, my muscles seem to ease up a lot, my thoughts flow more clearly, I sleep much better, I want to be active and move about, and so on. I think people on this forum can definitely fall prey to what they fundamentally despise, namely scientific reductionism. I know there are studies on starch problems. Fine. But many people start a potato centred diet as a quick fix for weight loss, and find they never stop. Then there's that Japanese region where potatoes are the bulk of the calories, and they are some of the longest living in the world. And the Pacific Islanders. And I'm sure there is evidence on the other side of the equation, showing no consumption of potatoes, rice etc is problematic.

Anyways, I think a lot of you could solve most of your remaining maladies by eating them. Importantly, not with dairy fat. Therein seems to lie the problem. Eat them on a low fat diet.

Forgive me for not remembering the name, but a lady on this forum introduced some very important information on wet starches, and the unique, I would argue necessary, effect this has. As I recall it was something along the lines of only wet starches can sufficiently shuttle glycogen to the muscles, or wherever else that wonderful stuff needs to end up.

Finally, I've put a few quotes from Ray himself, which seem to add some balance to this debate that any starchy food will be destructive:

'Well cooked potatoes, with butter or cream, are a very good way to get carbohydrate, if you aren't allergic to them, because they contain a good balance of amino acids, too, as well as minerals and B vitamins.'

'Well cooked white potatoes, such as russets, are very nutritious, and the (cooked) juice is just something for people with extreme metabolic or digestive problems.'

'Roots, shoots, and tubers are, next to the fruits, a good carbohydrate source; potatoes are a source of good protein.'

I lold. We need Carbs and protein right
.. Potatoes seem just as good as milk.

 

[wiggles92]

sounds incredible. Doing that tonight. Bout to boil some potatoes right now! And you don't add any fat at any point, right?

Use about a teaspoon of refined coconut oil per say 5 or 6 potatoes, which is about the number you use to make a whole hash brown.

 

[wiggles92]

It took me about 1 month of no starch before I didn't crave it anymore. Now it grosses me out. A month ago I ran out of fruit, and being 45 min from the nearest store I boiled up a few of my wifes potatoes to eat with some milk. Within 10 minutes my nose was plugged, and my stomach was upset. As long as I have access to fruit, I will never eat starch again. So more for you guys. I asked Ray a few weeks back if he thinks nowadays that certain types of cooked starch, boiled etc... were beneficial and if he eats any.

" When a non-starchy fruit is available I think it’s always preferable to starch. Alkali-processed corn is the only kind that I’m willing to eat, and seldom that (e.g., corundas made with wood ashes)." - Ray Peat

Hmm interesting. I'm willing to accept that Ray holds the view that starch is sub-standard, for reasons already discussed on this forum. It just seems like such a fundamental issue to pin down, and it's an issue people have just taken as gospel and not questioned. I think what bugs me the most is people crave starches. The rest of Peats protocol makes complete sense to me, because it removes food fears, and makes me understand why I want something. A curry without rice is no longer a satisfying meal. Roast meat and gravy without potatoes isn't either. It just doesn't seem to fit.

So how do you eat now? And what effects have you experienced from leaving starch behind?

 

[wiggles92]

westside started a thread about someone who has some theories on the subject. if you read through the thread, as well as Natalie's short baked vs boiled article on her website, you will get a sense of the theory.

Natalie Zimmerman: "The Woefully Misguided War On Carbohydrates"

"The simple truth is that when we lack sufficient boiled starch, we force the body to burn more free fatty acids for energy and hinder the muscles from responding to insulin."

Is the above quote correct? When I consume sugar only I get colder, and a rushed, sort of anxious 'alertness'. Boiled starches fix this. Are boiled starches the only way to get glycogen where it needs to go? I feel this warmth over my body when I consume wet starches, potatoes in particular, which feels pleasurable, and suddenly I'll be warm for hours. Does anyone understand how this works?

 

[wiggles92]

I lold. We need Carbs and protein right
.. Potatoes seem just as good as milk.

According to this forum that isn't correct. Or at least that's the impression I've got. Milk definitely is seen as more optimal than potatoes. Not that I'm bashing milk, I drink about 1.5 skimmed litres per day.

 

[wiggles92]

Solanine removed from boiling remains in water? so better not reuse the water for other thing, like cooking rice?

Logically I'd assume that's where it ends up. So yeah I always remove the water.

 

[damngoodcoffee]

The no starch thing makes me feel like low carb, despite of eating tons of sugar. Cold, stressed and weird. There's sort of this relaxed feeling too, but it's more like i'm about to pass out than anything enjoyable. Starch makes me feel safe and sound. :)

 

[tca300]

@wiggles92 I eat Fruit, and Milk, I combine skim and 1%. I eat hydrogenated coconut oil, liver, and oysters, but I only eat oysters once per week, and will usually have about 1 ounce of liver everyday.
Since giving up starch my skin is smoother, I don't get little zits that I use too on my arms, legs and back, My sense of smell has improved, and I no longer have pollen allergies during the spring and summer, nor do I have a chronically semi plugged nose. My digestion is better, I don't bloat, and I don't get sick anymore. My temperature has risen from a chronic 98.2 to 98.8-99.0, my teeth are noticeably harder and whiter, I don't get heart palpitations after eating, like I use to with starch foods, its easier to lose fat, and I have a better outlook on life. I'm sure there are other things, but I'm busy and can't think of anymore things off the top of my head.

 

[wiggles92]

@wiggles92 I eat Fruit, and Milk, I combine skim and 1%. I eat hydrogenated coconut oil, liver, and oysters, but I only eat oysters once per week, and will usually have about 1 ounce of liver everyday.
Since giving up starch my skin is smoother, I don't get little zits that I use too on my arms, legs and back, My sense of smell has improved, and I no longer have pollen allergies during the spring and summer, nor do I have a chronically semi plugged nose. My digestion is better, I don't bloat, and I don't get sick anymore. My temperature has risen from a chronic 98.2 to 98.8-99.0, my teeth are noticeably harder and whiter, I don't get heart palpitations after eating, like I use to with starch foods, its easier to lose fat, and I have a better outlook on life. I'm sure there are other things, but I'm busy and can't think of anymore things off the top of my head.

Well you can see the difference between you and damngoodcoffee. As I'm sure you're being honest about your improvements, whats the difference? Why do different people have such opposite reactions? I don't think I've come across any Peaty recommendations that results in so opposite reactions. But that's why I brought the topic up, because I'd like to have some discussion around this.

Why do some seemingly require starch for health, whereas for others it is a step towards degeneration?

 

[tca300]

@wiggles92 I don't know. Maybe it's the mental component of some whose life revolves around eating, and tasting certain flavors that only starchy foods with spices can provide, and being without that might mess with one's mind and therefore spilling over into their health. Also the strong rise in blood sugar from starch that fruit doesn't provide can become somewhat addictive I think. I don't care, because I eat to live, I don't live to eat. When Ray points out abvious benefits to fruits over starches, as well as the potential dangers of starch, it becomes a no brainer to me. If the world as we know it continues on without massive wars or a small ice age that kills my family and myself off, I wish to see my daughters grow up, live their lives and be a part of it as long as I can, and in good health. So my position for myself is to take advantage of every health factor that I know of, and can manipulate so as to stick around as long as I can. I personally feel, function, and look best without starch, so the evidence plus self experamentation is proof for be, but I have avoided starch for a long time, not just days, weeks or months, but coming up on several years.

 

[wiggles92]

@wiggles92 I don't know. Maybe it's the mental component of some whose life revolves around eating, and tasting certain flavors that only starchy foods with spices can provide, and being without that might mess with one's mind and therefore spilling over into their health. Also the strong rise in blood sugar from starch that fruit doesn't provide can become somewhat addictive I think. I don't care, because I eat to live, I don't live to eat. When Ray points out abvious benefits to fruits over starches, as well as the potential dangers of starch, it becomes a no brainer to me. If the world as we know it continues on without massive wars or a small ice age that kills my family and myself off, I wish to see my daughters grow up, live their lives and be a part of it as long as I can, and in good health. So my position for myself is to take advantage of every health factor that I know of, and can manipulate so as to stick around as long as I can. I personally feel, function, and look best without starch, so the evidence plus self experamentation is proof for be, but I have avoided starch for a long time, not just days, weeks or months, but coming up on several years.

Very good point. It could well be mind manipulating body. Have you had any stumbling blocks? Have you changed your approach since you started?

 

[superhuman]

@tca300 love it. Have you experienced and noticed any difference in terms of meal frequency? what is optimal for you or if it makes a difference? how often or when you eat? That also goes in terms of protein meals, like there seems to be alot of hype around that each protein meal should contain 30-40g protein to spike the leucin stuff and all that. I know RP has not talked about that in terms of protein intake for each meal so maybe the 30-40g amount is more in terms of muscle growth and all that jazz.
I have been doing alot of fasting and intermittent fasting the last years and that also has its own hype behind it.

 

[damngoodcoffee]

Also the strong rise in blood sugar from starch that fruit doesn't provide can become somewhat addictive I think.

I think that's a part of why i love starch so much. Not sure if the blood sugar rise is really a good or a bad thing.

 

[tca300]

@wiggles92 I slowly dropped starch out by having a bowl of rice or potatoes only in the evening, but not really any stumbling blocks. In the beginning I drank more lemonade and pop, now my sugars come exclusively from fruit and milk. I started to get nose bleeds from increased metabolism and lack of b vitamins, so I dont eat refined sugar anymore really. I also add salt to my juice, but not enough to make it repulsive.

 

[tca300]

@superhuman Meal frequency depends on how busy I am, but when I can choose I prefer to eat about every 2-3 hours, although when I'm at home all day eating small amounts every 60-90 minutes feels very good. The amount of protein I get per meal depends on how often I eat, but I like 30-40 grams at a time, it feels best at about that much. I use to fast a lot, but I feel better when I dont, and I still can lose weight just fine without fasting, so I just eat whenever Im hungry.

 

[tca300]

@damngoodcoffee It gives me heart trouble, and Ray doesnt speek fondly of the super quick rise in blood sugar either, so I tend to conclude It might not be optimal. At least for me.

 

[Westside PUFAs]

Starch haters always mention the insulin effect of starch but always ignore the insulin effect of protein:

"If protein is eaten without carbohydrate, it will stimulate insulin secretion, lowering blood sugar and activating the stress response, leading to the secretion of adrenalin, cortisol, growth hormone, prolactin, and other hormones. The adrenalin will mobilize glycogen from the liver, and (along with other hormones) will mobilize fatty acids, mainly from fat cells. Cortisol will activate the conversion of protein to amino acids, and then to fat and sugar, for use as energy.”-RP

“Insulin release is also stimulated by amino acids such as leucine, and insulin stimulates cells to absorb amino acids and to synthesize proteins. Since insulin lowers blood sugar as it disposes of amino acids, eating a large amount of protein without carbohydrate can cause a sharp decrease in blood sugar. This leads to the release of adrenalin and cortisol, which raise the blood sugar. Adrenalin causes fatty acids to be drawn into the blood from fat stores, especially if the liver’s glycogen stores are depleted, and cortisol causes tissue protein to be broken down into amino acids, some of which are used in place of carbohydrate. Unsaturated fatty acids, adrenaline, and cortisol cause insulin resistance.”-RP

The insulin response by the pancreas is a normal, physiological and biochemical reaction to amino acids and disaccharides/polysaccharides that pass by the beta cells of the pancreas. It's purpose is to transport them to their appropriate places around the body. They can't get to where they need to go to without insulin. That's why type one diabetics must inject insulin, everyday, multiple times a day for their whole life. Glycogen can not be stored without insulin and amino acids can not be moved around without insulin. The ingestion of protein causes the body to release insulin, in order to direct the amino acids toward muscle tissue, the brain and other organs. But this also removes glucose from the bloodstream. To counteract this effect, the body releases stress hormones that mobilize glycogen from the liver. Eating carbohydrates with the protein will minimize this effect.

The "glyciymic index" is another big misunderstanding health/nutriton. Your blood glucose is supposed to rise after eating. That is the whole point of eating; low blood glucose. High fat diets in combination with having excess body fat result in excess free fatty acids and intramyocellular lipids which block glucose from being transported properly resulting in high blood glucose. Blood glucose is supposed to rise and then go down the the right level when it’s being used properly.

And as I always like to remind, a starched based diet as promoted by the people who are getting the best results, is widely misunderstood by people who oppose it. It is a very unique way of eating and it is a specific types of starch, not bread and pasta, (they can be used in context but not as a base), while avoiding certain other foods, and it takes a lot of preparation and trial and error. It's not as simple as the Danny Roddy style of milk, oj, carrot, can of oysters, ice cream, and store bought oxtail soup. I'm not dissing that, I'm simply stating that it takes more prep time and work, which is a big factor in why people don't want to do it.

I know of Peat's view on starch. But he's also said positive things about it as well. Like I pointed out here at 3:13: Ray Peat on the myth of PUFA depletion and making our own fats

Yes, he said "preferably fruit and milk" but he still said "as much sugar and starch," in the context of overall daily calories and fat intake. Not everyone can do/wants to do lactose.

An anti starch quote:

“Rather than the sustained hyperglycemia which is measured for determining the glycemic index, I think the “diabetogenic” or “carcinogenic” action of starch has to do with the stress reaction that follows the intense stimulation of insulin release. This is most easily seen after a large amount of protein is eaten. Insulin is secreted in response to the amino acids, and besides stimulating cells to take up the amino acids and convert them into protein, the insulin also lowers the blood sugar. This decrease in blood sugar stimulates the formation of many hormones, including cortisol, and under the influence of cortisol both sugar and fat are produced by the breakdown of proteins, including those already forming the tissues of the body. At the same time, adrenalin and several other hormones are causing free fatty acids to appear in the blood.”-RP

Matt Stone responds:

"Again, I’m not sure where he gets the idea that starch is a pro-cancer and pro-diabetes substance in and of itself. An insulin spike in the absence of carbohydrate as happens when you consume protein by itself probably shouldn’t be compared to an insulin spike from starch, which is accompanied by lots of carbohydrates to keep the blood sugar from falling. While some people very well may feel symptoms of adrenal hormone activation from eating starch, many feel this activation from eating sugar but NOT when they eat starch. Again, know what it feels like to be having a surge of adrenaline (cold fingers and toes, irritability, appetite suppression, etc.) and try to figure this out for yourself – free of mental interference from biochemical oversimplifications like the one Peat uses in the above paragraph."

Ray Peat - Cortisol and Diabetes - 180 Degree Health

As far as this quote:
“I don’t have an eating plan, other than to be perceptive and to learn about your physiology, so that you can adjust things to your needs. Any craving is a good starting point, because we have several biological mechanisms for correcting specific nutritional deficiencies. When something is interfering with your ability to use sugar, you crave it because if you don’t eat it you will waste protein to make it.”-RP

..I use the physiology of starch and glycogen as my reference:

Starch (Carbohydrate) Digestion and Absorption

Starch

People will say "that's mainstream." But why do those same people ignore when Peat says to read "mainstream" books:

“Everyone should know the basic principles of nutritional physiology and have a general idea of the chemical composition of foods. Otherwise, you will be confused by conflicting claims. Become your own expert — for example, if someone tells you not to eat fruits and proteins at the same meal, get a book on digestion and absorption of food from the library, and read about interactions.” —Ray Peat, PhD

And when @Dan Wich asked Peat on one of the radio shows about how to study, Peat said "go to a library."

So turns out that Peat isn't as contrarian as some try to say.

As I said, I know Peat's view on starch and I obviously disagree with it. I like Peat more for his views on politics, anti-authoritarianism, and the ecosystem, rather than his views on which carbohydrates are best.

Even @cantstoppeating said this:

"This pretty much flies in the face of mainstream dogma that state "nutritional ketosis" is bad because of the excess cortisol which promotes lean-mass/muscle wasting. If Peat is repeating this same dogma, it makes me double-check the details of his dietary strategies."

UK Health Advice Now In Complete Chaos (but Now Going Full Circle And Slowly Rays Way!)

So I say the same thing. If Peat's view on starch is that it is fattening, causes excess endotoxin production, and can be "persorbed" then it makes me double-check the details of his dietary strategies.