Is eating whole-grain foods THAT big of a deal?

[StoopidMonkey81]

I'm fighting a losing battle with the beliefs of my S/O and my personal trainer on this one, so I thought I'd stop here before I give up. Every time I look for dietary advice (mostly for info on total calorie counts and protein intake) I get inundated with concrete demands that I never eat white bread or pasta again, ever. Thing is, I don't get why the push to go to whole grain is such an unbreakable commandment in the dieting world. When it comes to how it compares with white grains, I see whole grains as having:

1) More fiber - Makes you feel fuller and makes you more regular. But I don't have a snacking impulse and I don't have a problem with being regular, so I don't see the big benefits to me, personally, here. Not to mention we're only talking a gram or two per serving, not exactly a game changer.

2) More nutrients - Sure it has a few more nutrients, but if my overall diet isn't terribly lacking and I'm taking a loaded multivitamin, are the scant few extra nutrients in whole grain that significant that I should forgo while grains for good?

3) More calories - 100% whole grain breads are more dense and therefore have more calories, which are not my friends when I'm trying to lose weight.

Did I miss anything here? I'm trying not to oversimplify it but IMO I'm being more analytical and rational about it than nutrition experts who say "It's better for you" like some religious gospel that they don't have to think too much about. Maybe I'm over-analyzing this because I'm a stubborn food snob who is resisting giving up all my favorite foods for substitutions that don't taste as good, but if I'm going to give up something I want to know not only -if- the alternative is "better for me", but also -how- and -how much- it's better for me. If it's night and day and will help the pounds drop significantly, I'll give it a go. If it's a tiny miniscule amount better for me, then I'd like to know that so I can make an educated choice that doesn't sound like mindless dogma.

[Bkcmart]

Well, besides being processed by one method or another (which is always less than desirable), you're forgetting that you're body uses calories to digest food. The further processed the food, the easier it is to digest, and the less calories your body needs to chemically and mechanically break down said food.

As to how great the TEF (Thermogenic Effect of Food) is, is debatable. But A 5 second search on Pubmed has led me to this study, which says the difference could be as great as ~10% of the meal energy.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2897733/


Anyone have any other studies? This kind of set me of on a tangent....

[StoopidMonkey81]

Well, besides being processed by one method or another (which is always less than desirable), you're forgetting that you're body uses calories to digest food. The further processed the food, the easier it is to digest, and the less calories your body needs to chemically and mechanically break down said food.

As to how great the TEF (Thermogenic Effect of Food) is, is debatable. But A 5 second search on Pubmed has led me to this study, which says the difference could be as great as ~10% of the meal energy.

Ugh, there's the other unforgivable sin in the fitness world: processed food. Another example of word that's thrown about to cast damnable judgement on food without any real detail as to what it means and why it's bad. I have heard of the TEF and don't doubt the body takes some amount of time longer to break unprocessed foods down and some amount of extra calories to digest it. But if the difference is even 10% then it still doesn't pay to eat a 210 calorie serving of whole grain bread when I can have white bread for 100 calories (or less if it's the thin cut, fluffy low-cal variety). That's the kind of thing that annoys the hell out of me when it comes to dieting advice. Losing weight comes down in large part to "Calories in, calories out" yet if I suggested eating low-cal white bread instead of high-cal whole grain bread it would send most fitness "experts" into a tizzyfit.

[StrongMeat]

outside of better digestion/better movements and a healthier digestive tract its not "necessary" for fat loss

the thermic effect of food is highly overstated, a quick look can tell you because the energy expenditure of digestion is usually in calories whereas the food you eat is measured in kilocalories

focus on the overall kcal and youll have better results, theres nothing wrong with eating clean though, better food means a healthier more energized you in the long run

-StrongMeat-

[wdmvp]

Don't listen to the so-called experts because in reality they probably know less than you do. Calories in vs. calories out and meeting your personal macro/micro sufficiency is all that matters.

[TelusLob]

I'm fighting a losing battle with the beliefs of my S/O and my personal trainer on this one, so I thought I'd stop here before I give up. Every time I look for dietary advice (mostly for info on total calorie counts and protein intake) I get inundated with concrete demands that I never eat white bread or pasta again, ever. Thing is, I don't get why the push to go to whole grain is such an unbreakable commandment in the dieting world. When it comes to how it compares with white grains, I see whole grains as having:

1) More fiber - Makes you feel fuller and makes you more regular. But I don't have a snacking impulse and I don't have a problem with being regular, so I don't see the big benefits to me, personally, here. Not to mention we're only talking a gram or two per serving, not exactly a game changer.

2) More nutrients - Sure it has a few more nutrients, but if my overall diet isn't terribly lacking and I'm taking a loaded multivitamin, are the scant few extra nutrients in whole grain that significant that I should forgo while grains for good?

3) More calories - 100% whole grain breads are more dense and therefore have more calories, which are not my friends when I'm trying to lose weight.

Did I miss anything here? I'm trying not to oversimplify it but IMO I'm being more analytical and rational about it than nutrition experts who say "It's better for you" like some religious gospel that they don't have to think too much about. Maybe I'm over-analyzing this because I'm a stubborn food snob who is resisting giving up all my favorite foods for substitutions that don't taste as good, but if I'm going to give up something I want to know not only -if- the alternative is "better for me", but also -how- and -how much- it's better for me. If it's night and day and will help the pounds drop significantly, I'll give it a go. If it's a tiny miniscule amount better for me, then I'd like to know that so I can make an educated choice that doesn't sound like mindless dogma.

Find a new SO and trainer if they're pushing bro-science on you.

[jon1995]

No.

[Bkcmart]

Ugh, there's the other unforgivable sin in the fitness world: processed food. Another example of word that's thrown about to cast damnable judgement on food without any real detail as to what it means and why it's bad. I have heard of the TEF and don't doubt the body takes some amount of time longer to break unprocessed foods down and some amount of extra calories to digest it. But if the difference is even 10% then it still doesn't pay to eat a 210 calorie serving of whole grain bread when I can have white bread for 100 calories (or less if it's the thin cut, fluffy low-cal variety). That's the kind of thing that annoys the hell out of me when it comes to dieting advice. Losing weight comes down in large part to "Calories in, calories out" yet if I suggested eating low-cal white bread instead of high-cal whole grain bread it would send most fitness "experts" into a tizzyfit.

That works when you're talking about a couple of slices of bread. But the difference can be much greater. In the study I linked, they tested the difference between whole-wheat sandwiches and white-bread sandwiches. Imagine the difference in TEF between pasta and say, brown rice?

That isn't even getting into differences between the TEF has on Macro's.

The only thing that matters in terms of weight loss/gain is calories, and in that regard, white bread vs whole wheat isn't going to make or break you, of course, but that should be obvious.

outside of better digestion/better movements and a healthier digestive tract its not "necessary" for fat loss

the thermic effect of food is highly overstated, a quick look can tell you because the energy expenditure of digestion is usually in calories whereas the food you eat is measured in kilocalories

focus on the overall kcal and youll have better results, theres nothing wrong with eating clean though, better food means a healthier more energized you in the long run

-StrongMeat-

Where in the name of goodness did you come up with that idea? You can clearly see in the article I linked, they measure everything in kcal's....

[StoopidMonkey81]

The only thing that matters in terms of weight loss/gain is calories, and in that regard, white bread vs whole wheat isn't going to make or break you, of course, but that should be obvious.

It -should- be obvious, but if you spent your life listening to "experts" paying lip service to that gospel then it's far from obvious. Many will go so far as to say that if we ignore their dire warnings and eat white bread and pasta then we "aren't being serious about getting healthy". That's when I start thinking "Frak off!".

[Bkcmart]

It -should- be obvious, but if you spent your life listening to "experts" paying lip service to that gospel then it's far from obvious. Many will go so far as to say that if we ignore their dire warnings and eat white bread and pasta then we "aren't being serious about getting healthy". That's when I start thinking "Frak off!".

Haha, Nutritional Dogma...

[StoopidMonkey81]

Haha, Nutritional Dogma...

It's no joke! Most of these people take nutrition advice like "Always eat whole-grains!" and "Avoid all sugar since it gets turned straight into fat!" as inerrant articles of faith, and don't you dare question them! They also start to sound like preachers because many skittish dieters don't want to know the science behind weight loss, but to attach themselves on easy to memorize bumper sticker slogans and charismatic diet experts, who as it turns out do not like to be questioned because it forces them to face the ugly truth that they don't understand the scientific mechanics either, so they rely on loose correlations to make it through the day. So long as their clients lose weight, they don't feel the need to question their dogma.

[aterrigno]

The whole calorie in vs calorie out to lose weight is true but for overall nutrition and health whole grains and less process food are better for you



There is research to prove that a diet largely containing refined carbs or sugar increase estrogen levels and decrease test lvls... Overall decreasing your bmr, increasing your bf, and slowing your metabolism


There is also research to show that eating a diet composed largely of refined carbs/sugar increases chances for diabetes because of the insulin spikes and drops it causes



So in your short term goals to lose weight if you want to eat your white bread because it has less calories that's fine... but I believe most of us are in the losing fat section to become healthier overall and avoid long term problems... Eventually your diet should contain large amounts of
Complex carbs

[sharpieblet]

OP obviously knows how to think for himself and that's good, the same thing you're wondering now-i had that same realization about a year ago. there's no real direct fat loss benefit. If you get full off white breads and simple sugars and carbs and all that jazz, and continue to see results, stick with it. I switch up between white and wheat bread every once in a while just b/c the wheat bread IS a lil more filling and imho tastes better with PB. But overall cals is the biggest thing when it comes to fat loss and unlike everyone at my gym and all the out of shape mofos telling ME what i should avoid, I'M not afraid to go against the common mentality and just do what i know will work.

In short, do what you know will work. Don't let a polo shirt with the words 'Personal Trainer' or a nutrition degree fool you into doubting proven counter evidence.

[hungryone15]

OP you said it yourself, you're a stubborn food snob.

There is a ton of research supporting eliminating grains from your diet be it white or whole grain. Whole grains are marginally better for your.

Any one that tells you that in order to lose weight you need to subscribe to the calories in vs calories out theory is a complete moron. Everything you eat has a specific hormonal response, and this is far more important effect than how many calories you eat. And that is also why a caloric deficit diet will only work for a maximum of 3 months... After that it stops working and people usually gain more weight back than they lost.

I've personally helped over 50 people lose weight simply by eliminating grains (yes I train them too). I typically see about 10-15lbs lost in 3 weeks of eliminating grains.

Go increase your knowledge on the topic and learn how bad grains really are for your weight and your health. Here are some books:
"Wheat Belly" by William Davis
"The Paleo Solution" by Robb Wolf
"Good Calories Bad Calories" Gary Taubes
anything by Loren Cordaine

If you actually listened to the trainer you're paying, it'd be a smart decision for your wallet AND your health and fitness goals.

[Ninetysix]

^^^notsurifsrs

The names of the foods you eat do not determine if they're "good" or "bad" for fat loss. Rather, it's daily energy balance that governs. --Wonderpug

[Motaba]

^^^notsurifsrs

The names of the foods you eat do not determine if they're "good" or "bad" for fat loss. Rather, it's daily energy balance that governs. --Wonderpug

Yeah, I 2nd that.

[fearbrandon]

whole grains is more nutrient dense food. you get more bang for your buck. more nutrients and vitamins and better things for you in a smaller amount/calories.

you can eat a slice of pizza or eat a very nutritious meal for the same amount of calories.. but which one would u choose

[MrDude1]

the real irony is that most things marketed as "whole grain" do not contain anything more useful then "white" or whatever.... its just a marketing ploy.

[gpo613]

I am definitely new to nutrition. Well at least to the concept of hitting macros and being exact on calories. Here are my thoughts about processed foods, sugar and all the bad things in the world to eat.

If you are on the standard bodybuilding diet I have read so much about then you just can't possibly take in too much of the bad stuff for it to matter that much. Most guys here eat in the range of 2000-3000 calories a day. Most are trying to get between 140-220g of protein. If you are doing that it just doesn't leave that much room for too much bad stuff. So some people will eat some bad stuff, but just not a ton. There just isn't room in the total calorie count.

Now when you are eating 4000-6000 calories a day and not exercising and getting only say 120g of protein then you are eating a lot of bad stuff most likely. But 400-700 calories a day of not the best food isn't going to kill you especially if you are exercising on a regular basis.

[sharpieblet]

OP you said it yourself, you're a stubborn food snob.

There is a ton of research supporting eliminating grains from your diet be it white or whole grain. Whole grains are marginally better for your.

Any one that tells you that in order to lose weight you need to subscribe to the calories in vs calories out theory is a complete moron. Everything you eat has a specific hormonal response, and this is far more important effect than how many calories you eat. And that is also why a caloric deficit diet will only work for a maximum of 3 months... After that it stops working and people usually gain more weight back than they lost.

I've personally helped over 50 people lose weight simply by eliminating grains (yes I train them too). I typically see about 10-15lbs lost in 3 weeks of eliminating grains.

Go increase your knowledge on the topic and learn how bad grains really are for your weight and your health. Here are some books:
"Wheat Belly" by William Davis
"The Paleo Solution" by Robb Wolf
"Good Calories Bad Calories" Gary Taubes
anything by Loren Cordaine

If you actually listened to the trainer you're paying, it'd be a smart decision for your wallet AND your health and fitness goals.

so much stupid in your post idk what to say other than '.....'

cals in vs. cals out, cut for over 3 months, over 60 lbs fat loss, YOU MAD BRO?!!? enjoy staying in the red! i sure do love it when the trainers join up and get pissed that people get away with eating all types of carbs and sugars when it goes against all they THOUGHT was the only way to lose fat.

[StrongMeat]

Where in the name of goodness did you come up with that idea? You can clearly see in the article I linked, they measure everything in kcal's....

didnt see your link

i read it somewhere on here fwiw

-StrongMeat-

[mpipes]

The *marginal* amount of "nutrition" that whole grains supposedly have over "white" carbs can easily be found elsewhere in the diet, like vegetables, and even meat happens to be loaded with some of the same vitamins and nutrients.

Fact is, if you don't like it you're not gonna stick to eating it in the first place and that negates any experts claims.

By the way, farmers use grains, not grass, to fatten up livestock, chickens, turkeys, etc for slaughter in a matter of months, not years it would normally take with their natural diet. Food for thought.

[savaglauren]

As a nutritionist, I feel like I must step in and defend a bit. Often you hear the oversimplied "just eat whole grains" and whatnot. It's often oversimplified since we all tend to digest things in small doses (no pun intended). Most of the population does not have much, if any, nutritional knowledge. So simple words of advice gets chopped down to get a big picture across.

To answer some of the questions above, some information about carbohydrates. There are three types of carbs (and breakdowns within these categories): monosaccharides, disaccharides, and polysaccharides. They all provide the body with energy (hense while right before a marathon for example, you'd want to carb load and why when we're cutting, we want to limit carbs to get a deficet so we start burning fats). The reason why we use carbs for energy is because it gets broken down with glucose - what our cells use for energy. Monos are "simple sugars"...meaning it's composed of 6 carbons, 12 hydrogens, and 6 oxygens. Dis are made of two monos...polys are made of many monos.

When you have more processed carbs, like white bread, the pairs and chains of monos (the dis and polys) are processed down to monos. The problem with this from a health standpoint is that too many of these monos are then combined with fats by enzyms in the liver and then travels throughout the body for storage (fatty deposits). The liver also reacts to glucose in the body by releasing insulin into the bloody. If you have too much glucose in your blood (blood sugar), it can be difficult for your liver to keep up so to speak and over long periods of time, this may lead to type 2 diabetes (along with other risk factors), and cardiovascular disease (in particular hypertension).

Another thing about whole grains is the role of fibers. When you have insoluble and soluble fibers in your diet, they may do a few things. Like mentioned above, it improves saiety (makes you feel fuller longer)...the reason why is because food must be made into a mixture of acid and food (called chyme) in the stomach before being released into the small intestine for further digestion and absorption. It takes a long time the less process food is since you have to do that, plus whole grains take a while to be made into chyme. Whole grains also is good for cardiovascular health in that it helps to lower inflammation (particular in the arteries); diabetes in that it delays that circulation of glucose throughout your body, so it is absorbed more slowly (avoids those blood sugar spikes); gastrointestinal health in that it reduces stool passage time and therefore prevents constipation; and cancers - particular colon and rectal cancers by diluting and removing potential carcinogens and reducing inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract.

I hope this helps clear up some of the questions. You can see why a lot of people just want a sound bite. For reference, I am a nutrition professor at the undergraduate and graduate levels.

[Ninetysix]

When you have more processed carbs, like white bread, the pairs and chains of monos (the dis and polys) are processed down to monos. The problem with this from a health standpoint is that too many of these monos are then combined with fats by enzyms in the liver and then travels throughout the body for storage (fatty deposits). The liver also reacts to glucose in the body by releasing insulin into the bloody. If you have too much glucose in your blood (blood sugar), it can be difficult for your liver to keep up so to speak and over long periods of time, this may lead to type 2 diabetes (along with other risk factors), and cardiovascular disease (in particular hypertension).

Ummm..what do you think of these studies posted here about insulin:

http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=319

MYTH: Carbohydrate Drives Insulin, Which Drives Fat Storage

FACT: Your Body Can Synthesize and Store Fat Even When Insulin Is Low

[HealthResearch]

so much stupid in your post idk what to say other than '.....'

cals in vs. cals out, cut for over 3 months, over 60 lbs fat loss, YOU MAD BRO?!!? enjoy staying in the red! i sure do love it when the trainers join up and get pissed that people get away with eating all types of carbs and sugars when it goes against all they THOUGHT was the only way to lose fat.

Ultimately the no wheat no sugar issue is calories in vs calories out. They 'think' it's simply from eating unhealthy wheat when in reality they lose weight because they eat less calories. It's far more difficult to eat 2000 calories of chicken breast than it is chocolate cake.

[Corb158]

So somehow whole wheat can make your body less efficient at digesting calories from TEE?
So lets say you ate a 600 calorie meal, and we all know cause we read the stickies, that 15% of the calories consumed is used to burn it. So 15% of 600 is 90 calories burned in eating that meal. So wheat is somehow making you burn more calories eating it, so lets say 20% instead of 15% ok its only 120. Or the 10% difference that second post said, its 60 calories difference at 150 calories burned instead of 90. so a total of 50 calories difference.
Thats ONLY if it effects the whole meal, and not the 80 or 120 calories a piece of wheat bread is, if its only the bread then its like 16 calories difference, just flip the numbers if its white is using less calories to burn it than base line 15%

Lets say its matters, now what
Lets say it doesn't matter, now what

[asianstyles]

Ummm..what do you think of these studies posted here about insulin:

http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=319

MYTH: Carbohydrate Drives Insulin, Which Drives Fat Storage

FACT: Your Body Can Synthesize and Store Fat Even When Insulin Is Low

Where did the post you quoted state anything about fat storage or fat loss?

The post you quoted is simply saying that high levels of blood glucose in the blood can lead to type 2 diabetes.

[savaglauren]

Ummm..what do you think of these studies posted here about insulin:

MYTH: Carbohydrate Drives Insulin, Which Drives Fat Storage

FACT: Your Body Can Synthesize and Store Fat Even When Insulin Is Low

Hello! This is actually an interesting question. The debate about sugar and fat has been around since about the 60s (and is still being worked out).

The section you're referring to on that page (the myth and fact above)...the myth is way oversimplifying it. The overabudance of carbs (in particular monosaccharides) is known to lead to Metabolic Syndrome (MS). MS is known to be characterized by diabetes, impaired glucose absorption, hypertension, dylipidemia (high blood cholesterol levels), obesity, microalbuminuria (symptom of cardiovascular disease, kidney disease in diabetes, and overall high morbidity).

Important note about insulin resistance. Normally, when the presence of blood sugar (glucose) is detected, insulin is released. This doesn't always happen with those with insulin resistance (like in inviduals with diabetes). In essence insulin is less effective at lowering blood sugar. Also, when there is a decrease in insulin

As far as the direct link between the overconsumption of sugar and fat... Fructose - a monosaccharide (found in high fructose corn syrup, like sodas) does not stimulate insulin and leptin (homorone necessary for fat metabolism - often found to be lacking for one reason or another in many chronically overweight and obese individuals) and to inhibit ghrelin (secreted to stimulate appetite...if it's not supressed, you will still feel hungry even after you eat a bunch). So, these things can lead to overconsumption, thus leading to having excess of calorie intake. Diabetes causes many things in the body not to work "correctly" or as efficiently. These things may lead to excess fat storage, including protein tyrosin phosphateses (PTP)...these are enzymes that play a role in the body for cell growth and differentiation, as well as several cell functions. There are many different types of these PTPs, but there are a few that overwork in muscle and fat tissue in people who are obese. Two also inhibit the receptor on the cell for insulin (which is a reason why insulin isn't working as well...it's not able to attach to the cell to do its thing...one of the issues with insulin resistance). Insulin has been shown to be necessary for regulating blood sugar (as we all know), but also in energy balance (roles with ATP). If these things are not in homeostatis, that could all lead to being overweight/obese.

Long story short, there is no direct causal relationship between eating lots of sugar/carbs and it CAUSING obesity/overweight. BUT there are CORRELATED links, meaning, it may lead to things that do impact obesity/overweight. (ie causal relationship - smoking causes lung cancer...correlated - being elderly increases your risk for heart disease, but being elderly doesn't cause heart disease)

[korvix]

If it fits your macros, eat the ****ers
bread doesn't make you fat, ignorance is

[ParsleyTea]

If you don't want to give up your favorite foods, and can put up with the complaints from your SO and trainer for eating them, then don't. As you can tell there is a great deal of information out there on what is best for nutrition and weight loss. For many the simple calories in/calories out will work well enough to bring about weight loss. For some that idea doesn't work out and causes frustration. Experiment with your diet and find out what works best for you. We're all different.

I'm personally in the camp that all grains are not all that great for health. And as a result feel healthier for avoiding white and whole wheat.

Something beyond diet that I saw the other day that I found interesting was the possible role the sun can play in weight gain. The study found that since we get less sun exposure in the winter, causing less D3 to be made, possibly this plays a roll in why we tend to gain more weight during winter time.

"Taking vitamin D may assist fat loss and reduce risk of chronic disease"

http://www.drbriffa.com/2012/02/17/t...ronic-disease/