Whole-grain foods help control women's weight

Last Updated: 2003-11-25 14:55:29 -0400 (Reuters Health)

By Amy Norton

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Middle-aged women who favor whole grains over white bread and other refined grains may put on fewer pounds as they age, a large study suggests.

Harvard researchers found that among 74,000 women, those who ate more fiber-rich grains--such as oatmeal and whole-grain breakfast cereals--gained less weight over time than women who got the least fiber in their diets.

In addition, women with the highest fiber intake were half as likely as those with the lowest intake to become obese over 12 years. In contrast, diets heavy in refined-grain products like white bread and pasta were linked to greater weight gain over time.

Simin Liu and colleagues at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston report the findings in the November issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

While carbohydrates have lately gotten a bad rap in the weight-loss realm, the new findings underscores the fact that not all carbs are alike, Liu told Reuters Health.

Research suggests that when it comes to weight control, whole grains such as oats, bran and brown rice have an advantage over highly processed, low-fiber grain products. For one, fiber-rich whole grains are more filling, and people who favor them over refined grains may take in fewer calories.

It's also thought, Liu explained, that while starchy refined grains cause a rapid increase in blood sugar, whole grains may create a slower, more sustained release of sugar into the blood -- which may have a beneficial effect on metabolism and fat storage.

Liu noted that whole grains also contain enzyme inhibitors that may get in the way of metabolic efficiency -- meaning the body is forced to burn extra calories just to digest and absorb whole-grain foods.

For their study, the researchers analyzed data from a large, long-running study of female nurses in the U.S. More than 74,000 women who were between the ages of 38 and 63 in 1984 periodically gave information on their diets and weight over the next 12 years. Other factors, such as exercise and alcohol intake, were also measured.

Liu's team found that at the start of the study, women who ate more whole grains tended to weigh less than those with diets heavier in refined grains. And over time, higher intake of fiber-rich grains was associated with less weight gain.

On average, women who ate the most high-fiber, whole-grain foods gained a few pounds less than those with the lowest fiber intake. They were also 49 percent less likely to become obese.

In the U.S., the researchers note, most of the grain products people consume are of the highly processed, low-fiber -- and often calorie-laden -- variety. The new findings, they say, emphasize the importance of distinguishing fiber-containing whole grains from refined ones.

SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, November 2003.


http://www.reutershealth.com/archiv...125elin001.html

Actually ... these "enzyme inhibitors", called phytates, are more accurately termed "antinutrients". They don't just require more energy to digest them, they also inhibit the absorption of important minerals - especially zinc, iron and calcium.

Further, when carbohydrate material arrives in the large intestine undigested or only partially digested, this causes the colonies of bacteria and yeasts to proliferate .. leading to fermentation, gas, yeast overgrowth and potentially intestinal inflammations.

Additional information can be found here .. http://www.beyondveg.com/cordain-l/...egumes-1a.shtml

and here .. http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/ch...rol_myth_3.html


Doreen

The refined grains are some of the worst things to eat for health. Replacing them with whole grains is certainly better, but that does not mean that whole grains are healthy. They need to take the next step and see how eliminating all grains affects health.

IMO, "they " are just trying to preserve the increasingly flimsy "carbs are good" theory, by ascribing some magical properties to "whole grains." There is no need to speculate about whether whole grains "may create a slower more sustained release of sugar" no need to wonder at all, test it. It's been done of course, the Glycemic Index. If they don't know about it, or don't believe it, let them do their own tests or shut up. Too much nutritional advice is based on cunning logic, not science. Fact is, sure whole grains are a bit better, but in most cases, the release of sugar is about the same, or only trivially different. Depending on whose index you're using, brown rice is only a couple of points different from white. And most all indexes agree that whole wheat bread and white bread are at most a few points apart. If you got your 6-10 "pyramid servings" from so-called whole grains, you're still assaulting your insulin system with massive amounts of sugar, cause that's what they all turn into.

If they really want to see the effect of whole grains on a whole civilization, they need to go back and take a hard look at what has been found when Egyptian mummies were examined. Those folks weren't eating Wonder bread and Twinkies and yet there is a lot of evidence that there was obesity, diabetes, heart disease and tooth decay. Whole grains didn't seem to do a lot for those folks.

Not overly informative, the women that ate whole grain gained less weight but they still gained weight. I think we already know if you going to eat bread that whole grain bread is healthier.

While grains will likely always have a place in the human diet, it's becoming more and more obvious that their role as The Foundation of our nutrition is not in our best health interest. Even whole grains require processing in order to make them digestible ... they must be milled, aged and cooked, yet even with these interventions, the phytates and other antinutrients remain to some degree. In fact, consuming whole grains without adequate processing can make humans very ill. Only ruminant animals, with multiple-chambered stomachs and the proper intestinal bacteria, can extract the nutrients from grains in their raw state.

That being said, I will always adore certain whole grain foods - esp. oatmeal and brown basmati rice - which is more a testament to their addictive potential than to their healthfulness.


Doreen

What really kills me about this kind of (mis)information is that "whole grains" means "grains that have not been ground into flour." If it's been ground into flour, it ain't whole! The term whole wheat has no business being on any bread or flour product, IMHO. "Whole wheat" is a bowl of wheat berries. "Whole oats" is a bowl of old fashioned oatmeal. People think they're doing themselves a favour by eating Quaker Instant Sugar-Blaster Oatmeal and whole wheat (?) bread, and it's a measly amount of fiber with a crapload of starch.

One of the most vexing things is when they use relative terms to makes something seem like something it isn't. The perfect example [nutitionally speaking] is "Studies show that persons who eat Whole Grains live longer, gain less weight, and are are healthier." Most folks do not consider that "longer," "less," and "healthier" are all relative. The question is therefore, "who do they live longer than ?" The usual answer is either those on the SAD or more often than not, those who eat lots of Refined Grains.

In effect, all they're saying is that those who eat Whole Grains rather than Refined Grains are slightly healthier. Well, DUH !!! I could've told you that. Refined Grains are worse for you than Whole Grains. But, that doesn't make Whole Grains good for you. I could use the same comparison to make Arsenic seem like a health food:

"Studies show that persons who consume 500mg of Arsenic on a daily basis live longer."

Of course, that would be misleading, because I would be leaving out the fact that term "longer" was used in relation to a person consuming 500mg of Strychnine on a daily basis. Grains are similar. Both Refined and Whole Grains are poison to the Human Organism. Whole Grains are simply less posionous than Refined Grains, but that doesn't make them safe to consume on a daily basis, especially in the amounts the USDA suggests.

Whole Grains Help Weight Loss
December 12, 2003
Bakers, Food makers and nutritionists are warning about the amazing popularity of the Atkins diet have a new tool in their fight against this food fad in a new study that reveals an inverse assocation between whole grains and weight gain.

It found that while women who ate a large amount of refined grain foods were more likely to be obese, those with the greatest whole grain consumption weighed less and are less likely to gain weight.

The study, published in November's American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (vol 78, no 5, pp 920-927), investigated the relation between intake of dietary fibre and whole- or refined-grain products with weight gain over time.

They used a prospective cohort study on more than 74,000 US female nurses, aged 38-63 years in 1984 and free of known cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes at baseline. Their dietary habits were assessed in 1984, 1986, 1990, and 1994 with validated food-frequency questionnaires.

Average weight, body mass index, long-term weight changes, and the odds ratio of developing obesity (BMI of 30) according to change in dietary intake were recorded.

The researchers from the Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School found that women who consumed more whole grains consistently weighed less than women who consumed less whole grains.

Over 12 years, those with the greatest increase in intake of dietary fibre gained an average of 1.52 kg less than did those with the smallest increase in intake of dietary fibre independent of body weight at baseline and age.

Women in the highest quintile of dietary fibre intake had a 49 per cent lower risk of major weight gain than did women in the lowest quintile.

The team concludes that "weight gain was inversely associated with the intake of high-fibre, whole-grain foods but positively related to the intake of refined-grain foods, which indicated the importance of distinguishing whole-grain products from refined-grain products to aid in weight control".

I am not sure wether I should be laughing hilariously at this bit or just shaking my head in total disgust

Whoever wrote this isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, to say the least.

Once again you have an equation that is being looked at totally in the wrong light.

They say refined grain = weight gain
whole grain = lesser weight gain

You don't have to have a mensa level IQ to figure out the next one

no grain = even lesser weight gain

not that eating whole grain somehow magically make you slimmer

DUH !!!!!!!! double DUH !!!

http://www.foodnavigator.com/news/news-NG.asp?id=48118#

Whole grainers GAINED 1.52 kilograms less than refined grainers in TWELVE YEARS! Sure there may be a statistically significat inverse relationship in the data, but the actual weight amounts per year are all gains, and they are firmly in the "who cares" amounts. What a waste of research dollars. And look how the Reuters version of the article (first in this thread) "forgot" to disclose that all this fuss and conclusion drawing is based on 1.52 kilos over twelve years. Scientific illiterates.

Bah!

:|

Lynda

Let's see now. This wonderful, no doubt expensive, study has proven that it is better to eat oatmeal and whole wheat bread than to chow down on doughnuts and pop tarts. Wow! Science marches on.