White Bread? Brown Bread? Or Something Else?

White bread has had its day. Once upon a time it was a very popular stable of the average westerner's diet. Today things have changed. Health conscious folk got in the way and put a stand against this highly refined product, stating that it was just not healthy to eat something so processed. White bread has now been relegated to the "unhealthy" in place of the more "natural" brown bread that graces many a western home. It took a little while for palates to change but when they did brown bread became a very popular alternative. In the hope that more is more we now opt for the all too popular variety of whole grain breads that include more than one type of grain. And many grains we do not include elsewhere, such as Quinoa, millet, buckwheat, spelt, kamut (although some are not technically grains), etc.
The idea behind the unrefined craze is that "natural=better". This may well be true in most instances, but it might be a little simplistic to say that this is true in all cases. If we were to gain a richer understanding of our heritiage and the traditions of our ancetors we would notice that although they did consume unrefined grain, they did not consume un-processed grain. Their grain was unrefined in that it was not polished with a special machine that takes off it's fibre. But it was processed. Traditional cultures all over the world have soaked and fermented their grain before consumption. Science has now recognised the importance of doing this, as it breaks down a substance on the grain called phytic acid. Phytic acid has the ability to block the uptake of minerals in the body. This means if one consumes too much phytic acid they may, over time become somewhat mineral deficient. This is an important point for those who already suffer mineral deficencies, or those who concern that this might be a problem.

Do We know What Constitutes a Healthy Diet?

This is the question. Many of us believe that a healthy diet is common knowledge. Common because the govenment has made it so, with their food pyramid charts gracing most health clinics and scientific literature. The problem with this is that the government is not in receipt of the most cutting edge of nutritional science data. But eventually the small groups of nutrition savvy researchers have enough of their works published that eventually they infiltrate the mainstream, which in turn affects a change in the science that regular folk read in our papers and see in our hospitals. The problem is, there is a lag. And in the meantime a generation of folk will be riding on the old bandwagon, afraid to get off when they are exposed to small and what seems contradictory news about what foods constitute health. It is all very interesting to see a generation of people advocating for brown rice and whole grains, looking down their noses at their parents who are still eating white bread, and believing whole heartedly that they are the pinnacle of health. These people do not recognise that there is a connection between what they eat and their sub-optimal health. They will use statements such as: "I am healthy" and "I eat a healthy diet", yet never consider that there is something better, and all the while continue to catch the seasonal flu each winter, and a cold or two besides. They still suffer from hayfever and eczema, and perhaps some other allergies. They continue to have achey joints when it is cold and gum disease periodically.
I think another pertinent question that ought to be considered, perhaps even before the one above, is "What consitutes good health?" and then we can work out from here. Presently there are many conflicting ideas about what constitutes a good diet, and I shall be working to distill some of this information here on this blog and perhaps reveal some answers.