White Flour - is it bad for you?

[feder1]

Over the last 18 months we have bought and used a lot of white flour for cakes, pastries, scones, breads, wraps, rolls, pizzas, crumbles, pasta etc. but a recent bad do with constipation makes us wonder about something.

Previously we mostly avoided cooking like this or even shopping for these things but we recall several years ago an aquaintance exhorted us to absolutely avoid white flour since it turns into glue inside the body with dire consequences.

Since it is very hard to get unbiassed true info on any food and drink health matters, we wondered what does the team think please?

[Urbandreamer]

Previously we mostly avoided cooking like this or even shopping for these things but we recall several years ago an aquaintance exhorted us to absolutely avoid white flour since it turns into glue inside the body with dire consequences.

It's absolute rubbish, assuming that you do actually COOK, rather than simply mix the flour with water and eat it as a paste. BTW, in that form it's a crude glue that has been used in the past. Flour is also not treated to make it safe to eat raw, so don't do it.

I like more texture and flavour than refined white flour provides, however refined white flour will have less gluten than many other forms of wheat flour. Hence "dire consequences" are actually less likely with white flour than whole wheat flour. Indeed the wheat chosen for "white flour" is usually a low gluten type as rubbery cakes are about as popular as bread that has no spring.

You mention that it was several years ago. White flour use to routinely have "chemicals" added to improve it's shelf life. This has gone out of favour as all flour is treated the same in terms of shelf life and they don't really work with wholegrain flours. I should point out that Self raising flour also has chemicals added to it. The alternative would be to use plain flour and add the same chemicals yourself when you want to make scones etc. You know baking powder?

[ReformedCharacter]

Over the last 18 months we have bought and used a lot of white flour for cakes, pastries, scones, breads, wraps, rolls, pizzas, crumbles, pasta etc. but a recent bad do with constipation makes us wonder about something.

Previously we mostly avoided cooking like this or even shopping for these things but we recall several years ago an aquaintance exhorted us to absolutely avoid white flour since it turns into glue inside the body with dire consequences.

Since it is very hard to get unbiassed true info on any food and drink health matters, we wondered what does the team think please?

No, it doesn't turn into glue. Whether it is bad for you rather depends on how much of it you are getting through and what you are eating it with. If you are getting through cakes, pastries and scones etc. in any quantity then you are probably overdoing it. Digestive systems vary a lot between people and white flour has had about 75% of the grain's fibre removed. I agree that it is difficult to get sensible unbiased dietary advice but the consensus seems to agree that a high fibre diet is good for a variety of reasons including bowel movements. A handful of baby figs a day is a good way to treat that. There's no reason why you can't make most of those foodstuffs with at least a mix of decent brown flour. It also seems to be a consensus view now that we eat too many carbohydrates, so those foods may be making up too high a proportion of your diet.

RC

[AWOL]

Over the last 18 months we have bought and used a lot of white flour for cakes, pastries, scones, breads, wraps, rolls, pizzas, crumbles, pasta etc. but a recent bad do with constipation makes us wonder about something.

Previously we mostly avoided cooking like this or even shopping for these things but we recall several years ago an aquaintance exhorted us to absolutely avoid white flour since it turns into glue inside the body with dire consequences.

Since it is very hard to get unbiassed true info on any food and drink health matters, we wondered what does the team think please?

No, it doesn't turn into glue. Whether it is bad for you rather depends on how much of it you are getting through and what you are eating it with. If you are getting through cakes, pastries and scones etc. in any quantity then you are probably overdoing it. Digestive systems vary a lot between people and white flour has had about 75% of the grain's fibre removed. I agree that it is difficult to get sensible unbiased dietary advice but the consensus seems to agree that a high fibre diet is good for a variety of reasons including bowel movements. A handful of baby figs a day is a good way to treat that. There's no reason why you can't make most of those foodstuffs with at least a mix of decent brown flour. It also seems to be a consensus view now that we eat too many carbohydrates, so those foods may be making up too high a proportion of your diet.

RC

I am afraid that the idea that carbs are bad is very fashionable in the diet industry (an industry that succeeds at selling diets but fails to produce any lasting results) but has more evidence to the contrary than in it's favour. Some of the confusion seams to be that many people find it difficult not to have ideas relating to simple sugars spill over onto carbohydrates in general. Our bodies have evolved for optimal fuelling from carbohydrates. As an endurance runner and someone who has problems with hypoglycaemia I am acutely sensitive to what happens when our bodies have insufficient carbohydrate. I will skip ketosis and quite how nasty that is but point out that many fashionable diets push the body into this state of toxicity intentionally.

Yes simple sugars are overconsumed by most people and avoiding sweet treats is not likely to do anybody much harm except if they are hypoglycaemic at the time and would be good for the vast majority of us.

Here's a reasonable summary of the truth about carbs https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-we ... eat-carbs/ and I'd also recommend Giles Yeo's books and the various videos on Youtube for anyone wanting a rational and scientific approach to food consumption. His work is of unusually high quality for the quack ridden field of nutrition and he is a great communicator.

I completely agree that a high fibre approach to diet with plenty of fibre and moderating consumption of high GI foods for those that can manage it without intolerance or allergy is probably the best approach.

Regarding white flour, I agree that the OPs fears are little more than that. For most people white flour is fine being consumed in moderation but substituting with higher fibre flour is clearly much better as fibre is one of the few genuine routes to effective weight management and health. However everyone is different, for example a close relative of mine can consume white bread with reckless abandon but brown/wholemeal bread or brown rice all make her bloated, sore, and constipated even in the smallest quantities. The other issue with wholemeal bread or brown rice is that it may carry an increased risk of pesticide poisoning (and [expletive deleted] for the rice, especially long grain American rice). However the jury is out on the actual effect of the exposure to below individual safe limits amounts of pesticides in a cocktail although the cocktail effect is a grave concern.

Personally, I eat white flour products but try to minimise the amounts and if having toast tend to use frozen bread as this increases the fibre content surprisingly. Buying cakes regularly isn't a good idea in a world of plenty where diabetes is a major killer.

[Midsmartin]

Having at least some wholemeal flour is better, because fibre (also from beans, lentils, veg) encourage a healthy microbiome, that is, the mix of bacteria living in your intestines.
In recent years, it's been discovered that the balance of bacteria species is involved in all sorts of things from weight,cancer to your mood, and perhaps some depression. In the current New Scientist is an article about the link between longevity and the bacteria inside you. Centenarians have better bacteria! In animals, faecal transplants can be used to "fix" bacterial populations, resulting in the recipient losing/gaining weight, or restoring other problems.

[AWOL]

Having at least some wholemeal flour is better, because fibre (also from beans, lentils, veg) encourage a healthy microbiome, that is, the mix of bacteria living in your intestines.
In recent years, it's been discovered that the balance of bacteria species is involved in all sorts of things from weight,cancer to your mood, and perhaps some depression. In the current New Scientist is an article about the link between longevity and the bacteria inside you. Centenarians have better bacteria! In animals, faecal transplants can be used to "fix" bacterial populations, resulting in the recipient losing/gaining weight, or restoring other problems.

I read that article and sent it to my better half who unfortunately has issues with consuming fibre for some unknown but lifelong reason! I suppose that was a bit mean of me showing her benefits that would be outweighed by suffering if she were to adopt it.

Anyway, it's an interesting article although the source is clearly a fibre enthusiast

Ultimately fibre from a variety of sources is a good thing. Starting with eating veg and oats if you ask me he said typing over him empty porridge bowl.

Whilst I hate all the superfoods garbage that gets spouted (usually based on the dubious idea that eating lots of antioxidants is good for you), I have been seeing increasing evidence that dairy is extremely good for those who are not lactose intolerant.

[ReformedCharacter]

I am afraid that the idea that carbs are bad is very fashionable in the diet industry (an industry that succeeds at selling diets but fails to produce any lasting results) but has more evidence to the contrary than in it's favour. Some of the confusion seams to be that many people find it difficult not to have ideas relating to simple sugars spill over onto carbohydrates in general. Our bodies have evolved for optimal fuelling from carbohydrates. As an endurance runner and someone who has problems with hypoglycaemia I am acutely sensitive to what happens when our bodies have insufficient carbohydrate. I will skip ketosis and quite how nasty that is but point out that many fashionable diets push the body into this state of toxicity intentionally.

Yes simple sugars are overconsumed by most people and avoiding sweet treats is not likely to do anybody much harm except if they are hypoglycaemic at the time and would be good for the vast majority of us.

Here's a reasonable summary of the truth about carbs https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-we ... eat-carbs/ and I'd also recommend Giles Yeo's books and the various videos on Youtube for anyone wanting a rational and scientific approach to food consumption. His work is of unusually high quality for the quack ridden field of nutrition and he is a great communicator.

I completely agree that a high fibre approach to diet with plenty of fibre and moderating consumption of high GI foods for those that can manage it without intolerance or allergy is probably the best approach.

Regarding white flour, I agree that the OPs fears are little more than that. For most people white flour is fine being consumed in moderation but substituting with higher fibre flour is clearly much better as fibre is one of the few genuine routes to effective weight management and health. However everyone is different, for example a close relative of mine can consume white bread with reckless abandon but brown/wholemeal bread or brown rice all make her bloated, sore, and constipated even in the smallest quantities. The other issue with wholemeal bread or brown rice is that it may carry an increased risk of pesticide poisoning (and [expletive deleted] for the rice, especially long grain American rice). However the jury is out on the actual effect of the exposure to below individual safe limits amounts of pesticides in a cocktail although the cocktail effect is a grave concern.

Personally, I eat white flour products but try to minimise the amounts and if having toast tend to use frozen bread as this increases the fibre content surprisingly. Buying cakes regularly isn't a good idea in a world of plenty where diabetes is a major killer.

Thanks, but I have to disagree with some of that. Firstly, your last comment:

frozen bread as this increases the fibre content surprisingly

I don't think freezing increases the fibre content but (may) reduce the glycaemic response, see The impact of freezing and toasting on the glycaemic response of white bread:

https://www.nature.com/articles/1602746

I agree about Giles Yeo, I watched one of his videos yesterday about calories and how they are misrepresented, excellent stuff.

Our bodies have evolved for optimal fuelling from carbohydrates

I'm not so sure about that. Until farming was invented humans had little access to carbohydrates in significant quantity and no access to refined carbohydrates until very recently in evolutionary terms.

It's a pity that you say:

I will skip ketosis and quite how nasty that is but point out that many fashionable diets push the body into this state of toxicity intentionally

Because I would be interested to know why you think that. I used to be an endurance runner (well, long-distance anyway) myself although I'm too worn out to continue with that, unfortunately. I have - for many years - eaten about 6 meals a week, including a fasting period of 48 hours, which apparently means that I spend quite a long time in a state of ketosis. My understanding is that this is a natural and healthy state which apparently increases human growth hormone, cleans up old cells, normalises blood sugar levels and has some putative effects such as increasing longevity and slowing the progress of Alzheimer's. I've certainly never read anything to suggest that nutritional ketosis is harmful in any respect. I'd suggest that if our human ancestors couldn't cope with ketosis we wouldn't have survived as a species. Humans must have evolved to deal with food scarcity without becoming unwell and unable to function. It is rather more my view that it is the absence of regular ketosis in the average person that creates health problems such as diabetes and obesity. A point that Michael Mosely has been making in his various dietary advice. I'd certainly be interested in reading a counter view if you can provide any sources. I haven't found any myself, although the NHS link that you give states that:

This can cause headaches, weakness, feeling sick, dehydration, dizziness and irritability.

Well, if a person has never experienced ketosis regularly before they may well feel that way, I can honestly say that I don't experience that even with a 72 hour fast, in fact I tend to feel 'good' as a result. My guess is that that is why most if not all major religions advocate fasting days - although I don't fast for religious purposes myself.

RC

[AWOL]

Thanks, but I have to disagree with some of that. Firstly, your last comment:

frozen bread as this increases the fibre content surprisingly

I don't think freezing increases the fibre content but (may) reduce the glycaemic response, see The impact of freezing and toasting on the glycaemic response of white bread:

https://www.nature.com/articles/1602746

Strictly speaking it increases the amount of resistant starch which behaves like fibre. So strictly speaking my statement should have said "surprisingly freezing bread increases the amount of resistant starch which behaves like fibre".

I'm not so sure about that. Until farming was invented humans had little access to carbohydrates in significant quantity and no access to refined carbohydrates until very recently in evolutionary terms.

This has hints of the arguments given by paleo enthusiasts but the reality is very different. It's true that since agriculture carbohydrate access has increased but the reality is that early diets in many parts of the world early man would have found carbohydrates easier to source than protein. Refined carbohydrates is a totally different thing from access to carbohydrates. There's a reason that our official health guidance in the UK (Eatwell guide) recommends that a third of your food should be fruit and veg and a third starchy foods thus giving most of ones daily energy intake from carbohydrates.

Because I would be interested to know why you think that.

Through Ketosis, caused by not eating enough whilst ill and my body scavenging protein for energy, I got into a state of ketoacidosis. This lead to hallucinations, blinding headaches, photosensitivity, loss of consciousness, and other symptoms and I was told that I was a hairsbreadth away from death when admitted.

[ReformedCharacter]

This has hints of the arguments given by paleo enthusiasts but the reality is very different. It's true that since agriculture carbohydrate access has increased but the reality is that early diets in many parts of the world early man would have found carbohydrates easier to source than protein. Refined carbohydrates is a totally different thing from access to carbohydrates. There's a reason that our official health guidance in the UK (Eatwell guide) recommends that a third of your food should be fruit and veg and a third starchy foods thus giving most of ones daily energy intake from carbohydrates.

The diet of the earliest hominins was probably somewhat similar to the diet of modern chimpanzees: omnivorous, including large quantities of fruit, leaves, flowers, bark, insects and meat (e.g., Andrews & Martin 1991; Milton 1999; Watts 2008). Tooth morphology and dental microwear studies suggest that the diet of some hominins may have included hard food items such as seeds and nuts, and underground storage organs (USOs) such as roots and tubers (Jolly 1970; Peters & O'Brien 1981; Teaford & Ungar 2000; Luca et al. 2010). By at least 2.6 million years ago, a remarkable expansion in this diet started to occur; some hominins began incorporating meat and marrow from small to very large animals into their diet.

https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/evidence-for-meat-eating-by-early-humans-103874273/

Because I would be interested to know why you think that.

Through Ketosis, caused by not eating enough whilst ill and my body scavenging protein for energy, I got into a state of ketoacidosis. This lead to hallucinations, blinding headaches, photosensitivity, loss of consciousness, and other symptoms and I was told that I was a hairsbreadth away from death when admitted.

I'm sorry to hear that, but that, surely, is confusing the issue of ketosis with a disease that produced ketoacidosis which is not in general caused by ketosis.

Ketoacidosis is a metabolic state caused by uncontrolled production of ketone bodies that cause a metabolic acidosis. While ketosis refers to any elevation of blood ketones, ketoacidosis is a specific pathologic condition that results in changes in blood pH and requires medical attention. The most common cause of ketoacidosis is diabetic ketoacidosis but can also be caused by alcohol, medications, toxins, and rarely starvation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketoacidosis

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is a serious problem that can happen in people with diabetes if their body starts to run out of insulin. When this happens, harmful substances called ketones build up in the body, which can be life-threatening if it's not found and treated quickly. DKA mainly affects people with type 1 diabetes, but can sometimes affect people with type 2 diabetes. If you have diabetes, it's important to be aware of the risk and know what to do if you get DKA.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/diabetic-ketoacidosis/

So, it seems that it is not ketosis that is problematic for health but diabetes which can cause ketoacidosis. I've never come across any research which suggests that ketosis is in itself harmful, in fact quite the opposite.

RC

[AWOL]

I am not sure which conclusions you are drawing from the Nature article. That the earliest hominins were omnivores, that some tropical hominins ate a diet that may have been about half meat, or that Homo erectus about 2 million years ago had adaptations to meat eating? The reality is that the meat increase (supporting those brains) were predated by a diet that had more tubers so if the argument is that earlier adaptations are somehow more natural then these would take precedence. However one must be careful as the one thing that is clear is that throughout history mans diet varied enormously by location. This can even be seen in the genetics of our contemporaries.

I note that the article ends with...

Some unresolved questions in this area of research are:
1. How important were animal resources to hominins (versus plants and other non-animal resources), and how did this importance vary by hominin species, time period, habitat, or other variables?

So the debate continues.

However there is also a question as to how relevant this is to modern humans who have had plenty of time (200,000 years) to acquire adaptations (and have acquired them) which support a diet similar to our own. That's not saying that the changes to our diet in the last 70-years are not a cause for concern.

Moreover our gut biome has clear adaptations for things like dairy consumption and the passing of this ability from mother to child can be observed.

Ketones cause ketoacidosis and in my case it was the result of living off my own body protein due to a lack of carbohydrate and resultant starvation (rather than diabetic ketoacidosis). Ketones are harmful in the human body (liver and kidney in particular) and these nasty things are why I don't think it's wise to expose ones body to prolonged periods of ketosis. I admit that in general the long term effects of a Keto diet aren't well understood but this isn't really a ringing endorsement.

To be honest I could at the time I formed my views explain my position in great detail and can remember discussing it with my clinical chemistry lecturer at the time. In those days I could see the natural pathways and their interactions and effects most clearly. Now I can barely remember their names so I would no longer be able to clearly state my full reasoning nor convince anyone. Also, knowledge of this field may have advanced since then but I remain wary of mucking around with ketones.

[ReformedCharacter]

I am not sure which conclusions you are drawing from the Nature article. That the earliest hominins were omnivores, that some tropical hominins ate a diet that may have been about half meat, or that Homo erectus about 2 million years ago had adaptations to meat eating? The reality is that the meat increase (supporting those brains) were predated by a diet that had more tubers so if the argument is that earlier adaptations are somehow more natural then these would take precedence. However one must be careful as the one thing that is clear is that throughout history mans diet varied enormously by location. This can even be seen in the genetics of our contemporaries.

One of the conclusions, perhaps is that the carbohydrate content of our ancestors diets has little comparison with the carbohydrate content of our diets today, ie. no grains and that those tubers, for example, would have been high in fibre and relatively slow to digest compared with modern sources.

However there is also a question as to how relevant this is to modern humans who have had plenty of time (200,000 years) to acquire adaptations (and have acquired them) which support a diet similar to our own. That's not saying that the changes to our diet in the last 70-years are not a cause for concern.

Moreover our gut biome has clear adaptations for things like dairy consumption and the passing of this ability from mother to child can be observed.

I agree.

Ketones cause ketoacidosis and in my case it was the result of living off my own body protein due to a lack of carbohydrate and resultant starvation (rather than diabetic ketoacidosis). Ketones are harmful in the human body (liver and kidney in particular) and these nasty things are why I don't think it's wise to expose ones body to prolonged periods of ketosis. I admit that in general the long term effects of a Keto diet aren't well understood but this isn't really a ringing endorsement.

I don't think that it is helpful to say that ketones cause ketoacidosis, although that is true it ignores the reason that you developed ketoacidosis. A little like saying that someone died of a very high fever without looking at the underlying disease that caused it. I'm not a medic so I don't know the answer to that but I've never read any research that has suggested that inducing ketosis by fasting presents any risk of ketoacidosis and there does seem to have been quite a lot of research in fasting in the last couple of decades, filtering down to the likes of Michael Mosley.

I'm not sure and am perhaps sceptical about a 'Keto' diet for health. As far as I know it requires a lot of meat eating and the minimisation of carbohydrates. I would guess that those who advocate it are trying to invoke ketosis by eliminating carbohydrates rather than by fasting but I must admit that I haven't looked into it in detail because it seems to be another diet 'fad' and may benefit some people and not others, and then perhaps not in the long term.

The author of this video appears to have a vested interest in fasting and ketosis but I think the science is well accepted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhmtoAYVRSo

You may be interested, given your experience of ketoacidosis, about what he says about protein which is normally well preserved during ketosis.

RC

[AWOL]

I don't think that it is helpful to say that ketones cause ketoacidosis, although that is true it ignores the reason that you developed ketoacidosis. A little like saying that someone died of a very high fever without looking at the underlying disease that caused it. I'm not a medic so I don't know the answer to that but I've never read any research that has suggested that inducing ketosis by fasting presents any risk of ketoacidosis and there does seem to have been quite a lot of research in fasting in the last couple of decades, filtering down to the likes of Michael Mosley.

I'm not sure and am perhaps sceptical about a 'Keto' diet for health. As far as I know it requires a lot of meat eating and the minimisation of carbohydrates. I would guess that those who advocate it are trying to invoke ketosis by eliminating carbohydrates rather than by fasting but I must admit that I haven't looked into it in detail because it seems to be another diet 'fad' and may benefit some people and not others, and then perhaps not in the long term.

The author of this video appears to have a vested interest in fasting and ketosis but I think the science is well accepted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhmtoAYVRSo

You may be interested, given your experience of ketoacidosis, about what he says about protein which is normally well preserved during ketosis.

RC

I think the fasting thing is interesting although I believe it is not regarded as "proven" as an approach but there are good arguments for it. Although which type of fasting is the next question... just delaying breakfast has evidence of being effective.

I've watched some of this guys videos and he sounds good but a lot of what he says is misleading, and not proven scientific or medical truth so I avoid watching his videos as I have found myself believing him before I have stopped and realised that their is either no evidence for many of his positions or evidence to the contrary. He does sound very believable.

It's worth being aware he is not a medic, he is a Chiropractor and has been fined in the past by the Virginia State Medical Board for multiple breaches of its code. https://quackwatch.org/cases/board/chiro/berg/

One of the problems with Keto diets is that they lead to an increase in fat consumption and there has been research suggesting that the keto diet may lead to organ damage. There are many other problems including the fact that there is evidence that people actually start doing other things to make themselves feel better, for example smokers smoke more. So I am left sceptical.

That said I am not holding myself up as a guru, I am just stating my opinions. Having said all that I am rather softer round the middle so I probably need to increase my fibre intake consequently reducing the number of calories absorbed!