i wonder.

suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
flour. is it same as wholewheat?

or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.

No!

But, I know quite a few food processors who try to convince consumers
that their food science garbage is actually healthier for them. Do not
believe their nonsense.
--
john gohde
http://naturalhealthperspective.com/blog/

"Mr-Natural-Health" wrote.

> No!
>
> But, I know quite a few food processors who try to convince consumers
> that their food science garbage is actually healthier for them. Do not
> believe their nonsense.
> --
> john gohde
> http://naturalhealthperspective.com/blog/
>

I hate to say that John is correct but he is.

Bran is not the main component removed from wheat
to make white flour but wheat germ is. The reason for
the removal is that the germ contains oils which can
go rancid in flour. If you use whole wheat flours
you should use them while still fresh. Refrigeration
may help a bit. Bran can get stale too. Buy in small
amounts keep tightly closed and replace if the odor
changes. Same goes for wheat germ. And I doubt very
much the proportion mention of a cup to a cup is anywhere
near the bran in whole wheat flours.

Food faddists need to learn more about the topic.

later
bliss -- C O C O A Powered... (at california dot com)

--
bobbie sellers - a retired nurse in San Francisco

It is by the beans of cocoa that the thoughts acquire speed,
the thighs acquire girth, the girth become a warning.
It is by theobromine alone I set my mind in motion."
--from Someone else's Dune spoof ripped to my taste.

so if you add bran AND wheat germ to white flour, is it same as whole
grain flour?

The white flour will still be NOT whole grain. The bran will still be
whole grain.

On 12 Jan 2005 16:26:42 -0800, "salgud"
> wrote:

>The bran will still be
>whole grain.

Well, no... It will still be bran.

All the best,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

On 12 Jan 2005 16:26:42 -0800, "salgud"
> wrote:

>The bran will still be
>whole grain.

Well, no... It will still be bran.

All the best,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

"big macbeth" > wrote in
oups.com:

> i wonder.
>
> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
> flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>
> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.

There's a mechanical difference which interacts with digestive physiology:
the whole wheat takes longer to digest. That means that the starch
component, which gets digested into glucose, is released more slowly, which
means that the glucose is absorbed into the bloodstream at a lower rate for
a longer period. This can be important if you have glucose-regulation
problems, since the regulatory system does a better job of coping with a
slow, steady influx of glucose than with a big load of it coming into the
bloodstream all at once.

Eric Bohlman wrote:
> "big macbeth" > wrote in
> oups.com:
>
>> i wonder.
>>
>> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
>> flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>>
>> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
>> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.
>
> There's a mechanical difference which interacts with digestive
> physiology: the whole wheat takes longer to digest. That means that
> the starch component, which gets digested into glucose, is released
> more slowly, which means that the glucose is absorbed into the
> bloodstream at a lower rate for a longer period. This can be
> important if you have glucose-regulation problems, since the
> regulatory system does a better job of coping with a slow, steady
> influx of glucose than with a big load of it coming into the
> bloodstream all at once.

Even if you don't have glucose regulation problems, the body will react to
the pure white flour's quick digestion with a sudden large release of
insulin. When the glucose has been absorbed and the insulin level is still
high, you can "crash" and get strong cravings for more sugar. It's best to
avoid those swings in blood sugar whether you have a "problem" or not. If
you don't have a problem in the medical sense, you might still have a
problem with respect to the way you feel, and how it affects your body in
general.

"Hagrinas Mivali" > wrote in
:

> Even if you don't have glucose regulation problems, the body will
> react to the pure white flour's quick digestion with a sudden large
> release of insulin. When the glucose has been absorbed and the
> insulin level is still high, you can "crash" and get strong cravings
> for more sugar. It's best to avoid those swings in blood sugar whether
> you have a "problem" or not. If you don't have a problem in the
> medical sense, you might still have a problem with respect to the way
> you feel, and how it affects your body in general.

Actually, if you do experience such a swing you almost certainly *do* have
glucose-regulation problems, although they may be at a subclinical level.
alt.support.diabetes is replete with stories of diabetics who measured
their non-diabetic spouses' blood glucose both before and after a carb-
heavy meal and got readings of 85 mg/dl (4.7 mmol/L) both times. There are
potential issues (the area is still quite debated) involving the effects of
the temporarily increased insulin levels themselves in people with normal
glucose regulation, though.

"Hagrinas Mivali" > wrote in
:

> Even if you don't have glucose regulation problems, the body will
> react to the pure white flour's quick digestion with a sudden large
> release of insulin. When the glucose has been absorbed and the
> insulin level is still high, you can "crash" and get strong cravings
> for more sugar. It's best to avoid those swings in blood sugar whether
> you have a "problem" or not. If you don't have a problem in the
> medical sense, you might still have a problem with respect to the way
> you feel, and how it affects your body in general.

Actually, if you do experience such a swing you almost certainly *do* have
glucose-regulation problems, although they may be at a subclinical level.
alt.support.diabetes is replete with stories of diabetics who measured
their non-diabetic spouses' blood glucose both before and after a carb-
heavy meal and got readings of 85 mg/dl (4.7 mmol/L) both times. There are
potential issues (the area is still quite debated) involving the effects of
the temporarily increased insulin levels themselves in people with normal
glucose regulation, though.

Eric Bohlman wrote:
> "big macbeth" > wrote in
> oups.com:
>
>> i wonder.
>>
>> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
>> flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>>
>> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
>> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.
>
> There's a mechanical difference which interacts with digestive
> physiology: the whole wheat takes longer to digest. That means that
> the starch component, which gets digested into glucose, is released
> more slowly, which means that the glucose is absorbed into the
> bloodstream at a lower rate for a longer period. This can be
> important if you have glucose-regulation problems, since the
> regulatory system does a better job of coping with a slow, steady
> influx of glucose than with a big load of it coming into the
> bloodstream all at once.

Even if you don't have glucose regulation problems, the body will react to
the pure white flour's quick digestion with a sudden large release of
insulin. When the glucose has been absorbed and the insulin level is still
high, you can "crash" and get strong cravings for more sugar. It's best to
avoid those swings in blood sugar whether you have a "problem" or not. If
you don't have a problem in the medical sense, you might still have a
problem with respect to the way you feel, and how it affects your body in
general.

big macbeth wrote:
> i wonder.

> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
> flour. is it same as wholewheat?

> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.

This is part of paper I wrote. Hopefully this will explain it.

Bread. "The staff of life." A staple that's been around since
the beginning of civilization suddenly has a reputation worse than Mike
Tyson's. How in the world could this be? How can a food that has
been sustaining mankind for thousands of years now suddenly be bad?
Well, what happened is what the food companies have done to bread.
Decades ago, all bread used to be made of pure "whole wheat/grain"
flour. Now, although things have gotten better in the last decade or
so, most bread and baked goods are still made out of "enriched"
wheat flour. Want to know why the food companies "enrich" it?
It's because they stole all the goodness from the natural
wheat/grain. Here's what they do. There are three parts to a piece
of grain. The food companies, when making wheat/white flour, remove
the two nutritious parts, the bran and germ, and leave you with the
un-nutritious part the endosperm. In removing the bran and germ parts
of the grain, they also remove significant amounts of twenty-two
different natural vitamins, minerals and all of the fiber. The food
companies feel really bad about this, so they "enrich" the
remaining endosperm with four to six, cheapy synthetic vitamins in an
attempt to compensate you after they ripped you off. Aren't these
guys nice?

Patrick

wrote:
In removing the bran and germ parts
> of the grain, they also remove significant amounts of twenty-two
> different natural vitamins, minerals and all of the fiber. The food
> companies feel really bad about this, so they "enrich" the
> remaining endosperm with four to six, cheapy synthetic vitamins in an
> attempt to compensate you after they ripped you off. Aren't these
> guys nice?

In the US, they also put it prominently on the label along with a picture of
the food pyramid. They make you think that the vitamins in it can be
measured by what's on the labels, and there's no difference between how the
body absorbs the naturally occuring vitamins and the synthetic ones of the
same quantity. Could they possibly be wrong, given the state of health and
weight of the average American?

I wonder if you are a "half-wit" is it the same as being a dim wit? Sounds
like it. If you take a cup of shit and mix it with sugar, is it the same as
sugar or does it still have some shit in it?

"big macbeth" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>i wonder.
>
> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
> flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>
> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.
>

ROFLMAO!

ROFLMAO!

big macbeth wrote:
> i wonder.
>
> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
> flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>
> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.

Re-constituted "whole grains" are not even close to being the same as
the real thing.

TC

On 12 Jan 2005 15:46:58 -0800, "big macbeth"
> scribbled some thoughts:


>i wonder.
>
>suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
>flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>
>or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
>you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.

True whole wheat would be the ground wheat kernel sans
bleaching and used whole with nothing removed.

--

Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
| (©) (©)
Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
d(-_-)b | /// \\\

No!

But, I know quite a few food processors who try to convince consumers
that their food science garbage is actually healthier for them. Do not
believe their nonsense.
--
john gohde
http://naturalhealthperspective.com/blog/

"big macbeth" > wrote in
oups.com:

> i wonder.
>
> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
> flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>
> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.

There's a mechanical difference which interacts with digestive physiology:
the whole wheat takes longer to digest. That means that the starch
component, which gets digested into glucose, is released more slowly, which
means that the glucose is absorbed into the bloodstream at a lower rate for
a longer period. This can be important if you have glucose-regulation
problems, since the regulatory system does a better job of coping with a
slow, steady influx of glucose than with a big load of it coming into the
bloodstream all at once.

big macbeth wrote:
> i wonder.

> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
> flour. is it same as wholewheat?

> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.

This is part of paper I wrote. Hopefully this will explain it.

Bread. "The staff of life." A staple that's been around since
the beginning of civilization suddenly has a reputation worse than Mike
Tyson's. How in the world could this be? How can a food that has
been sustaining mankind for thousands of years now suddenly be bad?
Well, what happened is what the food companies have done to bread.
Decades ago, all bread used to be made of pure "whole wheat/grain"
flour. Now, although things have gotten better in the last decade or
so, most bread and baked goods are still made out of "enriched"
wheat flour. Want to know why the food companies "enrich" it?
It's because they stole all the goodness from the natural
wheat/grain. Here's what they do. There are three parts to a piece
of grain. The food companies, when making wheat/white flour, remove
the two nutritious parts, the bran and germ, and leave you with the
un-nutritious part the endosperm. In removing the bran and germ parts
of the grain, they also remove significant amounts of twenty-two
different natural vitamins, minerals and all of the fiber. The food
companies feel really bad about this, so they "enrich" the
remaining endosperm with four to six, cheapy synthetic vitamins in an
attempt to compensate you after they ripped you off. Aren't these
guys nice?

Patrick

I wonder if you are a "half-wit" is it the same as being a dim wit? Sounds
like it. If you take a cup of shit and mix it with sugar, is it the same as
sugar or does it still have some shit in it?

"big macbeth" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>i wonder.
>
> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
> flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>
> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.
>

big macbeth wrote:
> i wonder.
>
> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
> flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>
> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.

Re-constituted "whole grains" are not even close to being the same as
the real thing.

TC

"big macbeth" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> i wonder.
>
> suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
> flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>
> or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
> you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.
>

Is the white flour you are planning to bleached?
Does your white flour have added iron?

As others have already pointed out, you'll need to
added germ also.

If you add "too much" bran and you try to sell
your bread here in the states the US FDA may
come after you in a hostile way. In the 70's
Oroweat was selling a bread with added
wheat bran, the US FDA told them to
stop. Granted some of the new low
carb breads have added fiber, so the
pinheads over at the FDA may have
changed the regs. And some years ago,
there was a white bread with added celluose
to provide a lower calorie product.

If you are make it locally or for yourself
don't sweat it. Added bran will likely not
cause any problem. Indeed, it help
keep the bowels moving. Hopefully all
your flour, bran, and germ will be freshly
ground. And hopefully you aren't the
1 to about 150 that has some level
gluten intolerance ailment known a
celiac disease. In that case, a wise person
avoids all gluten like the plague. Know
also it is hard to diagnosis this problem
in a timely fashion.

May I suggest brown rice or perhaps millet:-)

On 12 Jan 2005 15:46:58 -0800, "big macbeth"
> scribbled some thoughts:


>i wonder.
>
>suppose you take one cup of bran and mix it with one cup of white
>flour. is it same as wholewheat?
>
>or does flour chemically change when it's defiberized so that even if
>you mix it later with bran flakes, it's still bad for you.

True whole wheat would be the ground wheat kernel sans
bleaching and used whole with nothing removed.

--

Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
| (©) (©)
Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
d(-_-)b | /// \\\