Rice is one of the most convincing argument againt rigid low-carb principles.

It represents 20%+ of all food in the world, most of it brown. A portion of 50g brown rice have close to 40g of carbs.

Yet the people who eat it rarely are obese, have diabete or cardiac issues.

My take is that it is because of its low calories/ high nutrition ratio.

I am for general low-carb [for refined carbs] eating, but calculating g of carbs *assuming all carbs are equal* instead of calories is a gammick.

Low calories/high nutrition, you say? Let's see, shall we?
According to Fitday, a 1 cup serving of cooked brown rice has the following nutrients:

Calories: 214.8
Protein: 4.99 grams
Carbs: 44.43 grams
Fiber: 3.48 grams

RDA Values:

Vitamin A: 0%
Vitamin C: 0%
Calcium: 2%
Iron: 5%
Vitamin D: 0%
Vitamin E: 3%
Thiamin: 9%
Riboflavin: 2%
Niacin: 15%
Folate: 2%
Vitamin B-6: 14%
Vitamin B-12: 0%
Phosphorus: 16%
Magnesium: 21%
Zinc: 8%
Copper: 10%

In order to get 100% of RDA of anything from this food, I would need to consume 5 cups cooked for a total of 1,074 calories and 204.75 grams of carb. That's hardly the profile of a 'superfood'.
Low cal/high nutrition? I don't think so.

If you eat 5 cups of rice a day (which I would never do/suggest), it will keep you from being starved.

Not bad for 1000 cal a day.

FACT; most of the people who eats a lot of rice are... very thin.

Not starved is a far cry from high nutrition, don't you think? That and at 1,000 calories per day, a person would be starving if this were undertaken for a prolonged period and they would be quite malnourished as well as having lost a great deal of lean body mass since 1,000 calories of rice doesn't even come close to providing adequate amounts of protein and what it does provide is incomplete protein.

Fact: The continent of Asia is leading the word in new cases of Diabetes diagnosed each year at the present with China and India at the top of that list.
Fact: Obesity is rising in both China and Japan (countries that consume large amounts of rice).
Fact: The Japanese as a whole consume more fish and vegetables (in weight) than they do rice, which is generally a side dish, not the whole of the meal. http://www.westonaprice.org/traditi...iets/japan.html
Fact: If I had to choose just 1,000 calories of some food to live on for several months, rice would be about my last choice for the above reasons stated; it certainly isn't much 'bang for your buck' nutritionally.
Fact: People who live on 1,000 calories of anything as a lifestyle are generally pretty thin but thin does not always equal healthy.

I know an awful lot of chunky rice-eaters, personally. As Lisa said, it's more about what ELSE you're eating with it. Just because a certain number of people who eat rice are thin, it doesn't mean the rice had anything to do with it.

How does that rice stack up ounce-for-ounce against dark leafy greens, blueberries, or broccoli?

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthre...ghlight=chinese

You might be interested in some of these responses to a question I posed ages ago!

Good question! Shall we look at the nutritional value of equal calorie intakes of all 3?

Spinach: (cooked from fresh, fat not added in cooking) 5.2 cups

Calories: 214.4
Carbs: 34.91 grams
Fiber: 22.34 grams
Protein: 27.65 grams

% Values of RDA:

Vitamin A: 1525%
Vitamin C: 152%
Calcium: 127%
Iron: 185%
Vitamin D: 0%
Vitamin E: 20%
Thiamin: 44%
Riboflavin: 110%
Niacin: 23%
Folate: 339%
Vitamin B-6: 113%
Vitamin B-12: 0%
Phosphorus: 52%
Magnesium: 203%
Zinc: 47%
Copper: 81%

Now that's what I call a high nutrition to calorie ratio!

How about broccoli?

Broccoli, cooked from fresh, fat not added in cooking: 4.95 cups

Calories: 214.89
Carbs: 38.83 grams
Fiber: 22.26 grams
Protein: 22.87 grams

%Value of RDA

Vitamin A: 213%
Vitamin C: 954%
Calcium: 35%
Iron: 36%
Vitamin D: 0%
Vitamin E: 29%
Thiamin: 21%
Niacin: 22%
Riboflavin: 43%
Folate: 96%
Vitamin B-6: 55%
Vitamin B-12: 0%
Phosphorus: 45%
Magnesium: 46%
Zinc: 19%
Copper: 17%

Not as good as the spinach, but very respectable and way better than that brown rice.

Now how about some strawberries?

Strawberries, raw, 4.71 cups

Calories: 214.78
Carbs: 50.26 grams
Fiber: 16.47 grams
Protein: 4.37 grams

%Value of RDA:

Vitamin A: 4%
Vitamin C: 677%
Calcium: 10%
Iron: 15%
Vitamin D: 0%
Vitamin E: 2%
Thiamin: 7%
Riboflavin: 24%
Niacin: 8%
Folate: 32%
Vitamin B-6 21%
Vitamin B-12: 0%
Phosphorus: 14%
Magnesium: 18%
Copper: 18%
Zinc: 6%

Still better than the rice and I get to fill up more because 214 calories of all these foods is way more than 1 little cup.

Yes, eating rice will keep you from starving to death. Not starving to death and being healthy are two different things.

I found this extract interesting. The man is a poor rice farmer, so most of his diet would be rice.

This is DISHONEST to suggest that this is because of rice.

You should specify WHY. The reason is because they adopt more and more western abuses and types of meal. Not related to rice that has been common foods for millenium.

Amusing. Isn't it just as dishonest to suggest that the relative thin-ness of the people of these countries is due to the rice, as you have done in this thread?

Before you accuse me of further dishonesty, you might want to read through the article that Mike posted.
If that man's diet, which is heavily rice based, had nothing to do with his diabetes, then I'd be very interested in hearing your explanation as to why he and so many others in one of the poorest areas of Vietnam are becoming diabetic. Somehow I don't think you'll find too many poor Vietnamese rice farmers living in rural areas adopting a Western diet.
Are they not active enough, then? Surely 12+ hours a day working in the rice fields is sufficient activity.
So if it's not diet and it's not lack of activity; 2 big sticks that the 'experts' like to wave around as the main causative factors for type 2 diabetes, what is it, then?
130 diabetes cases seen per day in a rural area? That's an insanely high number. I wonder what percentage of the population is diabetic there?

They're probably thin because that's about all they have to eat and live in a third world country. When you get to richer nations, eating rice probably adds to the expansion of the girth.


LOL! And your plan isn't a gimmick I suppose?

But you only have to read a little Atkins to realize he doesn't treat all carbs alike at all. He encourages one to eat veggies, berries, and other carbs that are full of fiber.

*YOU* should read again. They specifically mention the REASON.





Absolutely not. This one is a fact with no string attached.

I did read it again and nowhere in that article does it state what the specific diabetic patient was eating. To me, 'poor rurual rice farmer with 7 other mouths to feed' does not match with 'living on a junk food diet', no matter how cheap it is. Also, the description you posted of widespread availability was not the location of the clinic that this patient was seen at; he lives 150 Kilometers away:


Something that also was overlooked earlier:



These aren't fat old asian men pigging out on KFC and sitting around all day; these are hard-working, thin poor people (so much for that obesity causes diabetes theory). More evidence that thin does not necessarily = healthy. Diabetes also does not develop overnight unless you are talking about type 1; it takes several years at least to develop, so better to look at what this man's diet has been over the past 10 years rather than the past 10 months.

The only fact that I've seen so far in the debate on 'eating rice = thin person' is that it's generally accepted that someone living on 1,000 calories of anything per day and working hard physical labor is likely to be thin (and starving).