Tag Archives: grain consumption

How Did the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions Change Human Diets?

MP900227702[1]

With the advent of the Agricultural Revolution 10,000 years ago, mankind took a giant leap away from two million years of evolutionary adaptation. The Industrial Revolution that started in the late 18th century—about 240 years ago—was yet another watershed event. The Agricultural Revolution marks the end of the Old Stone Age and the start of the Neolithic period. The Neolithic ended four to six thousand years ago, replaced by the Bronze Age (or Iron Age in some areas).

EFFECTS OF THE AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION

The Agricultural Revolution refers to farming the land on a large scale, and all that entails: gathering and planting seeds, nurturing the soil, breeding plants for desirable traits, storing crops, processing plants to maximize digestibility, domesticating wild animals and enhancing them by selective breeding, setting down roots in one geographic location, etc. The revolution allowed for the expansion of reliable food supplies and an explosion of human populations. Less time was needed for hunting and foraging, allowing for the development of advanced cultures.

It wasn’t all sunshine and roses, however. We have evidence that human health deteriorated as a result of the revolution. For instance, some populations declined in height and dental health.

EFFECTS OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION

The Industrial Revolution starting in the late 18th century brought its own changes to our diet. Progressive industrialization and affluence changed the composition of our “energy foods.” For instance, peasants in poor developing countries derive about 75% of their calories from high-fiber starchy foods. With modernization, fiber-free fats and sugars become the source of 60% of calories. U.S. consumption of cereal fiber decreased by 90% between 1880 and 1976. In addition to lower fiber content, refined wheat products also had fewer vitamins and other micronutrients. Machinery allowed the production of margarine and vegetable oils. Sugar imports and snacking increased in the Western world.

Obesity suddenly became very common in the upper classes of Europe and England toward the end of the 17th century and even more so in the 18th. Weights also increased throughout populations of developed countries. For instance, if we look at U.S. men of average height between the ages of 30 to 34, average weights were 148 lb (66 kg) in 1863, but were up to 170 lb (77 kg) in 1963. Our current obesity epidemic didn’t even start until around 1970.

Let’s look at a few major U.S. diet changes from 1860 to 1975. Energy derived from protein rose from 12% to 14–15%. Energy from fat rose from 25 to 42% of calories. Energy from starches fell from 53 to 22%. Calories from sugar rose from 10 to 24%. Total carbohydrate calories fell from 63 to 46%.

It only takes a few decades to see major changes in a population’s food consumption. For instance, U.S. per capita consumption of salad and cooking oils increased from 21.2 pounds per person in 1980 to 54.3 pounds per person in 2008 (USDA data). I refer to these oils as industrial seed oils, and they include soybean, corn, and sunflower oil. We’re not entirely sure what effect these have on health. Some suspect they are related to obesity, heart disease, and other “diseases of civilization.” Per capita soybean oil consumption in the U.S. increased over a thousand-fold between 1909 and 1999, to 7.4% of total calories. It’s in many of our processed foods. Linoleic acid is a predominant omega-6 fatty acid in seed oils. Linoleic acid consumption increased by 200% in the last century. Thanks to increasing omega-6 fatty acid consumption, the omega-6/omega-3 ratio increased from 5.4:1 to 9.6:1 between 1909 and 2009. (Reference: Blasbalg TL, Hibbeln JR, Ramsden CE, Majchrzak SF, Rawlings RR. “Changes in consumption of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids in the United States during the 20th century.” Am J Clin Nutr. 2011 May;93(5):950-62. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.110.006643. Epub 2011 Mar 2.)

The Industrial Revolution also introduced into our diets large amounts of man-made trans-fats, which are highly detrimental to cardiovascular health. Public outcry has lead to diminishing amounts of dietary trans-fats over the last decade.

An occasional teaspoon of sugar probably won't hurt you

Added sugars: table sugar in coffee, high-fructose corn syrup in ketchup

At his Whole Health Source blog, Dr. Stephan Guyenet and Jeremy Landen produced a graph of U.S. sugar consumption from 1822 to 2005. Dr. Guyenet wrote, “It’s a remarkably straight line, increasing steadily from 6.3 pounds (2.9 kg) per person per year in 1822 to a maximum of 107.7 pounds (49 kg) per person per year in 1999. Wrap your brain around this: in 1822, we ate the amount of added sugar in one 12 ounce can of soda (360 ml) every five days, while today we eat that much sugar every seven hours.” Note that added sugars overwhelmingly supply only one nutrient: pure carbohydrate without vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, protein, fat, etc.

 

Think about the typical Western or Standard American Diet (SAD) eaten by an adult these days. It provides an average of 2673 calories a day (not accounting for wastage of calories in restaurants; 2250 cals/day is probably a more accurate figure for actual consumption). Added sugars provide 459 of those calories, or 17% of the total. Grains provide 625 calories, or 23% of the total. Most of those sugars and grains are in processed, commercial foods. So added sugars and grains provide 40% of the total calories in the SAD. That’s a huge change from the diet of our prehistoric ancestors. Remember, we need good insulin action to process these carbohydrates, which is a problem for diabetics. Anyone going from the SAD to pure paleo eating will be drastically reducing intake of added sugars and grains, our current major sources of carbohydrate. They’ll be replacing them with foods that generally require less insulin for processing. (Figures are from an April 5, 2011, infographic at Civil Eats: http://www.civileats.com.)

FUN FACTS! (from the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture)

  • A typical carbonated soda contains the equivalent of 10 tsp (50 ml) of table sugar.
  • The typical U.S. adult eats 30 tsp (150 ml) daily of added sweeteners and sugars.
  • U.S total grain product consumption was at record lows in the 1970s, at 138 pounds per person. By 2008, grain consumption was up by 45%, to 200 pounds per person.
  • Total caloric sweetener consumption (by dry weight) was 110 pounds per person in the 1950s. By 2000, it was up 39% to 150 pounds.
  • Between 1970 and 2003, consumption of added fats and oils rose by 63%, from 53 to 85 pounds. (How tasty would that be without starches and sugars? Not very.)
  • In 2008, “added fat” calories in the U.S. adult diet were 641 (24% of total calories).

Steve Parker, M.D.

Random Thoughts On Paleo Eating For People With Diabetes

Not really pertinent, but I like buffalo

I was interviewed  yesterday by Amy Stockwell Mercer, author of Smart Woman’s Guide to Diabetes.  All I knew beforehand was that she was interested in my thoughts on the paleo diet as applied to diabetes.

In preparation, I collected some random thoughts and did a little research.

What’s the paleo diet?

Fresh, minimally processed food.  Meat (lean or not? supermarket vs yuppiefied?), poultry, eggs, fish, leafy greens and other vegetables, nuts, berries, fruit, and probably tubers.

Non-paleo: highly processed, grains, refined sugars, industrial plant/seed oils, legumes, milk, cheese, yogurt, salt, alcohol.

Is the paleo diet deficient in any nutrients?

A quick scan of Loren Cordain’s website found mention of possible calcium and vitamin D deficits.  Paleoistas will get vitamin D via sun exposure and fish (especially cold-water fatty fish).  Obtain calcium from broccoli, kale, sardines, almonds, collards.  (I wonder if the Recommended Dietary Allowance for calcium is set too high.)

What About Carbohydrates and Diabetes and the Paleo Diet?

Diabetes is a disorder of carbohydrate metabolism.  In a way, it’s an intolerance of carbohydrates.  In type 1 diabetes, there’s a total or near-total lack of insulin production on an autoimmune basis.  In type 2 diabetes, the body’s insulin just isn’t working adequately; insulin production can be high, normal or low.  In both cases, ingested carbohydrates can’t be processed in a normal healthy way, so they stack up in the bloodstream as high blood sugars.  If not addressed adequately, high blood glucose levels sooner or later will poison body tissues .  Sooner in type 1, later in type 2.  (Yes, this is a gross over-simplification.) 

Gluten-rich Neolithic food

If you’re intolerant of lactose or gluten, you avoid those.  If you’re intolerant of carbohydrates, you could avoid eating them, or take drugs to help you overcome your intolerance.  Type 1 diabetics must take insulin.  Insulin’s more optional for type 2’s.  We have 11 classes of drugs to treat type 2 diabetes; we don’t know the potential adverse effects of most of these drugs.  Already, three diabetes drugs have been taken off the U.S. market or severely restricted due to unacceptable toxicity: phenformin, troglitazone, and rosiglitazone. 

Humans need two “essential fatty acids” and nine “essential” amino acids derived from proteins.  “Essential” means we can’t be healthy and live long without them.   Our bodies can’t synthesize them.  On the other hand, there are no essential carbohydrates.  Our bodies can make all the carbohydrate (mainly glucose) we need.

Since there are no essential carbohydrates, and we know little about the long-term adverse side effects of many of the diabetes drugs, I favor carbohydrate restriction for people with carbohydrate intolerance.  (To be clear, insulin is safe, indeed life-saving, for those with type 1 diabetes.)

That being said, let’s think about the Standard American Diet (SAD) eaten by an adult.  It provides an average of 2673 calories a day (not accounting for wastage of calories in restaurants; 2250 cals/day is probably a more accurate figure for actual consumption).  Added sugars provide 459 of those calories, or 17% of the total.  Grains provide 625 calories, or 23% of the total.  Most of those sugars and grains are in processed, commercial foods.  So added sugars and grains provide 40% of the total calories in the SAD.  Remember, we need good insulin action to process these carbs, which is a problem for diabetics.  (Figures are from an April 5, 2011, infographic at Civil Eats.)

Anyone going from the SAD to pure Paleo eating will be drastically reducing intake of added sugars and grains, our current major sources of carbohydrate.  Question is, what will they replace those calories with? 

That’s why I gave a thumbnail sketch of the paleo diet above. Take a gander and you’ll see lots of low-carb and no-carb options, along with some carb options. For folks with carbohydrate intolerance, I’d favor lower-carb veggies and judicious amounts of fruits, berries, and higher-carb veggies and

Will these cause bladder cancer? Pancreatitis?

tubers.  “Judicious” depends on the individual, considering factors such as degree of residual insulin production, insulin sensitivity, the need to lose excess weight, and desire to avoid diabetes drugs.

Compared to the standard “diabetic diet” (what’s that?) and the Standard American Diet, switching to paleo should lower the glycemic index and glycemic load of the diet.  theoretically, that should help with blood sugar control.

A well-designed low-carb paleo diet would likely have at least twice as much fiber as the typical American diet, which would also tend to limit high blood sugar excursions.

In general, I favor a carbohydrate-restricted paleo diet for those with diabetes who have already decided to “go paleo.”  I’m not endorsing any paleo diet for anyone with diabetes at this point—I’m still doing my research.  But if you’re going to do it, I’d keep it lower-carb.  It has a lot of potential.

Are There Any Immediate Dangers for a Person With Diabetes Switching to the Paleo Diet?

It depends on three things: 1) current diet, and 2) current drug therapy, and 3) the particular version of paleo diet followed. 

Remember, the Standard American Diet provides 40% of total calories as added sugars and grains (nearly all highly refined).  Switching from SAD to a low-carb paleo diet will cut carb intake  and glycemic load substantially, raising the risk of hypoglycemia if the person is taking certain drugs.

Drugs with potential to cause hypoglycemia include insulin, sulfonylureas, meglitinides, pramlintide, and perhaps thiazolidinediones.

Who knows about carb content of the standard “diabetic diet”?  Contrary to popular belief, there is no monolithic “diabetic diet.”  There is no ADA diet (American Diabetes Association).  My impression, however, is that the ADA favors relatively high carbohydrate consumption, perhaps 45-60% of total calories.  Switching to low-carb paleo could definitely cause hypoglycemia in those taking the aforementioned drugs.

One way to avoid diet-induced hypoglycemia is to reduce the diabetic drug dose.

A type 2 overweight diabetic eating a Standard American Diet—and I know there are many out there—would tend to see lower glucose levels by switching to probably any of the popular paleo diets.  Be ready for hypoglycemia if you take those drugs.

Paleo diets are not necessarily low-carb.  Konner and Eaton estimate that ancestral hunter-gatherers obtained 35 to 40% of total calories from carbohydrates.  I’ve seen other estimates as low as 22%.  Reality likely falls between 22 and 65%.  When pressed for a brief answer as to how many carbohydrate calories are in the paleo diet, I say “about a third of the total.”  By comparison, the typical U.S. diet provides 50% of calories from carbohydrate.

Someone could end up with a high-carb paleo diet easily, by emphasizing tubers (e.g., potatoes), higher-carb vegetables, fruits, berries, and nuts (especially cashews). Compared with the SAD, this could cause higher or lower blood sugars, or no net change.

A diabetic on a Bernstein-style diet or Ketogenic Mediterranean Diet (both very-low-carb) but switching to paleo or low-carb paleo (50-150 g?) would see elevated blood sugars.  Perhaps very high glucoses.

Any person with diabetes making a change in diet should do it in consultation with a personal physician or other qualified healthcare professional familiar with their case.

Steve Parker, M.D.

Fun Facts!

  • A typical carbonated soda contain the equivalent of 10 tsp (50 ml) of sugar.
  • The typical U.S. adult eats 30 tsp  (150 ml) daily of added sweeteners and sugars.
  • U.S total grain product consumption was at record lows in the 1970s, at 138 pounds per person.  By 2000, grain consumption was up by 45%, to 200 pounds per person.
  • Total caloric sweetener consumption (by dry weight) was 110 pounds per person in the  1950s.  By 2000, it was up 39% to 150 pounds.
  • Between 1970 and 2003, consumption of added fats and oils rose by 63%, from 53 to 85 pounds.  [How tasty would that be without starches and sugars?  Not very.]
  • In 2008, “added fat” calories in the U.S. adult diet were 641 (24% of total calories).

Fun Facts provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

(The paleo diet is also referred to as the Paleolithic, Old Stone Age, Stone Age, Ancestral, Hunter-Gatherer, or Caveman diet.)

Evidence for Human Grain Consumption 100,000 Years Ago

ScienceDaily December 17 reported findings of a Canadian archeological team who found evidence of systematic grain consumption by ancient humans in Africa:

The consumption of wild cereals among prehistoric hunters and gatherers appears to be far more ancient than previously thought, according to a University of Calgary archaeologist who has found the oldest example of extensive reliance on cereal and root staples in the diet of early Homo sapiens more than 100,000 years ago.

 

Neolithic technology

In case you’re new to the paleo diet, grains are considered verboten by most adherents.  (Paleo diet is also known as the Stone Age diet, caveman diet, and Paleolithic diet.)  The cereal grain mentioned in the ScienceDaily article is wild sorghum.

Many in the paleosphere believe that such ancient humans didn’t have the technical skills to transform wild grains into something edible on a regular basis.  I haven’t read the source material, nor do I have an opinion on whether the archeologists are correct.  I’m just sayin’…

Steve Parker, M.D.

Reference: Mercader, Julio,  et al.  Mozambican grass seed consumption during the Middle Stone Age. Science, December 18, 2009.