,
6 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
WHAT ARE ‘ANCIENT GRAINS’?
Every week I read how hybrid wheat is a ‘toxic, modern junk food’ & ‘ancient grains’ are superfoods that are key to good health.
But what does the science really say? Here’s a take from a botanist ⬇️
Every week I read how hybrid wheat is a ‘toxic, modern junk food’ & ‘ancient grains’ are superfoods that are key to good health.
But what does the science really say? Here’s a take from a botanist ⬇️
‘Ancient grains’ is essentially a marketing term used to cover a motley crew of seeds that aren’t bread wheat.
Many are anything but ‘ancient’. Quinoa, for example, has a history of human consumption only a third that of wheat. (3,000 vs 9,000 yrs.)
Many are anything but ‘ancient’. Quinoa, for example, has a history of human consumption only a third that of wheat. (3,000 vs 9,000 yrs.)
Even really old stuff like einkorn and emmer is only ~10% older than bread wheat, which itself is pretty ancient.
Oh and all three of these wheat species are hybrids that do not exist in nature.
Don’t like hybrid wheats? Put that einkorn/emmer/spelt bagel down right now!
Oh and all three of these wheat species are hybrids that do not exist in nature.
Don’t like hybrid wheats? Put that einkorn/emmer/spelt bagel down right now!
Not only are they not comparatively ‘ancient’, many aren’t even grains!
Grains are the seeds of grass plants. Quinoa & amaranth therefore are not grains!
Grains are the seeds of grass plants. Quinoa & amaranth therefore are not grains!
OK, but are they more nutritious?
The science here is relatively young, with claims of miraculous health benefits far predating much of the actual evidence.
On balance, in terms of stuff like protein, vitamins, minerals etc.....
There is really NO meaningful difference.
The science here is relatively young, with claims of miraculous health benefits far predating much of the actual evidence.
On balance, in terms of stuff like protein, vitamins, minerals etc.....
There is really NO meaningful difference.
