SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A more plant-based diet without stomach troubles: Getting rid of FODMAPs with enzymes:
A plant-based diet is a good choice for both climate and health. However, many plant-based products, especially legumes, contain FODMAP compounds that are poorly digestible and cause unpleasant intestinal symptoms. A study by VTT and Finnish companies succeeded in breaking down FODMAPs with enzymes and producing new, stomach-friendly plant-based food products.
FODMAPs are short-chain carbohydrate molecules that are poorly absorbed in the human small intestine. These non-absorbed compounds move along to the large intestine, where intestinal microbes feed on them. This results in the production of gases that causes symptoms especially for those suffering from intestinal disorders, but also for many others. These problems are relatively common, as it has been estimated that the irritable bowel syndrome alone affects between 10% and 20% of the population.
Many foods containing FODMAPs are in themselves healthy and good sources of fibre, nutrients and vegetable proteins. However, those suffering from symptoms will often avoid these foods and miss out on their health benefits.
In a study funded by VTT, Gold&Green Foods, Raisio, Roal and Valio, VTT focused on two key FODMAP compounds: galactan and fructan. Galactan is abundant in, for example, legumes, while fructan is found in many cereals, among other things.
[...] "The study showed that enzymes also work under a variety of conditions and in different food processes. This is interesting new information especially for legumes, as there are currently no similar legume-based foods suitable for the FODMAP diet on the market," says Nyyssölä.
"The results are most likely to be utilised next in the development of new food items, but also in academic research in order to verify the effects on intestinal symptoms with certainty," he continues.
Journal Reference:
Antti Nyyssölä, Simo Ellilä, Emilia Nordlund, Kaisa Poutanen. Reduction of FODMAP content by bioprocessing. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2020; 99: 257 DOI: 10.1016/j.tifs.2020.03.004
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Thursday April 16 2020, @04:59PM (11 children)
Cows eat grass, which tends to grow on its own without human intervention. Humans can't eat grass, so the cows convert indigestible vegetable matter into tasty meat. Even the waste from the cows is valuable as a fertilizer. It's a very efficient process.
If cows don't eat the grass, great herds of bison, deer, elk, antelope, caribou, and many other species will. They will emit the methane instead.
Also, if you outlaw raising cattle, you will destroy many ancient, rich cultures like the Masai for whose way of life it is central. Why do you hate black people?
If you get rid of cattle, you won't have their milk either and that will wipe out most kinds of cheese. Will you please stop ragging on the French, Immerman?
Without milk, you also won't have ice cream. That will make the little children cry. Why won't anyone think of the children, Immerman?
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2, Touché) by jurov on Thursday April 16 2020, @05:23PM (4 children)
Please don't be ridiculous. Most cows don't eat grass anymore.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16 2020, @07:09PM
Two points.
1/ It is mostly the USA that feeds corn to cows, due to the ridiculous corn subsidies. In the rest of the world they graze on pasture.
2/ Technically corn is a species of grass.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Friday April 17 2020, @04:44AM (2 children)
Please don't be ignorant. Cows eat grass until they get to the feedlot where they are fattened up for a few months before being shipped off to the slaughterhouse. Per Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:
And cattle raised for beef production are what we're talking about, because "cattle produce too much methane!" is an argument spun off from the "Grrrr! People eat too much meat!" argument that vegans have taken up as their banner. (Personally I think that's a terrible miscalculation, because conflating veganism with environmentalism turns too many people away from fighting climate change, so low is vegans' collective Q-score; we can carry on eating meat perfectly well, but we do need to do something about CO2 levels in the atmosphere.)
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Friday April 17 2020, @05:46AM (1 child)
I am of the opinion that we don't. 210ppm was so low as to be a danger to the entire biosphere. If it gets as low as 180ppm everything dies. 400 - 1000ppm is probably a comfortable range*. If that results in a greenhouse effect that warms the planet unacceptably, then we should look at countering that as a separate issue. The simplest (not necessarily the cheapest) way would be to calculate how much less sunlight you want and deploy a reflective sunshade at L1 to block that much.
*Given how much it stimulates plant growth I very much doubt we will get above that. Warming increases evaporation, which increases rainfall. Combine it with higher CO2 and the Sahara will be a jungle before we have to worry about too high CO2.
No problem is insoluble, but at Ksp = 2.943×10−25 Mercury Sulphide comes close.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Phoenix666 on Friday April 17 2020, @01:12PM
Zip it, deimtee. (sotto voce) You're getting in the way of my scheme to mine carbon from the atmosphere!
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by PinkyGigglebrain on Thursday April 16 2020, @06:16PM (1 child)
another fact that gets over looked is that grass feed cows generate less methane than corn/grain fed, which is most of the cows raised for meat are fed. The corn makes them gain weight faster so it is a preferred feed in the beef industry. but it also causes major problems for the cows since their not adapted to eating grains, one of those problems is increased methane generation.
If the beef industry switched back grass fed, which is tastier IMHO, the bovine generated methane everyone complains about would be reduced.
Fun fact; there are ~90 million cattle in the USA, most of which are fed corn, and they are currently blamed for a lot of methane. Historically there were 30-60 million Bison on the great plains of North America eating grass, and yet there didn't seem to be any problems with global warming back then.
(Thank you for making the point that cows can convert plants that Humans can't eat, and that grow on land unsuitable for other crops, into something Humans can eat. I was going to make a similar post.)
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday April 17 2020, @02:40AM
Corn is used for finishing. It's not used for growing 'em, which is the majority of the cattle's lives; that's mostly done on pasture, which is to say, grass.
Also, one bison equals two cows, and the peak estimates I've seen were in the 120M range.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 16 2020, @08:14PM (3 children)
So y'alls full of shit.
That would be all fine and dandy if farmers weren't growing said grass on prime agricultural land, instead of scrubland where not much edible by people grows. People can eat healthily with far less meat than you think they can.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday April 16 2020, @11:58PM
And I can eat healthy with far more meat than you think.
So... what's your point?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 3, Informative) by Reziac on Friday April 17 2020, @02:36AM
And that's a load of shit. Crop ag is so much more profitable than animal ag, that everywhere that CAN be cropped IS cropped. Animal ag is mainly relegated to land that fails for crops due to poor soil, bad terrain, or inadequate water.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday April 17 2020, @04:09AM
Something tells me you're one of those who calls everything between the coasts of America, "Flyover Country."
Prime agricultural land is the American Bottom [wikipedia.org]. It is, appropriately enough, used for agriculture, not for growing grass instead. It is not cattle country. What is cattle country? Scrubland that's really only good for growing grass. Areas of Texas, Montana, South Dakota, and places like that.
You don't know what I think about the relative health of various diets, because I didn't tell you. I disputed the fatuous arguments against meat consumption and the cattle industry that are making the rounds these days with the credulous. You imputed the rest.
Washington DC delenda est.