WHITE OR BROWN?

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20782, 30 July 1929, Page 10

WHITE OR BROWN?

THE BREAD QUESTION. A LONG-LIVED DISCUSSION. ■ “ Discussions on the relative merits of white and wholemeal bread are usuallydirected more' by physiological bias than by experimental facts. People who neither know the facts nor are able to appraise them, people with vested money interests and cranks of all kinds, speak and write freely' on the subject with ever-recurring waves of enthusiasm,” says the opening paragraph of an article on whole-meal bread published by the Medicinal Research Council amongst the Privy Council’s special reports. The tendency has always for civilised peoples, finding white bread more appetising, to depart further and further from the- wholemeal flour of their ancestors, the article goes on to say. ■ From the year 1868, however, waves of agitation for a return, to wholemeal bread have swept over Europe and America. Liebig was its fii’st great exponent. He advocated it during the famine of that year in East Prussia, and justified it on the grounds that it contained more protein and was therefore better food. He believed it to be very well digested, and much more satisfying than white-bread, and attributed its efficiency in -these respects partly to the inorganic salts in the outer layers of the grain. These are largely phosphates, and arguments based on this phosphate content are still used by advocates of wholemeal. When living conditions improved in Germany, interest in bread reform died down, but by this time the call had spread to England and America. In spite of exhortations, the bulk of the people remained unmoved and continued to partake as before of white bread. Their conclusive experiments showed that the proteins of the bran were digested with great difficulty and were only partially used by the human body. This, of course, rather lessened the importance of Liebig’s teaching. With the outbreak of war in 1914 the whole question was revived again. Extensive experiments were carried out, but no absolute unanimity was reached. Wholemeal was largely used, only to be thrown aside again when times of plenty were restored. VITAMINS AND ENERGY. The discovery of vitamins, and especially vitamin B, in the part of the grain lost in milling, gave fresh impetus to the wholemeal bread agitation. The chief supply of the vitamin lies in the embryo, and therefore the vitamin argument in favour of wholemeal can only be applied to wheat, for in milling rye the embryo separates with the meal and not, as in wheat, with the bran. Although other foodstuffs supply vitamin B, the vitamin theory is now the chief argument adduced in favour of wholemeal bread, but the relief of- constipation and the cultivation of slim figures are good seconds. The public, however, are still eating white bread. “ If the vitamin deficiency of white bread were the cause of so much .constipation and the vitamins of wholemeal were a specific cure, then this would. hardly have failed to attract the attention of physicians and of the public, neither of whom are slow to apply such simple remedies,” remark the writers.

Weight for weight, there is .uo doubt that white flour is a better source of energy than wholemeal flour. To achieve equilibrium in diet, it is necessary to eat 6 per cent, more wholemeal than white bread. Whether it would make for national economy to use wholemeal depends, say the writers, upon how efficiently the milled-off bran can be utilised for animal nutrition, etc.'The value of wholemeal as a laxative, they point out, is no greater or less than that' of any other laxative material. Therefore there is no reason why those who prefer to eat white bread and use other laxatives should not do so. There is no proof that it exerts its laxative action by virtue of its content of vitamin B. “WAIT AND SEE." Concluding their remarks on the subject. the writers say: ; — . “In advocating wholemeal bread for general use, whether in times’of need or in times of plenty, it should be remembered that not only men, but also women and children are concerned, and that all experiments on which arguments are based have been carried out on animals or adult males, Qhildren are very intolerant of high cellulose diets, and, for some, 'brown bfead is far too irritating, even if given with the idea of relieving constipation. Appetite is such an important factor in all digestive considerations that no one who dislikes a food of approved value should be forced to eat it if it can be avoided. In time of peace, of course, the grown-up population, if they have the choice, will never eat wholemeal bread unless they like it, no matter, how specious the advertisement, but they may force their children to eat it in the belief that they are doing them good., “One should,’therefore, be cautious in advising wholemeal bread generally, and wait until careful unbiased experiments have been done on a sufficient number of men, women, and children. Thus only can accurate conclusions be drawn.”