Hacker News Reader

> You generally want this to be high, because a typical modern diet has too little fiber.

By this metric we should all eat grass.

Staples such as rice and wheat are, technically, grasses.

Don't think white rice is necessarily high fibre. I think a better option to make the point is that by this metric we should all eat celery? :)

My point about common grasses was if they don't supply the recommended intake of fibre, we might look to alternatives.

The article mentions 'inulin' - it's a form of carbohydrate that alledgedly doesn't cause the same spike in blood sugar levels as starch. With a family history of type 2 diabetes, I have thus wondered about growing Jerusalem artichokes (sunchoke) as an alternative to potatoes.

Or lettuce.

Fair enough, but there really is no need to be pedantic. In the context here, "Eating grass" had clear enough a meaning.

We're not ruminants. The amount of fiber in food can't possibly be a prime criteria to assess the quality of food. Fiber is, after all, not digestible by definition. It is absurd to think that can matter much.

Actually, fiber is digested, just not by us, by our micro biome. Even resistant starches. It’s converted to fatty acids by the inhabitants of your colon.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com