Talk:Brown rice syrup

Composition

This site shows a brown rice syrup product where 80% of the carbohydrate is sugars (presumably glucose or maltose). Does anyone have information on why the discrepancy between that product and the article's claims? Is it just due to variable yields in the processes used in the syrup production?

Which kind of enzymes? How are they prepared from barley sprouts? Horst Emscher (talk) 07:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Copyrighted material?

The entire body of this is the same as the copyrighted material at this commercial grocery store: http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/specialdiets/sugar-conscious/sweeteners.html Perhaps they reused this material? Let's hope... Caltrop 12:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Glucose Digestion

Glucose is not "absorbed into the bloodstream immediately", it has to pass through the mouth, stomach, liver and into the small intestine before it is absorbed into the bloodstream.

It is the monosaccharide that all other sugars and starches, which are polysaccharides, are broken down into by the human body at the end of their digestion process, and as such is digested very quickly. It is typically used as a reference point for the Glycemic Index with a value of 100.

With a GI of 105, maltose has a GI higher than glucose, so far from it providing energy on a sustained basis, it is digested at a faster rate than glucose, and elevates blood glucose levels faster than ingested glucose.

http://www.carbs-information.com/glycemic-index/maltose-gi-value.htm

http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Monosaccharide

http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Polysaccharide

http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/publications.htm?seq_no_115=202475 --Solidpoint (talk) 11:46, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/carbohydrates1.html --Solidpoint (talk) 11:46, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

http://www.mmeade.com/cheat/digestion.html --Solidpoint (talk) 12:20, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

http://www.mendosa.com/dws-gi_list.htm

I will edit the article to reflect this correction. --Solidpoint (talk) 21:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Where are the supporting citations for the digestion time of maltose and "more complex carbohydrates". Without specifying the quantity of BRS ingested, there is no basis for any such claim, as the time to finish digesting any carbohydrate is very dependent on the glycemic load implied by the amount ingested. --Solidpoint (talk) 21:42, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

In light of the more precise analysis of composition of BRS consisting of glucose, maltose and maltotriose, the following statement is clearly erroneous.

It is also accepted within a macrobiotic diet regime as a sweetener because it is all natural and it is not as rapidly absorbed by the body.

First, as this study shows Effect of starch granularity on digestion rate, the surface area of starches greatly affects the rate of digestion, and as a consequence, their insulin response. Because BRS is a syrup, it's grain size is ~ zero. It's a slurry whose contents, for all practical purposes, has infinite surface area as the syrup diffuses in the fluids of the mouth and digestive tract.

Second, glucose has a GI of 100, maltose of 105 and that is nearly 50% of BRS composition, so the notion that it is not absorbed as readily by the body (as what? rocket fuel?) is clearly wrong. Whether or not it is accepted within a macrobiotic diet likely depends on the kind of misinformation that prevailed before my editing, and at any rate, there is nothing remotely natural about chemically tortured substances, no matter how natural their original feed stock. This does not make BRS good or bad, it just makes it what it is, a substance that is the product of chemically altering rice starch in much the same way it is digested by salivary and pancreatic amylase over the course of several hours.

By predigesting a starch, with amylopectin http://terpconnect.umd.edu/~nsw/ench485/lab5.htm polysaccharides of up to 2 million glucose molecules, into relatively simple sugars with 1-3 glucose molecules, BRS dramatically reduces digestion time, thereby greatly increasing it's GI as accelerated digestion elevates blood glucose levels in much less time. For endurance athletes whose blood glucose levels crash when liver and muscle glycogen are exhausted after ~ 2 hours, this has great benefit. For sedentary users, this is an invitation to develop diabetes. For those who are already diabetic, BRS can quickly turn hypoglycemia into hyperglycemia in a way that would be very difficult to manage. Therefore ....

BROWN RICE SYRUP should NOT USED BY DIABETICS under the impression it will not cause hyperglycemia. It absolutely will.

--Solidpoint (talk) 22:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Production of Maltose and Maltotriose

The production of BRS mimics the digestive processes of the human body detailed here. http://en.allexperts.com/q/Special-Diets-768/GI-index-impact.htm

Digestion and GI of Maltotriose

I have edited out the 2-3 hour digestion time claim as this would depend on how much was ingested. IE, the glycemic load, as well as the GI. The Mendosa GI of boiled brown rice is given as 68, based on a pure glucose reference GI of 100. (vs the other standard that is commonly used, white bread, which has an unknown, complex composition, and therefore, makes a poor reference)

This important study of the digestion of maltotriose in humans suggests that maltotriose is digested at the same rate as table sugar (sucrose) or even maltose once it is presented for digestion to the small intestine. IE, downstream from the action of salivary amylase in the mouth. (the stomach absorbs NOTHING, except alcohol) Since sucrose has a GI of 65, this research's finding that maltotriose has a GI similar to whole boiled brown rice at 68 seems entirely credible.

This (Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Enzymology Volume 132, Issue 2, 15 March 1967, Pages 432-443) is a refereed paper vetted by experts, not some claim made by the boss's secretary at Lundberg farms, or equally ignorant and ill-informed writer with no knowledge of the subject matter. --Solidpoint (talk) 06:23, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

arsenic

We should probably mention something about the arsenic content in brown rice syrup. (source) Rifter0x0000 (talk) 16:06, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Rice syrup passed off as honey?

Why is there no mention of the use of rice syrup (as one of several substitutes) to adulterate honey? Reports suggest that 'watering down of honey' is a serious problem in the UK, Australia, USA but not so much in the EU where there are stricter controls. [1] [2] [3] [4]

Fg63~enwiki (talk) 18:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

New talk page topics go to the bottom of the page, WP:BOTTOMPOST.

The first two are adequate sources and the adulteration issue is real. WP:JUSTDOIT. Zefr (talk) 18:19, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Link in Sources not working

one of links in the sources goes to a site that does no longer exist. EarlGrey42 (talk) 08:40, 16 May 2024 (UTC)