Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 51 posts

Re: The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

#21

Post by fouc »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #7
soldehierro wrote: post #3

I'm skeptical about this "miracle" grain's commerical viability - at least for human consumption, the barrier to entry is not simply edibility, but palatibility. It was only after trying millet - a grain with a long history of consumption and intriguing agronomic properties - that I realized just how agreeable rice, wheat, quinoa and nixtamalized maize really are. They might seem bland, but the moment you "go against…

Eh. White rice must be the blandest food in human history.

Spend more time eating rice until you understand the taste of it.

Re: The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

#22

Post by occz »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #7
soldehierro wrote: post #3

I'm skeptical about this "miracle" grain's commerical viability - at least for human consumption, the barrier to entry is not simply edibility, but palatibility. It was only after trying millet - a grain with a long history of consumption and intriguing agronomic properties - that I realized just how agreeable rice, wheat, quinoa and nixtamalized maize really are. They might seem bland, but the moment you "go against…

Eh. White rice must be the blandest food in human history.

The way I see it, it's there to soak up flavours from food that the rice accompanies. I think the texture is quite pleasant as well.

Now if only it were better for your health.

Re: The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

#23

Post by have_faith »

aex wrote: post #15

Nutritional facts are misrepresented by the Guardian in this article and in the primary source of the research: https://www.cerealmarino.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/APON... 50% more protein “per grain” is a comparison I’ve heard here first. The intro of the paper claims “13% protein” but its comparison table states “10.1% protein”. In comparison, regular wheat has around 12.6% protein, while Einkorn wheat contains…

> All plant foods contain all 20 amino-acids, essential and non-essential

Isn’t this well known? It’s the quantities that are vastly different. On the next couple slides it shows that you need 10 cups of broccoli to get 40g of protein, or 2 cups of edamame beans

Re: The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

#24

Post by aaron695 »

If we move any agriculture to the ocean which is 70% of the earth and mostly unused or used in a fungible way then we would continue rehabilitation of much more of the earth's forests.

Which the environmental movement will fight tooth and nail. They are about daily penitence not solutions.

Obviously 'waste' in the ocean sinks and stores carbon forever in deep water, and if done properly it also could strengthen fish stocks... so it'll be fought hard against.

Lots of good edible seaweed books out there.

Re: The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

#25

Post by Synaesthesia »

decker wrote: post #13

I'm always a bit conflicted about the idea of carbon capture. The whole idea seems predicated on the notion that the carbon is going to be sequestered forever and ignores organic matter getting broken down into methane which is much worse than the captured carbon dioxide. It really feels like the approach is creating climate debt for the future rather than coming up with a long term solution. I have to wonder if huma…

>I have to wonder if human kind will need to find some way to convert CO2 to pure carbon for storage as a climate control measure.

We have! They're called plants. Any other method uses far too much energy to be able to do at the scale we need.

Plants do capture carbon. As long as they don't burn subsequently, this isn't released again as CO2.

Re: The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

#26

Post by Synaesthesia »

readflaggedcomm wrote: post #8

Inspiring entrepreneurship and curiosity: taking risks on an unknown to expand his business and craft, following through to prove its usefulness, and improving lives. This is a craftsman .

I'd say this is someone who was curious and followed that curiousity.

Re: The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

#27

Post by antonvs »

aex wrote: post #15

Nutritional facts are misrepresented by the Guardian in this article and in the primary source of the research: https://www.cerealmarino.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/APON... 50% more protein “per grain” is a comparison I’ve heard here first. The intro of the paper claims “13% protein” but its comparison table states “10.1% protein”. In comparison, regular wheat has around 12.6% protein, while Einkorn wheat contains…

> 50% more protein “per grain”

That's "50% more protein than rice per grain," though. Presumably they're talking about white rice, which is one of the lower protein grains. 50% more than that would put it just below oat bran, but still well below e.g. spelt, quinoa, sorghum, amaranth, and others.

> The intro of the paper claims “13% protein”

One study found 13% dry weight protein on average in eelgrass seeds, so this is substantiated: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03043...

Re: The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

#28

Post by elihu »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #25
decker wrote: post #13

I'm always a bit conflicted about the idea of carbon capture. The whole idea seems predicated on the notion that the carbon is going to be sequestered forever and ignores organic matter getting broken down into methane which is much worse than the captured carbon dioxide. It really feels like the approach is creating climate debt for the future rather than coming up with a long term solution. I have to wonder if huma…

>I have to wonder if human kind will need to find some way to convert CO2 to pure carbon for storage as a climate control measure. We have! They're called plants. Any other method uses far too much energy to be able to do at the scale we need. Plants do capture carbon. As long as they don't burn subsequently, this isn't released again as CO2.

I'm not an expert in this area, but I was under the impression that any form of decomposition causes most of the carbon in the plant to re-enter the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Thus using plants to sequester carbon isn't just a matter of planting more trees; you actually have to pay attention to what happens when the tree dies.

Re: The rice of the sea: how a tiny grain could change the way humanity eats

#29

Post by aszantu »

estaseuropano wrote: post #17
aex wrote: post #15

Nutritional facts are misrepresented by the Guardian in this article and in the primary source of the research: https://www.cerealmarino.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/APON... 50% more protein “per grain” is a comparison I’ve heard here first. The intro of the paper claims “13% protein” but its comparison table states “10.1% protein”. In comparison, regular wheat has around 12.6% protein, while Einkorn wheat contains…

> * Glucose and other sugars are one of the handful things that there’s a consensus it’s bad for our health. Is that really the case? There is a difference between something being inherently unhealthy vs excessive in our current diet. We like sugars because our bodies need readily accessible energy. The issue is that today it is to easy and cheap to produce and consume and we don't control ourselves.

The body makes its own sugar from protein needed. The hypothalamus is very sensitive to insulin. The when looking for it, you'll prolly find other examples
Post reply on HN