Anonymous wrote:Interesting -- didn't realize diabetes was prevalent among Indians. I grew up in a home with boring, bland Indian food -- NOTHING was drowning in oil; veggies were cooked in like 1-2 spoons of oil, just with Indian spices so they didn't taste like American food, and daal was basically just boiled lentils w spices -- no oil at all.

+1

But my parents weren't what I would call health conscious. Our food wasn't drowning in oil. It's definitely different from what you would get in an Indian restaurant. I love some restaurant food, but it's not as healthy has a home cooked Indian dinner. At least not the kind in my house or my parents.

(They were immigrants, I'm 2nd gen)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting -- didn't realize diabetes was prevalent among Indians. I grew up in a home with boring, bland Indian food -- NOTHING was drowning in oil; veggies were cooked in like 1-2 spoons of oil, just with Indian spices so they didn't taste like American food, and daal was basically just boiled lentils w spices -- no oil at all.

I've never in my life experienced Indian food like that. Are your parents 2nd generation?

They're first gen but incredibly health conscious. So yeah -- desi food in my home growing up was NOTHING like what you get in restaurants (which can be tasty) or in other desi homes (not always tasty but drowning in oil). I saw we got food that was an "impression" of desi food but not the real thing. I grew up thinking it was SO boring -- and yet now I'm thinking -- health wise not so bad (though obv need to control rice intake).

Anonymous wrote:Interesting -- didn't realize diabetes was prevalent among Indians. I grew up in a home with boring, bland Indian food -- NOTHING was drowning in oil; veggies were cooked in like 1-2 spoons of oil, just with Indian spices so they didn't taste like American food, and daal was basically just boiled lentils w spices -- no oil at all.

That's not typical of any desi food I've had. I always complain of how much oil they use.

Anonymous wrote:Interesting -- didn't realize diabetes was prevalent among Indians. I grew up in a home with boring, bland Indian food -- NOTHING was drowning in oil; veggies were cooked in like 1-2 spoons of oil, just with Indian spices so they didn't taste like American food, and daal was basically just boiled lentils w spices -- no oil at all.

I've never in my life experienced Indian food like that. Are your parents 2nd generation?

Interesting -- didn't realize diabetes was prevalent among Indians. I grew up in a home with boring, bland Indian food -- NOTHING was drowning in oil; veggies were cooked in like 1-2 spoons of oil, just with Indian spices so they didn't taste like American food, and daal was basically just boiled lentils w spices -- no oil at all.

I grew up on Indian food and now treat it like dessert and eat it very infrequently. The amount of oil used is startling and my system just can't take it. I shudder to think what my arteries would look like today had I stayed on that diet. Like many other many of my relatives have diabetes and most all older Indian women I know carry an enormous amount of belly fat. I'm think the high carb diet causes much of that.

Glad to have a diet of an educated American now. Lots of vegetables, none of my food drowning in oil and lean meats. For carbs we do a lot of sold salads that are often half carb (such as quonia, orzo, and bulgur ) and half veggies. I do cook daal, but once again skip the oil and only use enough to saute onions. I look nothing like the Indian women in my family who still eat a traditional diet, no belly fat and most importantly no Insulin shots!

Yes, true about diabetes. We're south indian vegetarians. All my relatives have diabetes and are otherwise thin. My parents eat too much white rice. I prefer whole wheat roti. I prefer our home food to all cuisines (mexican, italian and greek are distant second, third and fourth places), but I work. Have two kids and spouse is not indian or veggie. So i dont have time or enough incentive to cook it all the time. Im trying to do it more often for our kids. They love rice, dhal, yogurt, idlis, sambhar and rasam (not spicy) as well as some veggie stirfrys, indian style. I agree it's looking a lot more attractive with all these negative nutrition reports. Its also heckuva lot cheaper than eating out/processed or meat foods.

Anonymous wrote:I'm 19:53 and I'm not thinking about arsenic. I'm concerned about the quantity of white carbs and the high risk of diabetes in my family and in the families of many South Indians I know.

This South Indian and most of my family back in India have moved away from white rice. Most of my parents' generation either has diabetes or a high risk. We eat either brown rice or other grains: millet, quinoa, oats, barley in lieu of rice. Some of these definitely need an adjustment. I pare down my portion of brown rice to a few spoons and load up on the daal and vegetables.

I'm 19:53 and I'm not thinking about arsenic. I'm concerned about the quantity of white carbs and the high risk of diabetes in my family and in the families of many South Indians I know.

Do your body a favor and make the switch to brown rice, it's better for you than white. Has a lower glycemic index so it takes longer for it to be converted into sugar. We use brown basmati rice for indian food since we cook a lot of it at home. It tastes quite good if you cook it with a splash of quality coconut oil (adds a nice nutty undertone).

MikeL wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worry about the white rice.

Go with Indian or Californian white rice (and Indian basmati) -- 80% less arsenic than brown rice. Avoid southern grown rice at all costs -- from Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas etc.

Why is that?

It has the highest arsenic content as compared to rice grown anywhere else -- something to do with the soil composition in those states vs. that in California and other countries. If last yr's report is accurate . . . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worry about the white rice.

Go with Indian or Californian white rice (and Indian basmati) -- 80% less arsenic than brown rice. Avoid southern grown rice at all costs -- from Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas etc.

Why is that?

Anonymous wrote:I worry about the white rice.

Go with Indian or Californian white rice (and Indian basmati) -- 80% less arsenic than brown rice. Avoid southern grown rice at all costs -- from Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas etc.

I worry about the white rice.

Grew up on Indian food and didn't care for it back then. We weren't a vegetarian family (just no pork), but I didn't like (and still don't like) Indian meat dishes. And I thought rice, daal, and a daily veggie were boring, esp when I knew my American friends were eating burgers and pasta nightly.

And yet with all the food news out there daily about this being bad for you or that being bad for you, part of me wants to go back to subsisting on rice, daal and a veggie. I'm told rice + lentils together form a complete protein (no idea if that's true, but I know daal has a lot of protein) and veggies obviously have known nutritional value. I feel like this is the formula that has worked for generations and back in the day aunts and grandmas were always giving random advice about putting x or y spice in your food bc it was good for your stomach or iron or whatever -- things like turmeric, cumin, etc. which Indian food is cooked with routinely. These aunts and grandmas had no medical training and often little science education at all, yet maybe there's something to this old world stuff . . . and I say this as an "eat in moderation" person who eats no pork (religious reasons), enjoys a good turkey sandwich 2x a month, and a burger maybe 3-4 times/yr. So it's not like I'm eating processed meats daily and freaking out about the latest WHO news, yet it seems like every day there is some report about how "modern" food is bad for you.