Nutrition
Unenriched Grains Over Fortified Ones
Not a toxicology argument — an arithmetic one. My supplement stack already covers what fortification exists to add, so fortified flour is a second dose I did not choose and am not counting.
The protocol
- Prefer unenriched or whole grains over synthetically fortified versions.
- The supplement stack already covers those micronutrients.
- This is about not double-dosing, not about fortification being harmful.
Sign in to join this protocol and track your own streak.
What I do
Unenriched or whole grains rather than synthetically fortified ones, where the choice exists.
Why — and it is not the reason people assume
This is arithmetic, not toxicology. I am not claiming enriched flour is dangerous, and I want that stated plainly because this preference gets grouped with claims I am not making.
Fortification exists to prevent deficiency across a population that is not supplementing. I am supplementing. My stack already covers the folate, the iron, the B vitamins that enrichment adds back — so fortified flour is a second dose, in a synthetic form I did not choose, at an amount I am not tracking, layered on top of one I am.
That is a reason to prefer the unenriched version. It is not a reason to warn anyone off the enriched one, and for someone not taking a stack the calculation runs the other way entirely.
The part that is a real preference
Whole grains over refined-then-enriched is a separate and simpler point: the whole version never had the nutrients stripped out, so nothing has to be added back. Enrichment is a repair of a process I would rather not have run.
Comments
Leave a comment
Loading comments…