I have always relied on beans when /out/ on long camping trips.

>>992543
Do you spend 2 hours gathering the wood needed to cook them while letting them soak, then cook them for an hour, then spend 10 minutes and half a gallon of water cleaning the soot from your pot?

Or just use a whole isopro canister?

>>992543
Bulk tuna soaked in olive oil has the absolute perfect balance of protein and fat. Seal it in meal sized sections, just remember you have to seal it so that it lasts.

Find high protein and high fat beans with low carbs. Beans are still good, so just find the best kind. Then buy them dehydrated. Dehydrated beans don't need cooking only need to soak. They also take up less space and weight less.

>>992543
FYI, get a food dehydrator. You can cook many tasty meals, including beans then dehydrate those meals to 10% moisture by weight and store them in sealed bags/jars. When on the hike you just pop out a meal and add hot water. It will rehydrate and there's no need to use a pressure cooker or wait forever for beans to soak then cook.

You can bring lard and dehydrated meats like jerky, biltong, or pemmican. Same goes for veggies. You can mix and match to make meals with them.

>>992545
You let them soak for a hour while you do other things. Then you heat them up for like five minutes and they are fine.

>>992561
Dry beans take atleast an hor preferably 5 to soak then 20 minutes on boil. Are you lying for a purpose like you are on the bean council? Or have you just never cooked?

>>992561
>>992584
neither of these things are true unless you are using a pressure cooker

>>992584
Peeled red lentils take around 15 minutes without pre soaking, but yes, this guy >>992561 has never cooked legumes.

>>992543
>These days now I find out all the problems my high carb diet has caused me
What problems? Based on >>992561 you aren't cooking beans properly, even quick soaks recommend two hours in boiled water. Even when I soak overnight I find it still takes at least half an hour to cook them through properly.

With that said, the perfect alternative for beans while /out/ would be lentils, doesn't need soaking, cooks faster, more or less the same as beans nutritionally(they are both starchy legumes after all). Certain varieties of lentils, like the red "skinless" ones cook particularly fast.

If you want more fat from your legumes, try peanuts(chickpeas can work too, but require similar preparation as beans do). Bonus points: peanuts are usually roasted beforehand, so no need to even cook, and their are more calorie to weight efficient than beans or lentils.

>>992594
From what I have researched, red lentils aren't peeled, they were cultivated that way.

>>992599
>What problems?
Low T and very high cholesterol
>>992599
>Based on >>992561 you aren't cooking beans properly

That is not me, I let my beans soak 8 hours and at home even let them sprout before cooking
I thing that other guy was talking about dehydrated beans which I have no expericnce with.

>>992605
>Low T and very high cholesterol
I can't comment on the Low T as I don't know anything about that, but I'm pretty sure the cholesterol is not from the carbs. I follow a very high carb diet (mostly whole plant based) and my cholesterol levels are very low. Genetics play a huge role on your baseline cholesterol levels, but switching carbs for fats is most likely going to raise it, not lower it.

And no, I'm not vegan, I'm just picky and prefer wild game and (unpolluted)freshwater fish that I catch and kill myself.

>That is not me, I let my beans soak 8 hours and at home even let them sprout before cooking
Ah ok. Regardless, give the lentils a try, soaked beans absorb water(obviously), so while dry beans and lentils have roughly the same calorie to weight ratio, soaked beans can double in weight without giving you any more calories. With that said, sprouting is underrated and is probably worth the weight trade-off, but you can do that with lentils and chickpeas too. If you get fancy with home prepping, soybeans are another high fat legume, but it is rarely eaten plain and is usually processed a fair bit in to something like tofu, tempeh, dehydrated mince or fermented, so I don't really bother with it.

I love me some beans, but I'd never take them /out/ to cook when lentils are around. I haven't tried anything like dehydration or pressure cooking though, that could change things for the sake of variety. Peanuts are a close second, but I find they are 3-4 times more expensive after adjusting for calories, so unless I really need maximum efficiency I would only bring a little as part of some kind of trail mix.

File: beans.jpg (42KB, 640x621px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 640x621px

>>992543

File: coolbeenz.png (149KB, 307x425px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 307x425px

>>992543
nice

File: fantasticplanet.jpg (172KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1200x1200px

>>992543
I get instant refried beans in the bulk bin of my local store, but pic related is easy to find
Just add boiling water
Be careful with the bean to water ratio
Bring some tortillas or rice for a nice meal

>>992543
Staples for me are Biltong, Salt Fish, Lentils, Oats wholegrain rice, a small selection of spices and a plant guide for whatever environment I'm in. I've usually got sugar and some lard as well.

Saltfish, lentil and nettle stew with turmeric and chili powder is surprisingly good. I usually just dump enough lentils in my water bottle and leave 'em there for a bit while moving on. They get plenty of time for a soak and I'm not sat waiting for them when I get hungry.

>>993272
I didn't know this existed. This is game-changing for me. Thanks anon.

>>993953
Is your game the farting game?
If so, you are correct and you will become dominant

Are carrots healthier than potatoes?

>>992543
Unsalted pistachios, avocados, olives, dried fish (diy), whey powder, nori and hard cheese. Add a fair amount of coarse psyllium fiber And you won't even have buy TP.

>>992605
A month of nofap does wonders for low T. Eat high fat/protein meals with high levels of HDL cholesterols. I know what you mean about the carbs. They really started to screw with me at about 37. If I eat more than 60 grams of carbs in a day, I have to double my activity level to avoid Ill effects.

>>992638
>>992605

could you guys elaborate on sprouted beans ?
are they edible without preperation ?

any particular nutritional benefits ?

I'm kinda looking for a hearty trailmix.

>>995798
>could you guys elaborate on sprouted beans ?
The short version is that seeds like beans preserve themselves by becoming biochemically inert. This means you could eat the dry bean as is and you would hardly digest any of it. Neither would it spoil or biodegrade, starchy low-fat legumes like beans and lentils can last indefinitely if kept in a cool and dry place.

>any particular nutritional benefits ?
Soaking initiates various biochemical process to start taking place, including releasing enzymes that start breaking down nutritional stores and forming various phytochemicals, many of them antioxidants. So not only do nutrients become more bioavailable, but you also get a wider nutritional profile.

>are they edible without preperation ?
Technically, sprouting is a preparation, just the most "natural" one.

As for eating sprouted beans uncooked, I have never tried it in bulk, but they are certainly chew-able when only sprouted. They might still produce gas, I'm not sure if cooking plays an additional role outside of soaking removing most of the gas forming compound from the bean. But you could always just cook the sprouted beans, as cooking also breaks down nutrients stores and increases nutritional bio-availability as well. Depending on your scheduling or other factors you'd want to cook the sprouts to stop the sprouting process or make it softer.

Many people eat sprouted lentils and chickpeas raw, so that is certainly possible.

>I'm kinda looking for a hearty trailmix.
Anything that is nuts, seeds and dried fruit should be just fine for this purpose. Avoid processed sugar, salt and animal products.

The moist nature of sprouting wouldn't lend itself well to trailmix, but you could work it in to some other kind of meal or food item.

I have always relied on the beans of others

>>992546
>Eating uncooked beans
>Not shitting yourself to death on the trail
Pick one anon.

>>996636
No, he's talking about beans that have been pre-cooked and then dehydrated/freeze dried. Like the ones in instant soup mixes and mountain house meals.

>>996640
Oh I see. It worried me for a second. I had some undercooked kidney beans once and thought I was going to die on the shitter.

File: Cute-Bunny.jpg (108KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 500x400px

So are beans healthy or not?
I keep trying to search on the internet and everyone has a different opinion.
This is so frustrating

>>998834
>opinion
You don't want opinions, you want peer reviewed journal articles, and even then you will see different conclusions
Nutritional science is one of the worst fields there is
Even the calorie counts of foods are wrong

So eat some beans if you want

>>992543
I loved beans when I was living what was a hunting camp for a year. But camping? They take too long to soak if dried. Though I guess a tin of baked beans would be good for energy content.

>>998834
Every single person disagrees about which kinds of foods are healthy and which aren't. Don't even try to find it out. All efforts are futile.

>>998879
>>998834
Beans are edible, eat them. Simple as that.

File: colorado-campervan.jpg (45KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x399px

>>998879
That idea freaks me out cause it might be true

>>998834
Anything is bad for you in excessive quantities.
Beans have a lot of nutritional value, but they do also have a lot of carbs. Eat sensible portions and make sure your activity level is proportional to your caloric intake.

>>998879
The problem is in the field of nutritional science
There are many industry shills publishing in shitty journals to further their agenda
The field also draws in people with more of an emotional response to the data than a dispassionate one
Until the field matures, there is not much nutritional science can say that is relevant for everyone except don't be too fat or thin and eat a varied diet

When I was a kid all the health conscious people ate tons of carbs.
This was the common wisdom.
Is it possible that carbs are not bad for you?

Rice and beans and corn is the healthiest meal you can eat

>>998834
Its like this:

Beans have some things in them that may be bad for you: carbs and phytic acid.

Also, theyre hard to digest.

Sprouting them helps with all of this. So, sprout your beans, and just make sure they arent the majority of your diet.

>>999026
>may be bad for you
If you hadn't said "may," I'd be arguing with you
Nice one, anon

Beans have fiber
It's pretty well established that fiber is good

I had a bean go in my nose and rot

>>999055
Yeah and I wouldnt fault you. But really Im not even trying to obfuscate. I was going to become a Dietitian at one point but the fucked up nature of the industry played a big part in ditching that idea.

>Vegetarians can be healthy and fit
>Paleo diet people healthy and fit
>Vegan bodybuilders

Paleo people are the big arguers against legumes in general. So what the fuck is 'right'? I can see their argument does make sense, but I havent seen any big studies that really look in to it.

But then again, the entire food science industry is funded by people who produce the foods which the paleo diet says are bad.

So I just avoid eating tons of carbs, try to eat lots of veg, and am as active as possible. I will definitely say though that soaking and sprouting beans reduces my flatulence, and it is shown to reduce phytic acid, so theres not really any reason for me not to.

>>999211
>paleo diet
is silly for so many reasons
Paleolithic people ate grains
Neanderthals ate grains
Otzi had grain in his stomach

Ancient peoples ate whatever they could wherever they lived over the course of our evolution
Trying to pick one diet, and say that is the natural human diet, is like choosing a single frame of a movie

>>999298
>Otzi
Was no where near paleolithic.
Grains that existed before agriculture and selective breeding bore no resemblance to grains of today.
Paleo diet is silly but grains especially ground up an bigly proccesed are bad mkay

>>998946
>Is it possible that carbs are not bad for you?
Certain forms of carbohydrates can be bad for you in high enough quantities, but these are all the refined or "empty carbs". What makes them bad is that the refining process isolates(to varying degrees) the carbs, removing other nutrients in the process that you would get with unrefined versions of the food. In most cases, other compounds are removed that slow absorption, like fiber. So what ends up happening is that unlike their whole food counterparts, where it is very difficult to get high blood sugar spikes, refined carbs get absorbed at much faster rates and provides little to no micronutrients.

People that tout carbs as bad never make the distinction between a can of soda a can of beans. Both are high in carbs, but they are on opposite sides of the healthiness spectrum and do very different things to your blood's glucose and subsequent insulin levels.

>Beans have some things in them that may be bad for you: carbs and phytic acid.
>carbs
See above.
>phytic acid
It is a bit hard to just label phytic acid as good or bad and be done with it. Phytic acid itself has anti-cancer, antioxidant and kidney stone prevention properties. However, high doses as found in dry beans can indeed block more than 80% of the absorption of some minerals. But as some have said, phytic acid levels can be reduced, even nearly completely removed, by sprouting, fermenting and cooking. There are also studies that suggest that people adjust to regular phytic acid consumption in various ways, including using existing minerals more efficiently and by developing a gut biome that produces phytase, which break it down.

Another "food hack" that many might not be aware of is combining your meals with members of the Allium family, specifically garlic and onions. These foods, even in fairly small amounts, can have a marked increase on your mineral absorption, and can counteract phytic acid's anti-nutrient properties.

>>999474
thank you smarter anon.
While I have you here; what about starch?
Do the beans have lots of starch ?
Is starch bad for me ?
And how about potatoes ?

>>999211
>>999298
If you guys are interested, of all the research I have done on nutrition, there are two sources which I find more or less the most trustworthy and useful. That is, without having to dedicate my life to get a degree in biochemistry and reading tens of thousands of scientific papers. I want to do other stuff with my life.

Once again I just have to state upfront I'm not veg*n, I don't follow their ideologies as I hunt, fish and eat meat on occasion, and have developed an interest in leather tanning. So while I might be biased towards the plant based side in the great dietary wars of our time, my philosophy is that given what is available to me, what are the healthiest options? When you are /out/ for more than a day or two your choices are considerably more limited than when you are in a supermarket.

Both of these sources are on the "plants based" side of dietary philosophy and greater internet diet wars, I find they are the most scientifically thorough and sound. Both are also completely free.

The first is www.nutritionfacts.org. This site is run by a non-profit organization. They have one full time researcher, and a team of 20 other researchers. This site is especially useful for presenting information in a way that lay people can actually make informed dietary decisions out of.

The second is www.plantpositive.com. This site is run by some autist who prefers to remain anonymous. This site tends to focus a lot more on addressing the scientific claims from the paleo school of thought, and goes over the history as to how the paleo came about and the flaws in some of the key studies they use as the foundation of their claims, like how the apparent lack of heart disease among the Inuit is because those in charge of registering deaths and declaring the cause were rarely doctors, as there simply aren't a doctor in every town, it was done by village chiefs or elders who didn't know how to diagnose the disease properly.

>>999490
In all honesty I would love to find a source that had no philosophy whatsoever.
Is there any neutral voice in these matters?

>>999488
>what about starch?
Starches tend to take longer to digest and get absorbed than simpler carbs. This can still vary a lot, as with white flour, which due to the lack of fiber, can cause a significant blood sugar spike as it still gets digested fast enough. With that said, even fruits, which tend to be more simple carbs, have slower absorption rates in the whole fruit form compared to the juice(refined) form.

With that said, whether carbs are bad mainly depends on how much and how quickly you absorb it, and whether you have existing medical conditions like diabetes. There are two ratings used: Glycemic Index(GI), and Glycemic Load(GL). The important one is GL, as it tells you how much actually ends up in your blood stream within a given time based on how much you eat of the food, whereas GI just tells you have readily it is absorbed.

Some meals with food with high GI rating still have a low GL rating overall because the total amount of carbs isn't enough to raise your blood level by much. A teaspoon of sugar has a very low GL, whereas sugar water with 100g of sugar in it has a very high GL. Both have the same GI though.

>Do the beans have lots of starch ?
Yes, I think around 30-50g of its dry weight is starch, depending on the variety.

>Is starch bad for me ?
It can be depending on the context, but only really if you eat the refined forms of it.

>And how about potatoes ?
As long as you make sure to avoid solanine toxicity and stick to healthy cooking options like boiling there is nothing really to worry about regarding potatoes. I prefer sweet potatoes though, more or less the same as potato in terms of macronutrients, but a much better micronutrient profile. Although I haven't looked at all the various alternative potato cultivars, I suspect the common white potato we typically find isn't the healthiest, just the easiest to grow.

>>999515
>In all honesty I would love to find a source that had no philosophy whatsoever.
I use the word philosophy here to mean more or less the same as a scientific hypothesis. In my experience, when it comes to food(which people can get very emotionally charged about) nearly all people pick and choose their evidence based on their existing cultural norms and habits to support their viewpoint(or philosophy). Or that is to say, the reason they choose one side over the other is rarely because they are primarily concerned with what science has to say about the relationship between health and food, but instead base their stance on how disruptive following the recommendations of science would be on their existing lifestyles and don't want to deal with the reality that what they know and love is actually bad instead of good for them.

Whenever the topic is brought up with other people, even vegans, their eyes start to glaze over when you start talking about the hard science, unless it supports their existing viewpoint, in which case they just give you a "Hah I knew I was right all along" look.

>Is there any neutral voice in these matters?
So those sources I mentioned are in my experience the least philosophical about the topic as you can get, as they are the most thorough and scientifically rigorous in their research, and hence, the most neutral.

So it is exactly what you are looking for.

>>999528
Just to add to that, I should mention that you will hear a lot mentions of vegan and vegetarian diets. This is mainly because one of the primary forms of evidence used for determining the overall health effects of food are population studies following thousands of people over several years and seeing what they eat and what diseases they get, and one of the easiest ways to group different dietary lifestyles together is according to vegan, vegetarian, piscetarian, fruitarian, omnivore etcetera labels. So they aren't studying the philosophies of the people following a given diet, just the quantifiable health effects. But it is none the less a very convenient and easy way to get useful data by using those labels.

The vast majority of people that follow a plant based diet do so for moral reasons that aren't grounded in science. Many vegans still eat pretty unhealthy anyway, a perfect example would be that a diet that consists purely of potato fries and beer doesn't violate vegan principles, but it is unhealthy as sin. The main guy behind nutritionfacts.org, Dr. Michael Gregor, specifically made the point in his recent book that veganism doesn't necessarily equate to health, and that his dietary recommendation are based on the latest and best scientific research and facts, and not moral ideology.

File: wild-broccoli.jpg (114KB, 482x599px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 482x599px

>>999422
>Grains that existed before agriculture and selective breeding bore no resemblance to grains of today.
Nearly everything we eat today has been domesticated in some form or another. The only exceptions I'm aware would be fish, wild game and bugs.

I'm not saying domestication is necessarily good, a good example would be iceberg lettuce, which is very popular because it is cheap to grow, but compared to other lettuce cultivars only have a fraction of the nutrients and is more a waste of money if anything.

But with that said, without domestication humanity would never have developed past the hunter gatherer lifestyle, undomesticated sources of food were either unavailable, scarce, or too low yield to be support civilization. It was the great wheat and rice fields of Africa, the Middle East and Asia that propelled humanity forwards.

Domestication is usually good though, just look at broccoli, one of the healthiest things you can put in your mouth, and the wild plant it was domesticated from(pic related), which is nothing more that a few weed like leaves that doesn't resemble broccoli in any form. (I have no clue about the nutritional properties of the wild cultivar).

>Paleo diet is silly but grains especially ground up an bigly proccesed are bad mkay
I'm just mentioning this since the paleo crowd tends to be all against domesticated foods while being ignorant of all the domesticated foods they think is natural(hur dur wheat bad but broccoli ok), but with rare exception there is nothing inherently wrong with domesticated cultivars, and in many cases, they are improvements simply by being more palatable and sustainable. A food that is better than another one is useless if you can't sustain yourself on it.

So I'd agree that refined grains are bad, but whole grains are actually pretty nutritious since they don't toss away all the micronutrients and fiber by refining it.

File: lettuce head.jpg (15KB, 301x301px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 301x301px

>>999568
>iceberg lettuce

Everyone complains out this but it is in no way bad for you. Not every single fucking thing you eat needs to be packed to the gills with micros
This is a good test to see if someone thinks about every piece of information logically or they just follow the herd.
Iceburg lettuce tastes great, has a great crunch and is very satisfying to eat.
Anyone who tells you not to eat it is an idiot.

>>999829
Not to mention that eating it keeps you from eating as much of the other calorie laden things on your plate.

>>999829
>>999834

Ok, I'll bite.

*breathes in*

ur a fagget

*breathes out*

>>999851
Sorry anon, I should have posted that I get triggered by Iceberg disparagement.
It makes me crazy that people dont think each thing through before they pass on collective wisdom.
There are just so many things people believe passionately that just do not add up when you look at the math.
I believe Iceberg hate is one of these.

>>1000085
Fair enough, but I still feel you are trying really hard to bait me here, so I suppose I should reciprocate with an appropriate spergy autastic reply to satiate your desires:

>Sorry anon, I should have posted that I get triggered by Iceberg disparagement.
Fair enough, I have obscure things that trigger me too.

>It makes me crazy that people dont think each thing through before they pass on collective wisdom.
I concluded that iceberg lettuce is basically a waste of money, and I'll stand by that. Now sure, if you like iceberg lettuce, by all means, do whatever makes you happy, I like it too. The only "negative", if you can call it that, of iceberg lettuce is that by eating it you deprive yourself of more nutritious foods, since we can only eat so much, the most direct comparison being other lettuce cultivars.

But if we are talking about nutritional value and cost, iceberg lettuce is just crispy water. The relative balance of nutrients of iceberg lettuce isn't terrible, the problem is that you'd probably die of starvation before you will die of other deficiencies as you simply can't cram enough of the stuff down your throat, it really is that sparse. Regular lettuce is already nutritionally sparse enough as is, but iceberg is just even more so.

>There are just so many things people believe passionately that just do not add up when you look at the math.
The math is not in favour of iceberg lettuce. Of the "whole foods", it ranks way down there at the bottom in terms of nutritional value.

>I believe Iceberg hate is one of these.
I don't hate it, I just think that it isn't economically efficient. Other lettuce cultivars are a better bang for your buck when compared to iceberg lettuce.

tl;dr I'll never buy iceberg lettuce myself, but if someone else makes a salad with it I don't see any harm eating it.

File: 20170423_163005.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

This thread inspired me to try and sprout a pound of pinto beans on friday.
Soaked them 8 hrs then drained .
Rinsed them once or twice and now the lool like this.
Any benefit in letting them go another day?

>>1000114
They look fine. If you do cook them just be prepared to cook them up to two hours, it varies from bean to bean. Just keep tasting as you cook until the bean itself becomes soft, but if you soaked/sprouted that long it shouldn't take more than an hour.

I'm terrible with bean cultivars, but I have had white beans like that before, and sprouted them to that level before, so it should be perfectly fine to cook now.

There honestly isn't much hard definitive science on exactly when is the best time to eat sprouted beans though. This is a complicated topic and varies from seed to see, but in general 2-4 days are when sprouts are at their prime, but that also depends on if you are sprouting for the greens that grow from the sprout(4+ days), or just want the seed to "activate"(1-4 days). If you sprout for longer without fermentation the seed starts to deplete its nutrients as it is using it to grow the sprout, so while the micronutrient value might not drop significantly(or depending on how you measure it, could improve), the macronutrient value will deplete as the stored energy is being used to grow the sprout.

In the case of beans, I would assume the biggest benefit would be the production of phytase(and the removal of gas forming compounds), so you could give it another day if you want. I have eaten cooked beans sprouted/soaked for 3-4 days, just starting on the fermentation, without any ill effects.

I have never eaten sprouted beans raw in substantially large quantities though(just one or two beans out of curiosity), so I can't recommend it for any particular purpose or advise against it likewise, but you could try it and post results. Many other legumes, like chickpeas and lentils, are commonly eaten as raw sprouts though(sprouted chickpeas are awesome), but beans have that gas issue which the others don't, which is also why I have been weary to try sprouted beans raw.

>>1000114
God damn it why do my pics always come out sideways on here
Fuck

>>999829
I think it tastes like cold, leafy shit and romaine isn't that much more expensive especially when I have a large budget for veggies since I don't buy meat.