Whole grain flour vs whole grain
One of my friends who is into health said that while whole grain is good for our bodies, processed whole grain such as whole grain flour doesn't necessarity means it's better than white flour. So he is saying whole grain bread(or anything that is made with whole grain flour) is not any better than white bread but whole grain rice eaten as whole has nutritional benefits.
Anyone heard anything like this? If he is right, I no longer need to eat dry whole wheat bread or anything made with whole grains.
This is a hopeless debate, because "good" and "healthy" do not have single or even consistent meanings/values, but vary too much per person.
That said, it takes more effort for your body to process unground grains than ground grains. (I won't address baked goods make from sprouted grains; basically, eat them if you love them - as I do - but not because they are X Y or Z.) The health differences are not noticeable for many people but may be noticeable for some people. Everyone's mileage may vary. So that doesn't make him "right" in such a way that you can't eat food made with ground grains.
Getting wrapped up in food rules will give you indigestion. That's not "good" or "healthy".
I'm not really an expert but if you look into glycemic load, finely milled flour white or whole wheat flour has a similar blood sugar effect. Blood sugar spike, insulin surge, then low blood sugar. So this impact on blood sugar, esp in diabetes and perhaps the inducement of diabetes is of concern. Glycemic load is reduced with whole grain which is essentially left whole. Thats why steel cut oats are a better breakfast than instant oatmeal. Pasta also seems to reduce glycemic load if not overcooked. Essentially you must make your carbs a bit harder to digest, churning in the stomach a bit longer to reduce the load. Of course there are other benefits to whole wheat flour, so it is an improvement over white.