So, here is a real day of my own.

It was a cinnamon danish. I was getting a latte, somewhere between eight and ten in the morning. I saw it in the display window and imagined a sweet flaky crunch of freshly baked pastry with some melted caramelised sugar on top. I just thought: what if I got one.

Within minutes, it was gone. I was doing something at the same time, and before I noticed, the danish was gone. The crunch was gone. I wasn’t satisfied with the experience. It was gone too fast. So I sat there and talked myself into getting a second one.

So was the second. And the third. And the fourth. The whole time, I was trying to see whether I felt satisfied yet, whether I was beginning to feel full, whether this one had finally been enough. But no. What I remember is the internal bargaining. It felt like two parts of me arguing with each other:

Is it enough?
Not really.
Another one?
It’s just one small pastry.
You don’t do this every day.

By one o’clock, I’d had four or five cinnamon danishes. To be completely honest, I’d lost count. I later put them into MyFitnessPal and realised I’d eaten the equivalent calories of four or five steaks. I would never have five steaks in a row.

And still, I didn’t feel remotely stuffed. I felt a little irritated with myself. And I only stopped because it was getting expensive and... embarrassing.

So what happened later that day? Of course, I thought: “Oh, right, I kind of lost it.”

Later there was a burger meal, and something else, and something after that. A full carb day.

By the end of it all, I felt a lot of regret. …And I wanted another cinnamon danish.

And the following day, I wanted one again. But the kilos were back. The oedema in my right leg was back. That’s what must have stopped me.

The day didn’t look like one neat rise and one neat crash. It looked like bargaining, repetition, irritation, regret and never really feeling satisfied. If we are going to talk about calories, then by that point I should have felt full. I did not. It was like I had just breathed in that sugar. And not just sugar, but sugar mixed with fat.

Sugar, flour and fat.

I also shared a shorter visual version of this pattern on Instagram here.

Grains have long been praised as the backbone of balanced nutrition.
Wholemeal bread or pasta, brown rice, oats and quinoa, all appear to carry a solid promise: complex carbs, fibre and a bit of protein for good measure.

But under a nutrient-first lens, that “bit of protein” doesn’t build much.

We often look at a food label and see numbers that seem reassuring: 9 g of protein per 100 g of bread, 13 g in oats, 14 g in quinoa.
Yet, the question isn’t how much protein a food contains, it’s how much your body can use.

If you’ve read Protein Prime, this is the next step: taking that idea of protein quality and applying it to grains.

In this series, when I talk about usable protein*, I mean the portion your body can actually digest, absorb and turn into its own proteins. That is the part that truly contributes to building and repair.

In essence, it comes down to two things: how well the protein is digested and whether the food provides all the essential amino acids in the right amounts. For those who enjoy the technical side, this is what modern scoring systems like DIAAS (Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score) aim to measure rather than treating every gram of protein on a label as equal. DIAAS is now considered the gold standard for assessing usable protein quality.

What “Protein” Really Means: a quick recap

Proteins are made from 20 amino acids, used to build and repair tissue and to make enzymes and hormones. Of these, nine are essential, meaning your body can't make them and must get them from food. To create new body protein, you need all essential amino acids in the right amounts.

The Limiting Amino Acid Problem

Protein building is limited by the essential amino acid you have least of. Think of a car assembly line: if you run out of steering wheels, the whole build stops no matter how many tyres you have.

In grains, the usual bottleneck is lysine. Many cereal grains provide roughly 30–50% less lysine than what’s needed for efficient protein synthesis. That puts a ceiling on how much of their “protein” can actually be used for building.

Past that point, the remaining amino acids can’t be used for protein synthesis. Instead, they’re burned for energy (oxidised) or converted into glucose or fat for storage.

In other words, grains give you protein on paper but not the balance your body needs to build. It’s an assembly line problem: too few “steering wheels” limits the whole output.

Subscribe now

How Much Protein Do Grains Really Provide?

Earlier, I mentioned “9 g of protein per 100 g of bread” or “13 g in oats” on food labels which sounds reasonable until you ask how much of that protein your body can actually use.

Usable Protein Comparison per 100 g

• Rice (100 g cooked) → ~2.7 g of protein, of which only ~1.0 g is usable.

• Whole-wheat bread (100 g) → ~8–9 g of protein, roughly ~2.4–2.8 g usable.

• Oats (100 g dry ≈ 1¼ cups) → ~13.15 g of protein, about ~5.7–8.8 g usable (depending on DIAAS source and processing).

• Quinoa (100 g cooked) → ~4.4 g of protein, with ~3.0 g usable (PDCAAS-based).

Grains provide little usable protein and you’d need massive servings to match what a few eggs or a small piece of chicken deliver effortlessly.

In the previous article (Protein Prime), we explored what it takes to get a full 30 g of protein.

This time, let’s consider a more realistic situation: how much usable protein you are actually getting from an average portion.**

Across typical portions, grains and grain-like foods deliver very little usable protein relative to their calorie load.

Bread and rice land at roughly 1 to 2 g of usable protein per portion despite 150 to 195 kcal. Even oats improve only modestly, staying under about 3.5 g of usable protein in an avarage bowl. Quinoa and buckwheat look better but still deliver only about 3 to 6 g of usable protein while costing 222 kcal or more.

By contrast, two eggs provide around 12.6 g of protein for about 140 kcal and 100 g of chicken delivers 31 to 33 g of protein for about 165 kcal.

The next chart turns the same data into a visual map. Each dot represents a portion of food, plotted by calories on the horizontal axis and usable protein on the vertical axis. The best foods land in the top left with more usable protein and fewer calories.

The “Complementary Protein” Myth

You’ve probably heard this advice:

“Combine grains and legumes to make a complete protein.”

The idea comes from amino acid theory. Lentils are relatively low in methionine. Grains are low in lysine. Put them together and the gaps are supposed to balance out.

But let’s see what actually happens when we combine one cup of lentils with either another cup of lentils or with a cup of rice.

According to the complementary logic behind this advice, adding rice should improve the usable protein outcome but in reality:

Meal Usable Protein (g) Calories

2 cups cooked lentils ~18–22 g ~460 kcal

1 cup rice + 1 cup lentils ~13–16 g ~470 kcal

Mixing rice with lentils dilutes how much usable protein this meal delivers. To reach the same 22 g of usable protein with the “balanced” combination, you’d need around 650–740 kcal, which is roughly 40–60% more energy for the same protein yield.

The numbers speak for themselves: combining grains and legumes doesn’t fix the amino acid bottleneck.

The Nutrient Cost

Grains don’t just provide little usable protein. They also require nutrients to be processed.

Like sugar, the glucose released from starch relies on magnesium and B-vitamins (B1, B2, B3, B5 and B6) as cofactors to be metabolised into usable energy. When those nutrients aren’t supplied in sufficient amounts, the body draws on its own reserves.

This glucose load also triggers the same downstream effects already seen with sugar: insulin release, suppression of fat burning and activation of brain reward pathways that promote repeated intake rather than satiety.

In grain-based meals, those metabolic and hormonal costs are rarely offset by meaningful protein or micronutrient return.

The Bottom Line

Grains do contain protein. But in practical terms, it is limited and constrained by amino acid bottlenecks that the body can’t work around.

What looks reassuring on a label rarely translates into usable building material. To get a meaningful amount of protein from grains, you have to accept large amounts of starch along with the metabolic, hormonal and neurological costs that come with processing glucose.

In the previous article, The Grain Illusion I, we looked at grains as carbohydrate sources and saw how closely they behave like sugar in the body. Here, we’ve looked at their protein and the picture doesn’t improve.

In the next article, we’ll complete the picture by examining what grains actually contribute in terms of vitamins and minerals and whether those contributions are enough to offset what they demand in return.

*Usable protein estimates here are based on modern protein quality scoring methods such as DIAAS (Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score), which account for both amino acid composition and how well those amino acids are digested and absorbed.

These methods account for limiting amino acids (such as lysine in grains) rather than treating all label protein equally. A full explanation of the calculations is outlined in Protein Prime.

**Notes for Food Protein Quality Comparison

Total protein and calories. These are food composition values. They vary by brand and preparation.

Estimated usable protein calculation:
Estimated usable protein (g) = Total protein (g) × (DIAAS % ÷ 100). (FAOHome)
If DIAAS is above 100, estimated usable protein is capped at total protein so you do not get more usable protein than total protein.

PDCAAS is used for quinoa and buckwheat and the lentil comparison where DIAAS values are not provided.

Before we continue with grains, it’s worth pausing here. To understand whether their protein measures up, we first need a shared foundation: what protein is, why quality matters and how it serves the body.

The Foundation

When people talk about nutrition, protein usually appears as one of the “big three” macronutrients alongside carbohydrates and fats. But unlike carbs and fats, protein’s role goes far beyond fuel. It is the raw material your body is built from.

Carbs are mostly fuel. Fats are both fuel and structure, supplying essential fatty acids for cell membranes and hormones. Protein is different again. It is not just energy. It is you.

Protein is the raw material your body uses to build, repair, and regulate itself from your muscles and skin to your enzymes and immune system. If your body were a building, carbs and fats would be the electricity and heating. Protein would be the bricks, the beams and the builders.

Amino Acids: The Building Blocks

Proteins are made of smaller units called amino acids. Imagine them as different types of car parts. Your body assembles them in endless combinations to make tissues, enzymes, hormones, and signalling molecules.

There are about 20 amino acids. They fall into three groups:

• Essential amino acids (9). Your body cannot make them, so they must come from food. If one is missing, the whole project stalls.

• Non-essential amino acids (11). Your body can make these but supplying them directly saves energy and resources.

• Conditionally essential amino acids. Usually the body makes enough but in times of stress, illness, growth or heavy training, it may not.

This is why protein quality matters as much as protein quantity. It is not enough to “get protein.” What matters is the mix of amino acids.

Why “Complete” vs “Incomplete” Matters

A complete protein provides all nine essential amino acids in good amounts. An incomplete protein is missing one or provides too little of it.

The body can only use protein as effectively as its weakest link. Think of it like building cars. You might have hundreds of wheels and engines but if you only have ten steering wheels, you can only build ten cars. The scarcest part sets the limit.

Protein works the same way. If a food is low in one amino acid, it limits how much of the other amino acids can be used. That is why the balance of amino acids matters just as much as the total grams of protein on the label.

Protein Quality and Human Needs

Unlike carbs or fats, amino acids are not stored for later use. You need all nine essentials every day.

Animal-based foods, meat, fish, eggs, dairy, generally provide them all in the right amounts and balance. This makes them high-quality proteins. Almost everything they contain can be used by the body.

Plant-based foods vary. Many contain protein but they are often short of one or more essentials. That makes them lower-quality proteins. Even if you eat a lot, your body can only put part of it to work.

Quality, not just quantity, determines whether protein does its job.

Subscribe now

The Calorie Cost of Protein

Another way to see the difference in protein quality is to ask: how much food and how many calories does it take to reach a useful amount of protein?

For most adults, about 30 grams of protein per meal is a solid target. That’s enough to support muscle repair, enzyme activity and satiety.

Here’s what it looks like across different foods when adjusted for usable protein (quality-corrected using PDCAAS/DIAAS):

• Chicken breast (cooked, skinless). About 97 g provides 30 g protein at only ~160 kcal.

• Eggs. About 5 large eggs (~238–250 g) provide 30 g protein, at about 340–360 kcal.

• Wholemeal bread. To reach 30 g usable protein, you’d need about 606 g bread (≈15–18 slices), adding up to ~1,500 kcal.

• Quinoa (cooked). About 800–875 g provides 30 g usable protein, at ~960–1,050 kcal.

• Buckwheat groats (cooked). About 1.3 kg provides 30 g usable protein, at ~1,190 kcal.

The label may say “good source of protein,” but if it takes enormous amounts of food and calories to reach a meaningful dose, that protein isn’t efficient. Protein quality is about both the amino acid profile and the calorie cost of getting enough of it.

This chart shows both the typical cooked weights and the actual portions of cooked food needed to supply 30 g of usable protein, not just 30 g of protein on the label. That’s why you see a whole loaf of bread, several bowls of grains, or just a small plate of chicken. Usable protein values are quality-corrected using PDCAAS/DIAAS estimates: chicken and eggs (complete proteins) keep their values, while plant foods often require far larger portions because of lower protein density or limiting amino acids. Values are rounded averages; brands and cooking methods will vary.

How these numbers were calculated
Values are based on typical cooked food composition (USDA and published nutrition databases). Protein density (grams per 100 g) was multiplied by portion size to reach 30 g total protein, then adjusted for protein quality using PDCAAS or DIAAS scores (which account for limiting amino acids and digestibility). Calories are rounded averages and will vary with brand, preparation, and cooking method.

Example – Wholemeal bread (average):
• Raw (label total protein): ~273 g cooked bread (~9 slices at ~30 g each) → ~670 kcal.
• Quality-corrected (PDCAAS ≈ 0.45; limiting amino acid = lysine): To obtain 30 g of usable protein, the required label protein is 30 ÷ 0.45 ≈ 66.7 g → ~606 g bread (~15–18 slices) → ~1,500 kcal.

You may have heard that plant proteins can be combined to compensate for missing or limiting amino acids. That is true and in future we may revisit how combinations change the picture. Here, though, the focus is on looking at pure foods to illustrate what protein quality means on its own.

Beyond Essentials: Why Non-Essential Amino Acids Still Matter

Textbooks call some amino acids “non-essential” because the body can make them. That does not mean they are irrelevant in food.

• Energy savings. Making amino acids from scratch costs the body effort. Getting them pre-formed saves resources.

• Stress and illness. Some “non-essential” amino acids (for example glutamine, arginine, cysteine) become conditionally essential when demand is high.

The most nourishing protein sources are those that provide a wide spread of all amino acids, not just the nine essentials.

Protein and Satiety

Protein also has a special effect on appetite. It is the most filling macronutrient. A protein-rich meal sends strong signals of satiety, telling your body that its nutrient needs are being met.

That is why diets higher in protein often lead to natural fat loss. People feel satisfied, eat fewer calories overall, and maintain muscle without needing to count every bite.

Protein’s filling effect is physiological. Certain amino acids - studied most extensively in whey - stimulate GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1), a gut hormone released after eating. GLP-1 slows gastric emptying, stimulates insulin secretion and contributes to satiety - the same satiety signal now mimicked by modern GLP-1 injections. Other proteins also increase GLP-1 and related satiety hormones such as PYY and CCK, while lowering ghrelin (the hunger hormone). Together these effects help explain why higher-protein meals naturally reduce hunger and make it easier to eat fewer calories.

Conclusion

We have only touched on the importance, complexity and necessity of dietary protein, but even this glimpse shows why it stands apart. Protein is both the structure and the machinery of the body, and its impact extends from muscle and tissue repair to hormones that influence appetite.

• Quality matters as much as quantity.

• Complete proteins cover all essentials; incomplete ones leave the job unfinished.

• Calorie cost shows whether protein is efficient or impractical.

• Even non-essential amino acids are valuable when provided by food.

• Protein plays a hormonal role, influencing satiety through signals like GLP-1, PYY and CCK.

Through a nutrient-first lens, protein is the clearest example of why not all calories are created equal. It is not just about energy - it is about whether what you eat builds you up.

In the next Grain Illusion article, we will put this into practice and ask: when grains claim to provide protein, what are they really offering, and does it measure up to what the body needs?

References

If you’d like to see the research behind this, here are two widely cited human studies that connect protein intake with GLP-1 and other satiety hormones.

1. Nilsson et al., 2009

Nilsson, M., Holst, J. J., & Björck, I. M. (2009). Metabolic effects of amino acid mixtures and whey protein in healthy subjects: studies using glucose-equivalent drinks. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 89(3), 963–972.
🔹 Finding: Whey protein and certain amino acid mixtures significantly increased GLP-1, GIP, and insulin compared to glucose alone.

2. van der Klaauw et al., 2013

van der Klaauw, A. A., et al. (2013). Role of gut hormones in food intake and appetite control: a focus on the effects of protein. Nutrition Research Reviews, 26(2), 223–236.
🔹 Finding: Reviews evidence that protein consistently stimulates GLP-1, PYY, and CCK, all contributing to satiety.

Grains are celebrated as the foundation of a healthy diet — wholemeal bread, oats, rice and quinoa. But under the nutrient-first lens, they behave less like nourishment and more like sugar. Here’s why grains, whether refined or whole, may be draining more than they give.

Grains are everywhere. From school food pyramids to cereal commercials and health blogs, we’ve been taught that grains, especially whole ones, form the bedrock of a healthy diet. Brown bread, oats, rice, quinoa - these foods are praised for their fibre, promoted for supposed heart health benefits.

But from a nutrient-first perspective, it’s worth asking:

Are grains truly nourishing, or are they simply less bad than sugar?

In my previous article, we explored table sugar, arguably the simplest and quickest-acting empty calorie, and followed how it affects the body from the first sweet taste on the tongue to the metabolic toll it takes on the liver, brain and hormonal systems.

Now we take one step further along the spectrum of nutrient-poor foods and turn our attention to something more complex: grains.

Key Question

We’ll look at each type of grain through one clear lens:

Does this food nourish your body after it’s been metabolised or does it take more than it gives?

This isn’t about what’s written on the label. It’s about what remains after digestion, absorption and energy production → the net result. Does the food leave you in a state of nutrient gain or nutrient debt?

In this series, we’ll explore:

1. What grains are: from refined to whole to pseudograins

2. How they are digested and metabolised, and what nutrients they provide (or lack)

3. The role of refinement, processing, fortification and antinutrients

4. And most importantly, whether they provide real nourishment or take more than they give

Subscribe now

What Are Grains?

Grains are the seeds of grasses, belonging to the Poaceae family. They’ve been cultivated for thousands of years, providing a reliable source of energy through their high starch content. When we talk about grains in the diet, we’re usually referring to familiar staples like wheat, rice, corn, oats and barley.

Let’s explore three broad categories often used when discussing grains in the diet: refined, whole and grain-like alternatives.

Refined Grains

Refined grains have had the bran and germ removed, leaving primarily the starchy endosperm. This process strips away most of the fibre, protein, naturally occurring nutrients like B-vitamins, iron, magnesium and zinc. White flour, white rice, pasta and many commercial breads and cereals fall into this category.

To keep things clear, we’ll focus here on their unfortified form. The processes of enrichment and fortification, and their actual impact, will be explored later.

Whole Grains

Whole grains retain all three parts of the seed: bran, germ and endosperm. This makes them higher in fibre and certain micronutrients compared to their refined counterparts. Wholemeal bread, brown rice, oats and barley are commonly cited examples.

Despite their “whole” label, whole grains are still largely made of starch and are often processed in ways (like rolling, puffing or grinding into flour) that make them break down in the body nearly as fast as refined grains. Intact kernels (like steel-cut oats or barley) digest more slowly, but the end product is still glucose.

Nutritionally, they are “less bad” than refined grains but not necessarily nutrient-dense.

Pseudograins

Pseudograins like quinoa, buckwheat, amaranth and millet aren’t true cereals, they come from non-grass plants but are used in similar ways. They’re often praised for being gluten-free and richer in certain nutrients, such as magnesium, iron or complete proteins (in the case of quinoa and buckwheat).

However, they still come with a high starch content and often contain antinutrients that reduce the absorption of key minerals. Their “superfood” status is often more marketing than metabolic magic.

And What about Cereals?

Breakfast cereals including those marketed as “whole grain” often begin as refined grains or heavily processed whole grains. They’re typically ground, extruded, shaped, sweetened and fortified to meet nutrient guidelines. On the label they may look nutritious, but in the body many cereals behave more like fast-digesting sugar, spiking blood glucose and offering little real nourishment.

How Grains Are Digested and Metabolised

Why grains act like the glucose half of sugar: fast energy with little nourishment

We often think of sugar and grains as very different foods. Sugar is the villain, everyone agrees too much is harmful. Grains, on the other hand, wear a “healthy” halo, especially when labelled whole grain. But when we look at what happens in the body, the gap between them isn’t as wide as we’ve been led to believe.

In fact, metabolically, grains behave a lot like sugar. Not identical, grains don’t deliver fructose in the way table sugar does, but their dominant effect is clear: they flood the body with glucose.

Let’s follow the journey step by step.

Step 1. Starch Breakdown Begins in the Mouth

Grains are built on starch: long chains of glucose molecules linked together. The moment you start chewing bread, rice, or pasta, enzymes in your saliva (amylase) begin cutting those chains into smaller units.

Step 2. The Stomach: A Pause in Digestion

Once swallowed, food enters the stomach, where the acidic environment halts the work of salivary amylase. Starch digestion essentially pauses here. Unlike protein (which begins to break down under pepsin) or fat (which mixes with bile acids later), carbohydrates wait.

The stomach churns the food into chyme but contributes almost nothing to breaking down grains. In other words, starch largely bypasses the digestive work of the body’s central organ, only resuming its digestion later in the small intestine.

Step 3. Rapid Conversion to Glucose in the Small Intestine

When chyme enters the small intestine, pancreatic amylase picks up where salivary enzymes left off, breaking starch chains down fully into single glucose molecules. These are absorbed quickly into the bloodstream through specialised transporters, producing a rapid rise in blood sugar.

• Refined grains contain about 75–85% starch in their composition. With little protein or micronutrients left, they behave almost like pure glucose once digested.

Where sugar (sucrose) delivers both glucose and fructose, grains are almost entirely glucose. That means every slice of bread or bowl of rice behaves like the glucose half of sugar: ready to spike blood sugar levels and demand an insulin response.

Step 4. The Insulin Response and Nutrient Cost

As glucose floods the blood, the pancreas releases insulin. Insulin’s job is to shuttle glucose into cells, where it can be used for energy or stored for later. Some goes into muscle and liver as glycogen, but when those stores are full, the excess is converted into fat.

This process isn’t “free.” It requires specific nutrients as cofactors, especially:

• Magnesium for insulin receptor activity and enzyme function.

• B-vitamins:

  • B1 (thiamine)

  • B2 (riboflavin)

  • B3 (niacin)

  • B5 (pantothenic acid)

  • B6 (pyridoxine)

These vitamins act as coenzymes in the pathways that convert glucose into usable energy. If they are insufficient, the body struggles to process glucose efficiently leading to fatigue, unstable blood sugar, and metabolic stress.

And just as with sugar, high blood glucose may even interfere with vitamin C uptake in cells, since glucose and oxidised vitamin C compete for the same transporters. (For a fuller breakdown of that mechanism, see The Sweet Deception.)

Whole Grains: Slower but Still Starch-Heavy

Whole grains contain around 60–70% starch, plus fibre, some protein, and small amounts of micronutrients. If eaten intact (like steel-cut oats or barley kernels), digestion is slower. But once they are ground into flour, rolled, puffed, or extruded, the starch becomes just as accessible as in refined grains.

The blood sugar rise may be slower but the destination is the same: a large dose of glucose, demanding insulin and nutrient cofactors that the grain itself doesn’t supply in proportion to the glucose load.

Pseudograins: Extras That Don’t Change the Core

Quinoa, buckwheat, amaranth, and millet are often promoted as “superfoods.” They do offer some extras:

• Quinoa and buckwheat provide all essential amino acids.

• Some are higher in minerals such as magnesium and iron.

But their composition still includes about 55–70% starch, meaning most of their calories break down into glucose. The extras don’t change the fact that most of the energy still arrives as glucose, creating the same metabolic demand.

Breakfast Cereals: the Extreme Case

Cereals deserve their own category because of how heavily they are processed. Whether labelled “whole grain” or not, most cereals begin as refined grains or heavily milled whole grains. They are then extruded, flaked, puffed, shaped, and often sweetened.

This processing breaks down the natural structure of the grain, leaving starch that is digested at lightning speed. Add sugar on top and you get both glucose and fructose together — the metabolic double hit of bread plus soda. The label may highlight fibre or fortification, but inside the body, cereals act like fast sugar.

The Bottom Line

Sugar is a mix of glucose and fructose. Grains are almost pure glucose. Both create a rapid rise in blood sugar and a demand for insulin. Both require cofactors like magnesium and B-vitamins that they do not provide in meaningful amounts.

Refined grains, whole grains, pseudograins, cereals: the speed may vary slightly, but the end result is the same: a glucose surge followed by an insulin surge, with little real nourishment in return.

Conclusion: Grains as Glucose Delivery Systems

When stripped back to their essence, grains are not the nourishing staples we have been led to believe. Whether refined, whole, or marketed as “superfood” pseudograins, they are predominantly starch: 55 to 85 % of their composition, and behave in the body like the glucose half of sugar.

They raise blood sugar, trigger insulin, and demand nutrient cofactors such as magnesium and B-vitamins without supplying enough in return. In some cases, high glucose levels can even interfere with vitamin C uptake in cells. The result is a food that often consumes more from the body than it gives back.

This is why grains belong among nutrient-poor foods. They may arrive in different guises: white bread, brown rice, quinoa salad, or fortified breakfast cereal, but the underlying story remains the same.

In this first article on grains, we focused only on how their carbohydrate metabolism makes them act more like sugar than nourishment. Next, we’ll look at what they actually provide: their protein quality, vitamins, and minerals.

Do they offer enough to justify their place as a dietary staple or do they continue the pattern of taking more than they give?

In my last post, I introduced the idea of a nutrient-first system—a way of thinking about food that goes beyond calories or macronutrients and instead focuses on what our bodies truly need: essential nutrients. I also outlined one of the first steps to improving your health: eliminating nutrient-poor foods, the so-called “empty calories.”

We’ve all heard the phrase, “a calorie is just a calorie.” The idea seems simple: eat too many, and you gain weight; eat fewer, and you lose it. But is it really that simple?

What if certain foods don’t just add energy but actually steal nutrients from your body?

This is the reality of nutrient-poor foods often called empty calories. These are foods that provide energy but lack the essential vitamins and minerals your body needs to function properly. Worse still, digesting and processing them actually costs your body nutrients, leaving you more depleted than before.

When you think of empty calories, what images come to mind?

Nutrient-poor foods fall along a spectrum, starting with the simplest form:
• Table sugar, the purest form, made up of glucose and fructose.
• Then come grains, both refined and whole.
• Next, we reach foods like French fries, a dense combination of carbohydrates and fats, often fried in highly processed seed oils.
• At the other end of the spectrum lie store-bought cakes and ultra-processed foods, which layer refined carbohydrates with fats (often seed oils), artificial additives, preservatives, and flavour enhancers.

Each step marks a progression from simple to more complex forms of nutrient-poor foods. And as we move along this spectrum, the metabolic burden on the body increases.

Today, we begin at the start of that spectrum with sugar. It may be the simplest empty calorie and the fastest source of energy, but is it really just energy or does it come at a hidden cost?

What is Sugar?

To understand why sugar has such a powerful effect on the body, let’s begin with what it actually is and what happens when we consume it.

The most common form of sugar we consume is table sugar, also known as sucrose. Found in countless everyday foods, from biscuits and sauces to tea and soft drinks, sucrose is a disaccharide, a compound made up of two simple sugars: glucose and fructose.

By weight, sucrose is approximately 50% glucose and 50% fructose, meaning every spoonful delivers both types of sugar to the body in equal parts. Once consumed, the bond between them is broken in the small intestine, and each sugar is absorbed and processed separately following very different metabolic pathways, and affecting the body in distinct ways.

✔ Glucose is quickly absorbed into the bloodstream, raising blood sugar levels and triggering an insulin response. Insulin is the hormone responsible for shuttling glucose into cells, where it can be used for energy or stored for later.

✔ Fructose, on the other hand, takes a different route. It bypasses normal glucose regulation, heading directly to the liver, where it is either used immediately or, more often, converted into fat. Unlike glucose, fructose does not trigger insulin release, nor does it signal satiety, meaning the body doesn’t register it as energy in the same way.

This distinction is critical when we consider how sugar influences appetite. When we consume glucose-rich foods, insulin helps regulate how much we eat by signalling fullness. Fructose, however, hijacks this system: it enters the liver unnoticed, does not contribute to satiety, and often leads to overconsumption without the body realizing it has had enough.

Think about the difference between drinking a sugary soda and eating a high-protein meal. A 500ml bottle of cola contains around 50–60g of sugar, roughly half of which is fructose. It delivers a massive sugar load in liquid form yet leaves you unsatisfied and still hungry. Compare that to eating three to four boiled eggs: similar in calories, but rich in protein and healthy fats that leave you feeling full for hours.

But sugar doesn’t just affect how full we feel, it affects how well our bodies function at a cellular level.

How Sugar Steals Nutrients from Your Body

Most people assume that if they burn off the calories from sugar, they’re in the clear. But sugar is not just about calories, it also drains the body of essential vitamins and minerals in order to be processed. Every time sugar is metabolised, it demands nutrients that it does not provide, leaving the body in a state of depletion.

To understand how this works, let’s follow the journey of sugar from the moment it enters the body.

Step 1: Sugar Hits the Mouth – The First Trigger

The first interaction with sugar isn’t in the stomach, it starts the moment it touches the tongue. Sweet taste receptors immediately recognise sugar and send a signal to the brain’s reward center, releasing a surge of dopamine (neurotransmitter involved in motivation, reward, and reinforcement). The same mechanism is involved in addictive substances, creating a feeling of pleasure and reinforcing the desire for more sugar.

At this stage, no nutrients are used yet, but the body is already primed for rapid absorption. The presence of sugar in the mouth triggers a metabolic response, preparing for a spike in blood sugar whether the sugar is needed or not.

Step 2: Sugar Reaches the Small Intestine – Absorption Begins

After leaving the stomach, sugar enters the small intestine, where it’s broken down (if not already in simple form) and absorbed into the body. At this stage, no vitamins or minerals are needed for digestion or absorption itself, but how sugar enters the bloodstream differs between glucose and fructose.

• Glucose is actively absorbed through SGLT-1 transporters, which use sodium to carry glucose into the intestinal cells. From there, it exits into the bloodstream via GLUT2 transporters.

• Fructose is absorbed by a separate pathway, through GLUT5 transporters, and then enters the bloodstream through GLUT2. Unlike glucose, fructose absorption is passive and does not require sodium.

Once absorbed, glucose travels throughout the body, while fructose is taken directly to the liver for processing. No B-vitamins are used at this stage but the body is now preparing to metabolise both sugars, and this is where nutrient demands begin to rise.

Step 3: Glucose Floods the Bloodstream – The Insulin Response and Cellular Metabolism

As glucose enters the bloodstream, it causes blood sugar levels to rise. In response, the pancreas releases insulin, which enables glucose to enter cells for energy use or storage.

If energy is needed, glucose enters cells (especially muscle and brain cells) via insulin-dependent GLUT4 transporters. If there’s excess glucose, it’s stored as glycogen in the liver and muscles. Once glycogen stores are full, the rest is converted into fat and stored in adipose tissue (body fat).

This entire process depends on several key nutrients:

• Magnesium is essential for insulin receptor activity and for the function of many enzymes in glucose metabolism.

• B-Vitamins, especially B1 (thiamine), B2 (riboflavin), B3 (niacin), B5 (pantothenic acid), and B6 (pyridoxine), are critical as coenzymes in the energy production pathways that process glucose inside cells.

Without sufficient B-vitamins, the body struggles to convert glucose into usable energy, which can lead to fatigue, blood sugar instability, and longer-term metabolic dysfunction.

Additionally, when blood sugar remains high such as after consuming large amounts of refined sugar glucose competes with vitamin C’s oxidised form (dehydroascorbic acid, or DHA) for entry into cells via GLUT1 and GLUT3 transporters, especially in immune cells. This competition can impair vitamin C uptake at the cellular level and may weaken immune defence.

Glucose metabolism is nutrient-intensive. It demands magnesium and B-vitamins to produce energy efficiently and excess glucose can even interfere with vitamin C function at the cellular level.

Step 4: Fructose Enters the Liver – A Silent but Heavy Burden

Fructose, unlike glucose, does not circulate widely in the bloodstream or trigger an insulin response. Instead, it is taken directly to the liver, where it is metabolised almost entirely. This unique pathway makes fructose less regulated and potentially more harmful when consumed in large amounts.

Inside the liver, fructose is rapidly converted into a compound called fructose-1-phosphate. This transformation is powered by an enzyme called fructokinase, and it comes at a cost: it uses up ATP, the molecule every cell depends on for energy. In other words, the body must spend energy just to start breaking down fructose without getting much in return.

From there, fructose enters metabolic pathways that bypass the normal checks and balances of glucose processing. This allows a large amount of fructose to be funnelled into fat production, a process known as de novo lipogenesis. Over time, this contributes to the build-up of fat in the liver one of the driving factors behind non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

Another consequence of this process is the increase in uric acid levels. As ATP is depleted and purines are broken down, uric acid rises raising the risk of gout, high blood pressure, and kidney stress.

Processing fructose also places a high demand on micronutrients, particularly the B-vitamins involved in energy metabolism:

• B1, B2, B3, and B5 are all required to help the liver break down sugars and generate usable energy.

But when fructose is consumed in large quantities, it can overwhelm the liver’s ability to keep up. This leads to dysfunction at the mitochondrial level. Mitochondria, the tiny power-generating structures inside each cell, begin to produce less energy and release harmful by-products in the process.
This internal imbalance creates oxidative stress, a condition where cells are damaged by an excess of free radicals and not enough antioxidants to neutralise them.

Fructose places a heavy metabolic load on the liver. It encourages fat build-up, uric acid production, and nutrient depletion—all without offering the body any signals of fullness or energy balance.

How Sugar Hijacks the Brain: The Addiction Pathway Begins Before You Swallow

Sugar doesn’t just feed the body as we saw in Step 1, it hijacks the brain. From the first taste, dopamine floods the reward system, making sugar feel not only enjoyable but necessary.

The First Contact: Mouth to Brain

Sweet taste receptors activate dopamine release instantly. The body prepares for sugar absorption even before digestion begins. This early reward makes sugar highly reinforcing.

Dopamine Spikes and Crashes

Unlike protein or fat, which promote slow, steady satisfaction, sugar creates a spike-and-crash pattern. Over time, the brain downregulates dopamine receptors. You need more sugar to feel the same reward.

This leads to:

• More frequent cravings

• Reduced pleasure from the same amount

• A cycle similar to that seen with addictive substances

Similarities to Addictive Substances

Brain imaging shows that sugar activates the same dopamine circuits as drugs like cocaine. While not physically addictive in the same way, sugar’s behavioural grip is powerful.

Key takeaway: Sugar isn’t just a preference. It reshapes brain chemistry, creating a habit that is hard to break.

Sugar’s Role in Hormonal Imbalance

Along the way, sugar manipulates hormonal systems that regulate hunger, fat storage, and stress response.

Insulin: Store, Don’t Burn

When insulin spikes after sugar intake, it tells the body to store fat Insulin both promotes fat storage and inhibits fat breakdown (a process called lipolysis). Over time, high insulin leads to insulin resistance, making fat burning harder and blood sugar harder to control.

Leptin: Blocked Fullness Signals

Fructose doesn’t trigger leptin, the hormone that tells you you’re full. Worse, regular sugar consumption creates leptin resistance, so the brain stops listening. You keep eating, even with enough energy stored.

Ghrelin: Hunger That Won’t Switch Off
Sugar, especially fructose, doesn’t suppress ghrelin, the hormone that signals hunger, as effectively as protein or fat. This means you may still feel hungry soon after eating, even if you’ve had enough calories.

Cortisol: Stress & Belly Fat

Blood sugar crashes trigger cortisol, your stress hormone. Chronic sugar intake means chronic stress response, which increases belly fat and inflammation.

Key takeaway: Sugar puts your hormones in fat-storage mode, disrupts hunger signals, and increases stress.

The Aftermath – Sugar Crashes & Cravings

After the initial dopamine rush, the nutrient drain, and the hormonal confusion, sugar leaves the body not with sustained energy but with instability. What follows is a crash not just in blood sugar, but in mood, energy, and biochemical balance.

Once insulin has done its job and pulled excess glucose from the blood, blood sugar levels drop, sometimes sharply. This can lead to symptoms that many people experience without even connecting them to what they ate:

• sudden fatigue

• irritability or anxiety

• brain fog

• intense cravings for more sugar or carbs

The body, sensing the drop, interprets it as a need for more fuel and it sends out signals: eat more. The brain, remembering the quick dopamine hit from sugar, reinforces the same behaviour. And so, the cycle repeats.

Empty Calories = Overfed Yet Undernourished

The story of sugar is not only about weight gain, or even about “good” vs. “bad” foods. It’s about how certain substances like table sugar can steal more than they give.

They take from your nutrient stores, dull your hormonal signals, and rewire your brain’s reward system. They leave you depleted, craving more, and less able to recognise what your body truly needs.

This is what it means to be overfed yet undernourished:
Eating enough or even too much but never feeling quite satisfied. Because what you’re eating doesn’t nourish you.

But this pattern is not irreversible.

Practical Steps: How to Cut Sugar from Your Drinks

If you’re ready to take action, here are three simple approaches you can take to remove sugar from your drinks:

1️ Try It Plain First – Before assuming you won’t like it, try having your tea or coffee without sugar just once. You might be surprised that it tastes better than expected!

2️ Gradual Reduction – If the taste isn’t enjoyable yet, slowly reduce the amount over time:

• Week 1: Reduce sugar by a quarter (e.g., 1.5 teaspoons instead of 2)

• Week 2: Reduce by half

• Week 3: Reduce to just a pinch

• Week 4: No sugar!

3️ Swap the Sweetness – If you enjoy having something sweet, pair your drink with real food instead of sugar:

• A piece of fruit (like berries or an apple) alongside your coffee or tea

• A square of dark chocolate (70% cacao or more)

• A small handful of nuts for natural sweetness and satiety

Bonus Step: Cut Sugary Sodas Too

If you're also drinking sodas like Coke or sweetened juices, try swapping just one a day for sparkling water, black coffee, or some herbal tea with no sugar. It’s a small change, but it can have a big impact on reducing sugar load and nutrient depletion.

The goal is to retrain your taste buds and break the cycle of needing sugar.

Each month, new scientific studies are published that often provide contradictory information, leaving consumers confused about the best dietary practices and health recommendations. As we navigate the sea of diet trends from gluten-free to raw food, from Atkins to intermittent fasting, we must recognize the fundamental truth: the quality of the food we eat matters far more than the numbers on a scale. It’s time to turn our focus to a nutrient-first system that prioritises essential nutrients for sustainable health and vitality.

The Problem with Traditional Approaches

Many popular diets emphasise reducing calories or specific macronutrient ratios, which can create a narrow view of nutrition. This often leads to obsessive tracking and a preoccupation with numbers rather than fostering a healthy relationship with food. Diets that promote processed, nutrient-poor options, filled with added sugars and vilifying fats, may result in short-term weight loss but ultimately fail to nourish our bodies. As a consequence, many experience cravings, fatigue and hormonal imbalances. An appropriate diet can have healing properties, restoring our bodies to optimal function.

The Nutrient-First Philosophy

A nutrient-first system switches the focus from calorie counting to emphasising essential nutrients: proteins, healthy fats, vitamins and minerals. These are the elements our bodies need to thrive. By prioritising nutrient density, we can nourish ourselves in a way that promotes long-term health and well-being.

The Motivation for This Approach

My journey toward a nutrient-first system was shaped by personal experiences with various dieting methods. After discovering a diet that effectively addresses essential nutrient needs, I experienced significant benefits. Friends and clients who adopted similar strategies also reported improvements, reinforcing my belief in the efficacy of this approach. However, I acknowledge the pushbacks rooted in medical recommendations, the long-held belief in the necessity of carbohydrates and the intertwining of nutrition with personal values, which can make discussions about dietary choices feel like navigating a minefield.

To address these challenges, I want to focus on nutritional science and the essential micronutrients our bodies require. I plan to develop a resource that identifies foods that can provide the necessary recommended daily allowances for various nutrients. I believe that specific nutrient-dense foods can supply most of these essential nutrients, making them invaluable for those seeking optimal health.

Benefits of a Nutrient-First System

Adopting a nutrient-first approach can lead to numerous benefits. It can improve energy levels, enhance mental clarity and support effective weight management. By emphasizing nutrient quality over quantity, individuals are more likely to experience lasting changes rather than temporary fixes. This system encourages sustainable eating habits that align with long-term health goals.

How to Begin Your Nutrient-First Journey

While the nutrient-first system is still being developed, there are practical steps you can take right now to improve your nutrition:

• Eliminate Nutrient-Poor Foods: Start by removing processed foods and those high in empty calories from your diet. Focus on eliminating sugary snacks, fast food and highly processed items that offer little nutritional value.

• Choose Whole, Natural Foods: Emphasise the consumption of whole, unprocessed foods. Opt for single-ingredient options such as meats, fish, eggs and nuts. While you can also include some fruits and vegetables, prioritise nutrient-dense animal-based foods, as these will provide your body with essential nutrients more effectively, such as high-quality protein, B vitamins, iron, zinc, omega-3 fatty acids and vitamin D.

• Listen to Your Body: Pay attention to your hunger cues and how different foods affect your energy levels and mood. This practice will help you develop a better understanding of your body’s needs and guide your food choices moving forward.

By focusing on these foundational steps, you can begin to cultivate a healthier relationship with food and lay the groundwork for a nutrient-rich diet, even before the full nutrient-first system is laid out.

The Journey Ahead

The nutrient-first system addresses a specific gap: existing dietary guidelines specify recommended daily allowances for 27 micronutrients, yet no mainstream dietary framework uses those figures as its primary selection criterion. By prioritising essential nutrients, we can foster a healthier relationship with food and support our overall well-being. I invite you to join me on this journey toward understanding the true power of nutrition and embracing a lifestyle that celebrates quality over quantity. Together, we can create lasting change, one nutrient at a time.

What’s Next?

Stay tuned for future posts where we will dive deeper into specific nutrients, explore practical meal preparation strategies and share success stories from those who have embraced simple nutrition. Let’s start our transformative journey together!