> On what basis have you arrived to those conclusions? The normal diet in China and Indonesia is plant based. Yes, they eat a lot of rice, but that rice is much more healthy than the vitamin-fortified substance made out of bleached, white flower that we call bread nowadays.
Likewise, I'd ask you what data you used to arrive at your conclusion that rice is healthier for you than bread? A quick googling of white rice vs white bread told me the exact opposite, or at best, that they were relatively equal. Other colors compared similarly, assuming I kept them similar. The terms "rice" and "bread" are way too generic to compare, really.
> Likewise, I'd ask you what data you used to arrive at your conclusion that rice is healthier for you than bread?
There was no conclusion to question. You created a false equivalence because there's an assumption that one MUST be better than the other. That presumption is what the original post questioned. There was no "conclusion"/assertion that flour > rice.
> There was no "conclusion"/assertion that flour > rice.
In your original post, you say "... but that rice is much more healthy than the vitamin-fortified substance made out of bleached, white flower that we call bread nowadays."
So, perhaps not a conclusion, but an assertion then. Semantics aside, I believe a statement like that should be backed up by data, and I've been unable to find any data that backs up your claim. So again, I ask to know what you're basing that assertion on.
Likewise, I'd ask you what data you used to arrive at your conclusion that rice is healthier for you than bread? A quick googling of white rice vs white bread told me the exact opposite, or at best, that they were relatively equal. Other colors compared similarly, assuming I kept them similar. The terms "rice" and "bread" are way too generic to compare, really.