To Bean Or Not To Bean, That Is The Question

(Legumes, Lectins, and Human Health)

By J.D. Moyer

With apologies to Shakespeare.
These days, many people across the world are wondering if they
should eat beans, or not.
Right now, this very minute, there are two powerful, but opposing,
dietary trends speeding towards a potentially explosive head-on
collision.
On the one side the paleolithic (or Stone Age) style of eating, a
dietary/lifestyle system that eschews grains, legumes, sugar, and all
processed foods in favor of quality meats, poultry, fish, vegetables,
fruit, and healthful fats. This is the anti-bean side.
On the other side is the fad-diet du jour, Tim Ferrisss slow-carb
diet as described in the bestselling The 4-Hour Body. Ferriss
unabashedly recommends legumes. Indeed, he suggests eating
beans or lentils with every meal (but forbids grains, fruit, and dairy
products except on the once-per-week binge day, during which
all foods are allowed).
Ferriss must be acknowledged as a cultural force in his own right; he
is a master marketer with legions of supportive blog readers (myself
among them). His efforts have propelled both of his books to the #1
spot of the New York Times nonfiction bestsellers list. He has
recently appeared on both The View and Dr. Oz pushing his slow-
carb diet, sleep gadgets, and anatomically precise better-sex tips.
Especially among the California/Silicon Valley/San
Francisco/young techy professional set, 4-Hour Body is extremely
influential. Just the other night at Ignite SF, a friend mentioned she
was going home to eat some beans. When Ferriss says eat beans,
people eat beans. Ferriss constitutes the current vanguard of the
pro-bean side.
Before we evaluate the evidence for and against legumes, lets see
who all is taking sides:
Pro-bean Anti-bean
Tim Ferriss (4-Hour Body)
Dan Buettner (Blue Zone)
Andrew Weil (drweil.com)
Pythagoras (Ionian philosopher)
Loren Cordain (The Paleo Diet)
Robb Wolf (The Paleo Solution)
Each link goes to a discussion of the health advocates
recommendation for or against legumes.
Other health gurus take a more nuanced stance. Mark Sisson, from
whom I take my own dietary cues, is generally against eating beans
and legumes, but acknowledges possible health benefits from eating
natt (a fermented soybean paste with is extremely high in vitamin
K2). PNu blogger Kurt Harris, M.D., another advocate of the
paleolithic diet, suggests eliminating beans but gives it a low priority
(#11) on his 12 steps to improving health.
The Evidence Against Beans
Contrary to conventional dietary wisdom, paleo diet advocates say
you should NOT eat beans. Why not?
1. Beans are hard to digest (the musical fruit).
Beans that are not properly soaked, drained, boiled, drained-again,
and slow-cooked can result in severe digestive stress. Even under
the best of circumstances, beans can you make fart more.
2. Beans can aggravate auto-immune diseases.
All legumes (beans, but also tofu, soy-milk, peas, lentils, and
peanuts) contain lectins. Some of these lectins are implicated in
IBS, Crohns disease, arthritis, multiple sclerosis, peptic ulcers,
allergies, and Type 2 diabetes.
3. Beans are high in starch and carbohydrates.
Beans are a starchy food, high in carbohydrates. Eating significant
amounts of beans may interfere with weight loss.
4. Beans contain estrogen mimics, which can be harmful to health.
Beans, especially soybeans but also fava beans and other beans,
contain phytoestrogens weak estrogen mimics that can interfere
with hormone function. Phytoestrogens evolved in plants as a
defense mechanism, a way to disrupt the reproductive success of
predators. Red clover (a legume) has been shown to disrupt
reproduction in animals.
Male infants and toddlers are probably the most vulnerable to the
negative effects of a high legume diet, as is discussed in this article
by Kaayla Daniel of the Weston Price Foundation. From the article:
Every week I get agonized letters from parents who fed their sons
soy infant formula and who report estrogenized boys who are
flabby, lethargic, high strung and/or embarrassed by breasts and
underdeveloped genitals. These parents want to know, What can
we do now?
Disturbing. Do not feed your infant soy formula.
5. Beans can shrink your brain.
An even more heinous side-effect of eating soybean products
frequently may be brain shrinkage.

Tofu turns your brain to jello.
I kid you not. One study looked at autopsies of nearly 4000
Hawaiian men, and compared brain weight results with dietary
habits. The men who had eaten the most tofu and soy had smaller
brain sizes and a higher chance (more than double) of developing
Alzheimers disease. The linked article mentions a possible
mechanism; phytic acid in soybeans interferes with vitamin B12
absorption (which is independently associated with brain shrinkage
and dementia). In most beans, phytic acid can be greatly reduced by
soaking, draining, and boiling, but soybeans retain high amounts
even when cooked.
6. Lentils might make you fat.
Tim Ferriss recommends eating generous portions of legumes as a
part of his slow carb weight loss diet. In The 4-Hour Body he
mentions lentils as being one of his favorite legumes.
But can lentils make you fat? There is some evidence that the lentil
lectin binds weakly to the insulin receptor, setting cells to always
on for fat production. Thats Peter J. DAdamos hypothesis in Eat
Right For Your Type. Though many of DAdamos ideas are
speculative and not supported by the evidence, he should at least be
credited with bringing lectins into the public consciousness.
7. Many brands of canned beans have bisphenol A in the can
lining.
People who eat beans dont necessarily have the time or inclination
to properly soak them, drain them, boil them, drain them again, and
then slow-cook them. Canned beans are the logical alternative to
time-consuming preparation.
The problem with canned foods is that the plastic can linings often
contain bisphenol A (BPA), a powerful endocrine disruptor. BPA is
strongly associated with heart disease, prostate cancer, breast cancer,
miscarriage, erectile dysfunction, and abnormal reproductive
development in children. We should all be staying away from the
stuff. For most people, canned food, soda, and plastic bottles/cups
are the main sources of BPA.
Trader Joes states that their canned beans are BPA-free (though
their canned tomatoes and soups do contain BPA). Eden Organic
beans are also BPA-free.

Tim Ferriss's "freak to geek" snapshots from his (pro-bean) book The 4-Hour Body.
The Evidence in Support of Beans
1. Beans are high in protein and fiber.
Not everyone enjoys a high-meat diet. For people who prefer to not
consume animal protein at every meal, beans provide a decent
amount of protein. Because theyre high in fiber, theyre also quite
filling.
2. Beans provide a steady source of glucose for energy.
Consuming high amounts of fructose (the sugar found in fruit, corn
syrup, and agave nectar) is associated with gaining belly fat, poor
insulin sensitivity, increased risk of heart disease, and higher LDL
levels. Table sugar is not exempt sucrose is half glucose and half
fructose.
Ferriss recommends eliminating fructose entirely (except on cheat
days), and using legumes as a carbohydrate source. The starch in
beans breaks down into glucose. Too much glucose can still make
you fat, but the fat will be subcutaneous (under the skin) fat, which
isnt associated with disease as much as abdominal fat.
Ferriss claims his slow-carb diet has a high rate of compliance,
and that one reason for this is the steady energy provided by
legumes. Its true that switching too quickly to a low-carb diet can
result in energy crashes; the body needs a few weeks to adjust to
using different kinds of fuel (including dietary fat, stored body fat,
glycogen, and even lactic acid).
However, most carb withdrawal has nothing to do with blood
sugar levels. Except in cases of diabetes, the body regulates blood
sugar within a tight range, via insulin and glucagon. Most carb
withdrawal symptoms are in fact exorphin withdrawal
symptoms. Beans, which do not contain food opioids, will not
protect you from the aches, fatigue, and flu-like symptoms some
people get when giving up wheat and dairy.
3. Beans are high in folate and iron, and have appreciable
amounts of magnesium, manganese, copper, selenium,
molybdenum, and antioxidants.
Beans are not nutritionally empty. Depending on the legume, beans
can provide decent amounts of a few vitamins and many minerals.

Bento with beans -- how could something this cute be bad for you?
As for the anti-nutrients, phytic acid and lectins, most can be
soaked/drained and cooked out. If you dont mind having a frothing
bowl of beans on your counter (I do), then you can effectively
remove most of the anti-nutrients. Soaking is most effective for
getting rid of phytic acid, and boiling is most effective for reducing
lectin levels. Do not slow-cook beans without boiling first. Slow
cooked kidney beans and red beans (often in the form of chili) lead
to dozens of cases of lectin poisoning in the U.S. every year.
4. Beans are associated with reduced risk of colon cancer.
If the evidence holds up, this is a pretty big win for
beans. Colorectal cancer is a relatively common, very serious
disease (second only to lung cancer in lethality).
One clinical trial that looked at over 2,000 adults with precancerous
colon polyps found that those people who ate more beans over a four
year period had fewer advanced polyps and less cancer. Those
that increased fruit and vegetables in their diets, but not beans, did
not enjoy the same protective effects.
If eating beans actually does reduce the chance of colorectal cancer,
whats the mechanism? One theory is that the nondigestible carbs in
beans are broken down (by gut flora) into the short-chain fatty acid
butyrate, which has anti-inflammatory and anticancer
properties. Various phytonutrients in beans may act synergystically
to prevent cancer in other ways.
One interesting possibility, for which there is strong evidence, is that
a lectin in broad beans forces colon cancer cells to
differentiate. Could it be that not all lectins are bad?
Beans vs. Meat
I think some members of the paleo community are guilty of
unsophisticated categorical thinking (meat is GOOD grains &
beans are BAD). Instead of looking at the evidence regarding
specific foods and the possible benefits of drawbacks of those foods
(from all perspectives, including health effects, ease of preparation,
taste and culinary possibilities), they eliminate entire food groups
and exalt others.

Bacon bias -- wishing something to be health food does not make it so.
Take bacon, for example. Love for bacon has reached fetishistic
heights among paleo bloggers. Mark Sisson and Kurt Harris are
both on the pro-bacon bandwagon (otherwise, I agree with 90+% of
what both these guys recommend). This salt and nitrite-laden meat-
product is delicious, but please dont try to claim that its good for
you. Processed meats (including bacon) are implicated in colon
cancer and other diseases. While saturated fats are not to be feared,
nitrites, and to a lesser extent salt, should be.
Unprocessed red meat may also slightly raise the chance of colon
cancer, but the risks are less than those incurred by obesity or lack of
exercise. And before you smack me in the face with your copy of
The China Study, please read this detailed critique by nutrition
blogger Denise Minger.
Maybe the solution is to eat some beans with your bacon.
Beans vs. Fruit
Back to fructose for a minute Ferrisss book recommends cutting
out all fruit. While it makes sense to limit fructose, lets consider
how many blueberries a person would have to eat to get the same
amount of fructose delivered by a regular 12oz can of Coke (36g
carbs mostly from HFCS). By my rough calculations, thats about
the same as two cups of blueberries. Three whole grapefruit would
also do it. I really dont see a good reason for not eating half a cup
of blueberries or a half grapefruit with breakfast its just not that
much fructose, and both fruits are high in vitamins and other
phytonutrients. On the other hand, a large banana, or 12oz of orange
juice, delivers about as much fructose as the can of soda.
For steady weight-loss, Ferriss may be on to something when he
recommends beans over fruit. But youll probably get the same
benefits if you eat some beans and some less-sweet fruit (tart apples,
berries, grapefruit, kiwis, etc.).
The Bottom Line Who Should Eat Beans
The way I see it, theres no reason to fear properly cooked
beans. There is also no reason to force yourself to eat them.
If you dont like beans, but still want to avoid colon cancer (who
doesnt?), there are many ways to reduce risk. Stay lean, exercise
regularly, dont eat processed and cured meats, keep your vitamin D
levels high, and eat broccoli, cauliflower, and cabbage. Raw
sauerkraut may be especially beneficial.
Nobody should eat large amounts of soy, in any form, though tiny
cubes of tofu in miso soup wont hurt you. Red beans and kidney
beans are risky unless you know how theyve been
prepared. Canned beans may come with an unwelcome dose of
BPA.
Anybody who has Crohns, ulcerative colitis, IBS, multiple
sclerosis, or arthritis should avoid beans. Lectins can tear up the
intestinal lining, causing leaky gut. Leaky gut, in turn, leads to
autoimmune problems. In terms of lectins, dairy products, grains,
peanuts and nightshade vegetables (tomatoes, potatoes, eggplant,
peppers), are potentially as problematic as beans.
Beans and lentils arent an ideal fat-loss food unless you get lots of
exercise, both because of starch content and possible lectin-insulin
problems (at least with lentils). But properly prepared (soaked,
drained, boiled, and slow-cooked) beans are probably a better choice
than bread or bananas.
For many people, one of the joys of the paleo diet is that they dont
have to eat beans (or oatmeal, or any of a long list of bland, boring
foods). Conventional wisdom (and Tim Ferriss), push beans as a
kind of wonder food, but thats just not the case. You dont have to
eat beans to achieve vibrant health. Many people respond very well
to cutting out both grains and beans, but keeping some fruit in the
diet (Mark Sissons primal diet).
Food Avoidance and The Great Carb Debate
Im fascinated by how food affects health, but I also just enjoy
eating. I hope to never get cancer or heart disease, but chances are
very good that something will kill me eventually (ideally it will be
something exciting, like a genetically engineered dinosaur, or a
falling disco ball, or lightning, or an orgy). Dying from
complications due to eating too many lectins, gluten, nitrites, or
fructose does not strike me as a good way to go out, so I try to limit
my intake of those substances.
I do eat beans once in a while, usually canned pinto or black beans
from Trader Joes, or white butter beans in a salad. If I go out to
Mexican food Ill usually eat some meat and refried beans but skip
the tortillas and rice.

Dr. Kurt Harris writes the popular PNu blog.
I agree with Kurt Harris that consuming some carbs is easier on the
body than consuming zero carbs or lots of carbs. Going into ketosis
now and then wont hurt you, but long-term ketosis can deplete
calcium and selenium, give you bad breath, cause a metallic taste in
the mouth, and lead to mental dullness and sluggishness. Its easy to
stay out of ketosis by consuming some carbs. Wheat products,
syrups, desserts, and sweet fruits are not ideal choices. Vegetables,
berries, properly cooked beans, and even dark chocolate are good
choices. Some rice is probably also fine for people who exercise a
great deal.
I find the whole notion of avoiding carbohydrates altogether to be
faintly ridiculous somewhat akin to avoiding nitrogen or
carbon. Avoiding a specific class of chemicals, like lectins, makes
more sense, but even then you may be throwing out the baby with
the bathwater. Some lectins may be good for us.
On the whole, I agree with the premises of the paleolithic diet
well be healthier if we eat high quality meats, poultry, fish, eggs,
vegetables, and nuts than if we eat neolithic foods (processed
foods, sugary desserts, grains and legumes, fruit juice, etc.). What
Im skeptical of is the idea that observing any set of dietary rules
strictly will make us healthier. We did, after all, evolve to be
adaptable creatures, with a robustly flexible digestive
system. Were more like rats than we are like panda bears (who eat
only bamboo), koala bears (who pretty much just eat eucalyptus), or
lions (who just eat meat).
On the other hand, Ive noticed that my enjoyment of food has only
increased with a slightly more restrictive diet. The less sugar and
fruit I eat, the sweeter all food tastes. Same thing goes for salt. Our
palate can quickly adjust to a new normal. And since Ive cut out
grains for the most part, I eat a much wider variety of meats and
vegetables, mostly cooked in pastured butter. It all tastes damn
good. A more restrictive diet doesnt necessarily correspond to less
enjoyment of food.