I happily admit I'm a geek when it comes to this stuff, and it probably comes across as being anal sometimes. No offense taken at being told this.
However, it's all interesting stuff and it's only by talking about things like this that you ever learn. It's only by reading similar discussions that I gave paleo I real try, and I'd never turn back. I don't want to turn this into a testimonial, but suffice it to say that I used to eat plenty of wholegrains as part of what most would consider a very healthy diet, and if it hadn't been for reading posts like this one I'd still be eating that way. And my A1C would still be above 7, I'd still have that last half-stone of podge on my now-flat stomach despite running marathons, and I'd still have a low-level feeling of bloating all the time.
phoenix, I think we're going to end up respectfully disagreeing on whole grains. As you rightly say, drawing nutritional conclusions is difficult; there are confounding factors in pretty much every study ever carried out, because replacing one food for another invariably introduces other factors. I can easily believe a diet containing whole grains can be an improvement over one that doesn't contain whole grains; but if what you're swapping out is (for example) HFCS or refined sugar then that's not really a surprise! I'd be surprised and amazed if any data could be found to show that swapping in grains in place of meat, fish, vegetables, nuts and seeds improves overall health (in all seriousness I'd also be very interested; I'm by no means a die-hard zealot, I've changed my mind on things previously and will again if something better can be shown. But nothing I've seen so far comes close to convincing).
For what it's worth, I think many people can tolerate some amount of whole grains without any real negative effects (though not everyone). But I cannot see any nutritional benefit in choosing whole grains over meat, fish, nuts, seeds, vegetables and fruit. Whole grains' anti-nutrients, highly acidic renal load and relatively high carbohydrate content aren't, in my opinion, outweighed by any nutritional value found in the grains. And for diabetics, it's the carb content that's the deal breaker in my opinion; it's simply not worth spiking your blood glucose (or increasing your insulin intake to cover it) for the rather paltry nutritional benefits you'd get from the grains. Eat some leafy green veg instead.
There's an interesting article on cereal grains from an evolutionary perspective
here; it's an interesting piece, discussing both grains' role in advancing our civilisation and their importance in feeding the modern world, but also their deleterious health effects in most if not all people.
I'd also recommend the first part of
this pack. This was written for a specific audience (it's an intro pack handed out before a seminar that's attended by athletic coaches), so there are some non-obvious references and in-jokes in there; but the content of the first article is relevant here. As an aside, the second article probably isn't of any interest (it's aimed at athletes eating to the Zone diet), but the later pieces on intermittent fasting and hormesis are interesting as well; intermittent fasting is something I'm going to look at seriously in the near future.
My final thought though is simple - for anyone wanting to improve their control but unsure whether to eat whole grains or not, try both approaches and see what suits you best. Try a month on a strict paleo diet with no grain and no dairy; test your blood, monitor how you feel and look and perform. Reintroduce grains or dairy or both for a month and test your blood, monitor how you feel and look and perform. Go with what suits your life and goals the best. That way you've made an informed choice based on your own reaction to your diet - this is the only real way of knowing what's best for YOU.
Thanks a lot for the discussion, it's been really interesting (at least to the anally retentive among us!)