There was a very famous book published around 1970. It may have been called, “Diet for a Small Planet”. The author claimed that one should eat rice and beans together in order to get a “complete protein”.
Several years later, IIRC, that was debunked as “an old wives tale” and I’m really not sure what the accepted truth is today.
Diet for a Small Planet Diet for a Small Planet - Wikipedia
"Diet for a Small Planet is a 1971 bestselling book by Frances Moore Lappé, the first major book to note the environmental impact of meat production as wasteful and a contributor to global food scarcity. She argued for environmental vegetarianism—practicing a vegetarian lifestyle out of concerns over animal-based industries and the production of animal-based products.
The book has sold over three million copies and was groundbreaking for arguing that world hunger is not caused by a lack of food but by ineffective food policy. In addition to information on meat production and its impact on hunger, the book features simple rules for a healthy diet and hundreds of meat-free recipes. “Its mix of recipes and analysis typified radicals’ faith in the ability to combine personal therapy with political activism.”[1]
…
Lappé admitted in the 10th anniversary 1981 version of the book that sufficient protein was easier to get than she had thought at first:
"In 1971 I stressed protein complementarity because I assumed that the only way to get enough protein ... was to create a protein as usable by the body as animal protein. In combating the myth that meat is the only way to get high-quality protein, I reinforced another myth. I gave the impression that in order to get enough protein without meat, considerable care was needed in choosing foods. Actually, it is much easier than I thought.
"With three important exceptions, there is little danger of protein deficiency in a plant food diet. The exceptions are diets very heavily dependent on [1] fruit or on [2] some tubers, such as sweet potatoes or cassava, or on [3] junk food (refined flours, sugars, and fat). Fortunately, relatively few people in the world try to survive on diets in which these foods are virtually the sole source of calories. In all other diets, if people are getting enough calories, they are virtually certain of getting enough protein."[3]
In some traditional cuisines there is a balance of 70% whole grains to 30% legumes, which may vary to 80% grains with 20% legumes. This tradition can be seen expressed in three regions:[4]
Latin America: beans with tortillas or rice,
Middle East: bulgar wheat with chickpeas, or pita falafel with hummus,
Asia: soy with rice (southern China, northern Japan, Indonesia), soy with wheat or millet (northern China), or soy with barley (Korea and southern China).
The first edition, published by Ballantine, was sponsored by the Friends of the Earth organization. It includes recipes based on the complementary combinations and was followed by a collection, Recipes for a Small Planet by Ellen Buchman Ewald, with an introduction written by Lappé. A film carrying Lappé’s message was distributed by Bullfrog Films.[5]"
Rice > beans.
rice wine
rice vinegar
rice noodles
rice pudding
fried rice
curry rice
chicken rice
dirty rice
congee
sushi
onigiri
mochi
pilaf
paella
bibimbap
biryani
risotto
heck, in my neck of the woods alone, we’ve got:
suman
espasol
tupig
bibingka
biko
puto
kitsinta
ampaw
pinipig
lugao
siopao
arroz caldo
goto
puso
sinangag
You are right! It’s still wide spread, though. I Googled the question before I answered here and it confirmed what I believed, but I didn’t research in a thorough way. I remember being taught this during health/nutrition classes… back in the 70s. I merely confirmed my own belief and didn’t look further.
Thanks for fighting my ignorance.
Rice don’t know beans about variety.
I make all types of bean soups and stews with my Instant Pot pressure cooker every week. No pre-soaking needed, just pour the dried beans (navy, black, pinto, kidney, lima, split pea, lentil, Orson, whatever) in the pot with all the other ingredients. No soup takes longer than an hour to cook under pressure.
My bean soups have one thing in common—they’re all delicious, nutritious and auspicious (greens & black-eye peas bring New Year’s good luck).
Want a healthy, crunchy snack? Drain a can of garbanzo beans, spritz with olive oil, sprinkle with chili powder, salt and garlic powder for a savory snack (or sugar and cinnamon for a sweet snack), then “fry” them in your air-fryer at 400f for 18 minutes. Crunchalicious! Try doing that with rice!
For clarification, “peas” in the Caribbean means “beans”.
In Jamaica, rice&peas is traditionally eaten on Sunday. Dining in St Martin, a Jamaican guy at another table told me I had my days mixed up, as I was eating rice&peas and it was a weeknight. I explained that I was only in the Caribbean a short time, and I had to eat a years worth of rice&peas, as the dish is not readily available back home.
He was eating by himself, and we had an empty chair at our table, so my gf invited him over so we didn’t have to talk across the restaurant. We ordered another bottle of wine and some more food. When the check arrived, everything was on one check, which I paid.
As we left the restaurant, our new Jamaican friend invited us to come to his home for dinner the next evening. He gave some vague directions, and a description of his home. Somehow we found him. He and his wife were gracious hosts, and served us rice&peas, even though his wife thought it odd since it wasn’t Sunday. Sadly, Irma destroyed their home and they returned to Jamaica.
I like them both…a lot.
If were one or the other I’ll go with beans. More nutritious, filling, and they’ve got fiber.
If I eat just rice, it’ll jam up my insides as sure as if I poured a box of spackle down my innards.
Something I don’t think has been mentioned yet…
I assume all of you choosing rice are willing to give up coffee?
I’m not trying to start a quarrel with you but I’d really like to know if this is your opinion or if you have found some kind of evidence that makes this point. If so, I’d very much like to know what that evidence might be.
Yeah, rice for sure. A little butter, some salt and pepper. Combined rice and beans is good.
One cup (185g) rice, white, long-grain, regular, raw, unenriched
One cup (185g) Beans, black, mature seeds, raw
Looks like beans win in the nutrient department. Note that the rice I chose is unenriched, so that’s in its natural state.
You bean counters can put me in the bean column.
Funny. Coffee beans may be (vaguely) shaped like beans, but they’re not legumes. They’re the seeds of a fruit called the coffee cherry.
In my experience, rice is a lot easier to cook than beans. I’ve been using the same rice cooker for thirty-six years.
Sure, I’ll assume you’re asking the question in good faith and not being deliberately quarrelsome.
If I eat quantities, not necessarily large quantities, but a serving of low fiber starches by themselves, I feel bloated, distended, and generally out of sorts, regardless of how satisfying it may be to the taste. Same goes for red meat.
I reiterate: this thread makes no sense to me. When has anyone ever had to choose between rice or beans?
Right. Coffee isn’t a legume, hence coffee “beans” aren’t beans. However, you can make coffee out of rice.
Come on dude, it’s just a fun mental exercise. We’re just having fun here.
In all seriousness, Brown Rice is by far the best thing, for me personally, to keep the trains moving down the track, without undesirable side effects.