Are you hungry?

6. December 2011 William Davis (43)
Eliminate modern high-yield semi-dwarf Triticum aestivum . . . and what is the effect on appetite?

A reduction in appetite is among the most common and profound experiences resulting from wheat elimination. I know that I have personally felt it: Wake up in the morning, little interest in breakfast for several hours. Lunch? Maybe I'll have a few bites of something. Dinner . . . well, I'd like to exercise first.

The wheatless report that:

--Appetite diminishes to the point where you can't remember whether you've eaten or not. It is not uncommon to miss a meal, perfectly content. Calorie intake drops by 400 calories per day, on average, calories you otherwise would not have needed but all went to . . . you know where.
--Hunger feels different: It's not the gnawing, rumbling hunger that plagues you every 2 hours. In its place, you will find that hunger feels like a soft reminder that, gee, maybe it's time to have something to eat because you haven't had anything in--what?--4 to 6 hours. And it's a subtle reminder, not a desperate hunt that makes you knock people aside at the food bar, steal coworkers' lunches stored in the refrigerator, salivating at the mere thought of food.
--The simplest foods satisfy--It no longer requires an all-you-can-eat buffet to satisfy, but a few small pieces of healthy food. (Yeah, but what happens to revenues at Kraft, Nabisco, and Kelloggs, not to mention the revenues at agribusiness giants ADM and Monsanto? Slash consumption by, say, 30%, you likewise slash revenues by 30%. What would shareholders say?)
--Even prolonged periods of not eating, i.e., fasting, is endured with ease.

Hunger and the relentless search for something to eat disappear for most people. By eliminating the appetite-stimulating properties of wheat, we return to a natural state of eating for sustenance, to satisfy physiologic need. We are no longer victims of this incredibly powerful appetite-stimulant called gliadin from wheat.

This is why many diets fail: They fail to remove this powerful appetite stimulant. You might eat only lean meats, limit your calories, and exercise 90 minutes per day, but as long as the gliadin protein is pushing your appetite button, you will want to eat more or you will have to mount monumental willpower to resist it. You can lose 20 pounds on phase 1 of the South Beach diet, for instance, only to regain it in phases 2 and 3 when "healthy whole grains" are added back.

So the key is to remove the gliadin protein from your life, i.e., eliminate all things wheat.

 

Chocolate . . . for adults only

30. November 2011 William Davis (22)
If you've got a serious chocolate addiction and you'd like to make it as healthy as possible, give this X-rated dark chocolate a try.
I call it X-rated because it is certain to not satisfy young, sugar-craving palates, but is appropriate for only the most serious chocolate craver. This is a way to obtain the rich flavors and textures of cocoa, the health benefits (e.g., blood pressure reduction, antioxidation) of cocoa flavonoids, while obtaining none of the sugars/carbohydrates . . . and certainly no wheat!

It is easy to make, requiring just a few ingredients, a few steps, and a few minutes. Set aside and save for an indulgence, e.g., dip into natural peanut or almond butter.

Ingredients:
8 ounces 100% unsweetened cocoa
5 tablespoons coconut oil, melted
1/2 cup dry roasted pistachios
1/4 cup whole flaxseeds or chia seeds
Truvia or other non-aqueous sweetener

Using double-boiler method, melt cocoa. Alternatively, melt cocoa in microwave in 15-20 second increments. Stir in coconut oil, pistachios, and flaxseeds or chia seeds. Stir in sweetener, mixing thoroughly. (Note that the sweetener must be non-aqueous, as water-based sweeteners will separate in the oils.)

Lay a sheet of parchment paper out on a large baking pan. Pour chocolate mixture slowly onto paper, tilting pan carefully to spread evenly until thickness of thick cardboard obtained. Place pan in refrigerator or freezer for 20 minutes.

Remove chocolate and break by hand into pieces of desired size.

"Friday is my bad day"

19. November 2011 William Davis (29)
At the start, Ted had a ton of small LDL particles. His starting (NMR) lipoprotien values:

LDL particle number: 2644 nmol/L

Small LDL: 2301 nmol/L

In other words, approximately 85% of all LDL particles were abnormally small. I showed Ted how to use diet to markedly reduce small LDL particles, including elimination of wheat, limiting other carbohydrates, and even counting carbohydrates to keep the quantity no higher than 15 grams per meal ("net" carbs).

Ted comes back 6 months later, having lost 14 pounds in the process (and now with weight stabilized). Another round of lipoproteins show:

LDL particle number: 1532 nmol/L

Small LDL: 799 nmol/L

Better, but not perfect. small LDL persists, representing nearly 50% of total LDL particle number.

So I quiz Ted about his diet. "Gee, I really stick to this diet. I have nothing made of wheat, no sugars. I count my carbs and I almost never go higher . . . except on Fridays."

"What happens on Friday?" I asked.

"That's when I'm bad. Not really bad. Maybe just a couple of slices of pizza. Or I'll go out for a big custard cone or something. That wouldn't do it, would it?"

That's the explanation. Your liver is well-equipped to recognize normal, large LDL particles. Large LDL particles therefore "live" for only a couple of days in the bloodstream. But the human liver does not recognize the peculiar configuration of small LDL particles, so it lets them pass--over and over and over again. The result: Once triggered by, say two slices of pizza, small LDL particles persist for 5 days, sometimes longer.

So Ted's one "bad" day per week is enough to allow a substantial quantity of small LDL particles to persist. While a fat indulgence (if there is such a thing) pushes large LDL up, the effect is relatively short-lived. Have a carbohydrate indulgence, on the other hand, and small LDL particles persist for up to a week. It means that Ted's one "bad" day per week is enough to allow his small LDL particles to persist at this level, preventing him from gaining full control over coronary plaque.

It also means that, if you have blood drawn for lipoprotein analysis but had a carbohydrate goodie within the previous week, small LDL particles may be exaggeratedly high.

HDL 80 mg/dl

14. November 2011 William Davis (73)
More and more people in my clinic are showing HDL cholesterol values of 80 mg/dl or higher, males included.

Think about it: Nationwide, average HDL for males is 42 mg/dl and for females 52 mg/dl. Even though these average values are generally regarded as favorable, HDL cholesterol values at these levels are nearly always associated with higher levels of triglycerides, postprandial (after-eating) lipoprotein abnormalities, and excessive quantities of small LDL particles.

HDL particles are, of course, protective and are powerfully anti-oxidative. Higher levels of HDL have been associated with reduced potential for cancer, as well as reduced risk for heart disease.

Following the simple regimen that we follow to gain control over coronary plaque has therefore increased levels of HDL to heights that are uncommon in the rest of the population, levels that readily top 80, 90, or 100 mg/dl. That regimen includes:

1) Elimination of all wheat--Yes, consumption of "healthy whole grains" sets you up to have lower HDL levels; elimination of wheat increases HDL.
2) Limited carbohydrate consumption--While eliminating wheat is a powerful nutritional strategy to increase HDL, non-wheat carbohydrates like quinoa, millet, beans, rice, and fruit can still cause high triglycerides that lead to reduced levels of HDL. Limited exposure helps keep HDL at higher levels.
3) Omega-3 fatty acid supplementation--Because omega-3 fatty acids reduce both triglycerides and blunt the postprandial rise in lipoproteins that can cause HDL degradation, HDL rises with omega-3s from fish oil.
4) Vitamin D supplementation--The effect is slow, but it is BIG. HDL just goes up and up and up over about 2 years of supplementation. Before vitamin D, HDL levels of 60 mg/dl were the best I could hope for in most people. Now 80 mg/dl is an everyday occurrence.

Other factors can also be used to increase HDL levels, such as weight loss, red wine and alcohol, exercise, cocoa flavonoids, green tea, and niacin. But following the regimen above sends HDL through the roof in the majority.

Lessons from the 20-year statin experience

2. November 2011 William Davis (0)
Readers of the Heart Scan Blog know that, while I recognize that statins are useful in a small segment of the population with genetically-determined disorders, they are wildly overused, misused, and abused. In my view, the majority of people taking statins have no business doing so and could, in fact, obtain superior results by following some of the strategies advocated in these pages.

Nonetheless, the 30-year long statin experience has taught us some important lessons. Statin drugs have enjoyed more "research" than any other class of drugs ever conceived. They have received more media attention and embraced by more physicians than any other class of drugs. Combine these social phenomena and I believe that several lessons can be learned:

Small LDL particles and increased HbA1c--An evil duo

30. October 2011 William Davis (53)
Small LDL particles are triggered by consumption of carbohydrates. Eat more "healthy whole grains," for instance, and small LDL particles skyrocket.

Increased hemoglobin A1c, HbA1c, a reflection of the last 60-90 days' blood sugars, is likewise a reflection of carbohydrate consumption. The greater the carbohydrate consumption and/or carbohydrate intolerance, the greater the HbA1c. Most regard a HbA1c of 6.5% or greater diabetes; values of 5.7-6.4% pre-diabetes. However, note that any value of 5.0% or more signifies that the process of glycation is occurring at a faster than normal rate. Recall that endogenous glycation, i.e., glucose modification of proteins, ensues whenever blood sugars increase over the normal range of 90 mg/dl (equivalent to HbA1c of 4.7-5.0%). Glycation is the fundamental process that leads to cataracts, arthritis, and atherosclerosis.

Put the two together--increased quantity of small LDL particles along with HbA1c of 5.0% or higher--and you have a powerful formula for heart disease and coronary plaque growth. This is because small LDL particles are not just smaller; they also have a unique conformation that exposes a (lysine residue-bearing) portion of the apoprotein B molecule contained within that makes small LDL particles uniquely glycation-prone. Compared to large LDL particles, small LDL particles are 8-fold more prone to glycation.

So glycated small LDL particles are present when HbA1c is increased above 5.0%. Small, glycated LDL particles are poorly recognized by the liver receptor that ordinarily picks up and disposes LDL particles, unlike large LDL particles, meaning small LDL particles "live" much longer in the bloodstream, providing more opportunityt to do its evil handiwork. Curiously, small LDL particles are avidly taken up by inflammatory white blood cells that can live in the walls of arteries, where they are oxidized--"glycoxidized"--and add to coronary atherosclerotic plaque.

The key is therefore to tackle both small LDL particles and HbA1c.

Unforgiving small LDL particles

21. October 2011 William Davis (39)
Small LDL particles are triggered by carbohydrates in the diet: Eat carbohydrates, small LDL particles go up. Cut carbohydrates, small LDL particles go down.

A typical scenario would be someone starts with, say, 2000 nmol/L small LDL (by NMR) because they've been drinking the national Kool Aid of eating more "healthy whole grains" and consuming somewhere around 200 grams carbohydrates per day, including the destructive amylopectin A of wheat. This person slashes wheat followed by limiting other carbohydrates and takes in, say, 40-50 grams per day. Small LDL: 200 nmol/L.

In other words, reducing carbohydrate exposure slashes the expression of small LDL particles, since carbohydrate deprivation disables the liver process of de novo lipogenesis that forms triglycerides. Abnormal or exaggerated postprandial (after-eating) lipoproteins that are packed with triglycerides are also reduced. Because triglycerides provide the first lipoprotein "domino" that cascades into the formation of small LDL particles, carbohydrate reduction results in marked reduction in small LDL particle formation.

So let's say you are doing great and you've slashed carbohydrates. Small LDL particles are now down to zero--no small LDL whatsoever. What LDL particles you have are the more benign large variety, say, 1200 nmol/L (LDL particle number), all large, none small. You are due for some more blood work on Thursday. On Tuesday, however, you have four crackers because, what the heck, you've been doing great, you've lost 43 pounds, and have been enjoying dramatic correction of your lipoprotein abnormalities.

Your next lipoprotein panel: LDL particle number 1800 nmol/L, small LDL 700 nmo/L--substantially worse, with a major uptick in small LDL.

That's how sensitive small LDL particles can be to carbohydrate intake. And the small LDL particles can last for up to several days, since small LDL particles are not just smaller in size, they also differ in conformation, making them unrecognizable by the normal liver receptor. The small LDL particles triggered by the 4 crackers therefore linger, outlasting the normal-conformation large LDL particles that are readily cleared by the liver.

This phenomenon is responsible for great confusion when following lipoprotein panels, since a 98% perfect diet can yield dismaying results just from a minor indulgence. But, buried in this simple observation is the notion that small LDL particles are also extremely unforgiving, being triggered by the smallest carbohydrate indulgence, lasting longer and wreaking their atherosclerotic plaque havoc.

I eliminated wheat . . . and I didn't lose weight!

19. October 2011 William Davis (33)
Elimination of wheat is a wonderfully effective way to lose weight. Because saying goodbye to wheat means removing the gliadin protein of wheat, the protein degraded to brain-active exorphins that stimulate appetite, calorie consumption is reduced, on average, 400 calories per day. It also means eliminating this source of high blood sugar and high blood insulin and the 90-minutes cycles of highs and lows that cause a cyclic need to eat more at the inevitable low. It means that the high blood sugar and insulin phenomena that trigger accumulation of visceral fat are now turned off. It may possibly also mean that wheat lectins no longer block the leptin receptor, undoing leptin resistance and allowing weight loss to proceed. And weight loss usually results effortlessly and rapidly.

But not always. Why? Why are there people who, even after eliminating this appetite-stimulating, insulin-triggering, leptin-blocking food, still cannot lose weight? Or stall after an initial few pounds?

There are a list of reasons, but here are the biggies:

1) Too many carbohydrates--What if I eliminate wheat but replace those calories with gluten-free breads, muffins, and cookies? Then I've switched one glucose-insulin triggering food for another. This is among the reasons I condemn gluten-free foods made with rice starch, cornstarch, tapioca starch, and potato starch. Or perhaps there's too many potatoes, rices, and oats in your diet. While not as harmful as wheat, they still provoke phenomena that cause weight loss to stall. So cutting carbohydrates may become necessary, e.g., no more than 12-14 grams per meal.

2) Fructose--Fructose has become ubiquitous and has even assumed some healthy-appearing forms. "Organic agave nectar" is, by far, the worst, followed by maple syrup, honey, high-fructose corn syrup, sucrose,and fruit--yes, in that order. They are all sources of fructose that causes insulin resistance, visceral fat accumulation or persistency, prolongation of clearing postprandial (after-meal) lipoproteins that antagonize insulin, and glycation. Lose the fructose sources--as much of it as possible. (Fruit should be eaten in very small portions.) Watch for stealth sources like low-fat salad dressings--you shouldn't be limiting your fat anyway!

3) Thyroid dysfunction--A real biggie. Number one cause to consider for thyroid dysfunction: iodine deficiency. Yes, it's coming back in all its glory, just like the early 20th century before iodized salt made it to market shelves. Now, people are cutting back on iodized salt. Guess what's coming back? Iodine deficiency and even goiters. Yes, goiters, the disfiguring growths on the neck that you thought you'd only see in National Geographic pictures of malnourished native Africans. Number two: Exposure to factors that block the thyroid. This may include wheat, but certainly includes perchlorate residues (synthetic fertilizer residues) on produce, pesticides, herbicides, polyfluorooctanoic acid residues from non-stick cookware, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (flame retardants), and on and on. If you are iodine-deficient, it can even include goitrogenic iodine-blocking foods like broccoli, cauliflower, and soy. Thyroid status therefore needs to be assessed.

4) Cortisol--Not so much excess cortisol as disruptions of circadian rhythm. Cortisol should surge in the morning, part of the process to arouse you from sleep, then decline to lower levels in the evening to allow normal recuperative sleep. But this natural circadian cycling is lost in many people represented, for instance, as a flip-flopping of the pattern with low levels in the morning (with morning fatigue) and high levels at bedtime (with insomnia), which can result in stalled weight loss or weight gain. Cortisol status therefore needs to be assessed, best accomplished with salivary cortisol assessment.

5) Leptin resistance--People who are overweight develop an inappropriate resistance to the hormone, leptin, which can present difficulty in losing weight. This can be a substantial issue and is not always easy to overcome. It might mean assessing leptin levels or it might mean taking some steps to overcome leptin resistance.

Okay, that's a lot. Next: More on how to know when thyroid dysfunction is to blame.

Do the math: 41.7 pounds per year

14. October 2011 William Davis (21)
Consumers of wheat take in, on average, 400 calories more per day. Conversely, people who eliminate wheat consume, on average, 400 calories less per day.

400 calories per day multiplied by 365 days per day equals 146,000 additional calories over the course of one year. 146,000 calories over a year equals 41.7 pounds gained per year. Over a decade, that's 417 pounds. Of course, few people actually gain this much weight over 10 years.

But this is the battle most people who follow conventional advice to "cut your fat and eat more healthy whole grains" are fighting, the constant struggle to subdue the appetite-increasing effects of the gliadin protein of wheat, pushing your appetite buttons to consume more . . . and more, and more, fighting to minimize the impact.

So, if you eat "healthy whole grains" and gain "only" 10 pounds this year, that's an incredible success, since it means that you have avoided gaining the additional 31.7 pounds that could have accumulated. It might mean having to skip meals despite your cravings, or exercising longer and harder, or sticking your finger down your throat.

400 additional calories per day times 365 days per year times 300,000,000 people in the U.S. alone . . . that's a lot of dough. Is this entire scenario an accident?

Or, of course, you could avoid the entire situation and kiss wheat goodbye . . . and lose 20, 30, or 130 pounds this year.

We got the drug industry we deserve

14. October 2011 William Davis (6)
A biting commentary on just who is writing treatment guidelines for diabetes and cardiovascular disease was published in the British Medical Journal, summarized in theHeart.org's HeartWire here.

"About half the experts serving on the committees that wrote national clinical guidelines for diabetes and hyperlipidemia over the past decade had potential financial conflicts of interest (COI), and about 4% had conflicts that were not disclosed.

"Five of the guidelines did not include a declaration of the panel members' conflicts of interest, but 138 of the 288 panel members (48%) reported conflicts of interest at the time of the publication of the guideline. Eight reported more than one conflict. Of those who declared conflicts, 93% reported receiving honoraria, speaker's fees, and/or other kinds of payments or stock ownership from drug manufacturers with an interest in diabetes or hyperlipidemia, and 7% reported receiving only research funding. Six panelists who declared conflicts were chairs of their committee.

"Of the 73 panelists who had a chance to declare a conflict of interest but declared none, eight had undeclared COI that the researchers identified by searching other sources. Among the 77 panel members who did not have an opportunity to publicly declare COI in the guidelines documents, four were found to have COI."

The closing quote by Dr. Edwin Gale of the UK is priceless:
"Legislation will not change the situation, for the smart money is always one step ahead. What is needed is a change of culture in which serving two masters becomes as socially unacceptable as smoking a cigarette. Until then, the drug industry will continue to model its behavior on that of its consumers, and we will continue to get the drug industry we deserve."

It's like having Kellogg's tell us what to each for breakfast, or Toyota telling us what car to drive. The sway of the drug industry is huge. Even to this day, I observe colleagues kowtow to the sexy sales rep hawking her wares. But that's the least of it. Far worse, even the "experts" who we had trusted to have objectively reviewed the evidence to help the practitioner on Main Street appears to be little more than a hired lackey for Big Pharma, hoping for that extra few hundred thousand dollars.
Wheat Belly #5 on New York Times Bestseller list!

Wheat Belly #5 on New York Times Bestseller list!

9. September 2011 William Davis (66)
The New York Times just released its bestseller list due for release September 18th, 2011 . . . .

Wheat Belly is #5!! (That darned Jane Fonda woman elbowed me out for the #4 spot!

[caption id="attachment_4452" align="alignright" width="574" caption="Wheat Belly hits #5 on New York Times Bestseller List--in 1st week!"][/caption]
Tags :

Comments (66) -

  • Sean

    9/9/2011 3:54:19 AM |

    Hey, congratulations Dr D.
    I hope you aren't going to go all Hollywood on us now that you are a best-selling author.

  • Princess Dieter

    9/9/2011 7:03:22 AM |

    GREAT! I know I got several folks to buy by blogging/reviewing/facebooking, and some are doing the no-gluten now (including my sis!)

    Now, onto the next one on cholesterol/heart health, yes? ; )

    Oh, and I just started using a glucose monitor to test...interesting (but I hate pricking my finger, wuss that I am.)

    Again, congrats. Go take on Big Grain!

  • miki

    9/9/2011 8:01:02 AM |

    Congratulations! There is hope! I couldn't not notice Tim Ferriss right behind you. He is also "Plaeoish".

  • Michia

    9/9/2011 8:45:39 AM |

    Awesome!  And, oh yeah, you just turned into a much bigger target Wink

  • Alexandra

    9/9/2011 10:03:21 AM |

    I just shared this story over at Fat Head but I thought you might enjoy it as well.
    My copy of Wheat Belly arrived yesterday and is next on the reading list.

    Related story...a very happy turn of events.

    Back in June of this year, a musician friend of mine came to my area for a concert.  I hadn’t seen him in several years and was distressed to see him using a cane (he is only about 57 years old) and clearly appeared to be in pain.  This sweet guy came up to me and said I looked healthy and full of life (what a lovely compliment!) He told me that he had been suffering from severe joint pain throughout his body and was now living on pain medication and was having difficulty performing. He asked me what I was doing to be healthy (I am 120 lbs lighter since the last time he saw me.)  Rather than tell all on a busy concert night, I told him I would send him an e-mail with links, etc. the next day. The e-mail included Fat Head as well as numerous blogs and web sites that I thought would be of help to him.  Long story short, I saw my friend again this past weekend... no cane and walking comfortably.  He told me that, so far, all he had done was stop eating cereal and bread and within three months was able to stop all his pain medications and can again walk without pain, or a cane!  To have played a role in helping this wonderful person feel well again made my heart swell!

  • Debbie B in MD

    9/9/2011 11:04:49 AM |

    My copy just came yesterday!!! I am really enjoying it and making a list of who needs a copy for Christmas presents. Maybe they will be early presents because I wouldn't want to keep this from those I love any longer than necessary. Congratulations!!!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/9/2011 12:07:35 PM |

    Thanks, Debbie!

    Your mention of Christmas reminds me that I should put some holiday recipes up on the blogs. Holidays tend to be incredible wheat-fests, so it's best to be armed with tasty wheat-free, low-carb recipes.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/9/2011 12:12:02 PM |

    Wow, Alexandra! Great story.

    Now, more than likely your friend would have tested negative for celiac markers and his doctor would say it was all in his head or a coincidence. This is precisely what I've been seeing.

    Imagine we live in a village where 9 out of 10 people who drink from the water well in the center of town get sick; they stop drinking water from the well, they all get better. They drink from the well again, they get sick, etc. With a consistent and reproducible effect like this, how long do we wait for the clinical trial to prove to us that we are sick from drinking the water?

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/9/2011 12:24:52 PM |

    Yes, Miki, it appears to me the top sellers on the list are all diet books. That tells us something!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/9/2011 12:27:48 PM |

    Thanks, Princess.

    Because the Wheat Belly 100% wheat-free approach is so critical to the heart health message, this alone will occupy me and my team for some time. Corollary to the Wheat Belly message is that, follow this idea and the need for drugs for cholesterol, hypertension, diabetes, arthritis, and other conditions is dramatically reduced or eliminated in many, if not most, people. I think this message bears repeating . . . and repeating and repeating.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/9/2011 12:29:21 PM |

    Believe me, Sean, I'm not going anywhere! I grew up very poor, had to work for everything, so I believe that I've learned humility and to appreciate the small things in life. This has always been about the message, not about notoriety. And the message is much too big for any one person to manage singlehandedly.

  • otterotter

    9/9/2011 1:40:09 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    This is a great news, congratulations !  and now I cannot even wait for my copy to arrive.

    One more question: I know wheat is bad, but is "pure wheat bran" good for me ? I am using a lot of wheat bran in my diet to promote the fibre in take.


    cheers!

    zuo

  • Dee

    9/9/2011 2:17:21 PM |

    Congadulations on Wheat Belly.  I hope a lot of Doctors read or hear about it.  Glutin intorance is rampant throught out the world.
    Dee

  • Lori

    9/9/2011 3:44:03 PM |

    Congratulations! As I posted on the Fathead blog, my mother found out for herself how far wheat can push up blood sugar. An hour after she ate a piece of toast, her BG was 245, up from 101. (Yes, that's two hundred forty-five.)

  • Bill Davis

    9/9/2011 4:47:57 PM |

    Dr Davis

    Good book!

    However, I think the message of the book is bigger than what the cover would lead one to believe. Mis- representation? I was wondering at first knowing somewhat of the origins of the book. In fact I was somewhat disappointed that the cover only addressed a side effect of this 'medication'. And I try to avoid side effects.

    That being said, what do I think is the real message of the book? (and I should know - check my name. Actually I'm the other BD.) It is definitely IMO chapter 10. I'm beginning the third time through 10.

    Then, I saw your post above and it made me think (yes I do that at times since I am sentient) - This is such an important book EVERYONE should read chapter 10. Is this just another diet/food book?  Whether you or the publisher chose the title (they do sometimes you know) it got my chapter 10 right up there where many more will read it. There are 6 out of 10 on that NYT list about what, one would be led to believe, this book is about.

    Diet books are a dime a dozen but heart disease is here to stay (unless the message of ch10 gets out!).

    Again - Good book. Congratulations!

    My new doctor in Boulder needs this in his waiting room. He has your other ones there.

  • cancerclasses

    9/9/2011 5:20:34 PM |

    The fiber myth is just another anti health lie designed to keep you sick and in surgery, forget the conventional wisdom on this one too and do the opposite, you'll be healthier.  Everyone needs to learn the long established and well known scientific truth about fiber, not the conventional wisdom and opinions constantly parroted by the media.  Just google 'brian peskin fiber' and read the post titled "Fiber Fiction" where you'll see the rest of this short cut & paste:  
    "In 2004, the cancer journal, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, stated that colon cancer is not helped by eating fiber Dr. Gilbert Omenn stated in a 2000 New York Times article on this subject: “There’s not a shred of [cancer fighting] evidence from these trials. ...the surprising results [no cancer protection] showed the need to rigorously put belief systems to the test, especially when you are making recommendations to literally hundreds of millions of people.” He concluded with, “...it is time to abandon the idea that fiber can help prevent colon cancer.” (Emphasis added)

    As referenced in my landmark book, “The Hidden Story of Cancer,” fiber actually worsens
    colon cancer rather than helping it. Even the Cancer Institute finally agrees with this conclusion. The
    true tragedy lies in the fact that those following this advice and eating the most fiber get the most colon cancer! This fact was reported in 2000 in the Lancet, the world’s premier medical journal.
    There is a general misconception that plant foods are loaded with vitamins that we benefit from; unfortunately, these nutrients are locked away in the plant fiber, or cellulose, which cannot be digested by humans. Herbivores are able to break down the cellulose and get to the nutrients, but due to our digestive tract design, humans cannot."

    And there's more to learn there, be sure to google that and read up, for your health's sake.

  • Joe

    9/9/2011 5:21:42 PM |

    Come up with a tasty, healthy, low-carb (wheat free, of course!) substitute for cannoli and I can guarantee that there will be a national holiday named after you, Doc.

    "Dr. Davis Day," which will fall somewhere between Thanksgiving and Christmas, and celebrated by BILLIONS!

    Joe

  • Hans Keer

    9/9/2011 5:44:52 PM |

    Congratulations doc D. How can this message be brought to an even broader public?

  • otterotter

    9/9/2011 5:54:50 PM |

    Thanks cancerclasses, I will read the bok.

    I am taking fibre mainly to increase the bowl movements to once a day intead of once every two days, and it works for that purpose. Not sure whether it is good or bad through.

  • Linda

    9/9/2011 8:51:05 PM |

    Not to get TOO personal, but, what difference does it make if the bowels move every day or every other day? Why not let your body just do it's thing when it is ready?

    Add some flax to your daily diet, that should do the trick! That stuff really moves things along. LOL

    I can remember my mother taking laxatives every day when I was a kid, and she insisted that we had to move those bowels! When I told her, as an adult, that I sometimes go two or more days, she had a fit!

    It just isn't necessary..............................

  • Galina L.

    9/10/2011 12:27:28 AM |

    Why not increase a dose of a magnesium supplement? I am taking some and have to be careful with the dose because it can make bowl movements more frequent. For some people it should be a desirable side-effect.

  • otterotter

    9/10/2011 1:08:30 AM |

    Linda,

    I have grounded flax seeds in my diet as well, but the problem is I cannot have too much of it. Overdosing flax seeds made my blood too thin and ended up in emergency room last year, with bloody stool ...

    To go 100% wheat free, I might have to try corn bran ...

  • otterotter

    9/10/2011 1:11:00 AM |

    Yes, I am having magnesium as well, it make the stool softer, but not more frequent... well unless you take too much of it.

  • Michia

    9/10/2011 1:24:33 AM |

    Hi otterotter
    This informative site helped me a lot while I was coming back after surgery for a bowel resection several years ago.  
    http://www.gutsense.org/
    I echo the recommendation of magnesium and would add vitamin C.  Make it magnesium citrate, best absorption.  Start in easy since too much at once of either will put you on the, um "fast track" Wink
    I eat VLC, and have to stay 100% wheat-free or risk the wrath of an RA flare.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/10/2011 2:00:01 AM |

    I am no expert in bowel health, but I do know that some GI--minded people hold the opinion that stool held for prolonged periods in the intestinal tract changes in character and leads to the cascade of changes leading to cancer.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/10/2011 2:02:08 AM |

    Hi, Hans--

    I believe that is currently underway!

    Just today, I've gotten dozens of phone calls and emails from major national media, all wanting to understand what the heck is going on with this crazy Wheat Belly thing.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/10/2011 2:03:18 AM |

    Wow, Joe. Thank you.

    But you give me too much credit. I am simply the delivery boy on this information.

    But thank goodness you picked a day after Halloween!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/10/2011 2:10:28 AM |

    Thank you, Uncle Bill!

    While I chose the main title, Wheat Belly, I had pushed for a much more edgy (obnoxious?) subtitle: Muffins tops and man boobs in a whole grain world.

    They would not budge on the "man boob" thing.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/10/2011 2:16:58 AM |

    Aaagghhh! One piece of toast, blood sugar goes up 144 mg/dl!

    I feel like we should conduct an exorcism.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/10/2011 2:17:44 AM |

    Yes, I agree, Dee. It is rampant.

    It is, in my experience, the rule and not the exception. It certainly does NOT end at celiac disease, but ranges far and wide into virtually every facet of health.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/10/2011 2:19:38 AM |

    Hi, Zuo--

    Because wheat fiber is essentially cellulose (AKA wood), it is inert. There is only danger for the most exquisitely wheat- and gluten- sensitive.

    However, there are plenty of non-wheat fibers to take advantage of, such as nuts, vegetables, seeds, flaxseed, and chia.

  • Diane

    9/10/2011 11:42:14 AM |

    Hi Princess,
    Check out this example of "painless blood sugar testing" on the Blood Sugar 101 website.  I can vouch for its effectiveness!
    http://www.phlaunt.com/diabetes/19774432.php

  • Teresa

    9/10/2011 4:31:49 PM |

    Enhorabuena, dr, Davis, me gustaría saber si algún día podré leer su libro en español.

  • Patricia

    9/11/2011 3:13:55 PM |

    Plants contain both indigestible fibers like cellulose and digestible fibers like pectin.  Both impart health benefits.  Digestible fibers absorb and carry out bile acids that promote the production of carcinogens by intestinal bacteria.  Indigestible fibers builk up stools, speeding up transit time and thereby dilluting carcinogens produced by anaerobic bacteria in the gut.  Plant fiber is good, and we can get enough of both kinds from non-starch vegetables and fruits.

  • greensleeves

    9/11/2011 5:16:56 PM |

    Dear Dr. Davis:

    Just finished Wheat Belly. Congrats - what an excellent book! I wish you every success.

    I was intrigued by your comments on einkorn, and very interested to read your experiments with it here. I've been baking all kinds of bread for more than 25 years now. I began after living in France in the early 80s and wishing to eat the delicious French-style breads at home, such as pain de campagne, which at that time were very difficult to find in the USA. I couldn't get the same results, so I began to study a lot of dough chemistry to discover the differences between traditional French grains and the American grains I was using.

    They are quite different, as you so accurately note! The French have largely resisted engineered foods, and now we know they were apparently right to do so.

    As others have noted, your einkorn bread would have had even fewer blood sugar effects had you followed a traditional 3-day soourdough process. Traditional European breads take 3-5 days to make, and the sourdough process substantially changes the dough chemistry. Also, very fresh flour is almost never used in traditional baking - it should always be allowed to sit in a cool place (the underground cellar or "cave" of the baker's mill, traditionally) for about 3 weeks before using. Part of the "astringent" taste you note in the einkorn is due to the very fresh flour.

    This also leads me to ask you more about rye. Rye traditionally grew as a "weed" in European fields during wet years, when the wheat didn't fare so well. Until the late 19th century, almost all French bread would have contained some rye, as they were commonly harvested together and ground together. Only the very rich could afford to have their grains sorted to pure wheat. During a very wet, cold year, the field would have been more rye than wheat, actually. In Germany and Scandinavia, where it's quite cold in the winter, too cold for normal wheats, people ate more rye, even exclusively so.

    We've all seen traditional German-style or Danish-style rye - 100% whole dark rye bread with coriander, made the traditional sourdough way. It takes more than 3 days to make, and after baking the bread has to sit for 24-48 hours before it can be sliced. The bread is nearly black, like pumpernickel, very dense, almost a brick, and you have to eat it in super-thin tiny slices. Everyone in Denmark will tell you rye is much healthier than wheat.

    Your book mentions rye a few times in passing, which deeply intrigued me. Rye has low levels of gliadin - the protein you persuasively argue as being very problematic for many people - but in rye, these are covered by another structure called pentosans.

    These pentosans are what prevent rye from rising and make the dough as sticky as glue and completely wet, so difficult to work with. 100% rye can't be kneaded and doesn't form a dough that can be shaped into loaves - you have to pour it into the pan. Rye also has another protein called secalin, which may bother celiacs, but may not effect the wheat-gluten intolerant.

    I wonder if people with mild wheat intolerances - not full celiac - could tolerate small amounts of traditional-style German/Scandinavian rye breads, just as they may be able to tolerate small amounts of einkorn? That is, could everyone's Danish grandmother be correct? Smile

    Do you have any insight into rye, Dr. Davis? Sorry for the long comment, and thank you so much for your inspiring and wonderful book!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/12/2011 2:30:59 AM |

    Hi, Green--

    Excellent! Thank you for your valuable insights into the unique French wheat and bread experience.

    As you have likely gathered, despite the differences in rye, its genetics, the quantitative and qualitative differences in the gliadin, there are few data to tell us how much better or worse it can be except in celiac sufferers who, of course, have their reactions triggered by rye.

    Of course, we still have lectins to contend with in rye. My suspicion is, given the phenomenon that I believe applies, that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, i.e., each undesirable component of wheat (gliadin, lectins, amylopectin A) adds up to tell only part of the story. I suspect that there are other, yet unidentified, components of wheat, and thereby perhaps rye, that account for its extravagant unhealthy effects that are greater than the sum of the parts.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/12/2011 2:31:35 AM |

    Thank you, Patricia, for a wonderful discussion!

  • greensleeves

    9/12/2011 6:37:21 AM |

    Thanks so much for your quick response, Dr. Davis! Of course those opposed to your work will quickly bring up the French experience, which is why I mention it. Smile

    If you have time, please let me point you to a seminal 1990 book on bread, "The Taste of Bread," by the French bread "guru," baker Raymond Calvel. You will be very interested in Chapter 15, where he - the ultimate authority - discusses the health concerns around bread, as known already in 1990. He discusses the problems of conventional agriculture, that fill flour with fungicides and pesticides. And he notes that modern industrial methods of bread-making oxidize the dough to ill effect.

    He also discusses what he calls "toxic factors" in bread, particularly phytic acid, and he quotes a French study describing how it interferes with calcium, iron, and magnesium absorption. He does mention celiac disease and wheat allergy - very prescient for 1990.

    Finally, he quotes from various French medical experts who argue that bread should equal around 20% (about 400 calories) of a woman's daily calorie intake. Calvel closes arguing that people need to eat a higher quality, traditionally made, organic bread from traditional-style flours without additives. And this is from a French baker in bread-loving France! (Note that the actual French level of consumption he documents is a mere 5 oz of baguette per person a day - about 360 calories.)

    Compare this to our recent Food Pyramid guidelines, which suggested Americans eat "up to" 11 servings of grain products a day - for bread which is served in 1 oz Wonder slices, that's more than twice what even the French ate in the same time period.

    Here the USDA pyramid was telling Americans to eat "up to" 770 calories, or nearly 50% of a woman's daily recommended 1,600 calories! In the added sugars section of those guidelines, the chart explicitly called out bread as a good food with no added sugars! Doughnuts, Danish, muffins, cookies and poundcake are also noted for having 2 or less added sugars. You had to read pretty deep in the smaller print to find out the guidelines suggested that women eat "only" 6 slices of bread a day.

    So when your critics point to the fact that French women eat bread and yet "don't get fat," please note the massive differences in French and American consumption levels. Smile

  • Ryan

    9/12/2011 1:24:59 PM |

    Bought my copy at Barnes and Noble yesterday.  Going to read it this week and share with my in-laws who have all sorts of issues that going Wheat Free could possibly help.  
    I have been Wheat free for 3 years now.  It has been great Smile  A lot of things have improved -- mostly my tummy aches are finally gone and I can eat dinner without having to go to the bathroom within 20 minutes of eating.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/12/2011 11:47:49 PM |

    Hi, Ryan--

    You're not alone.

    I'd crudely estimate that, oh, 50 million people share the same gastrointestinal issues that you've suffered from consumption of this thing called "wheat."

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/12/2011 11:54:57 PM |

    Hi, Green--

    Thank you for your incredibly insightful perspectives!

    Interestingly, I had a casual conversation with a cameraman from Paris just today. While no expert in bread or wheat, he reiterated much of what you told me about the very different taste, texture, and baking habits of French bread. What is not clear to me is that, while the French preparation of bread may impair weight gain, does it spare you from all the other adverse effects of wheat? An interesting topic for though and investigation.

  • Rodger Morrow

    9/13/2011 1:16:14 AM |

    As you may have seen, Novak Djokovic just won the U.S. Open men's singles title, becoming the sixth man to win three Grand Slam titles in the same year. His record for the year: 64-2.

    But did his gluten-free diet have something to do with it? Some people think so:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/is-a-glutenfree-diet-behind-djokovics-smash-success-2285004.html

    Dr. Davis, we welcome your thoughts …

  • Peggy Cihocki

    9/13/2011 1:29:17 AM |

    This is beyond awesome! But I hope it climbs even higher on the list and gets to #1! I already have it in my Kindle App 4 iPhone, but will be buying a copy for my daughter--unless she buys it herself for her Kindle! This is a message that needs to be spread like wildfire!
    @Greensleeves, your comment about French bread is very interesting and enlightening. Those are important points to bring up when someone tries to counter Dr. davis' message with tales of The French. Ah, the French, always the "paradox!"

  • pam

    9/13/2011 6:42:13 AM |

    congrat.
    my book just arrived today.
    will bring it to office cause my colleagues just don't believe me about wheat gives "belly" & "moobs" (man boobs).
    i was hoping that the title photo is a real wheat belly. (just for the shock value) but perhaps that's too gross & sensational. XD
    regards,

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/13/2011 12:43:54 PM |

    Hi, Pam--

    I actually pushed for a big wheat belly on the cover, but the publisher wouldn't hear of it. They thought it would paint the book as simply another weight loss book.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/13/2011 12:44:51 PM |

    Thanks, Peggy!

    (Maybe I should get myself one of these Kindle things. My daughter says she loves hers, too.)

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/13/2011 12:46:48 PM |

    Hi, Rodger--

    Of course, it's impossible to prove in an individual instance, but it sure sounds like something happened to really supercharge his performance. I predict that we will be hearing plenty more about enhanced performance of athletes who say goodbye to wheat, mostly due to increased power of concentration and greater capacity to generate sustained energy.

  • Sue

    9/13/2011 4:56:41 PM |

    My Dad died of cerebellar ataxia, twenty years ago.  Your book is the first explanation for this terrible condition that I have seen.  Of course, consumption of the 'new' wheat would not have been a factor at that time, but then we have always had celiacs.  The question is, has there been an increase in cerebellar ataxia in recent years?  Or has enough time elapsed for it to have become apparent?  
    I have been mostly grain free for some years now, so am part of the Choir reading your book.  My issue is mostly with minor joint pain, diagnosed as the beginnings of arthritis.  I also have Dupuytren's disease, and really am hoping that it will not progress.  I have a question that was not answered in the book.  Just how dedicated need a person be?  Am I losing ground and doing myself harm if I indulge in a wheat laden treat now and again?  Should I really be paying attention to the hidden wheat in sauces and condiments?  Or can I continue with a more lackadaisical approach, avoiding the obvious baked goods, cereals etc, but not sweating the small stuff?
    Congratulations on the success of the book, and thank you for writing it.

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    9/13/2011 6:24:28 PM |

    To Greensleeves  (Server  was blocking this days ago & then "Moderator" too),
    You will enjoy all sourdough rye study "Structural diff. btwn. Rye & wheat ...lower post-prandial insulin ..." in 2003 Am J Clin Nutri; 78(5):957-964 full text http://www.ajcn.org/content/78/5/957.full
    And 2009 "Endosperm & whole grain rye breads ... beneficial blood glucose profile" in Nutrition Journal 2009, 8:42 full text http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1475-2891-8-42.pdf

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/14/2011 2:45:23 AM |

    Thank you, Sue.

    Modern wheat was phased into diet starting about the late 1970s, so it may indeed have played a part in your Dad's illness.

    If your Dad potentially had a wheat-induced disease, I would err on the side of safety and be meticulously wheat-free.

  • Dale

    9/15/2011 12:58:44 AM |

    Dr. Davis, Congratulations! May "Wheat Belly" be on the NY Times Best Seller for a long, long time - so your work can improve many more lives as it has so spectacularly improved mine! I'll be happy to share my story.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/15/2011 11:43:28 AM |

    Thanks, Dale!

    If you'd like to share a story, just post the details here and I will repost.

  • Darleen Michael-Baker

    9/15/2011 4:48:17 PM |

    Congrats Dr. D!!

    I just heard about your book over on Dana Carpendar's "hold the toast" blog last week and promptly zipped over to Amazon and bought it for my Kindle.  I cannot stop reading! Fascinating information, thank you so much for writing this.

    I haven't read through all the comments nor have I read any other of your posts yet so please forgive me if this is old news to you but I wanted to know if you had read either of Gary Taubes's books.  "Good Calories, Bad Calories" or "Why we get fat and what to do about it?"  Your book compliments the info in those very well.

    Now if I could just get hubby to read them!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/16/2011 2:41:39 AM |

    Hi, Darleen-

    Thank you!

    Yes, I've read both of Gary Taubes' very excellent books. He has done a great service by bringing the light of day to many subjects that we previously just accepted as "conventional wisdom."

  • Mark. Gooley

    9/17/2011 2:10:11 AM |

    Saw it in a Barnes and Noble while on a trip, so I... ordered a Kindle version and read that on my phone (didn't want to lug books around).  I'm so glad it's doing well.  I've been eating low-carb for a year now and it's helped my type 1 diabetes a lot, but I've lost little weight.  I hadn't stopped eating wheat entirely but now I have, and we'll see if that's any help.  Seems a lot of type 1 diabetics have trouble losing weight once they've piled it on from trying to keep blood sugar levels reasonable while eating carbohydrates...

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/17/2011 1:22:41 PM |

    Yes, Mark, a tough balancing act.

    But I have indeed seen marked improvements in blood sugar with wheat elimination in type 1 diabetes. Also, note that type 1 diabetes is, to an incredible and underappreciated degree, a disease of wheat exposure. You may recall from the book that type 1 diabetics are 20-fold more likely to develop celiac disease and vice versa. They are, in many ways, one and the same. It means that the benefits of wheat elimination may be especially dramatic in many with type 1 diabetes.

  • LaurieLM

    9/19/2011 9:22:43 PM |

    Very Good Dr Davis, I have purchased 8 copies of 'Wheat Belly' so far. I put my low-carb, no-wheat money where my mouth is. Like I did with purchasing copies of Gary Taubes' 'Good Calories, Bad Calories' and handing it out like no-sugar candy, I'm doing with 'Wheat Belly'. 4 of the 8 copies have been given to physicians- one to my internist, one to my doctor-sister and two to two doctor friends( one an internist and one an ob-gyn). I am trying to reach as many doctors as I can and I have lots of pre-med students in my orbit and whose attention I command for several hours each week. Each one teach one......or two or ten PLEASE.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 12:36:03 PM |

    Wow! Thank you, Laurie.

    We could all use more friends like you!

  • Averyclaire

    9/22/2011 11:32:25 PM |

    Just heard about your book, downloaded it to my Nook and I wondered ...Have you ever heard of this ailment?   I am a 62 year old woman with something that seems to have mystified the three doctors I have seen, including two gastroenterologists (one from NW Hospital in Chicago).  I suddenly began having “attacks” after eating.    Within a few bites of food, I became “sick” with four hours worth of excruciating pain in the upper abdomen, terrible abdominal distension and often vomiting (no diarrhea).  At first I thought I had food poisoning.    This had happened beginning two years prior maybe once every three or four months.   I thought my stomach had become sensitized to tainted food.  (I made this up....but this is what I began to think.)   Until last April when it happened over and over and over and didn’t quit.   At least four times per week I was in severe pain hanging over the commode.    I discovered by visiting the drug store that I could take Ultra Strength Gas-X at the first symptom of an oncoming attack and reduce the pain and bloating down to one or two hours rather than four.    I tried Beano, but that didn’t seem to work.   Thinking I perhaps couldn’t digest something I was eating, I began to take over-the-counter health food store enzyme tablets when I had a big meal.  I still was sick.    I tried first being fat free, then I tried being lactose free, and then I tried being gluten free.    NOTHING.   The two doctors I had seen at this point did not know what was wrong.   I had LOTS of blood work done, a colonoscopy, an endoscopy, an MRI (which compared previous CT scans) to check for blocked ducts, stones, tumors, etc.   NOTHING.    I even went to the hospital in the middle of a severe attack to have blood drawn to check for pancreatitis.   NOTHING.   So while I was waiting several weeks to see a third doctor at Northwestern Hospital in Chicago, I began to chart my food.    Much to my surprise it seemed that carbohydrates were the culprit.   So I began a regimen of no pasta, no bread, no cereal, no rice, no potatoes.   I soon discovered that I could not eat beets, carrots or spinach either.    So now I began to suspect complex carbohydrates to be the culprit.    

    When I told this to the doctor at Northwestern he looked at me like I was crazy.   He said he never heard of this, talked about a surgery where they cut some sphincter muscle, and said he did not think my condition warranted it, but it was possibility.   He sent me for Celiac/gluten/sprue testing and NOTHING showed up.    When I told him I stayed away from these complex carbs for three weeks and was not sick....he simply said “keep on doing what you are doing.”   Let me know if you get sick again.   I did NOT go back.

    I do get sick occasionally when I try to add “old” favorites back into my diet.   I have a small list of complex carbs from the internet and try to stay away from these things.   I am worried because I ate a lot of whole grains and now I have NONE.    I am worried about my nutrition.   I eat yogurt or oatmeal (I don’t understand why oatmeal does not make me sick) for breakfast.   I eat salad, simple soup, or yogurt for lunch....sometimes eggs.   For dinner I eat chicken or fish and mostly green beans.    My husband and I have not eaten red meat for a long time because he had bladder cancer two years ago (he’s OK now).   However, I cannot seem to get filled up.   I am always hungry.   Now I have added some red meat back into my diet because I need more than just chicken and fish to fill me up.   I used to make meatless meals with pastas and rice, but no more.  I discovered I could eat an Atkins Bar once a day, or perhaps take an Atkins drink for nutrition.  And of all things I can eat as a treat....I eat soft serve yogurt or fudgsicles.   These do not seem to bother me.

    I have lost 40 pounds (not a bad thing for me) since May 1st.

    I do not think I am crazy.   I retired from my job last December and have a wonderful husband who is also retired and we truly enjoy one another’s company.   I have several very fun, and fulfilling hobbies.   And I belong to several women’s groups that fill my days.

    Have you ever heard of an ailment like this?    Can you offer any solutions, ideas, cures?   I would appreciate anything you could tell me or suggestions you could make.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/23/2011 12:34:53 AM |

    Hi, Avery--

    I'm afraid you're asking a cardiologist with an interest in wheat and its effects on overall health about a complex gastroenterological issue. So I'm afraid I'm unlikely to shed much light on your difficult struggle.

    One thought: Did anybody assess you for bacterial/yeast overgrowth? Various foods, especially wheat, can modify the bacteria of the intestinal tract, such that they are different, more harmful species, and can also ascend higher towards the stomach where they don't belong.

  • Averyclaire

    9/23/2011 8:37:59 PM |

    Thank you Dr. Davis.   I find your book fascinating.   Learning so much about wheat in general puts things in perspective for me.   You seem so knowledgeable about the wheat and other illnesses, I thought you might have heard of my problem.  I have seen two gastroenterologist specialists and an endocrinologist and had lots of tests, but not the bacteria thing.   I will inquire about this.  I appreciate your taking the time to mention this.   I have been taking probiotics, but no cure yet.   I simply stay away from complex carbs.   I did have a lot of heart testing done a couple of years ago and that is super good.  Thanks again.

  • Penny

    9/24/2011 2:46:29 PM |

    Congratulations on the success of your new book!
    How do you feel about products like Garden of Life, Perfect Food, re: wheat grass? Is this something to avoid?

    Thanks, Penny

  • Penny

    9/24/2011 9:12:08 PM |

    opps, it's Garden of Eden. I am interested in adding green products like this to my smoothies. Do you think these will cause any wheat issues? And just from your knowledge do you feel these products are a good source of nutrients for people?


    Thanks, Penny

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/25/2011 12:06:41 AM |

    Hi, Penny--

    The many green products out there, thankfully, are free of wheat contamination. Just be sure to examine the label.

    They are, in general, a wonderful source of nutrients. Modern agricultural techniques have caused nutrients to be depleted and block absorption into the plant. Such supplements may therefore make up for such food-sourced deficiencies.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/25/2011 12:11:08 AM |

    Let us know what becomes of your situation, Avery.

  • Dacid

    10/4/2011 9:33:04 PM |

    Google the website "the fiber menace" and read the blog and buy the book.  The author nails the coffin lid shut on fiber same as the good doctor does with wheat.

Add comment

Loading

My life is easy

17. February 2007 William Davis (3)
In the old days (the 1980s and 1990s), practicing cardiology was very physically and emotionally demanding. Since procedures dominated the practice and preventive strategies were limited, heart attacks were painfully common. It wasn't unusual to have to go to the hospital for a patient having a heart attack at 3 am several times a week.

Those were the old days. Nowadays, my life is easy. Heart attacks, for the most part, are a thing of the past in the group of people who follow the Track Your Plaque principles. I can't remember the last time I had a coronary emergency for someone following the program.

But I am reminded of what life used to be like for me when I occasionally have to live up to my hospital responsibilities and/or cover the practices of my colleagues. (Though I voice my views on prevention to my colleagues, the most I get is a odd look. When a colleague recently covered my practice for a weekend while I visited family out of town, he commented to me how quiet my practice was. I responded, "That's because my patients are essentially cured." "Oh, sure they are." He laughed. No registration that he had witnessed something that was genuine and different from his experience of day-to-day catastrophe among his own patients. None.)

I recently had to provide coverage for a colleague for a week while he took his family to Florida. During the 7 days, his patients experienced 4 heart attacks. That is, 4 heart attacks among patients under the care of a cardiologist.

If you want some proof of the power of prevention, watch your results and compare them to the "control" group of people around you: neighbors, colleagues, etc. Unfortunately, the word on prevention, particularly one as powerful as Track Your Plaque, is simply not as widespread as it should be. Instead, it's drowned out in the relentless flood of hospital marketing for glitzy hospital heart programs, the "ask your doctor about" ads for drugs like Plavix, which is little better than spit in preventing heart attacks (except in stented patients), and the media's fascinating with high-tech laser, transplant, robotic surgery, etc.

Prevention? That's not news. But it sure can make the slow but sure difference between life and death, having a heart attack or never having a heart attack.

My bread contains 900 mg omega-3

15. February 2007 William Davis (8)
Phyllis is the survivor of a large heart attack (an "anterior" myocardial infarction involving the crucial front of the heart) several years ago. Excessive fatigue prompted a stress test, which showed poor blood flow in areas outside the heart attack zone. This prompted a heart catheterization, then a bypass operation one year ago.

FINALLY, Phyllis began to understand that her unhealthy lifestyle played a role in causing her heart disease. But lifestyle alone wasn't to blame. Along with being 70 lbs overweight and overindulging in unhealthy sweets every day, she also had lipoprotein(a), small LDL particles, and high triglycerides. The high triglycerides were also associated with its evil "friends," VLDL and IDL (post-prandial, or after-eating, particles).

When I met her, Phyllis' triglycerides typically ranged from 200-300 mg/dl . Fish oil was the first solution, since it is marvelously effective for reducing triglycerides, as well as VLDL and IDL. Her dose: 6000 mg of a standard 1000 mg capsule (6 capsules) to provide 1800 mg EPA + DHA, the effective omega-3 fatty acids.

But Phyllis is not terribly good at following advice. She likes to wander off and follow her own path. She noticed that the healthy bread sold at the grocery store and containing flaxseed boasted "900 mg of omega-3s per slice!". So she ate two slices of the flaxseed-containing bread per day and dropped the fish oil.

Guess what? Triglycerides promptly rebounded to 290 mg/dl, along with oodles of VLDL and IDL.

A more obvious example occurs in people with a disorder called "familial hypertriglyceridemia," or the inherited inability to clear triglycerides from the blood. These people have triglycerides of 800 mg/dl, 2000 mg/dl, or higher. Fish oil yields dramatic drops of hundreds, or even thousands of mg. Fish oil likely achieves this effect by activating the enzyme, lipoprotein lipase, that is responsible for clearing blood triglycerides. Flaxseed oil and other linolenic acid sources yield . . .nothing.

Don't get me wrong. Flaxseed is a great food. As the ground seed, it reduces LDL cholesterol, reduces blood sugar, provides fiber for colon health, and may even yield anti-cancer benefits. Flaxseed oil is a wonderful oil, rich in monounsaturates, low in saturates, and rich in linolenic acid, an oil fraction that may provides heart benefits a la Mediterranean diet.

But linolenic acid from flaxseed is not the same as EPA + DHA from fish oil. This is most graphically proven by the lack of any triglyceride-reducing effects of flaxseed preparations.

Enjoy your flaxseed oil and ground flaxseed--but don't stop your fish oil because of it. Heart disease and coronary plaque are serious business. You need serious tools to combat and control them. Fish oil is serious business for triglycerides. Flaxseed is not.

More Omnivore's Dilemma

11. February 2007 William Davis (2)
Another irresistible quote from Michael Pollan’s book, The Omnivore’s Dilemma:

“In many ways breakfast cereal is the prototypical processed food: four cents’ worth of commodity corn (or some other equally cheap grain) transformed into four dollars’ worth of processed food. What an alchemy! Yet it is performed straightforwardly enough: by taking several of the output streams issuing from a wet mill (corn meal, corn starch, corn sweetener, as well as a handful of tinier chemical fractions) and then assembling them into an attractively novel form. Further value is added in the form of color and taste, then branding and packaging. Oh yes, and vitamins and minerals, which are added to give the product a sheen of healthfulness and to replace the nutrients that are lost whenever whole foods are processed. On the strength of this alchemy the cereals group generates higher profits for General Mills than any other division. Since the raw materials in processed foods are so abundant and cheap (ADM and Cargill will gladly sell them to all comers) protecting whatever is special about the value you add to them is imperative.”

A food manufacturer’s nightmare is when you and your family shop in the produce aisle in the grocery store. Produce is unmodified (aside from the pesticide and genetic-engineering issues), not added to, and therefore of no interest to the food manufacturer, since no additional profit can be squeezed out of it. If you pay 45 cents for a cucumber, there’s no room for a processor to multiply it’s return.

Vegetables and fruits have imperfections, no doubt, particularly pesticide residues and the “dumbing-down” of some foods to increase their desirability (e.g., green grapes, what I call “grape candy”). But vegetables and fruits are the closest you can get to foods that are essentially unmodified by a food manufacturer. Due to the absence of processing, they are not calorie-dense like a bag of chips; they include all the naturally-occurring healthy factors like flavonoids that food scientists have, thus far, struggled and failed to identify, quantify, and control; and they lack all the unhealthy additives that processed foods require for extended shelf life, palatability, and reconstitution (anti-separating agents, emulsifiers, sweeteners, etc.)

Vegetables, in particular, should be the cornerstone of your plaque control program. Not breakfast cereals, breads, bacon, sausage, mayonnaise, fruit drinks and soda, all the foods that worsen the causes of coronary plaque and raise your heart scan score.

If you would like to understand how the current perverted state of affairs in food have come about, Pollan’s book is must reading.

Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma

11. February 2007 William Davis (0)

“ ‘You are what you eat’ is a truism hard to argue with, and yet it is, as a visit to a feedlot suggests, incomplete, for you are what what you eat eats, too. And what we are, or have become, is not just meat but number 2 corn and oil.”

Author Michael Pollan offers unique, enlightening, and entertaining insights into the food we eat in his new book, The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A natural history of four meals.

Pollan draws parallels between the dilemma of the primitive human living in the wild, having to stumble through the choices of animals and plants that could nourish or kill, and the ironically modern return of this phenomenon in present-day supermarkets. While the dangers of food choices aren’t as immediate as in the wild (eat the wrong mushroom or herb, for instance, and you die), they can nonetheless be life-threatening, or at least health-threatening. Hydrogenated oils, high-fructose corn syrup, carageenan, guar gum. . .“What is all this stuff anyway, and where in the world did it come from?”

Among the issues Pollan discusses is that of modern cattle raising practices: the rush to fatten a cow from an 80 lb calf to a 1200-pound, bloated cow over a period of 14 months. Nature created this animal to mature over a 4 to 5 year period through grazing, thus it’s beautifully “engineered” ruminant system that allows it to digest cellulose in grasses, a process that humans and other mammals are incapable of. The pressures to bring greater quantities of beef to market at a reduced price and make more money have resulted in a farming industry that encourages the incorporation of unnatural, often inhumane practices like corn feeding (rather than grass grazing), refeeding of bovine body parts (thus “mad cow disease”), and widespread and chronic administration of hormones and antibiotics.

(I can't help but think that the rapid and perverse fattening of cattle by industrial "farming" is paralleled by the fattening of the eating American. After all, we are the hapless recipients of this flood of cheap, unhealthy, plasticized food.)

The industrialization of food has de-personalized the act of eating. You no longer have any connection with the green pepper in your salad (unless you grew it yourself), nor do you have any appreciation for the suffering of the cow in your hamburger. Worse, the distortion of livestock raising practices has modified the food composition of meat. Range-fed animals, leaner and richer in omega-3 fatty acids, have been replaced by the marbled, saturated fat-rich modern grocery bought meats.

This is a theme that Pollan reiterates time and again: how food processing adds value to the manufacturer, often starting with a healthy ingredient but modifying it, adding ingredients, taking out others, until it’s something decidedly unhealthy. Yet the manufacturer will trumpet the fact that a healthy ingredient is included. Breakfast cereals are the most blatant example of this. What the heck are Cheerios but an over-processed attempt to make more money out of the simple oat?

Pollan’s eloquent and unique insights into food are definitely worth reading.

As always, per our Track Your Plaque policy, I recommend Mr. Pollan’s book strictly on its merits. We obtain no “cut”, commission, or other financial gain by recommending his book. Track Your Plaque members pay their modest membership fee for truth. They do not pay for us to advertise something that provides hidden advantage to us. We do not advertise, editorialize to steer you towards a specific product or service. What we say, we truly believe.

The most frequently asked question of all

8. February 2007 William Davis (0)
The most frequently asked question on the Track Your Plaque website:

"Can you recommend a doctor in my area who can help me follow the Track Your Plaque program?"

This is a problem. Unfortunately, I wish I could tell everyone that we have hundreds or thousands of physicians nationwide who have been thoroughly educated and adhere to the principles I believe are crucial in heart disease:

1) Identify and quantify the amount of coronary atherosclerotic plaque present. In 2007, the best technique remains CT heart scans.

2) Identify all hidden causes of plaque. This includes Lp(a), post-prandial disorders, small LDL, and vitamin D deficiency.

3) Correct all patterns.


But we don't.

You'd think that this simple formula, as straightforward and rational as it sounds, would be easily followed by many if not most physicians. But Track Your Plaque followers know that it simply is not true. My colleagues, the cardiologists, are hell-bent on implanting the next new device, providing a lot more excitement to them as well as considerably more revenue.

The primary care physician is already swamped in a sea of new information, going from osteoporosis drugs, to arthritis, to gynecologic issues, to skin rashes and flu. Heart disease prevention? Oh yeah, that too. They can only dabble in heart disease prevention a la prescription for Lipitor. That's quick and easy.

Nonetheless, I believe we should work towards identifying the occasional physician who is indeed willing to help people follow a program like Track Your Plaque. As we grow, we will need to identify some mechanism of professional education and we will maintain a record of these practitioners. But right now, we're simply already stretched to the limit just doing what we are doing.

If you come across a physician who practices in this fashion and you've had a positive relationship, we'd like to hear about it.

Do stents kill?

6. February 2007 William Davis (5)
There's apparently a lively conversation going on at the HeartHawk Blog (www.hearthawk.blogspot.com). Among the hot topics raised was just how bad it is to have a stent.

I think that my comments some time back may have started this controversy. I've lately noticed that having a stent screws up your heart scan scoring in the vicinity of the stent. I was referring to the fact that I've now seen several people in the Track Your Plaque program do everything right and then show what I call "regional reversal": unstented arteries show dramatic drops in score of 18-30%, but the artery with a stent shows significant increase in score.

This is consistent with what we observe in the world outside Track Your Plaque when stents are inserted. Someone will get a stent, for instance, in the left anterior descending artery. A year later, there will be a "new" plaque at the mouth of the stent or just beyond the far end. This is generally treated by inserting another stent. Use of a drug-coated stent seems to have no effect on this issue.

Now, my smart friends in the Track Your Plaque program would immediately ask, "Does this mean you continually end up chasing these plaques that arise as a result of stents? Do you create an endless loop of procedures?"

Thankfully, the majority of times you do not. Rarely, this does happen and can lead to need for bypass surgery to circumvent the response. But it is unusual. The tissue that grows above and below stents does seem to be unusually impervious to the preventive efforts we institute.

Perhaps there's some new supplement, medication, or other strategy that will address this curious new brand of plaque growth. Until then, you and I can only take advantage of what is known. If it's any consolation, the plaque that seems to grow because of a previously inserted stent seems to lack the plaque "rupture" capacity of "naturally-occuring" plaque. It is, indeed, somehow different. It is more benign, less likely to cause heart attack. It's always been my feeling that this tissue behaves more like the "scar" tissue that grows within stents, causing "re-stenosis", a more benign, less rupture-prone kind of tissue.

Dr. Reinhold Vieth on vitamin D

5. February 2007 William Davis (4)
A Track Your Plaque member brough the following webcast to our attention:

Prospects for Vitamin D Nutrition
which can be found at http://tinyurl.com/f93vl

Despite the painfully dull title, the webcast is the best summary of data on the health benefits on vitamin D that I've seen. The presenter is Dr. Reinhold Vieth, who is among the handful of worldwide authorities on vitamin D. In 1999, Dr. Vieth authored the first review to concisely and persuasively argue that vitamin D nutrition was woefully neglected and that its potential for health was enormous.
(See Vieth R, Am J Clin Nutr 1999 May;69(5):842-856 at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=10232622&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_DocSum.)

I predict that, after viewing Dr. Vieth's hour-long discussion, you will be as convinced as I am that vitamin D is crucial for health. Unfortunately, Dr. Vieth doesn't delve into the conversation about the potential effects on heart disease, since his audience was primary interested in multiple sclerosis, a disease for which vitamin D replacement promises to have enormous possibilities. Even in 2007, the data suggesting that vitamin D has heart benefits is circumstantial. Nonetheless, from our experience, I am thoroughly convinced that, with replacement to blood levels of vitamin D to 50 ng/ml, heart scan scores drop more readily and faster.

If you view Dr. Vieth's wonderful webcast, keep in mind that when he discusses vitamin D blood levels, he's using units of nmol/l, rather than ng/ml. To convert nmol/l to ng/ml, divided by 2.5. For example, 125 nmol/l is the same as 50 ng/ml (125/2.5 = 50).

Vitamin D on Good Morning America

1. February 2007 William Davis (9)

Positive comments about vitamin D made it to a discussion on Good Morning America today about the new and exciting developments in nutrition and "functional foods".

I'm thrilled that the media is conducting these conversations. It sure is making my job easier, not having to persuade patients that taking vitamin D is truly and hugely beneficial for health. I still have to struggle with my colleagues, who tell patients to stop the "poisonous" doses we use.

But I worry that many of the details behind vitamin D don't quite make it to the media conversation. These are crucial, make-it-or-break-it issues, such as:

--Vitamin D must be vitamin D3 or cholecalciferol, not D2 or ergocalciferol. D2 is virtually worthless. Little or none is converted to the active D3, despite the fact that D2 is the form often added to some foods.

--Vitamin D3 supplements must be oil-based capsules, or gelcaps. Tablets are so poorly or erratically absorbed that it's simply not worth the effort. (We get ours from the Vitamin Shoppe.)

--The dose should be sufficient to eliminate the phenemena of deficiency, which is around 50 ng/ml. I take 6000 units per day. Dr. John Cannell of www.vitamindcouncil.com takes 5000 units per day. I give my wife 2000 units per day (she's not as deficient as I was), each of my kids 1000 units per day, except for my 180 lb. 15 year old who takes 2000 units.

I fear that, when people hear that vitamin D packs fabulous effects for health, they will take a 400 unit tablet--nothing will happen. They will not obtain the benefits such as reduction of blood pressure and blood sugar; increased bone density, reduction of arthritis, dramatic reduction in risk for fractures; reduction in risk for colon, prostate, and breast cancer; reduction in risk for multiple sclerosis; reduction in inflammatory processes such as those evidenced by C-reactive protein; and facilitation of reduction of heart scan score.

Would you bet your life on chelation?

31. January 2007 William Davis (1)

Hugh's heart scan score was 1751, an awful score. Recall that, at this level of scoring, Hugh's heart attack and death risk is 25% per year.

Obviously, serious efforts need to be taken. In this situation, much as I despise drug companies and what they represent and their heavy-handed ways, I'm more inclined to resort directly to prescription agents, as well as our nutritional supplements and other strategies. The price of dilly-dallying could be his death.

Hugh and his wife asked about chelation. Now, there are five studies I'm aware of that have tried to examine the value of chelation. None showed any measurable benefit, though all were rather weak in design and small in number of participants. One study, for instance, looked at whether anginal chest pains were provoked any later after chelation. Another looked at whether calf claudication, or calf cramping while walking due to artery blockages in the leg arteries, was delayed on treadmill testing after chelation. No benefit was observed: no delay in provocation of angina, no delay in provocation of claudication.

However, the adherents of chelation have been vehement enough that the NIH has funded a large, multi-center study to settle the question once and for all. Best I can tell, the study has not been contaminated by any drug company involvement. It is meant to be an unbiased, objective study of whether chelation has any value.

My personal experience in patients who underwent chelation is that, despite spending hundreds or thousands of dollars, plaque grew at the expected rate--no effect at all.

None of this constitutes proof of efficacy nor proof of lack of efficacy. We will need to await the NIH trial to have better information.

Should Hugh bet his life on chelation? I advised him strongly against it. At this point, the only reason I can see to pursue chelation would be faith--that is, expectation based not on fact, but on hope.

The powerful forces preserving the status quo

31. January 2007 William Davis (1)

An interesting quote from the book, Critical Condition: How health care in American became big business--and bad medicine:


Politics and Profits

To protect its interests and expand its influence, the health care industrial complex has done what all successful special interests do: It's become a big donor and a high-powered lobby in Washington. In the last fifteen years, HMOs, insurers, pharmacuetical companies, hospital corporations, physicians, and other segments of the industry contributed $479 million to political campaigns--more than the energy industry ($315 million), commercial banks ($133 million), and big tobacco ($52 million). More telling is how much the health care industry spends on lobbying. It invests more than any other industry except one, according to the nonpartiisan Center for Responsive Politics. From 1997 to 2000, the most recent year for which complete data is available, the industry spent $734 million lobbying Congress and the executive branch. Only the finance, insurance, and real estate lobby exceeded that amount in the same period, with a ttoal of $823 million. In contrast, the defense industry spent $211 million--less than one-third of the health care expenditure.


These telling statistics indicate just how vigorously profit-seeking forces in heart care are trying to preserve the status quo. Hospitals want to protect their valuable procedure-driven enterprise, the pharmaceutical industry wants to protect its enormous though little-known niche of procedure-based medications (like $1200 a dose ReoPro), and the medical device industry wants to maintain the multi-billion dollar-generating machine aided and abetted by the FDA's 501k rule (that makes entry to market a breeze).

The current procedure based formula for heart disease profits so many and they are desperate to preserve it. Resistance to the deep-pocketed efforts of industry and hospitals will come from people like you and me, trying to propagate a better way.

Remember: hospital procedures for coronary disease represent the failure of prevention. They are not--any longer--successes in and of themselves.

Read a scathing insight into some of these practices by reading investigative journalists' Donald Barlett and James Steele's book, Critical Condition. I found their descriptions painfully accurate. (But don't get too angry! Remember: only optimists reverse their plaque! We need to turn the conversation in a positive direction, not just in this Blog or the Track Your Plaque website, but nationwide.)

One of the new missions for the www.cureality.com website is to help you understand just how powerful, insidious, shrewd, and pervasive the efforts to maintain the current system truly are.