Tell me your wheat elimination story and receive a copy of my new book, Wheat Belly

I'm looking for interesting wheat-free experiences.

For the past year, I have been writing my new book, Wheat Belly . After many, many late nights and soccer games missed, it's now finished. The book will be out in fall, 2011, to be published by Rodale, the Prevention Magazine people.

Wheat Belly will provide, in excruciating detail, the discussion of how wheat was transformed from innocent wild grass to incredible genetically-altered Frankengrain and why it has become such a health nuisance.

I am looking for interesting stories of wheat elimination for the online and special editions of the book. If you have an interesting tale of wheat-elimination successes, woes, or drama, I'd like to hear about it. Even better, if you would agree to be interviewed by phone (not for live use, just for comments and detail), the editors at Rodale will help tell your story.

If we use your story, I will have a free copy of the new Wheat Belly sent to you when it becomes available.

Please post your story in the comments here. I will then need to obtain your contact info, which we will do privately.

 

Real men don't eat carbs

Real men don't eat carbs. At least they don't eat them without eventually paying the price.

How do carbohydrates, especially those contained in "healthy whole grains," impair maleness? Several ways:

--Consume carbohydrates, especially the exceptional glucose-increasing amylopectin A from wheat, and visceral fat grows. Visceral fat increases estrogen levels; estrogen, in effect, opposes the masculinizing effects of testosterone. Overweight males typically have low testosterone and high estrogen, a cause for depression, emotionality, weight gain, and low libido.

--Sugar-provoking carbohydrates like wheat cause visceral fat to accumulate which, in turn, triggers prolactin to be released. Increased prolactin in a male causes growth of breasts: "man boobs,""man cans," "moobs," etc. This is why male breast reduction surgery is booming at double-digit growth rates. In cities like LA, you can see billboards advertising male breast reduction surgery.

--Carbohydrates increase visceral fat that sets the stage for postprandial abnormalities, i.e., markedly increased and persistent lipoproteins, like chylomicron remnants and VLDL particles, that impair endothelial function literally within minutes to hours of ingestion. Impaired endothelial function underlies erectile dysfunction. This is why Internet spammers so enthusiastically send you offers for discounted Viagra.

--Carbohydrates increase blood sugar which provokes the process of glycation, glucose modification of proteins, that also contributes to endothelial dysfunction followed by erectile dysfunction.

Real men therefore avoid carbs.

Real men don't eat carbs

Real men don't eat carbs. At least they don't eat them without eventually paying the price.

How do carbohydrates, especially those contained in "healthy whole grains," impair maleness? Several ways:

--Consume carbohydrates, especially the exceptional glucose-increasing amylopectin A from wheat, and visceral fat grows. Visceral fat increases estrogen; estrogen, in effect, opposes the masculinizing effects of testosterone. Overweight males typically have low testosterone, high estrogen, a cause for depressions, emotionality, and weight gain.

--Consume carbohydrates like wheat and visceral fat causes prolactin to be released. Increased prolactin in a male causes growth of breasts: "man boobs,""man cans," "moobs," etc. This is why male breast reduction surgery is booming at double-digit growth rates. In cities like LA, you can see billboards advertising male breast reduction surgery.

--Carbohydrates increase visceral fat that sets the stage for postprandial abnormalities, i.e., markedly increased and prolonged lipoproteins like chylomicron remnants and VLDL particles that impair endothelial function. Impaired endothelial function underlies erectile dysfunction. Eat a bagel, become impotent.

Why do the Japanese have less heart disease?

We should look to the Japanese to teach us a few lessons about preventing heart disease. A Japanese male has only 65% of the risk of an American male (despite 40% of Japanese men being smokers), while a Japanese woman has 80% less risk than an American woman. While the U.S. is near the top of the list of nations with highest cardiovascular risk, Japan is the lowest.

What are they doing right?

There is no one explanation, but several. Genetics probably does not play a substantial role, by the way, as demonstrated by observations of Japanese people who emigrate to Western cultures. People of Japanese heritage living in Hawaii, for instance, develop the same cardiovascular risk as non-Japanese living in Hawaii. They also develop obesity and diabetes.

Among the factors that likely contribute to reduced risk in Japanese people:

--A style of eating that does not include a lot of sweet foods. No breakfast cereal or donuts for breakfast, for instance, but miso soup with tofu, fish, green onions, and daikon (as takuan, or pickled radish).
--Seaweed--It's probably a combination of the green phytonutrients and iodine. Typical daily iodine intake is in the neighborhood of 5000 mcg per day from nori, kombu, wakame, and other seaweed forms. (The average American obtains 125 mcg per day of iodine from diet.)
--Seafood--Fish in many forms not seen in the U.S. are popular.
--Green tea--Consumption of green tea has been confidently linked to reduced cardiovascular risk, probably via visceral fat-reducing, anti-oxidative, and anti-inflammatory effects. Although tea in Japan is often the less flavonoid-rich oolong tea, softer benefits from this form are likely.
--Soy--Tofu, miso, and soy sauce are staples. It's not clear to me whether soy is intrinsically beneficial or whether it is beneficial because it serves to replace unhealthy alternatives. (Genetic modification may change this effect.)
--Reduced exposure to cooked animal products (except seafood). This is not a saturated fat issue, but probably an advanced glycation end-product/lipoxidation issue that result from cooking.
--The lack of a "eat more healthy whole grain" mentality, the advice that has plunged the entire U.S. into the depths of a diabetes and obesity crisis (along with high-fructose corn syrup and sugar). Noodles like udon and ramen do have a place in their diet, as do some dessert foods. But the overall wheat exposure is less--no bagels, sandwiches, and breakfast cereals.
--Less overweight and obesity--The above eating style leads to less weight gain.

Japanese foods have a unique taste, consistency, and mouth-feel that go well with saltiness, thus the downside of their diet: salt consumption. On a broad scale, high salt consumption has been associated with hypertension and gastric cancer. But the tradeoff has, on the whole, been a favorable one.


One study trying to find some answers:

Dietary patterns and cardiovascular disease mortality in Japan: a prospective cohort study.

Shimazu T, Kuriyama S, Hozawa A et al.
Division of Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Forensic Medicine, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan.


We prospectively assessed the association between dietary patterns among the Japanese and CVD mortality. Dietary information was collected from 40 547 Japanese men and women aged 40-79 years without a history of diabetes, stroke, myocardial infarction or cancer at the baseline in 1994.
During 7 years of follow-up, 801 participants died of CVD.

Factor analysis (principal component) based on a validated food frequency questionnaire identified three dietary patterns: (i) a Japanese dietary pattern highly correlated with soybean products, fish, seaweeds, vegetables, fruits and green tea, (ii) an 'animal food' dietary pattern and (iii) a high-dairy, high-fruit-and-vegetable, low-alcohol (DFA) dietary pattern. The Japanese dietary pattern was related to high sodium intake and high prevalence of hypertension. After adjustment for potential confounders, the Japanese dietary pattern score was associated with a lower risk of CVD mortality (hazard ratio of the highest quartile vs the lowest, 0.73; 95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.90; P for trend = 0.003). The 'animal food' dietary pattern was associated with an increased risk of CVD, but the DFA dietary pattern was not.

The Japanese dietary pattern was associated with a decreased risk of CVD mortality, despite its relation to sodium intake and hypertension.

Niacin: What forms are safe?

Niacin, or vitamin B3, remains a confusing issue for many people. It shouldn't be.

It doesn't help that most physicians and many pharmacists also do not understand the basic issues surrounding niacin. The only reason why there is any level of prevailing knowledge about niacin is that Kos Pharmaceuticals managed to "pharmaceuticalize" a niacin preparation, prescription Niaspan, that provided the revenue to fund professional "education."

Niacin can be helpful to increase HDL, reduce small LDL particles and shift them towards the more benign large particles, reduce triglycerides, and reduce lipoprotein(a).

So here's a brief description of the various forms that you will find niacin:

Immediate-release niacin--Also called crystalline niacin or just niacin. This is the original niacin that releases within minutes of ingestion. Because it releases rapidly, it triggers the most intense "hot flush." While this form of niacin works wonderfully well, is the safest, and is dirt cheap, the majority of people are simply unable to tolerate the intense flush. It also works best taken twice a day, generating two intolerable flushes per day.

Slow-release niacin--These preparations were popular in the 1980s, since the slow 12 to 24 hour pattern of release minimized the annoying hot flush. But, with prolonged use, it also became apparent that an unnaceptable frequency of liver toxicity developed. Unfortunately, this means that any niacin preparation that trickles niacin out over an extended period, including many of the slow-release preparations now sold in health food stores and pharmacies, have potential for liver toxicity. These preparations should be avoided.

6-hour release niacin--Releasing niacin more slowly than immediate-release niacin but more rapidly than slow-release niacin, 6-hour release (or what the Niaspan people call "extended-release" niacin) is nearly as effective as immediate-release niacin with approximately the same low potential for liver toxicity. It is far less liver toxic than slow-release niacin. 6-hour release niacin therefore offers the best balance between effectiveness and safety. Preparations that show this pattern of release include Niaspan ($180 per month), the poorly-named Sloniacin (about $8 per month), and Enduracin (about $7 per month) for 1000 mg per day. (Some Track Your Plaque Members have also determined that several other over-the-counter preparations have been demonstrated to share a similar pattern of release.)

Then there are the scam products that have no useful effect at all:

Flush-free or no-flush niacin--Inositol hexaniacinate, or 6 niacin molecules bound to the sugar, inositol, has no effect in humans, at least not with the dozen or so preparations that I've seen used. Nor are there any data to document the effectiveness of flush-free niacin. It's also more expensive.

Nicotinamide--This niacin derivative likewise has no effect on the usual targets for niacin treatment.

While I used to prescribe Niaspan, the ridiculous pricing and aggressive marketing really turned me off. I now advise my patients and our online followers to use only Sloniacin or Enduracin, unless you can tolerate immediate-release niacin.

Introduction to the New Track Your Plaque book, version 2.0


Out with the old,
in with the new  



“I believe that you are suffering from what is called a fatty degeneration of the heart.”

Dr. Tertius Lydgate to Mr. Casaubon on making a diagnosis with the new medical device, the stethoscope.

George Elliot
Middlemarch, 1871





Old notions in medicine have a peculiar way of lingering.

In 1882, Dr. Robert Koch discovered the tubercle bacillus in tissues of people with “consumption.” By connecting a bacterium with the disease, he usurped the long held notion that tuberculosis was a degenerative disease caused by lack of fresh air. But, for decades after Dr. Koch’s revelation, the “bad air” belief persisted. Surgical collapse of the lung, a painful and barbaric treatment for tuberculosis, persisted well into the 1960s, years after effective antibiotics were discovered in 1947.

The medical community of the 19th century viewed mental illness as the hereditary end-product of ancestral nervousness, alcoholism, prostitution and criminal behavior, a bias that remained widespread well into the mid-20th century. Nazi physicians invoked the theory of heritable “mental degeneration” to justify wholesale extermination of schizophrenics. Electro-convulsive therapy (ECT, or “electroshock therapy”) was widely applied to treat schizophrenia, depression, homosexuality, and criminal behavior for over 30 years, gradually abandoned (at least in its original form) after years of abusive application to subdue patients, demonized in the 1975 movie, “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” depicting the author’s real-life experience with ECT.

Long after a theory or practice has been discredited, it can persist, refusing to die. The new and improved may not be adopted into mainstream practice for years, even decades.

Back to the 21st century: What if you realized that, by quirks of human nature and the uneven adoption of health information, your doctor practiced medicine appropriate for 1985? 1975?

While digital information nowadays is transmitted at the speed of light, disseminating as fast as it takes the next juicy tidbit to be “virally” reproduced via social networking websites, it’s the human factor that still operates with the inertia of human behavior. Habits and attitudes slow the adoption of new information in time measured not in seconds, but in years or decades.

A century ago, 20 years were required for the new technology of blood pressure measurement to be adopted after its introduction in the U.S. in 1910, since physicians were long comfortable with the practice of “pulse palpation” (feeling the pulse). (The arcane language of pulse palpation persists to this day, terms like “pulsus parvus et tardus,” the slow rising pulse of a stiff aortic valve; and the "water-hammer" pulse of a leaking aortic valve.)

The discovery of new, health-changing information today in the 21st century disseminates through the ranks of modern healthcare providers at much the same pace as measuring blood pressure did in the early 20th century.

It’s also tempting to paint American medicine as a fiefdom intent on maintaining exclusive rein over health information. Look back over the hierarchical relationship of medicine over nursing in the past century: When blood pressure measurement was adopted on a broad scale in the 1930s, it was practiced only by physicians, since nurses were deemed incapable. (Modern-day nurses should surely have a hearty laugh over this.) Stethoscopes, around even longer than blood pressure cuffs, weren’t permitted to fall into the hands of nurses until the 1960s, since the medical community feared that nurses might command too much control over patient care. Even after nurses were permitted to have their own stethoscopes, great pains were taken to be certain the nurses’ version was readily distinguishable from the “real” tool wielded by physicians; nurses’ stethoscopes were therefore labeled “nurse-o-scopes,” or “assistoscopes,” and were required to be smaller and flimsier.

Old and ineffective doesn’t always give way to new and better at once; it is slowed by habit as well as an unwillingness to relinquish control.

Somehow technology marches on. But it does so unevenly, sweeping some along in its first wave, others in its wake, some never at all.

Just as effective antibiotics to cure tuberculosis were available for 20 years while surgeons continued to remove patients’ lungs, so better solutions to heart disease are already available but not yet employed by your neighborhood physician. The primary care physician may have heard about some of the newest means to prevent heart disease, but is too overwhelmed with the day-to-day of sore throats, diarrhea, and rashes. Cardiologists, intent on inserting the next best stent or defibrillator, have little but passing interest in strategies that might halt or reverse the heart disease that can be “managed,” no matter how imperfectly, with procedural solutions like angioplasty and bypass surgery. We should bear these flawed human tendencies in mind as we explore the world of heart disease prevention.

We need look no farther than the front page of the newspaper to find evidence of the failure of present-day heart disease detection and management. Over the past several years, headlines have carried the likes of Tim Russert, Bill Clinton, Larry King, Dick Cheney, David Letterman, Tommy Lasorda, Ed Bradley, Mike Ditka, Walter Cronkite, Alberto Salazar, all heart disease sufferers. Some, like talk show host David Letterman, survived their brush with heart catastrophe and underwent successful bypass surgery. Others, like marathoners Fixx and Salazar, raised none of the conventional red flags for heart disease. All received standard, “modern” medical care . . . all the way up to their heart attack, bypass surgery, or untimely death.

Like the sphygnomanometer (blood pressure) cuffs of 1910, Track Your Plaque represents an example of the new. But, unlike the simple practice of taking blood pressure in the early 20th century, Track Your Plaque represents an entirely new way to look at coronary heart disease: a new way to measure it, a new way to identify its causes, and a new way to seize control over it, often to the point of achieving reversal of the process. It also puts control over much of this process into your hands and away from hospitals, cardiologists, and heart procedures. 

I could speak of revealing “secrets,” but that’s not true. In Track Your Plaque, I simply convey information about heart disease that you were likely unaware existed, strategies that doctors fail to discuss. I assemble them into a “package” that, together, create an enormously empowering unique approach to prevent heart disease and heart attack.

Track Your Plaque also challenges the high-tech status quo, practices that occupy exalted places in the enormous cardiovascular healthcare machine that has dominated American healthcare for the past 40 years. I propose that high-tech hospital procedures should join the practice of ECT for homosexuality and insanity¾and become yet another relic of the past.

What are "normal" triglycerides?

Among the most neglected yet enormously helpful values on any standard cholesterol panel is the triglyceride value.

Triglycerides traverse the bloodstream by hitching a ride on water (serum)-soluble lipoproteins, or lipid-carrying proteins. We measure triglycerides as an indirect index of triglyceride-containing lipoproteins.

Triglycerides are a basic currency of energy. While the average American ingests around 300 mg of cholesterol per day, he or she also ingests 60,000-120,000 mg (60-120 grams) of triglycerides, i.e., 200 to 400 times greater amounts, from fat intake. Zero triglycerides in the diet or in the bloodstream is not an option.

But what represents too much triglycerides in the bloodstream? There are several observations to help us make this determination:

1) When fasting triglycerides are 133 mg/dl or greater, 80% of people will show show at least some degree of small LDL particles.

2) When fasting triglycerides are 60 mg/dl or less, most (though not all, since genetic factors enter into the picture) people will show little to no small LDL particles.

3) When fasting triglycerides are 200 mg/dl or greater, small LDL particles will dominate and large LDL particles will be in the minority or be gone entirely.

4) When triglycerides are 88 mg/dl or greater after eating, then risk for heart attack is doubled. Non-fasting triglycerides in the 400+ mg/dl range are associated with 17-fold greater risk for heart attack.



From Austin et al 1990. "Phenotype A" means that large LDL particles dominate; "phenotype B" means that small LDL particles dominate.

Note that conventional "wisdom" (i.e., NCEP ATP-3 guidelines) is that triglycerides of up to 150 mg/dl are okay, a level that virtually guarantees expression of small LDL particles and increased cardiovascular risk.

Based on observations like these, in the Track Your Plaque program we aim for fasting triglycerides of no higher than 60 mg/dl and postprandial (after-meal) triglycerides of no more than 90 mg/dl.

Curiously, while fat intake (i.e., triglyceride intake) plays a role in determining postprandial triglyceride blood levels, it's carbohydrate intake that plays a much larger role. That will be an issue for another day.

1985: The Year of Whole Grains

In 1985, the National Cholesterol Education Panel delivered its Adult Treatment Panel guidelines to Americans, advice to cut cholesterol intake, reduce saturated fat, and increase "healthy whole grains" to reduce the incidence of heart attack and other cardiovascular events.

Per capita wheat consumption increased accordingly. Wheat consumption today is 26 lbs per year greater than in 1970 and now totals 133 lbs per person per year. (Because infants and children are lumped together with adults, average adult consumption is likely greater than 200 lbs per year, or the equivalent of approximately 300 loaves of bread per year.) Another twist: The mid- and late-1980s also marks the widespread adoption of the genetically-altered dwarf variants of wheat to replace standard-height wheat.

In 1985, the Centers for Disease Control also began to track multiple health conditions, including diabetes. Here is the curve for diabetes:


Note that, from 1958 until 1985, the curve was climbing slowly. After 1985, the curve shifted sharply upward. (Not shown is the data point for 2010, an even steeper upward ascent.) Now diabetes is skyrocketing, projected to afflict 1 in 3 adults in the coming decades.

You think there's a relationship?

Have some more

Wheat, via exorphin effects, is an appetite stimulant. Eat a whole wheat bagel or bran muffin, you want another. You also want more of other foods. You also want something to eat every two hours due to widely-swinging insulin-glucose responses: blood sugar high followed by a sharp downturn that triggers a powerful impulse to eat (thus the cravings for a snack at 9 and 11 a.m. after a 7 a.m. breakfast).

If wheat is a stimulant of appetite, then removing it should yield reduced appetite and reduced calorie intake. That is precisely what happens.

When wheat products are removed from the diet--without calorie restriction, without counting fat or carbohydrate grams, no exercise program, no cleansing regimen, no skipping meals . . . nothing--calorie intake drops 350 to 400 calories per day. This calorie figure remains curiously consistent across multiple studies in which wheat was eliminated.

400 calories per day results in 21 lbs lost over 6 months, based just on calories. (3500 calories per pound lost.) That is what happens in wheat elimination diets: 21-26 lbs lost over 6 months.

Wheat is the processed food industry's nicotine, a means of ensuring repeat food purchases. It's also low-cost (subsidized by the U.S. government), high-yield, an ingredient that even has its very own withdrawal syndrome should you miss a "hit."
Wheat addiction: 140 lbs lost

Wheat addiction: 140 lbs lost

Here is detailed comment from a reader who figured out the wheat (and dairy) issue on her own with impressive results.

Though it seems an unpardonable over-simplification of diet, this concept of eliminating wheat-based products (along with obvious unhealthy foods like candy and soda) yields unexpectedly large results, as our reader relates.


Hi Dr. Davis,

Several years ago, chronic untreated asthma infections hospitalized me. I thought it was recurring bronchitis as I'd never had asthma in my life. Killed much of the alveoli... took awhile to de-crap the lungs and regrow the alveoli. Got assigned a cardiologist sort-of by accident while in the hospital for that (couple days of constant heated steroid, stress, a pain + situation combined, elevated my heart rate to 298 for a brief time). When I went to see him, he wrote me a prescription for the Eades' PPLP [Protein Power LifePlan] book.

It's taken awhile, since it's required radical gradual changes in most aspects of my overly Type-A life, but I'm now about 140 lbs lighter, and hopefully much more in the future.

Miraculously, after 10 days on a hard meat-eggs-cheese-veggie-berry approach (which I sadly confess was mostly pepperoni & mozz nuked... I was busy! ;-)), all my medical symptoms disappeared too. Acid reflux, acne, brain-fog, rashes, 'severe asthma', allergies, etc. etc. By trial and error I realized I wrongly attributed that to lowcarbing when it was getting off gluten that actually did it for me. Which since I'm lowcarb also means all the crap my celiac boyfriend can eat, I can't. Lowcarb does many great things for me (just dropping all the bloating and increasing the energy level are awesome), but getting off wheat was critical.

I've since found that a single tablespoon of "milk" in the morning, or something with wheat (say a tortilla), will make me ravenous *specifically for milk and wheat* all day. Conversely, I can be eating lowcarb and then eat total junk--but something without gluten--and not have it bother me much at all. But one pumpernickel slice at Outback and I am DOOMED. It doesn't always happen that instant; will-power has some sway; but the odds of my making a 'poor decision that leads to cascade failure and totally abandoning my eating plan' in the next 48 hours is astronomically higher if milk or wheat were involved. Oddly, cheese does not seem to affect me this way.

When I was younger (I'm 42 now) I had to stop drinking milk. If I drank some I wanted more. If I drank more I needed more. If I drank more, that was it: I'd be stumbling to the kitchen in the dark at 3am, drinking out of the carton, falling gasping against the refrigerator after several long gulps, like a heroin addict who just got a fix. I finally realized that since I'd lived on a ton of milk my whole life, maybe this was a milk problem; so I usually stayed away from it. So then it turned out wheat/gluten were an issue too. Which made me realize how much of my life was filled with not-eating most of the time (very busy, workaholic, but very sedentary), but when I did eat, ingesting amazing amounts of wheat products. I'm astounded that my whole life I mostly ate things I am apparently intolerant to "or something." Sometimes I wonder how much different even my brain would be if it'd been different.

This might contribute to my ending up weighing 500# at one point. The only amazing thing is that I didn't get a disease. (Well I did--obesity--but I mean any others.) I'm from a family of people who are mostly fat, mostly alcoholic, and mostly dead of cancer. I'm just fat, worse than the others but otherwise seemingly ok. Now I'm starting to think that maybe my whole family may have some 'issue' with the primary foods of our culture.

I tell friends that my horrible chronic acid reflux was solved merely by getting off gluten. They nearly all say, "I could never give up bread!" (Isn't it funny, you never hear people say, "Oh man, I could never give up broccoli!") I tried to convince one young friend to try it; her doctor told her eating more protein and fat was unhealthy, and gave her a prescription (this is lifetime--it doesn't cure it, merely treats the symptom) to a drug to help with acid reflux. I said you're kidding me, you think taking a drug the rest of your life is healthier than trading your pasta for a steak?? Go figure.

I still haven't figured out the milk connection (or why I seem ok with cheese for some reason; maybe there is a dosage-difference, or the sugar combined with it has some effect), but I think it's pretty clear that dropping milk and wheat has very radically changed my life for the better. I may actually live, which being a single mom to an awesome 11 year old girl, is a good thing.

Best,
P.

Comments (14) -

  • Anonymous

    5/27/2008 6:15:00 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    What a great story to share!

    Just an aside, most people have no idea the impact of particular foods or the excess of foods on their blood sugar. Still we go about our daily lives, some of us with very high blood sugar after a meal on a daily basis. I think if non-diabetics (the general population) were encouraged to learn to use a glucose meter (that you don't have to be a diagnosed diabetic to use one), some chronic health ailments would diminish.

  • Brian

    5/27/2008 9:35:00 PM |

    I find it interesting when wheat and dairy get mentioned at the same time when talking of food addiction. Some years ago I came across information on the opiate- like nature of gluten and casein (proteins in wheat and milk). A quick web search will return lots of leads.

  • Angela Coppola

    5/27/2008 10:00:00 PM |

    So why is it that cheese seems ok to some people? What about yogurt? Is it the lactose or something else? I have always wondered about these things.

  • Anne

    5/28/2008 1:37:00 AM |

    One reason that you may be able to tolerate cheese but not milk is because milk contains lactose and hard cheeses are almost lactose free. Lactose intolerance is caused by the lack of the enzyme to digest this milk sugar.

    Cheese is high in casein, a major protein in dairy.

    Both lactose intolerance and/or casein intolerance are often associated with gluten intolerance.

    I am glad that you turned your health around with lifestyle eating changes.

  • Anonymous

    5/28/2008 3:35:00 PM |

    I had a major gut episode yesterday after eating rice cereal with milk. I've previously tolerated milk, and cheese as well. But I've read that a gluten-sensitive gut can be sensitive to other foods until the gut heals (by avoiding gluten). I'm not sure if it's the casein or lactose, but I'm leaning towards lactose since I've been able to tolerate fermented cheese.

    The lady in this post, and your last post mentioned strong cravings for wheat after eating some. I've read theories (at alternative sites) about most people having at least a small amount of candidiasis. I wonder if that might be part of the reason for the strong cravings. I don't crave wheat anymore, but if something causes severe pain enough times, one tends to get over it quickly.

    S

  • Nyn

    5/28/2008 4:10:00 PM |

    Very inspiring to read. I would have to know more about how this 'Type A' personality managed to eat so low-carb and eliminate wheat long enough to lose that kind of weight. I am at a loss as to what to eat in place of wheat, and while it seems like an easy answer, I have almost zero time for meal prep. I eat 2 of 3 meals a day at my office or in the car, and some days even all 3. No way to slow down my schedule either. Anyone know of a elimination-wheat-blog/diary I can follow to get some ideas? Still a wonderful story, and glad you shared it.

  • PJ

    5/28/2008 11:35:00 PM |

    Wow, thanks for posting my email comments doc. When I gave permission I didn't realize it'd be front page news. Though I noticed you did leave out my ravings about how wonderful you and my cardiologist are I noticed... very humble of you!

    I'm no expert on anything, and my blog isn't a nutrition blog, but I'm at The Divine Lowcarb for anybody who likes layman blogs.

    PJ

  • Sue

    5/29/2008 1:25:00 AM |

    Just eat a green salad or low-carb vegies in place of wheat.  Salad and vegies easy to prepare if you get them packaged - already washed and cut.

  • Gyan

    5/30/2008 11:48:00 AM |

    Is that so that carbs are less harmful to physically active people and more harmful to sedentary people?

    Since the active muscles of physically active people with tend to utilize glucose more efficiently than not-so-active muscles of sedentary people.

    Also does it make any difference if one consumes freshly milled flour of 100% extraction
    (the way our ancestors used to eat) with plenty of butter?
    (By fresh I mean less than one week old).

  • jpatti

    6/4/2008 10:28:00 PM |

    Carbs are more harmful to people with the genetic propensity for metabolic syndrome, whether they are active or not!  

    Of course, exercise helps whether someone is perfectly normal or flatout diabetic.  

    As for wheat, I don't personally think if you're not diabetic and don't have gluten intolerance that it is necessarily bad.  But as far as grains go, it's relatively nutritionally bankrupt.  Barley or buckwheat are the best grain choices.  I think even rice or oats are better choices than wheat.

    And, of course, veggies are better bang for your carb buck than any of the grains.

    I really think that those who tolerate wheat and choose to eat it should prefer whole wheat berries (they cook up to a nice hot cereal overnight in a crockpot with some apples and cinnamon).  Second best choice is bread or pasta made from freshly ground flour - you can grind it yourself with either a dedicated grinder or some appliances can grind wheat like the Vitamix.  Far behind those choices is freshly baked bread made from preground whole wheat flour.

  • jpatti

    6/6/2008 10:40:00 AM |

    I just want to add - even for those who have no problems with wheat and eat it as a whole grain... the problem is it's a staple in people's diets.  Same problem with corn.

    There's not enough nutrition in wheat or corn foods to make them worthwhile as a significant part of your diet.  Even if you tolerate them just fine now and then, you just don't need them to be at the base of your food pyramid.  Vegetables should be at the base, whether you eat grains or not.  

    And if you eat grains regularly, there's so many better choices than wheat or corn.  Barley and buckwheat are the best.  But even oats or whole grain rice are way better than wheat or corn.

    Wheat and corn are pretty much "filler" foods at best - they mostly provide calories.  In places  and times where there are food shortages, they're very useful foods cause they prevent starvation pretty well.  They're cheap, store well, and fill bellies, but that's really the best you can say for them.

    But in the western world today where we have a wide variety of foods available to us, the primary benefit of wheat and corn is to food manufacturers who make a fortune out of processing such cheapo ingredients into forms that tempt us to pay big bucks for them.

    I don't agree that wheat is somehow worse than all other carby foods, but realistically, cutting wheat out of your diet *mostly* results in a much healthier diet cause most folks eat so much crap made from wheat.  

    Personally, if I had to give *one* piece of diet advice to *everyone*, it wouldn't be to avoid wheat.  Rather, it would be to eat at least half of your food intake as fresh vegetables.  

    Eating loads of veggies provides a wide range of nutrients, probably ones we haven't discovered yet too.  And it also crowds most of the worst foods out of your diet, regardless of what they are.

  • Anonymous

    6/3/2009 4:45:37 PM |

    A recent study using Italian cheese made from ewes milk showed some very strong heart health benefits.

    The cheese mentioned in this study is an Italian cheese called Pecerino.
    The most popular type in the US is called Pecerino Romano,an aged cheese with a salty taste.

    CLA-rich cheese may boost heart health: Study


    Quote:
    Consuming cheese from ewe’s milk, rich in conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), may reduce markers linked to heart disease, suggest results from a small Italian study.

    Researchers from the University of Florence report that ewe’s milk rich in cis-9, trans-11 CLA produced favourable changes in inflammatory cytokines and platelet aggregation, both of which are associated with atherosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries due to the build-up of fatty deposits on artery walls.

    Atherosclerosis is the primary cause of coronary heart disease (CHD), which costs the British public health system more than €5bn per year.

    “These observations, although preliminary and obtained in a limited study group, seem to be of relevance for the practical implications in terms of nutrition and health of the general population,” wrote the researchers in Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases.

    “If the effects of dairy products naturally enriched for their contents of cis-9, trans-11 CLA are confirmed by further examinations, this will likely have important implications for human nutrition and food industry.”

    Cheese – ewe decide

    Researchers, led by Francesco Sofi, recruited 10 subjects with an average age of 51.5 and randomly assigned them to consume a diet containing 200 grams per week of cheese from ewe’s milk (pecorino cheese), naturally rich in CLA, or cheese from cow’s milk (placebo), for 10 weeks.

    Sofi and his co-workers report that consumption of the CLA-rich ewe’s cheese produced significant reductions in inflammatory markers, including a 43 per cent reduction in interleukin-6 (IL-6), a 36 per cent reduction in IL-8, and a 40 per cent reduction in tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha). No significant changes were observed following 10 weeks of placebo, they added.

    Furthermore, a 10 per cent reduction in the extent of platelet aggregation, induced by arachidonic acid, was observed for the CLA-cheese group, compared to placebo.

    “CLAs have been previously reported to attenuate inflammatory cytokine expression in animals and humans, and it has been recently reported that they are able to inhibit the expression of cytokine-induced adhesion molecules on endothelial and smooth muscle cells,” wrote the researchers.

    “Thus, it is conceivable to hypothesise that CLAs are able to attenuate the atherosclerotic process through inhibition of the initiating inflammatory cytokines, such as those measured in our study, as well as through inhibition of the stress signalling cascades these cytokines elicit,” they added.

    Source: Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases
    Published online ahead of print, doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2009.03.004
    “Effects of a dairy product (pecorino cheese) naturally rich in cis-9, trans-11 conjugated linoleic acid on lipid, inflammatory and haemorheological variables: A dietary intervention study”
    Authors: F. Sofi, A. Buccioni, F. Cesari, A.M. Gori, S. Minieri, L. Mannini, A. Casini, G.F. Gensini, R. Abbate, M. Antongiovanni

  • Chrissy

    7/6/2010 9:55:19 PM |

    I wanted to lose weight so I decided to keep it simple.  cut out wheat is the only rule.  However I am not in the obese category, and don't drink soda's or much sugar, most of the sugar I eat is in with the wheat foods (eg: cake).  I also eat fruits ad vegetables every day and very little fast food (now and again when travelling for example)  by day three and four of the no wheat diet, I am WAY less hungry and eat less.  But I am having cravings for toast - previously my staple food.  I used to eat up to six slices of toast a day, plus other wheat based foods, biscuits and such.
    The reason I know it's a craving for wheat, is because I look at other foods I like, and I have no appetite for them whatsoever, because I am not ACTUALLY HUNGRY.  It's easy to over-eat on wheat based products, but if you're not allowed them, you just don't want to eat anything.  so your appetite becomes regulated.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 7:29:34 PM |

    Just an aside, most people have no idea the impact of particular foods or the excess of foods on their blood sugar. Still we go about our daily lives, some of us with very high blood sugar after a meal on a daily basis. I think if non-diabetics (the general population) were encouraged to learn to use a glucose meter (that you don't have to be a diagnosed diabetic to use one), some chronic health ailments would diminish.

Loading