Santa Claus is alive . . . and works for the drug industry

12. December 2008 William Davis (7)


Maybe your teenagers no longer believe in Santa Claus, but I assure you: Not only is he alive, I believe that we have evidence that he works for the drug industry!

Psshaww! you say. Yet another rant from that kook, Davis. Who can he pick on next? What other imagined "conspiracies" can he uncover?

Let me recount the evidence and I'll let you decide how damning it all is:

--Christmas is a culture of excess, overeating, celebration: Cookies, candy canes, pie, chocolate, egg nog, more cookies . . . A virtual wheat and sugar frenzy!

--Wheat and sugars make us diabetic!

--What does a diabetic look like? How about big protuberant abdomen, florid cheeks, baggy eyes (from sleep apnea)? The red outfit and beard is optional, of course. Could you think of a better representation of what happens to a person when they eat goodies all the time?


I therefore submit that Santa Claus is at the root of a campaign to cultivate diabetes! Diabetes: a growth industry that is raking in billions of dollars for the drug companies!

I'd bet that Mr. Claus would agree with the dietary advice dispensed by the folks at the American Diabetes Association website:

A place to start is at about 45-60 grams of carbohydrate at a meal. You may need more or less carbohydrate at meals depending on how you manage your diabetes.


Eat more carbohydrates, get fatter in the abdomen, require more medication to keep sugar low. Then start over: eat more carbohydrates, get fatter, more medicines. Kaching!

"You may need more?" Personally, I'd be rendered comatose and helpless if I indulged in such carbohydrate gluttony.

If Mr. Claus were, instead, interested in our health and keeping us non-diabetic, Christmas would be a time for pistachios, almonds, dark chocolates, and tea.

You want health advice? Don't ask Santa Claus!

Another case of aortic valve disease reduced with vitamin D

12. December 2008 William Davis (8)
I watched Seth's aortic valve deteriorate over a two year period.

I was first consulted in 2004 to offer an opinion on Seth's heart scan score of 779 and flagrantly abnormal cholesterol patterns, including triglycerides in the 400 mg/dl range. But I heard a murmur, as well, a murmur of a leaky aortic valve, "aortic valve insufficiency."

Over the next two years, I watched Seth's aortic valve worsen, going from mild leakiness to severe.

In 2006-2007, I tiptoed into vitamin D replacement and asked Seth to add some vitamin D. Time passed and Seth's aortic valve got progressively worse.

Over the past year, However, he's maintained a truly healthy level of vitamin D, with blood levels consistently in the 60-70 ng/ml range.

While Seth's last echocardiogram showed a severely leaky aortic valve, the most recent echo showed mild leakiness ("mild aortic insufficiency")--a dramatic reduction.

I continue to see this in many, though not all, patients with aortic valve disease. Though I've more frequently witnessed either stalled progression or reversal of aortic valve stenosis (stiffness), I've now seen a handful of people with aortic valve leakiness (insufficiency) also reverse.

I've posted about this peculiar phenomenon previously:

Aortic valve disease and vitamin D
More on aortic valve disease and vitamin D

Prior to vitamin D, I had NEVER witnessed any aortic valve disease stop or reverse.

A formal trial at some point would be invaluable.

Track Your Plaque Program Data Tracking Tools

7. December 2008 William Davis (3)
At last: After talking about the new Track Your Plaque community tools for the last year, our data tracking software is now available!



Track Your Plaque is, admittedly, somewhat data-intensive. The basic concept relies on the fact that we track heart scan scores, cholesterol values, lipoprotein values like percent small LDL and Lp(a), vitamin D blood levels, intake of omega-3 fatty acids, etc. Our new data tracking tools will help Members track their data over time.

Even more interesting, you can allow other Members (not required) to view your data for comments and feedback. You can also view the program data of other Members (if they choose to make their data "public") to learn how they are going about stopping and reversing their coronary plaque.

In other words, our graphic data tracking tools are yet another way we are using to acquire a collective wisdom on how to put a stop to coronary heart disease, heart attack, and perverse "let's make money with heart procedures" hospital solutions.

One of the aspects that helps make this work is the sharing of data. So far, the people who have begun to enter their data have all made their information "public." It's not truly "public," but viewable only by other Track Your Plaque Members. Also, Members can, in effect, anonymize their data simply by using a nickname, e.g., heartprotection or hearthawk.

The data tracking tools are in beta-test version, so there are bound to be a few glitches. But we're eager to hear from our Members' experiences on how to improve these tools. Report any problems or make your suggestions on the Track Your Plaque Member Forum--Technical Support.

Yet another reason to avoid fructose

6. December 2008 William Davis (5)
Have you seen the Corn Refiners Association commercial campaigns to educate the American public on the safety of fructose? If you haven't, you can view these interesting specimens on You Tube:

"Get the facts--You're in for a sweet surprise: Fructose is safe in moderation!"

Two Moms

Two lovers


Beyond the fact that fructose stimulates liver production of glycerol, which thereby increases liver VLDL production and raises blood levels of triglycerides; likely stimulates appetite; increases cholesterol levels; fructose has also been clearly implicated in increasing blood levels of uric acid.

Uric acid is the substance that, in some people, precipitates in joints and causes gout, the painful inflammatory arthritis that has been increasing in prevalence over the last four decades since the introduction of fructose in 1967. While blood levels of uric acid in the early part of the 20th century averaged 3.5 mg/dl, more recent population assessments have averaged 6.0 mg/dl or higher. (Non-human mammals who don't eat processed foods, drink fruit drinks or beer, and don't eat candy have uric acid levels of <2.0 mg/dl.)

Uric acid is looking like it may prove to be an important risk factor for coronary disease and atherosclerotic plaque. It is no news that people with higher blood levels of uric acid are more likely to experience adverse cardiovascular events like heart attack. People with features of the metabolic syndrome also have higher uric acid blood levels; the more characteristics they have, the higher the uric acid level. However, the prevailing view has been that uric acid is simply an accompaniment of these processes, but not causal.

However, more recent observations suggest that increased levels of uric acid may instead be a cause of metabolic syndrome and high blood pressure.

Increased blood levels of uric acid have been shown to:

--Increase blood pressure
--Induce kidney damage (even in the absence of uric acid kidney stones)
--Antagonize insulin responses

A diagnosis of gout is not required to experience all of the adverse phenomena associated with uric acid. (For not entirely clear reasons, some people, perhaps based on pH or other factors, are more prone to trigger crystallization of uric acid in joints, similar to the phenomena of sugar crystallization when making rock candy.)

Which brings us back to fructose, a sweetener that clearly substantially increases uric acid levels. I suppose that the mothers and lovers in the Corn Refiners' commercials are right to a degree: Our kids will survive, as will you and I, despite increases in triglycerides, enhanced diabetic tendencies, amplified appetites, and increased uric acid due to fructose in our diet. We will also likely survive despite being 100 lbs overweight, partly due to the effects of fructose.

But if long-term health is your desire for you and your family, fructose has no role whatsoever to play.

Interestingly, the obviously expensive and slick ad campaigns from the Corn Refiners' videos have triggered some helpful video counterarguments:

High-fructose corn syrup
Conspiracy for Fat America
High-fructose corn syrup truth


A full discussion of uric acid, the scientific data behind uric acid as a coronary risk factor, and the nutritional means to reduce uric acid will be the topic of a thorough discussion in an upcoming Special Report on the Track Your Plaque website.

Free the Animal

4. December 2008 William Davis (10)
Richard Nikoley from the Free the Animal Blog contributes this informative comment:



'Bout 18 months ago, I was at 230 (5'10) and looked awful. I was on Omeprezole for years for gastric reflux, a variety of prescription meds since early 20s for seasonal sinus allergies, culminating finally in the daily, year round squirts of Flonase-esque sprays (the best for control without noticeable side-effects), and finally, Levothroid for about the last 7 years or so, as I had elevated TSH (around 9ish).

My BP was regularly 145-160 / 95-110.

I decided to get busy. I modified diet somewhat, cutting lots of junk carbs, and began working out -- brief, intense, heavy twice per week. BP began coming down immediately, such that within only a couple of weeks I was borderline rather than full blown high. Then after about six months, a year ago, I went to full blown low-carb, high fat, cutting out all grains, sugar, veg oils, etc, and replacing with animal fats, coconut, olive oil. You know the drill. Then, first of the year I felt great and simply stopped all meds, including the thyroid. I also began intermittent fasting, twice per week, and for a twist, I always do my weight lifting in some degree of fast, even as much as 30 hours.

That's when the weight really started pouring off. Take a look:

http://www.freetheanimal.com/root/2008/09/periodic-photo-progress-update.html

http://www.freetheanimal.com/root/2008/08/faceoff.html

In July I figured it's about time for a physical. Here's the lipid panel, demonstrating am HDL of 106 and Try of 47, great ratios all around:

http://www.freetheanimal.com/root/2008/07/lipid-pannel.html

However, my TSH was even higher -- 16ish. It seems odd that I was able to lose 40-50 pounds of fat (10-15 pounds of lean gain for a 30 pound net loss at that time -- now an additional 10 pounds net loss).

One disclosure is that I was drinking too much, almost daily, and quite a bit (gotta save some vices...). Anyway, I'm at the point now where I want to drill down. I know I need to see an endocrinologist and have T3 and T4 looked at, but in advance, I wanted to see if the recent changes I've made could make a difference:

1. Stopped all alcohol.
2. Stopped most dairy, except ghee and heavy cream, and cheese is now used as a "spice," i.e., tiny quantities -- no more milk.
3. 6,000 IU Vit D per day.
4. 3 grams salmon oil, 2 grams cod liver oil.
5. Vit K2 Menatetrenone (MK-4) -- side story: getting off grains reversed gum disease for which I have had two surgeries, then supplementing the K2 DISSOLVED calculus on my teeth within days -- hygienist and dentist are dumbfounded. Stephan (Whole Health Source), who comments here, has an amazing series on K2.


If you view his photos, you'll appreciate just how far he has come.

Overall, Richard's program is wonderful and his pictures clearly display his success. However, Richard, thyroid function is indeed a problem, a problem that needs to be fixed ASAP. Remember, low thyroid function used to be diagnosed at autopsy at which time the coronary arteries and other arteries of the body were found to be packed solid with atherosclerotic plaque, even in young people.

I'd recommend:

1) Consider 200 mcg Iodine per day from kelp if you do not use iodized salt.

2) Seeing your doctor right away for thyroid replacement, hopefully with consideration of your T3 status.

3) A heart scan--Not to lead to procedures, but something for you to track over time as your program improves and thyroid function is restored.

Beyond this, keep up the great work. Great blog, too!

Low Thyroid and Plaque

3. December 2008 William Davis (12)
Having now tested the thyroid status of several hundred patients over the last few months, I have come to appreciate:

1) That thyroid dysfunction is rampant, affecting at least 25% of everyone I see.
2) It is an enormously effective means to reduce cardiovascular risk.


I'm not talking about flagrant low thyroid dysfunction, the sort that triggers weight gain of 30 lbs, gallons of water retention, baggy eyes, sleeping 14 hours a day. I'm talking about the opposite extreme: the earliest, subtle, and often asymptomatic degrees of thyroid dysfunction that raises LDL cholesterol, lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a), a huge effect!), and adds to coronary plaque growth.

Correcting the subtle levels of low thyroid:

1) Makes LDL reduction much easier

2) Facilitates weight loss

3) Reduces Lp(a)--best with inclusion of the T3 fraction of thyroid hormone.

Recall that, 100 years ago, the heart implications of low thyroid weren't appreciated until autopsy, when the unfortunate victim would be found to have coronary arteries packed solid with atherosclerotic plaque. It takes years of low thyroid function to do this. I advise you to not wait until you get to this point or anywhere near it.

I find it fascinating that many of the most potent strategies we are now employing in the Track Your Plaque process are hormonal: thyroid hormones, T3 and T4; vitamin D (the hormone cholecalciferol); testosterone; progesterone; DHEA, pregnenolone. Omega-3 fatty acids, while not hormones themselves, exert many of their beneficial effects via the eicosanoid hormone pathway. Elimination of wheat and cornstarch exert their benefits via a reduction in the hormone insulin's wide fluctuations.

We haven't yet had sufficient time to gauge an effect on coronary plaque and heart scan scores. In other words, will perfect thyroid function increase our success rate in stopping or reversing coronary plaque? I don't know for sure, but I predict that it will. In fact, I believe that we are filling a large "hole" in the program by adding this new aspect.

Fat and fiber composition of nuts

30. November 2008 William Davis (16)


From Mukuddem-Petersen J, Oosthuizen1 W, Jerling JC. J Nutr 2005.



If you haven't yet done so, adding raw nuts to your health program yields a broad panel of health benefits.

Contrary to conventional advice, nuts can be eaten in unlimited quantities. Provided they are raw--unroasted, unsalted (since salting only accompanies roasted nuts), not roasted in unhealthy oils like hydrogenated cottonseed or soybean (very common)--they do not make you fat, regardless of the quantity consumed. Beer nuts, honey-roasted nuts, mixed nuts roasted in unhealthy oils with salt added are either fattening or exert other unhealthy effects (e.g., hypertension, rise in Lp(a), and cancer from the hydrogenated fats).

Some notable observations from the chart:

--Hazelnuts and macadamians are the richest in monounsaturates
--Walnuts are the richest in the omega-6 linoleic acid, while also richest in the "omega-3" linolenic acid.
--From a fat composition standpoint, raw cashews and dry roasted peanuts aren't so bad.
--Pistachios figure pretty favorably in this analysis, rich in monounsaturates.
--Coconuts are unusually rich in saturated fat, though about half is lauric acid--an issue for future conversation.



Here's a listing of the fiber composition of nuts per 1 oz serving (about a handful):

Almonds (24 nuts) 3.5 g
Brazilnuts, dried (6-8 nuts) 2.1 g
Cashew nuts, dry roasted, with salt added (18 nuts) 0.9 g
Hazelnuts or filberts 2.7 g
Macadamia nuts, dry roasted, with salt added (10-12 nuts) 2.3 g
Mixed nuts, dry roasted, with peanuts, with salt added 2.6 g
Peanuts, all types, dry-roasted, without salt 2.3 g
Pecans (20 halves) 2.7 g
Pine nuts, dried 1.0 g
Pistachio nuts, dry roasted, with salt added (47 nuts) 2.9 g
Walnuts, English (14 halves) 1.9 g

Data courtesy USDA Nutrient Database


Note that almonds are the winners with 3.5 grams fiber per ounce, pistachios a close second. Pine nuts and cashews place last on the fiber content chart.

Not addressed by the charts is protein content of nuts, as well as the low sugar content, all additional beneficial aspects of nuts. Nuts are also a moderate source of magnesium (though seeds like pumpkin and sunflower shine in the magnesium content area).

Rather than micromanage the specific fat and fiber content of your diet, why not get a little of the good of everything on the list and just mix and match the nuts? (Mixed and matched on your own, of course, not a hydrogenated cottonseed oil nut mixture).

Flush-free niacin kills

29. November 2008 William Davis (12)
Here, I re-post a conversation I've posted before, that of the scam product, "no-flush" niacin, also known as "flush-free" niacin.

I find this issue particularly bothersome, since I have a patient or two each and every week who forgets the explicit advice I gave them to avoid these scam products altogether. Despite costing more than conventional niacin, they exert no effect, beneficial or otherwise. Niacin--the real thing--exerts real and substantial beneficial effects. No-flush or flush-free does nothing except drain your wallet. I continue to marvel at the fact that supplement manufacturers persist in selling this product. Ironically, it commands a significant premium over other niacin forms.

They are outright scams that should be avoided altogether.


My former post, No-flush niacin kills:

Gwen was miserable and defeated.

No wonder. After a bypass operation failed just 12 months earlier with closure of 3 out of 4 bypass grafts, she has since undergone 9 heart catheterization procedures and received umpteen stents. She presented to me for an opinion on why she had such aggressive coronary disease (despite Lipitor).

No surprise, several new causes of heart disease were identified, including a very severe small LDL pattern: 100% of LDL particles were small.

Given her stormy procedural history, I urged Gwen to immediately drop all processed carbohydrates from her diet, including any food made from wheat or corn starch. (She and her husband were shocked by this, by the way, since she'd been urged repeatedly to increase her whole grains by the hospital dietitians.) I also urged her to begin to lose the 30 lbs of weight that she'd gained following the hospital dietitians' advice. She also added fish oil at a higher-than-usual dose.

I asked her to add niacin, among our most effective agents for reduction of small LDL particles, not to mention reduction of the likelihood of future cardiovascular events.

Although I instructed Gwen on where and how to obtain niacin, she went to a health food store and bought "no-flush niacin," or inositol hexaniacinate. She was curious why she experienced none of the hot flush I told her about.

When she came back to the office some weeks later to review her treatment program, she told me that chest pains had returned. On questioning her about what she had changed specifically, the problem became clear: She'd been taking no-flush niacin, rather than the Slo-Niacin I had recommended.

What is no-flush niacin? It is inositol hexaniacinate, a molecule that indeed carries six niacin molecules attached to an inositol backbone. Unfortunately, it exerts virtually no effect in humans. It is a scam. Though I love nutritional supplements in general, it pains me to know that supplement distributors and health food stores persist in selling this outright scam product that not only fails to exert any of the benefits of real niacin, it also puts people like Gwen in real danger because of its failure to provide the effects she needed.

So, if niacin saves lives, no-flush niacin in effect could kill you. Avoid this scam like the plague.

No-flush niacin does not work. Period.


Disclosure: I have no financial or other relationship with Upsher Smith, the manufacturer of Slo-Niacin.


Copyright 2008 William Davis, MD

CT coronary angiography is NOT a screening procedure

28. November 2008 William Davis (3)
I've recently had several hospital employees tell me that their hospitals offered CT coronary angiograms without charge to their employees.

Among these hospital employees were several women in their 30s and 40s.

Why would young, asymptomatic, pre-menopausal women be subjected to the equivalent of 100 chest x-rays or 25 mammograms? Is there an imminent, life-threatening, symptomatic problem here?

All of these women were without symptoms, some were serious exercisers.

There is NO rational justification for performing CT coronary angiography, free or not.

What they really want is some low-risk, yet confident means of identifying risk for heart disease. Cholesterol, of course, is a miserable failure in this arena. Framingham risk scoring? Don't make me laugh.

Step in CT coronary angiography. But does CT coronary angiography provide the answers they are looking for?

Well, it provides some of the answers. It does serve to tell each woman whether she "needs" a heart procedure like heart catheterization, stent, or bypass surgery, since the intent of CT angiography is to identify "severe" blockages, sufficient to justify heart procedures.

Pitfalls: Because of the radiation exposure, CT angiography is not a procedure that can be repeated periodically to reassess the status of any abnormal findings. A CT angiogram every year? After just four years, the equivalent of 400 chest x-rays will have been performed, or 100 mammograms. Cancer becomes a very real risk at this point.

CT angiography is also not quantitative. Sure, it can provide a crude estimation of the percent blockage--the value your cardiologist seeks to "justify" a stent. But it does NOT provide a longitudinal (lengthwise) quantification of plaque volume, a measure of total plaque volume that can be tracked over time.

What's a woman to do? Simple: Get the test that, at least in 2008, provides the only means of gauging total lengthwise coronary plaque volume: a simple CT heart scan, a test performed with an equivalent of 4 - 10 chest x-rays, or 1 - 2.5 mammograms.

Perhaps, in future, software and engineering improvements will be made with CT coronary angiography that reduce radiation to tolerable levels and allows the lengthwise volume measurement of plaque. But that's not how it's done today.

The Wheat Deficiency Syndrome

26. November 2008 William Davis (21)
Beware the dreaded Wheat Deficiency Syndrome.

Like any other syndrome, you can recognize this condition by its many tell-tale signs:

--Flat abdomen
--Rapid weight loss
--High energy
--Less mood swings
--Better sleep
--Diminished appetite
--Reduced blood sugar
--Reduced blood pressure
--Reduced small LDL and total LDL
--Increased HDL
--Reduced triglycerides
--Reduced C-reactive protein and other inflammatory measures


Of course, you could choose to cure yourself of this syndrome simply by taking the antidote: foods made with wheat flour, like bread, breakfast cereals, pastas, pretzels, crackers, and muffins.

All the signs of the syndrome will then disappear and you can have back your protuberant abdomen, irrational mood swings, exagerrated appetite, higher blood sugar, etc.
Wheat Belly Revisited

Wheat Belly Revisited

23. March 2009 William Davis (24)
Do you have a wheat belly?

When I first coined this phrase back in July, 2007, I had witnessed the phenomenal health effects of wheat elimination in several hundred patients.

In the nearly two years that have passed since my original post, I have witnessed hundreds more people who have done the same: eliminate pretzels, crackers, breads of all sorts, bagels, pasta, muffins, waffles, pancakes, etc.

If anything, I am convinced now more than ever that wheat is among the most destructive foods in the human diet. At least 70% of people who eliminate wheat from their diet obtain at least one, if not several, substantial health benefits.

Now, if I were trying to sell you something, say, an alternative to wheat, then you should be skeptical. If I tell you that drug or nutritional supplement X is great and you should take it, only to follow it with a sales pitch, you should be skeptical.

What am I selling? Nothing. I gain nothing by telling everyone to avoid wheat. In fact, I wish it wasn't true. Wheat foods taste good. Wheat flour makes great comfort foods. In years past, I spent many hours sitting at the bagel shop reviewing papers over a cup of coffee and a bagel. No longer.

So here, back by popular demand, the original Wheat Belly post:



Wheat Belly

You've heard of "beer bellies," the protuberant, sagging abdomen of someone who drinks excessive quantities of beer.

How about "wheat belly"?

That's the same protuberant, sagging abdomen that develops when you overindulge in processed wheat products like pretzels, crackers, breads, waffles, pancakes, breakfast cereals and pasta.



(By the way, this image, borrowed from the wonderful people at Wikipedia, is that of a teenager, who supplied a photo of himself.)

It represents the excessive visceral fat that laces the intestines and triggers a drop in HDL, rise in triglycerides, inflames small LDL particles, C-reactive protein, raises blood sugar, raises blood pressure, creates poor insulin responsiveness, etc.

How common is it? Just look around you and you'll quickly recognize it in dozens or hundreds of people in the next few minutes. It's everywhere.

Wheat bellies are created and propagated by the sea of mis-information that is delivered to your door every day by food manufacturers. It's the same campaign of mis-information that caused the wife of a patient of mine who was in the hospital (one of my rare hospitalizations) to balk in disbelief when I told her that her husband's 18 lb weight gain over the past 6 months was due to the Shredded Wheat Cereal for breakfast, turkey sandwiches for lunch, and whole wheat pasta for dinner.

"But that's what they told us to eat after Dan left the hospital after his last stent!"

Dan, at 260 lbs with a typical wheat belly, had small LDL, low HDL, high triglycerides, etc.

I hold the food companies responsible for this state of affairs, selling foods that are clearly causing enormous weight gain nationwide. Unfortunately, the idiocy that emits from Nabisco, Kraft, and Post (AKA Philip Morris); General Mills; Kelloggs; and their kind is aided and abetted by organizations like the American Heart Association, with the AHA stamp of approval on Cocoa Puffs, Cookie Crisp Cereal, and Berry Kix; and the American Diabetes Association, whose number one corporate sponsor is Cadbury Schweppes, the biggest soft drink and candy manufacturer in the world.

As I've said many times before, if you don't believe it, try this experiment: Eliminate all forms of wheat for a 4 week period--no breakfast cereals, no breads of any sort, no pasta, no crackers, no pretzels, etc. Instead, increase your vegetables, healthy oils, lean proteins (raw nuts, seeds, lean red meats, chicken, fish, turkey, eggs, Egg Beaters, low-fat yogurt and cottage cheese), fruits. Of course, avoid fruit drinks, candy, and other garbage foods, even if they're wheat-free.

Most people will report that a cloud has been lifted from their brains. Thinking is clearer, you have more energy, you don't poop out in the afternoon, you sleep more deeply, some rashes disappear. You will also notice that hunger ratchets down substantially. Most people lose the insatiable hunger pangs that occur 2-3 hours after a wheat-containing meal. Instead, hunger is a soft signal that gently prods you that it's time to consider eating again.

You will also make considerable gains towards gaining control over your risk for heart disease and your heart scan score, a crucial step in the Track Your Plaque program.
Tags :

Comments (24) -

  • Anonymous

    3/23/2009 10:25:00 PM |

    I've lost most of my wheat belly by eating as you suggest. But it seems like there is a last little bit that won't go away, plus I have "wheat breasts". Is there a reason these things don't go away quickly (especially the breasts), and is there something else I can do?

  • Ellen

    3/23/2009 11:08:00 PM |

    Everything sounds right on! except for the low-fat recommendations.  A body needs fat!

  • Anonymous

    3/24/2009 2:35:00 AM |

    ok, but what is the mechanism?

    Please explain why wheat is a problem food.  I am not looking for clinical trials, just a plausible theory that I can align with or not.

    Although I don't impose the burden of data on you, here are a few references with ample data showing remarkable statistical evidence for benefits to vegetarianism:-

    http://www.vegsoc.org/info/health2.html

    http://www.vegetarian-nutrition.info/updates/vegetarian_diets_health_benefits.php

    As a Dr I am sure you would feel bad not presenting a balanced view.

  • Kiwi

    3/24/2009 3:06:00 AM |

    Yes. Think I'd avoid the manufactured oils too and go for more animal fats. Just as nature intended.

  • Anonymous

    3/24/2009 7:27:00 AM |

    It is so true, I have experienced it my self, I never used to eat sweets an cereals, but bread and pasta, have been my main diet, not any more!I used to think I had such a healthy diet as I never ate sweets and refind stuff!!

    "Most people will report that a cloud has been lifted from their brains. Thinking is clearer, you have more energy, you don't poop out in the afternoon, you sleep more deeply, some rashes disappear. You will also notice that hunger ratchets down substantially. Most people lose the insatiable hunger pangs that occur 2-3 hours after a wheat-containing meal. Instead, hunger is a soft signal that gently prods you that it's time to consider eating again."

    The above quote describes me so well, after eliminating wheat from my life!

    Is Rye as bad as wheat?

  • Kipper

    3/24/2009 11:59:00 AM |

    I appreciate your point here, but...

    I've been strictly wheat-free since the start of the year (I've slipped up a bit when I've forgotten to pack my own soy sauce for a sushi outing, and there's probably been some "stealth wheat" in infrequent restaurant meals...otherwise nada). I have some sort of wheat-related enteropathy that provides a strong incentive to be strict. I do eat some non-wheat grain products, but not every day. My sugar intake is also not perfect, but it's still much improved over any point in 2008.

    So I should be looking pretty good about now, right? Well, no. My weight seems to have stabilized down about 5-7lb below my previous stable weight, but any changes from that baseline have been strictly upward (mostly water retention after weight lifting). My waist measurement is unchanged. If there's any legitimate loss (beyond water weight due to the lower carb diet) it hasn't come off there. I'm quite overweight, so this is really a tiny drop in the bucket.

    This near-total lack of improvement has been achieved with a schedule of 4+ hours of intense exercise most weeks.

    So, anyway. Not asking for help, just commenting that the picture is not necessarily as rosy as you depict.

  • bee

    3/24/2009 1:35:00 PM |

    brown rice, corn, quinoa, amaranth, whole barley, millet - there are a whole range of whole grain alternatives to wheat. wheat just seems to be more addictive that other grains.

    thanks for another great post.

  • Missbossy

    3/24/2009 2:15:00 PM |

    Sorry it I've missed this in your other posts... but besides wheat, are there, in your opinion, any safe cereals? I've been almost completely grain/cereal free for a year but am thinking about adding oatmeal to my diet. In your experience, how well do your patients tolerate this? Thanks.

  • D

    3/24/2009 4:27:00 PM |

    I agree with what you say about wheat. I feel much better when I omit it from my diet.

    However, I do have a question. Previous generations ate wheat without having the dire health consequences we have now. Was this due to
    1. not eating nearly as much wheat as people do today? or
    2. not eating transfats and/or tons of sugar, along with the wheat? or
    3. performing hard, physical labor, something most of us don't do?
    Or, perhaps a combination of those things, plus other factors I haven't even considered.

    Before great grandpa went out to plow the fields, he probably had a breakfast of some kind of meat and/or eggs, biscuits, perhaps gravy, and then he worked really hard for hours. The kids walked to school, maybe several miles, and lunch might have been bread and butter and milk. And when they had recess, they played hard. That generation didn't have obesity and rampant heart disease. If we lived the same way our grandparents and great grandparents lived, might we be able to eat wheat products (not the super-refined junk, but what they had available), without the major health consequences?

  • Martin Levac

    3/24/2009 4:57:00 PM |

    Healthy oils and lean proteins? That idea is derived from the Mediterranean idea which is derived from the observations of Ancel Keys, the father of the lipid hypothesis. It's pure speculation.

    It's rather contradictory. The lipid hypothesis says carbohydrate is good. Thus, we should eat wheat. Yet here you are telling us wheat is actually bad for us. Tell us to eat healthy oils, i.e. vegetable oils like olive oil and canola oil. But then tell us to eat lean meats, implying there's something bad about animal fat, i.e. saturated fat, and something good about vegetable oils, i.e. polyunsaturated fat omega 3/6/9 (without noting that vegetable oils contain many times the amount of omega 6 contained in animal fat). Ancel Keys' lipid hypothesis is based on those assumptions too.

    To cut wheat, yes. But to cut animal fat, where's the justification?

  • Kipper

    3/25/2009 3:32:00 AM |

    @D: I do think exercise offsets a lot of metabolic derangement. It's part of how hockey players (the young serious ones, not slow moving middle-aged folks like me) can get away with eating shockingly poor diets.

    Incidentally, my parents tell me my grandpa had very similar symptoms to mine, before I was old enough to be aware of it myself. I have some sort of intolerance or allergy, though.

  • Kiwi

    3/25/2009 10:38:00 AM |

    reply to D:
    One of the problems with modern bread is the speed it's produced at.
    Starting in the early 1960's bread production was industrialised using "bread improvers". A loaf can now be turned out in just a couple of hours, whereas back in the past it was a long process. Earlier in the nineteenth century and before, bread had to 'prove' using naturally occurring wild yeasts. The time factor is important because of the somewhat indigestible properties of grain. Phytic acid and enzymes in the grain need to be neutralised with a long exposure to yeasts. This can be achieved also by soaking grains overnight or longer.
    Traditional societies prepare their grains this way to make them digestible and to get the full nutritional benefit.
    See 'Weston Price Foundation' for information for grain prep.

  • keith

    3/25/2009 4:12:00 PM |

    My experience supports giving wheat up completely, not just cutting down. My chronic joint pain went away--maybe an autoimmune-related phenomenon. Will be interested to see if it affects my serum C-reactive protein.

  • Shreela

    4/10/2009 11:40:00 AM |

    "You will also notice that hunger ratchets down substantially. Most people lose the insatiable hunger pangs that occur 2-3 hours after a wheat-containing meal. Instead, hunger is a soft signal that gently prods you that it's time to consider eating again."

    My mother, and paternal grandmother were both diagnosed with hypoglycemia (low blood sugar), and were instructed to eat many small meals per day to avoid symptoms of hypoglycemia.

    I started having the same symptoms during junior high, so my mother taught me to eat many small meals to avoid my shakes, headaches, and light-headedness that happened after 3-4 hours without food (except when I ate really large meals occasionally, then I could last longer without food).

    I start following Dr. Davis' blog, and he was blogging about the benefits of fasting from some studies. I commented that I didn't think I could fast because of the hypoglycemia, and he replied to stick it out, and stop the wheat. Coincidentally, I had a borderline H1C at that time.

    But instead of sticking it out, I forced myself to not eat until my hypoglycemic signs started, then I ate veggies, meat, or fruit, with a few nuts here and there. I'd eat as little as possible, then wait until the next episode of hypoglycemic symptoms. Oh, I did continue eating rice or potatoes, but smaller servings, and quit sugar during that time.

    I started noticing I could go a little longer between meals without hypoglycemic symptoms after about 4 days, and I think it was about 7-10 days off wheat and sugar (but still eating a little rice or potatoes) when I went 16 hours without food, and no hypoglycemic symptoms.

    My follow-up HA1C was in the normal range after stretching out my meals, and stopping wheat and sugar.

  • Anonymous

    6/3/2009 7:49:17 AM |

    Does wheat reduction works as well (i.e. eating a slice of bread or 30 grams of pasta or breading your meat instead of eating two big bowls of pasta, a loaf of bread, a slice of pizza, several biscuits and pastries daily) or total removal of wheat from the diet is absolutely required?

  • crowdancer

    7/24/2009 4:10:10 PM |

    I believe that wheat and refined carbs are responsible for the 'muffin-tops' and 'wheat bellies' so many folks are carrying around now.
    I work with people who have gluten addiction all the time and when they eat a Whole foods diet free of gluten, dairy, soy, and sugar the weight falls off them quick. And onlike most other diets the weight falls off the belly first, which is an awesome motivator. Also, there aren't the constant cravings of the low fat diet. My dad went on the gluten, dairy, soy and sugar free diet plan and his blood sugar and blood pressure went from borderline diabetic/high blood pressure to optimal ranges in a few weeks. He is off all medications now and full of energy at 66 years old.

  • buy jeans

    11/2/2010 8:48:53 PM |

    Now, if I were trying to sell you something, say, an alternative to wheat, then you should be skeptical. If I tell you that drug or nutritional supplement X is great and you should take it, only to follow it with a sales pitch, you should be skeptical.

  • Sarah

    5/7/2011 2:53:21 PM |

    I have been low carb for 5 years and cut out wheat from my diet completely. No pasta, no breads of any kind, no breading on my meat, no waffles/pancakes/donuts/etc or any grains at all. I also cut out potatoes and corn.

    I dropped down from 190 to 135, a normal weight for my height, and I have kept it off for 4 years. I completely believe that the grains we eat now are so far removed from what they used to be  (due to refining processes, selective breeding to be more tasty, etc) that they have become a slow acting poison.

    Thank you for this blog!

  • David

    8/29/2011 3:01:03 PM |

    I wish there was a law that would prevent quackery such as this from being published and promoted.  "This food is evil".  "That food is evil".  Aside from junk food that is high in fat and/or sugar, specific foods or food groups are not the problem unless you have an allergy.

  • Donna H.

    8/29/2011 11:34:49 PM |

    David says:
    "I wish there was a law that would prevent quackery such as this from being published and promoted. “This food is evil”. “That food is evil”. Aside from junk food that is high in fat and/or sugar, specific foods or food groups are not the problem unless you have an allergy."

    And I wish there was a law that would prevent the 'ignorant gene' from being passed down from parents to children...

    Thank you Dr. Davis for bringing this to light.  It would seem plausible that genetically modified grains have contributed significantly to our modern illnesses...most notably, inflammation, diabetes and the dramatic rise in the incidence of celiac disease.  As grains have been "pushed" into our daily diets since the 1970's (think low fat, whole grain nonsense), T-2 diabetes has increased exponentially!  And while there is no 'one-size-fits-all' DIET, if the USDA Food Pyramid (the definitive guide on how to eat healthy!) was so great with its ongoing drumbeat of  "EAT MORE GRAINS!", then wouldn't we have LESS diabetes...LESS obesity...and wouldn't we all be slim and healthy?  I guess this is the reason why the standard American diet has the acronym: SAD...

  • Dr. William Davis

    8/30/2011 6:34:36 PM |

    Hi, Donna--

    Well said!

    The status quo has gotten us into a heap of misery, health-wise. I am not willing to accept it!

  • AnnieBee

    9/13/2011 12:49:21 AM |

    FYI:  There is no longer a USDA food pyramid with an emphasis on grains on the bottom of the pyramid.
    It was replaced by "ChooseMyPlate" in August 2011.  It's not perfect.  One fourth of the plate is for grains.  But I am happy to see that half of the plate is for vegetables and fruits.
    http://www.choosemyplate.gov/

  • Ron E

    9/18/2011 9:20:59 PM |

    Are oats and oat and oat bran also bad for you?

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/20/2011 12:42:23 PM |

    We took all oat products out of the diet a while back, due to its extravagant blood sugar-increasing effect.

Add comment

Loading