How important is high blood pressure?


Control of blood pressure is crucial for coronary plaque control and stopping your heart scan score from increasing.

Dr. Mehmet Oz (of Oprah fame and a cardiac transplant surgeon at Columbia University) made graphic point of this on the ABC TV news show, 20/20, last evening on an episode called "Our Bodies: Myths, Lies, and Straight Talk". (See a summary on the ABC News 20/20 website at http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2109291&page=1)

Although I believe he somewhat overstated the case for hypertension (proclaiming "If you're going to remember one number, if you're going to focus and fixate on one number in your entire health profile, it better be your blood pressure"), he made the point that a blood pressure of 115/75 is what you should have for optimal health.

I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately, the old advice that desirable blood is 140/90 or less is absolutely wrong. At this level, we see flagrant increases in heart scan scores. We also progressive enlargement of the thoracic aorta, the large vessel that leaves the heart and branches to provide the major arteries of the body. Growth of the aorta to an aneurysm is also common at these formerly acceptable blood pressure. (The diameter of your aorta in the chest is an easily obtainable measure on your CT heart scan.)

The blood pressure you need for halting and reversing plaque growth on your heart scan is indeed 115/75 or less. (Not so low, however, that you're lightheaded.) This is the blood pressure that you were meant to have evolutionarily. It's also the blood pressure that helps tremendously in keeping your aorta from enlarging.

Watch for an upcoming exhaustive report on blood pressure and its plaque-raising effects and how to reduce it using nutritional strategies on the www.cureality.com membership website.

Is your doctor in cahoots with the hospital?

I got a call from a doctor about a patient we've seen in past.

"I've got Tricia in the office. She's been having some kind of chest and abdominal pain. I think it's esophageal reflux, but just to be safe I'm sending her to the hospital."

I advised this physician that, given Tricia's low heart scan score, she was unlikely to be having a coronary "event" like heart attack or unstable symptoms. It wasn't impossible, but just highly unlikely.

As the patient was without symptoms at the moment and had driven herself to his office, I offered to perform a stress test immediately. (Though stress tests are of limited usefulness in people without symptoms, they can be useful provocative maneuvers in people with symptoms of uncertain significance.)

The doctor declined. Tricia was, after all, in his office and he was responsible for any decisions despite any objections I voiced. Well, Tricia was directed by her doctor to go to a local hospital, though one with an especially notorious reputation for putting virtually anyone they can get their hands on through as many procedures as possible.

As you might guess, this doctor was closely associated with this hospital. He and his colleagues obtain incentives (or are penalized) if they do not generate revenue-producing procedures for the hospital.

So, guess what? Tricia ended up with several procedures, all of which yielded nothing--except $30,000 in revenues from Tricia's insurance company.

I harp on this deplorable state of affairs because it is utterly, painfully, and shamefully TRUE. Just look at the hospital and you'd better brace yourself for a series of tests that could cost you the equivalent of a nice 3 bedroom home. If they were truly necessary after the failure of preventive and other simple efforts, fine. But, all too often, they are driven by profit motives.

Could I have stopped this somehow from occurring? After all, Tricia was reasonably aware of the way we do things around here. I fear that even this failed to serve Tricia well. But I remain hopeful that, as we build broader awareness of these issues, that more and more people and physicians will stand up and refuse to tolerate the status quo.

Where is the Track Your Plaque program going?

I spend a lot of time worrying about how people can be helped to navigate through this program.

Take, for instance, the man in rural Texas who, while traveling in Dallas, got a heart scan on a whim. His score was 990. When he took the report back to his doctor, he got a smirk--and that's all. When he came to the Track Your Plaque program, he lacked a physician advocate to help him.

Or the woman from Florida who sought opinions from two reputable cardiologists for her heart scan score of 377. Both advised her that she needed a heart catheterization--despite her lack of symptoms, her 5-day-a-week exercise program, and normal stress test. She also lacks a physician advocate who acts on her behalf, helping her achieve success, rather than just churning her for money from hospital procedures.

For people like this and for others, I see the Track Your Plaque program evolving in several directions:

1) An online clinic--You enter and we take your "hand" and lead you step by step through the process, not only at the beginning, but over the months and years. This would help clear up some of the confusion and zigzags that some people experience trying to navigate through the program.

2) Develop physician and non-physician partners--The woman in Florida, for instance, could be referred to a doctor nearby who understands the program and is able to assist her. At present, this is virtually impossible because of the bias towards heart procedures, drugs as the sole treatment for heart disease risk, and the superficial physician-patient relationship. The majority of practicing physicians just don't understand the program despite the fact that it is based on sound clinical and experimental data. But it will in time.

Looking back, we've come a long way. I remember first having patients undergo heart scans 10 years ago. My colleagues laughed or called it "silly". The general public didn't know what they meant.

Now we're talking about how to broadcast the most powerful heart disease prevention program available in the world to a larger audience, but making it easier and more accessible. Mass media like Oprah's two hour-long spots helped, but we need to make the next leap. Not just identifying hidden heart disease to feed the hungry cardiovascular hospital procedure monster, but to educate/inform/empower the public on what to do with the scan once they've had it.

Who cares about triglycerides?

Walter's triglycerides were 231 mg. His LDL cholesterol was "favorable" at 111 mg, HDL likewise at 49 mg.

"Everything looks good," his doctor declared.

"Do you think the triglycerides are okay, too?" Walter asked.

"Well, the guidelines do say that triglycerides should be less than 150, but I believe you're close enough. Anyway, triglycerides don't really cause heart disease."


When I met Walter, I made several comments. First of all, in light of his heart scan score of 713, none of his numbers--HDL, LDL, or triglycerides-- were acceptable. But the triglycerides were glaringly and terribly too high.

Why? What exactly are triglycerides?

Triglycerides are a basic fat particle that, though they do not cause heart disease directly, trigger the formation of an array of abnormal lipoprotein particles in the blood that are among the most potent causes of heart disease known.

These abnormal lipoprotein particles include small LDL, VLDL, and IDL (intermediate-density lipoprotein--a really bad pattern). Excess triglycerides also cause HDL to drop. They also cause a distortion of HDL structure, causing the particles to become abnormally small. Small HDL is also useless HDL, unable to provide the protection that HDL is designed to do.

So Walter's elevated triglycerides are, in reality, a substantial red flag for an entire panel of abnormal particles that contribute to the growth of his coronary plaque.

So, if you get this kind of commentary on your triglycerides, ask for another opinion. (Track Your Plaque Members: Also see Triglycerides: Mother of meddlesome particles at http://www.cureality.com/library/fl_dp002triglycerides.asp.)

Total cholesterol and heart scans

Andy was fearful of heart disease in his life. At age 52, he'd already had four CT heart scans--one each year on or near his birthday.

Yet, when I looked at Andy's scans, his scores had been increasing 20-24% per year. Each and every score was greater by 20% or more over the previous.

So I asked Andy what steps he had taken to stop this relentless progression. "Well, I've always been real health conscious. But ever since my first scan, I really started sticking to a healthy diet, exercising nearly every day, and I take a bunch of supplements."

"What did your doctor advise?" I asked.

"Well, Dr. ---- said that nothing needed to be done, since my total cholesterol was always below 200."



Men's Health magazine's fabulous story about the folly of using total cholesterol to gauge heart disease risk.




Aaaauuuggghhh!! Wrong!

This man was, in fact, at rapidly escalating risk for heart attack. This rate of growth simply can't continue forever without igniting this bomb.

A total cholesterol below 200 is meaningless, as Andy's increasing coronary plaque proved. For instance, you can have a total cholesterol of 165 mg but with an HDL cholesterol of 27 mg. This would constitute very high risk for heart disease despite the low total cholesterol. The low HDL pattern is among the most common reasons for a misleading total cholesterol. Small LDL, high triglycerides, and lipoprotein (a) are other frequent reasons.

Andy, run the other way! Do not heed this doctor's advice! You need a solid answer to the question: Why exactly do I have coronary plaque in the first place?

Then, agree on a treatment program that corrects your specific causes.

Cardiologists out of touch

This weekend, I'm fulfilling some responsiblities I have every so often to some of the local hospitals. It gives me a chance to interact with many of my colleagues who are likewise "on call" for the weekend.

I tried to strike up several conversations with colleagues about how they were managing heart disease prevention. I received blank stares, puzzled looks, indifference. One colleague declared that 80 mg of Lipitor is all you need to know.

These same colleagues are the ones scrambling for the heart attack patients in the emergency room, climbing over one another for consultation in the hospital for patients with chest pain and heart failure. They're consumed with expanding the range of procedures they can perform.

Carotid stenting is hot. So is stenting of the leg arteries. Defibrillators have been a financial bonanza. Opportunities abound on how to add these procedures to a cardiologist's abilities.

But heart disease prevention? How about heart disease reversal?

Frankly, I'm embarassed by my colleagues' lack of interest. Imagine we had a cure for breast cancer--not a palliative therapy that just slows the disease down or prolongs life, but actually cures it once and for all. I would hope that all physicians and oncologists would learn how to accomplish this. What if instead they focused on learning new ways to remove breasts, administer new toxic chemotherapies, etc. but ignored the whole idea of cure?

This is what is happening with coronary plaque reversal. The answer is right in front of them, but the vast majority (99%) of cardiologists choose to ignore it. After all, prevention and reversal simply don't pay the bills.

That means that, in 2006, you simply cannot rely on your cardiologist to counsel you on how to achieve regression or reversal of coronary plaque. How about your internist, family physician, or primary care doctor? Well, they're busy doing pneumovax injections, Pap smears, managing knee and hip arthritis, low back pain, diarrhea, headaches, sinus infections and . . yes, dabbling in heart disease prevention.

And, for the most part, doing a miserable job of it. What you generally get echoes the drug manufacturers pitch: Take a statin drug, cut the fat in your diet.

Until the majority of doctors catch on, you're going to have to rely on sources like the Track Your Plaque program for better information.

What if your lipoproteins are perfect?



Sandy is a 56-year old woman--fit, slender, physically active, with no bad habits. A retired teacher, she has time to devote to her health. She bikes several days per week, mountain bikes, walks, and takes fitness classes. In short, she's the picture of perfect health.

Her heart scan score was not terribly impressive: 41. However, at her age, this modest score placed her in the 77th percentile. This suggested a heart attack risk of around 2-3% per year.

So we measured Sandy's lipoproteins. They were shockingly normal. In fact, Sandy is among the very rare person with absolutely no small LDL particles. All other patterns were just as favorable, including an HDL in the 80s.

This may seem like good news, but I find it disturbing. People are often initially upset by seeing multiple abnormal lipoprotein patterns. But lipoprotein abnormalities are the tools that we use to gain control over coronary plaque.

So what do we do when there are no abnormalities?

There are several issues to consider:

1) Your heart scan score reflects the sum total of your life up until that point. What if you were 20 lbs heavier 10 years earlier and your lipoproteins were abnormal during that period? Or you smoked until age 45 and quit? As helpful as they are, lipoproteins and related patterns are only a snapshot in time, unlike the heart scan score.

2) You have a vitamin D deficiency. This is unusual as a sole cause of coronary plaque. Much more commonly, it is a co-conspirator.

3) The heart scan is wrong--highly unlikely. Heart scans are actually quite easy, straightforward tests. (The only time this tends to happen is when scoring that appears in the circumflex coronary artery is actually in the nearby mitral valve. This really occurs only when there's very minimal calcium in the valve.)

4) There's a yet unidentified source of risk. Probably very rare but conceivable. For instance, there's an emerging sense that phopholipid patterns may prove to be coronary risks. One clinically available measure that we've not found very useful is phospholipase A2, known by the proprietary name "PLAC" test. (See http://www.plactest.com for more information from the manufacturer/distributor of the test.) But there's probably lots of others that may prove useful in future.

How often does it happen that someone fails to show any identifiable source for their coronary plaque? I can count the number of instances on two fingers--very unusual. (Thank goodness!)

Sandy's case is therefore quite unique. How should we approach her coronary plaque? In this unusual circumstance, lacking a cause, we tend to introduce therapies that may regress plaque independent of any measurable lipoprotein parameters. But that's a whole new conversation.

Fly to India for a bypass operation?


In the June 19, 2006 issue of People Magazine, there's an article called "The Doctor is in . . .INDIA". The report talks about how, with health care costs in the U.S. spiralling out of control, more and more Americans are leaving the country to have their procedure performed.

They tell the story of Mr. Carlo Gislimberti of New Mexico and cite these numbers:

Heart Surgery
Cost in U.S.: $200,000

Cost in India: $10,000


Mr. Gislimberti opted to have his coronary bypass operation in India for cost reasons.

But the People magazine report left out one other option: The Track Your Plaque program: $39.00

Do your part to save ballooning health care costs: Engage in a truly powerful program of heart disease prevention like the Track Your Plaque program. The cost difference is laughably huge. And you won't require a 12-inch chest incision.

Follow conventional guidelines and guess what? You're going to have a heart attack. Follow the American Heart Association diet and you'll have heart disease.

Cut to the chase. The only program that is able to detect, track, and control coronary plaque better than any other process I know of is this program.

Note: I am not proposing that a heart disease prevention program like Track Your Plaque can replace a procedure like coronary bypass when a dangerous situation has developed. The Track Your Plaque program is designed to be implemented in the years before heart surgery is required. That's when you have the greatest control over your fate.

Surprise: Heart scan score reversal

Gene is a jovial, fun-loving railroad worker who didn't take anything too seriously--including his heart scan score of 767.

This score placed Gene solidly in the 99th percentile (in the worst 1%). It came as no surprise to Gene. After all, his father died at age 36 of a heart attack and Gene's brother died at 60 of a heart attack. So Gene took life as it came and long ago decided not to fret about his fate.

But Gene's wife prodded him and prodded him to get the heart scan. That's when I met him.

Of course, Gene had been prescribed Lipitor by his doctor for a somewhat high LDL cholesterol. Our assessment uncovered several additional patterns including lipoprotein (a), small LDL, a pre-diabetic tendency, and a severe deficiency of vitamin D.

At 224 lb and 5 ft 6 inches in height, I felt that Gene was at least 40 lbs overweight.

One year later and with reasonable correction of all his patterns except weight loss and Gene's heart scan score was 590--a reduction of 23%!

Gene was thrilled, as was I. But, frankly, I was also surprised. Dramatic regression of coronary plaque tends to not occur so readily as long as pre-diabetic patterns persist and weight is not controlled.

The lesson: Often the only way to tell if you've achieved control or regression of coronary plaque is to have another heart scan. The tremendous variation in human responses never ceases to amaze me.

Call me when you're having chest pain


I met a patient, Anna, yesterday. She was quite frustrated and frightened.

At age 50, Anna suffered a heart attack and received a stent to her left anterior descending coronary artery. What she found upsetting is that, because several members of her family had suffered heart attacks in their 40s (Dad--heart attack at age 45, paternal uncle--heart attack age 40, and even another uncle with heart attack in his late 20s), she had repeatedly asked her doctor whether she was okay.

She received the usual array of false assurances: "You're feeling fine, right? Then don't worry about it." "Look. Your cholesterol is in the normal range. Even your cholesterol/HDL ratio is fine." "Women don't get heart disease until later in life."

All proved absolutely false. As we talked, Anna exclaimed, "I think what I've been told all along is that we'll take you seriously when you finally have a heart attack!"

She's exactly right. The vast majority of times, heart disease is discovered by accident, usually because of an "event" like heart attack. This is like changing the oil in your car when it finally breaks down--it's too late.

CT heart scan, followed by lipoprotein testing and associated values, then correction of your specific causes. It's that simple.
A wheat-free 2010

A wheat-free 2010

A Heart Scan Blog reader sent this fascinating description of his wheat-free adventure.

Whenever I discuss this notion of going wheat-free and the incredible health effects that develop, I invariably receive comments or emails saying something like "I eat wheat and feel fine. That can't be true." The problem is that not everybody needs to go wheat-free. 20-30% of people can include wheat in their diet and suffer little more than weight gain, some not at all.

But stories like Michael's (below) are commonplace in my experience. I've had many patients who, at first, refused to believe that wheat exposure might be the underlying cause for health struggles. But they finally give it a try and find that rashes, arthritis, acid reflux, irritable bowel symptoms, mood swings, anger, etc. are miraculously improved or gone.

Anyway, hear what Michael has to tell us:


Dr. Davis,

I want to thank you. I was browsing the web a while back and happened to stumble upon your blog post about wheat belly. The first thing that caught my attention was that I thought you had somehow gotten a photograph of me. The young man you posted an image of looked exactly like me. So I read what you had to say. After reading, I thought "Four weeks isn’t so bad. I think I can handle this."

It has now been nine weeks and all I can say is that I am completely amazed. Let me say first that twice in the past twenty years I have been tested for allergies. The first time I was tested I showed a slight reaction to Timothy Grass, but not enough to cause me any problems. The second testing I did not show a reaction to anything. So, I have always assumed that my chronic sinus problem were due to sensitivities to environmental pollutions. Now I am not so sure. I would like to list for you everything that has happened to me since I eliminated wheat from my diet.

1. I have lost a total of 12 pounds in the last 9 weeks.
2. I have lost 1 ¼ inches of belly fat
3. I have lost a tremendous amount of fat from my neck.
4. My entire life I have had problems with oily hair. I could wash my hair and three hours later I looked as if I hadn’t washed in a week. Now my hair stays clean and soft for two to three days without shampoo.
5. My hair was always flat and stringy. Now it has lots of body.
6. I used to have thick layers of dry skin on my scalp. It would come loose in chunks as large as a fingernail. That dry scalp is gone.
7. I used to have dry flaky skin that seemed to secrete oil. That no longer happens. My skin is now soft and smooth.
8. I have lived with bad acne for at least 35 years. Now it is hard to find a pimple on my body.
9. I have always had to fight dehydration. That is no longer a problem.
10. I used to drink two large cups of coffee every morning just to be able to function. I now have enough energy that I have eliminated caffeine from my diet.
11. I sleep more soundly than ever before and my dreams are clear and vivid.
12. My thought processes are more active and clear than they have ever been.
13. My chronic sinus issue is now a thing of the past.
14. I used to have problems with getting the “shakes” if I had gone more than a couple of hours without eating. It was as if I was suffering from low blood sugar. I would even be afraid that I would pass out. Now all I feel is hunger. I can go all day without eating and never feel in danger of losing consciousness.


Today is Thursday. This past Monday my wife and I were eating out and I ordered a burger without a bun. What I didn’t realize was that the burger would arrive covered in onion rings. I knocked the mountain of onion rings onto the plate but there were still a couple that were embedded in the cheese. I decided, what the hell, a couple of onion rings shouldn’t make that much of a difference. I will not make that mistake again anytime soon. Within 30 minutes I felt like there was a steel spike going through my left eye socket. I don’t remember ever being in that much pain. My sinuses were exploding. This morning, as I write this, I still feel the vestiges of that pain. Just enough that I know it is there. But after two and a half days, I am at least able to function again.

I owe you a debt of gratitude. You may have just saved my life. In the very least you have given me the means to improve my life in ways that I never thought possible.

Thank you so much,
Michael B.



Now, if wheat exposure can do that in Michael, what damage can it do in other people?

Personally, I previously experienced many of the same symptoms that Michael suffered, all gone with wheat elimination.

My advice: If you have any inkling that you might have a wheat sensitivity, make a New Year's resolution to stay wheat-free for 4 weeks and see whether you can feel any difference. Not everybody will, but many will be telling us about the dramatic health turnarounds they experienced.

Comments (22) -

  • Anonymous

    1/2/2010 4:22:52 AM |

    worrisome. with such a dramatic reaction to wheat, should he consider testing for celiac? Should he encourage his relatives to test for gluten sensitivity? should he make the effort to avoid even miniscule amounts of gluten, such as in OTC meds or supplements?

  • Eclecbit

    1/2/2010 4:23:40 AM |

    Wheat-free is the way to be! Before going wheat-free I was taking anti-histamines and decongestants several times a week and my sinuses would still be hurting. My doctor was no help, he would just blame it on allergies. Now that I'm wheat-free I can go for months without a sinus headache and when I do get one I can usually trace it to something that I ate.

    I also haven't had a cold or flu in the 1 1/2 years that I've been wheat-free and the joint pain in my knees and fingers is gone along with my chronic cough. Now I'm just dealing with some linger thyroid issues.

    I see so many people at my work that would benefit from going wheat free, but it's difficult to bring up the subject with them. I guess my New Year's resolution will be to convince at least one person that I know to go wheat-free for at least 4 weeks.

  • elanecu

    1/2/2010 7:21:54 AM |

    Are we to infer that the belly was from wheat and the sinus problem from onions?

  • Dr. William Davis

    1/2/2010 1:40:31 PM |

    I should have mentioned that the majority of people who show positive effects of wheat elimination  are negative for antibodies for celiac.

    While somewhere around 1 in 100-133 Americans have celiac disease (and the Celiac Disease Foundation estimates that only 3% know it), I would estimate that many, many times that have some form of wheat intolerance.

  • Anonymous

    1/2/2010 4:08:11 PM |

    Gluten is poison.

    A good post by Dr. Harris
    http://www.paleonu.com/panu-weblog/2009/12/28/avoid-poison-or-neutralize-it.html

    "The biggest circle in the Venn diagram encompasses 83% of the population –all the smaller circles plus those who might show evidence of an innate response but in whom testing for antibodies may show nothing, and who therefore would never be known to have been damaged by gluten consumption, even if they had MS, schizophrenia, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, Grave’s disease. Lupus, Type I diabetes, Sjogren disease, etc. or any other of the many diseases that travel with celiac as a consequence of leaky gut and ensuing molecular mimicry that occurs when you damage your gut with wheat."

  • JD

    1/2/2010 4:49:15 PM |

    Here is an interesting abstract from Science Daily on the possible cause of irritable bowel syndrome: Breakthrough on Causes of Inflammatory Bowel Disease http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091217094905.htm

    ""All the food that we eat is foreign to our body," Dr Eastaff-Leung says. "In healthy people the immune system has a mechanism to tolerate these foods and not react. But some people do not have enough of these regulatory cells and their body overreacts and goes into attack mode. That is where the inflammation occurs," she says."

    One would think wheat causes varying degrees of inflammation as well.

  • Ryan Koch @ Health Matters to Me

    1/2/2010 5:56:03 PM |

    Great post, Dr. Davis.  I reference your blog frequently to explain wheat's affects on health.  You are doing a great service to many people by promoting such a simple, yet transformational dietary change.

    Thank you!

  • Flowerdew Onehundred

    1/2/2010 8:02:53 PM |

    If your health improves from eliminating gluten grains, why even *bother* testing for celiac?  There's no treatment except to continue eating a clean diet, so what's the point of having an official diagnosis?

    No one demands to see your celiac card to serve you a burger without a bun or a salad without croutons!

    I had pretty random symptoms until I developed what turned out to be secondary lactose intolerance.  I had never had a problem with lactose, but I tried taking lactaid first...and that did absolutely nothing.  I researched why that would be, and I wound up eliminating gluten.  

    In the rear-view mirror, it all makes sense now.  My mystery rash *was* dermatitis herpetiformis after all.  I always felt like a million bucks on Atkins induction and my digestion *improved* - this is not what most people report the first week they do Atkins.  I used to have tinnitus, and if I accidentally eat wheat, it comes back.  I had a very hard time controlling my weight, and now I know why.

    I now only eat almost no grains at all, and I have no desire to go back to the bad old days of being bloated and crabby and experiencing a late-afternoon sleepy spell!

    Oh, and after eight weeks off gluten, the lactose intolerance completely disappeared.

  • Anne

    1/2/2010 9:17:10 PM |

    elanecu - the problem with the onions is they were probably coated in wheat.

    Scientists and doctors try to discovery how to change genes and manipulate the immune system, but the real answer to many chronic diseases may be as close as the food on our dinner plate.

  • Neonomide

    1/2/2010 11:46:55 PM |

    I'm going to try going 100% wheat-free, thanks! But it's easier said than done, as it's everywhere. I seem to have a very different reaction to grains depending largely on what I eat. Often (occasional) piece of bread is OK, but cereals are not. Bloating and periods on excess and unlogical hunger may follow.

    I hate to always talk about how things are here in Finland, but we also have that stupid "eat grains 6-9 times a day" dogma that americans have. Yet I think we have, on average, a bit more choice as rice, oat, barley and rye are just as popular here as wheat. But wheat still exists in so many foods, because gluten is so versatile in food processing and baking.

    If you have an access I beg you to check out this study in GUT on gluten if you haven't yet:

    http://gut.bmj.com/content/56/6/889.extract


    If a staggering 83% of the population might show evidence of an innate response to gluten, how can we know who is safe from ravages of wheat consumption ?

  • Amy B.

    1/3/2010 12:49:46 AM |

    elanecu - I am Michael B.'s wife - the problem with the onion rings was that they had been battered (with a wheat-flour based batter) and fried.

    I have been on this wheat-free diet along with Michael. The changes that I have experienced are minuscule in comparison to his, but I have experienced an increase in energy and better hydration. As Dr. Davis has pointed out, not everyone will experience such drastic changes. But I have seen first-hand that it DOES work wonders for some people, and even though I haven't experienced any drastic changes, I do plan to continue eating wheat-free along with Michael. And I would like to add my thanks to you, Dr. Davis!

  • Peter

    1/3/2010 1:17:19 PM |

    I wonder about flourless bread made from sprouted wheat, quite popular here in Portland, OR.  It doesn't seem to budge my blood glucose much at all.  If it doesn't raise my blood glucose is it unlikely to be raising small LDL?

  • Susan

    1/3/2010 8:00:00 PM |

    I too thought gluten was fine with me -- right up until I was diagnosed with an autoimmune disease, and no matter how many drugs they threw at me I didn't improve AT ALL until I eliminated wheat. It took a year for me to figure this out, and I'm so glad I did, because my doctors never mentioned it as a possibility.

    I now eat no grains, potatoes, soy, corn, or sugar and I've experienced a dramatic improvement in my condition.

  • Anonymous

    1/4/2010 12:54:09 PM |

    Neonomid,
    Wheat, barley, rye all contain gluten. Oats are frequently cross contaminated by gluten grains.
    Some celiacs also have trouble with avenin, the gluten in oats.

  • Anonymous

    1/4/2010 1:04:41 PM |

    Flowerdew Onehundred,

    If you have a formal diagnosis of DH, you are considered to have celiac. Getting a biopsy for DH is the easiest way to go for sure, compared to imperfect blood tests, endoscopys, and pathology reports.

    Any one individual may not consider a formal diagnosis worthwhile in the short run, but the health care system is set up differently. Good luck with the pharmacy and the insurance, if you should ever need a gluten free medication. And best wishes should you ever be hospitalized and need a special diet.  

    It can also help family members get the proper screening. All first degree relatives of celiacs should be screened periodically, even if asymptomatic.

  • joe

    1/4/2010 1:49:46 PM |

    For years I was using two inhalers to deal with severe seasonal allergies. When I went on the Atkins diet, I noticed that I didn't need the inhalers, and, in fact, didn't have so much as a runny nose. Through trial and error, I discovered it was the wheat that was triggering the allergies. I haven't used an inhaler in more than 10 years now, and I definitely don't eat wheat, or any other grain for that matter.

  • O Primitivo

    1/25/2010 12:54:11 AM |

    "Britons May Be Avoiding Wheat Unnecessarily, UK" - http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/176895.php

  • Anonymous

    3/29/2010 10:02:45 AM |

    I had a similar reaction to wheat, but genetic testing was negative for celiac disease, putting me in the more common camp of "gluten intolerant".

  • Deb

    7/14/2010 8:49:51 AM |

    I was wondering about the spelt flour used in some health food store breads. Is that wheat free? Or is there an acceptable brand of bread available? I noticed at a yoga center my sinuses were much better due to absence of eggs, meat and I believe also wheat products.

  • Viagra Online

    8/24/2010 5:31:53 PM |

    I always try to take cake myself by I just want to know which could be the perfect diet to be healthier. I'm diabetic.

  • buy jeans

    11/2/2010 8:53:04 PM |

    Personally, I previously experienced many of the same symptoms that Michael suffered, all gone with wheat elimination.

  • Shreela

    3/22/2011 6:03:27 PM |

    I also follow Dr. Scot Lewey, a GI, who posted this:
    Gluten Proven to Cause Digestive Symptoms and Fatigue in Non-Celiacs

    My GP tested my blood for celiac, even though I told him I hadn't eaten any wheat in many weeks, but he looked it up in a lab book which didn't say being wheat free was necessary (I suspect that lab book might have been outdated, but forgot to ask at that time). I was negative.

    Although eventually my 3rd GI figured out I'm most likely intolerant to food additives (which ones are up to me to figure out via my own rule out diets - figured 3 out, but either there's more, or I haven't figured out all the names for the same food additives).

    Well anyway, I went back on wheat since white wheat didn't trigger my "gut attacks" (extreme inflammation), and noticed my sinus problems returned.

    Also, I was able to go much longer without hypoglycemic symptoms (not diabetic, but quite familiar with low blood sugar symptoms).

    So now I "mostly" avoid wheat, and can still tell if I've overdone it (more than 1-2 times a week with a moderate amount). My sinuses act up, and once I had a few days of shakes and light-headedness until I stayed off wheat for a few more weeks.

Loading