2

votes

Best link to show the poisonous effects of wheat?

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created January 09, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Still trying to convince a few close relatives. I'm looking for a NONPALEO link that outlines the ill effects of wheat.

2f931662684a7747be36255c8b486228

(1049)

on January 13, 2012
at 04:55 PM

Nonchalantly and very honestly mention how good you feel (if you do) why you feel better, what this diet has done for you.....and leave it at that. You're relatives may eventually convince themselves. When they ASK for direction..point them. I have learned to answer questions when asked or shut my mouth, otherwise the topic becomes a challenge. (who's right-who's wrong) It's frustrating!!

2f931662684a7747be36255c8b486228

(1049)

on January 13, 2012
at 04:49 PM

Just my point Matt, no point at all in 'pushing' the argument. I know it sounds like defeatism. It's kind of like a half empty train heading to paradise (nobody gets on) but try selling the last ticket on a train to hell and people will fight over it. Some people just need to wait until something becomes the "thing" to do and go with the flow. And right now the biggest flow is.. well..."the standard" (SAD).

7b91be6e22d4e2960f40935e306bdee5

(245)

on January 11, 2012
at 02:18 PM

Exactly Matt. Every time we get into a discussion about diet, and I say something she wants to see proof of, the only "proof" I can find is Rob Wolf, Session, or others that dont really reference a medical source. Example - lectins and anti nutrients. She's truly interested but wants to see a source other than a "paleo" one.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on January 11, 2012
at 01:00 PM

When you compare the real, chronic effects of the high grain diet with the immediate, acute claimed effects in the paleo diet book literature there is a disconnect. I find reading Naipaul's description of the East Indian vegetarian diaspora in Trinidad to be a more compelling argument against the high grain/veg fat/meatless diet than "bleeds-it-leads" alarmism.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41747)

on January 11, 2012
at 12:34 PM

"that 20 or so yrs of forgoing grains will make them live better or longer" - reference? That's the problem the OP is trying to address. We make these SWAG (scientific wild-ass guess) and take them for gospel.

4ec0fe4b4aab327f7efa2dfb06b032ff

(5145)

on January 09, 2012
at 11:52 PM

Linking to the Huffington Post for anything science related is no way to win an argument.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41747)

on January 09, 2012
at 09:24 PM

Call it a toxin, though I'm not sure the average person would react to it as a toxin.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on January 09, 2012
at 09:03 PM

And Wheat Belly isn't considered ancestral/paleo, so it's a corroborating source.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:56 PM

There was that ex vivo zonulin paper (in non-celiacs), too, but I think the in vivo human studies didn't show it, too. I haven't heard of too many other non-celiac gluten studies.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:53 PM

Fair enough. I find it to be a compelling piece, personally, but understand not everyone does.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:40 PM

But the OP is looking for compelling evidence that wheat is poison. I don't see it. If inflammation were the smoking gun, I would expect to see very high CRP's as a sign of trauma.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:32 PM

You have to look at it in more detail, thhq. The reduced inflammation is important for a wide swath of diseases. And the gut problems are likely to come from a decrease in soluble fiber for the gut bacteria (which is an important finding, since it's a potential caveat of a gluten-free diet). An important followup would certainly be for them to do the same experiment, but make sure to include prebiotic foods to account for the lack of beta-glucans from wheat, such as apples, oranges, onions, mushrooms, etc.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:25 PM

? This article indicates a decrease in beneficial gut flora for the subjects following the GFD, along with an increase in e coli. It's hardly compelling evidence that wheat is poisonous, but could be taken to mean that a gluten-containing diet is beneficial.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:16 PM

Poison for celiacs is a fair comment. But telling someone that eats wheat and has no ill effects that they're being poisoned will tag you for the loony bin.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 07:34 PM

Man, I cannot type today.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 07:33 PM

Yeah, I really liked their conclusion that the reduced beneficial gut bacteria was due to lack of prebiotics, too. When I first went really strict on paleo and cut out fruit, I felt really terrible. I added back some orange (or apple) once or twice a week and felt tons better, presumably for the prebiotics. I now make sure to include more onions and mushrooms, as well.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 07:32 PM

Yeah, I really liked their conclusion that the reduced beneficial gut bacteria was due to lack of probiotics, too. When I first went really strict on paleo and cut out fruit, I felt really terrible. I added back some orange (or apple) once or twice a week and felt tons better, presumably for the prebiotics. I now make sure to include more onions, as well. And mushrooms are great for prebiotics, too.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on January 09, 2012
at 07:28 PM

Without claiming that I totally understood the abstract, I do make a conscious effort to eat prebiotic foods since I'm not feeding my gut flora with gluten. I'm also using two probiotic foods and my gut is much happier than it ever was on gluten. I know when I was on SAD my doctor was very surprised that I tested negative for inflammation (I was too as I felt awful) so it will be interesting this winter to see how my blood tests go after 8 months of ancestral eating.

7dc950fc76a046048e683d2a27dced37

on January 09, 2012
at 07:16 PM

I think "poisonous" is overstating it.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on January 09, 2012
at 06:44 PM

Oh, you beat me! I copied the link and came back to post it also. Great minds working together, I guess.

  • 7b91be6e22d4e2960f40935e306bdee5

    asked by

    (245)
  • Views
    1.3K
  • Last Activity
    1429D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

5 Answers

2
7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 06:42 PM

My favorite recent non-meta-analysis for non-celiac populations is this 2010 study, where after a month of eating gluten free, the study participants had decreased inflammation.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:25 PM

? This article indicates a decrease in beneficial gut flora for the subjects following the GFD, along with an increase in e coli. It's hardly compelling evidence that wheat is poisonous, but could be taken to mean that a gluten-containing diet is beneficial.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:40 PM

But the OP is looking for compelling evidence that wheat is poison. I don't see it. If inflammation were the smoking gun, I would expect to see very high CRP's as a sign of trauma.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on January 09, 2012
at 07:28 PM

Without claiming that I totally understood the abstract, I do make a conscious effort to eat prebiotic foods since I'm not feeding my gut flora with gluten. I'm also using two probiotic foods and my gut is much happier than it ever was on gluten. I know when I was on SAD my doctor was very surprised that I tested negative for inflammation (I was too as I felt awful) so it will be interesting this winter to see how my blood tests go after 8 months of ancestral eating.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 07:34 PM

Man, I cannot type today.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:56 PM

There was that ex vivo zonulin paper (in non-celiacs), too, but I think the in vivo human studies didn't show it, too. I haven't heard of too many other non-celiac gluten studies.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:53 PM

Fair enough. I find it to be a compelling piece, personally, but understand not everyone does.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 07:33 PM

Yeah, I really liked their conclusion that the reduced beneficial gut bacteria was due to lack of prebiotics, too. When I first went really strict on paleo and cut out fruit, I felt really terrible. I added back some orange (or apple) once or twice a week and felt tons better, presumably for the prebiotics. I now make sure to include more onions and mushrooms, as well.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 07:32 PM

Yeah, I really liked their conclusion that the reduced beneficial gut bacteria was due to lack of probiotics, too. When I first went really strict on paleo and cut out fruit, I felt really terrible. I added back some orange (or apple) once or twice a week and felt tons better, presumably for the prebiotics. I now make sure to include more onions, as well. And mushrooms are great for prebiotics, too.

7841848bd0c27c64353c583fb7971242

(7275)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:32 PM

You have to look at it in more detail, thhq. The reduced inflammation is important for a wide swath of diseases. And the gut problems are likely to come from a decrease in soluble fiber for the gut bacteria (which is an important finding, since it's a potential caveat of a gluten-free diet). An important followup would certainly be for them to do the same experiment, but make sure to include prebiotic foods to account for the lack of beta-glucans from wheat, such as apples, oranges, onions, mushrooms, etc.

4ec0fe4b4aab327f7efa2dfb06b032ff

(5145)

on January 09, 2012
at 11:52 PM

Linking to the Huffington Post for anything science related is no way to win an argument.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on January 09, 2012
at 06:44 PM

Oh, you beat me! I copied the link and came back to post it also. Great minds working together, I guess.

1
2f931662684a7747be36255c8b486228

(1049)

on January 11, 2012
at 10:24 AM

I find that most people opt for immediately results (and have to deal with the consequences). Hard to explain to a newbie or nonbie that 20 or so yrs of forgoing grains will make them live better or longer. And most people could selfishly give a hoot about those 'effects' unless they're personal. May be easier to pinpoint one single aspect of their lives or health that they would like to change quickly: Sinues, weight, tiredness, complexion, discomfort (ex: instestinal, headaches)...and find the associations with wheat.

And those who have very slight symptoms that are quite varied, will probably never find the change worth their while. (such as my husband- you can explain all you want- he feels fine) Some just fair better than others, while some are hunched over with bellyaches.

I really think people do listen to their bodies more than they listen to others. And that takes most a long long long time. If their body is not screaming yet, you can scream all you want and probably won't be heard.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on January 11, 2012
at 01:00 PM

When you compare the real, chronic effects of the high grain diet with the immediate, acute claimed effects in the paleo diet book literature there is a disconnect. I find reading Naipaul's description of the East Indian vegetarian diaspora in Trinidad to be a more compelling argument against the high grain/veg fat/meatless diet than "bleeds-it-leads" alarmism.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41747)

on January 11, 2012
at 12:34 PM

"that 20 or so yrs of forgoing grains will make them live better or longer" - reference? That's the problem the OP is trying to address. We make these SWAG (scientific wild-ass guess) and take them for gospel.

7b91be6e22d4e2960f40935e306bdee5

(245)

on January 11, 2012
at 02:18 PM

Exactly Matt. Every time we get into a discussion about diet, and I say something she wants to see proof of, the only "proof" I can find is Rob Wolf, Session, or others that dont really reference a medical source. Example - lectins and anti nutrients. She's truly interested but wants to see a source other than a "paleo" one.

2f931662684a7747be36255c8b486228

(1049)

on January 13, 2012
at 04:49 PM

Just my point Matt, no point at all in 'pushing' the argument. I know it sounds like defeatism. It's kind of like a half empty train heading to paradise (nobody gets on) but try selling the last ticket on a train to hell and people will fight over it. Some people just need to wait until something becomes the "thing" to do and go with the flow. And right now the biggest flow is.. well..."the standard" (SAD).

2f931662684a7747be36255c8b486228

(1049)

on January 13, 2012
at 04:55 PM

Nonchalantly and very honestly mention how good you feel (if you do) why you feel better, what this diet has done for you.....and leave it at that. You're relatives may eventually convince themselves. When they ASK for direction..point them. I have learned to answer questions when asked or shut my mouth, otherwise the topic becomes a challenge. (who's right-who's wrong) It's frustrating!!

1
De267f213b375efca5da07890e5efc25

(3747)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:41 PM

Perfect Health Diet has the best discussion that I've seen so far, covering about 12 pages. You can either get a copy of the book to read it or, if a Jaminet wants to chime in with persmission, I'll post a copy to just that section here. You might also want to check out Wheat Bellies. I haven't read it myself but given the title I'd guess there's a good, if verbose, answer to your question there.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on January 09, 2012
at 09:03 PM

And Wheat Belly isn't considered ancestral/paleo, so it's a corroborating source.

0
Medium avatar

(10611)

on January 09, 2012
at 08:59 PM

Try some Ned Kock analysis:

http://healthcorrelator.blogspot.com/2011/10/china-study-ii-animal-protein-wheat-and.html?m=1

Ned has used the China Study results to extract positive correlations between wheat flour and mortality. As I recall increased wheat means less meat in the diets, which confounds things. The statistics aren't strong enough evidence to say that wheat is a poison, only that wheat can shave a little bit of time off of your life expectancy.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!