In search of wheat: Emmer

23. June 2010 William Davis (13)
While einkorn is a 14-chromosome ancient wheat (containing the so-called "A" genome), emmer is a 28-chromosome wheat (containing the "A" and "B" genomes, the "B" likely contributed by goat grass 9000 years ago).

Both einkorn and emmer originally grew wild in the Fertile Crescent, allowing Neolithic Natufians to harvest the wild grasses with stone sickles and grind the seeds into porridge.

Having tested einkorn with only a modest rise in blood sugar but without the gastrointestinal or neurological effects I experienced with conventional whole wheat bread, I next tested bread made with emmer grain.

The emmer grain was ground just like the other two grains, cardiac dietitian Margaret Pfeiffer doing all the work of grinding and baking. Margaret added nothing but water, yeast, and a little salt. The emmer rose a little more than einkorn, but not to the degree of conventional whole wheat.

I tested my blood sugar beforehand: 89 mg/dl. I then ate 4 oz of the emmer bread. It tasted very similar to conventional whole wheat, but not as nutty as einkorn. Also not as heavy as einkorn, only slightly heavier than conventional whole wheat.

One hour later, blood sugar: 147 mg/dl. I felt slightly queasy for about 2-3 hours, but that was the end of it. No abdominal cramps, no sleep disturbance or crazy dreams, no nausea, no change in ability to concentrate.

I asked four other wheat-sensitive people to try the emmer bread. Likewise, nobody reacted negatively (though nobody tested blood sugar).

So it seems to me, based on this small, unscientific experience, that ancient einkorn (A) and emmer (AB) wheat seem to act like carbohydrates, similar to, say, rice or quinoa, but lack many of the other adverse effects induced by conventional wheat.

Modern wheat , Triticum aestivum, contains variations on the "A," "B," and "D" genomes, the "D" contributed by hybridization with Triticum tauschii at about the same time that emmer wheat hybridization occurred. It is likely that proteins coded by the "D" genome are the source of most of the problems with wheat products: immune, neurologic, gastrointestinal destruction, airway inflammation (asthma), increase in appetite, etc. This is consistent with observations made in studies that attempt to pinpoint the gliadin proteins that trigger celiac, the area in which much of this research originates.

If I ever would like an indulgence of cookies or cupcakes, I think that I will order some more einkorn grain from Eli Rogosa.
Tags :

Comments (13) -

  • Stephan

    6/23/2010 5:24:11 PM |

    Thanks for subjecting yourself to these experiments!  Very interesting.  I have a friend who reacts poorly to wheat but tolerates spelt.

  • Anonymous

    6/23/2010 5:35:44 PM |

    Wheat is eaten everywhere in the world. I'd hope GM crop scientists design a variety which can solve this problem.

  • k

    6/24/2010 2:40:27 AM |

    If I am not mistaken, corn is also the result of the domestication of wild grasses existing some 8,000 years ago. Fooling with mother nature put us on a collision course with consequences.

  • Anne

    6/25/2010 2:25:31 AM |

    My concern is that the body could be reacting without symptoms. Could  these ancient grains cause inflammation even though there is no obvious reaction? I have lived 7 years without gluten and have no desire to add it back to my diet. Before I eliminated gluten I was very ill. It is not worth the risk to me.

  • Anonymous

    6/25/2010 4:11:10 AM |

    Dr. Davis,

    In your experience, in terms of small LDL and the like, what's better: a high peak of 150 that's brought down relatively quickly or a lower peak, but extended over a longer duration?

    Thanks,
    David

  • Dr. William Davis

    6/25/2010 3:25:38 PM |

    Anne--

    Please don't interpret these casual observations to mean that we should eat einkorn.

    My goal with this little experience is to gain an understanding of where along the way of wheat's 10,000+ year human consumption history did things go wrong.

    It seems to me that humans could have gotten away with eating einkorn much more freely, with fewer health problems than with modern wheat. I still would like to know where the extreme adverse effects were acquired, however. I suspect this occured in the 1960s and 1970s with the hybridization experiments conducted in Mexico. more on that later.

  • Dr. William Davis

    6/25/2010 3:26:15 PM |

    Anon--

    No data. I suspect that the high peak is worse, but that is based on no formal data.

  • Anonymous

    6/26/2010 9:48:57 AM |

    FODMAPs comprise a monosaccharide (fructose), a disaccharide (lactose), oligosaccharides (fructans and galactans), and polyols.

    In one study, as obese people lose weight, the balance between the Firmicutes and the Bacteroidetes changes - the latter increasing in abundance as an overweight person gets slimmer.

    Fructans, found in wheat, are fermented by bacteria in the large intestine into short chain fatty acids.


    Besides human metabolism, the digestion of wheat is also affected by how it is metabolized by the particular intestinal flora inhabiting a person.


    Sources:

    Evidence-based dietary management of functional gastrointestinal symptoms: The FODMAP approach

    An obesity-associated gut microbiome with increased capacity for energy harvest


    Food tables: fructose



    Fructose in the diet appears to be even more dangerous in the presence of trans-fats.


    Source:

    High Levels of Fructose, Trans Fats Lead to Significant Liver Disease, Says Study

    "The investigators found that mice fed the normal calorie chow diet remained lean and did not have fatty liver disease. Mice fed high calorie diets (trans-fat alone or a combination of trans-fat and high fructose) became obese and had fatty liver disease.

    "Interestingly, it was only the group fed the combination of trans-fat and high fructose which developed the advanced fatty liver disease which had fibrosis," says Dr. Kohli. "This same group also had increased oxidative stress in the liver, increased inflammatory cells, and increased levels of plasma oxidative stress markers.""

  • Tom Moertel

    6/26/2010 7:47:08 PM |

    Your experience with einkorn and emmer is interesting. They do not seem to cause you the problems that wheat does, and that evidence supports the theory that they are less harmful than wheat.  But the same evidence makes another theory equally plausible: that foods such as wheat harm you through pathways that form only through repeated exposure.  Under this theory, einkorn and emmer could be just as harmful as wheat but, being novel to your diet, haven't had enough time for their pathways to form.

    It would be interesting, then, to learn what happens if you were to incorporate einkorn or emmer into your diet more regularly.

  • carrmh37

    6/27/2010 1:48:06 AM |

    This abstract would seem to support your view that it may be a modern phenomenon.

    Journal of Medicinal Food
    Effects of Short-Term Consumption of Bread Obtained by an Old Italian Grain Variety on Lipid, Inflammatory, and Hemorheological Variables: An Intervention Study

    http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/jmf.2009.0092

    Michael

  • Anya

    9/9/2010 11:45:05 AM |

    Naturopath David Getoff recently did a podcast on this subject, it is worth listening to: http://naturopath4you.com/mp3s/Gluten%202010%20Final.MP3

  • lindaharper

    9/11/2010 8:47:02 PM |

    Just wondering if you have experimented with fermenting the wheat or sprouting wheat and then drying it to make bread. I've read  that making bread through this method helps celiac problems and wondered if there is a connection  since soaking and/or sprouting neutralizes the phytic acid and supposedly aids in digestion and keeps blood sugars from rising as much.

  • Janet Creamer

    11/30/2012 3:07:09 AM |

    Wondering if there is a difference in European wheat types verses American. I have illness, vomiting and nausea when I consume wheat here in the US. But when I tried it in France, Germany and Switzerland, I did not have any problems. I thought it might be the way US wheat is processed, but it might be the wheat type, as well.

    Thank you,
    Janet Creamer

Add comment

Loading
Dr. Jarvik, is niacin as bad as it sounds?

Dr. Jarvik, is niacin as bad as it sounds?

20. October 2007 William Davis (5)
A popular health newsletter, Everyday Health, carried this headline:

A Cholesterol-Busting Vitamin?
Did you know that niacin, one of the B vitamins, is also a potent cholesterol fighter?
Find out how niacin can help reduce choleseterol.

At doses way above the Recommended Dietary Allowance — say 1,000–2,500 mg a day (1–2.5 grams) — crystalline nicotinic acid acts as a drug instead of a vitamin. It can reduce total cholesterol levels by up to 25%, lowering LDL and raising HDL levels, and can rapidly lower the blood level of triglycerides. It does so by reducing the liver’s production of VLDL, which is ordinarily converted into LDL.


I'd agree with that, except that it is rare to require doses higher than 1000-1500 mg per day unless you are treating lipoprotein(a) and using niacin as a tool for dramatic drops in LDL. But for just raising HDL, shifting HDL into the healthy large class, reducing small LDL, and for reduction of heart attack risk, 1000-1500 mg is usually sufficient; taking more yields little or no further effect.

But after that positive comment comes this:

Niacin is safe — except in people with chronic liver disease or certain other conditions, including diabetes and peptic ulcer. . . However, it has numerous side effects. It can cause rashes and aggravate gout, diabetes, or peptic ulcers. Early in therapy, it can cause facial flushing for several minutes soon after a dose, although this response often stops after about two weeks of therapy and can be reduced by taking aspirin or ibuprofen half an hour before taking the niacin. A sustained-release preparation of niacin (Niaspan) appears to have fewer side effects, but may cause more liver function abnormalities, especially when combined with a statin.


Strange. After a headline clearly designed to pull readers in, clearly stating niacin's benefits, the article then proceeds to scare the pants off you with side-effects.

But look to the side and above the text: Ah . . . two prominent advertisements for Lipitor, complete with Dr. Robert Jarvik's photo. "I've studied the human heart for a lifetime. I trust Lipitor to keep my heart healthy."

Niacin bad. Lipitor good. Even celebrity doc says so. Sounds like bait and switch to me. "You could try niacin--if you dare. But you could also try Lipitor."

Who is Dr. Jarvik, anyway, that he serves as spokesman (or at least figurehead) for this $13 billion dollar a year drug? Of course, he is the 1982 inventor of the Jarvik artificial heart, surely an admirable accomplishment. But does that qualify him to speak about heart disease prevention and cholesterol drugs?

Jarvik has never--never--actually prescribed Lipitor, since he never completed any formal medical training beyond obtaining his Medical Doctor degree, nor has he ever had a license to practice medicine. He does, however, continue in his effort to provide artificial heart devices, principally for implantation as a "bridge" to transplantation, i.e., to sustain a patient temporarily who is dying of end-stage heart failure.

So where does his expertise in heart disease prevention come from? It's beyond me. Perhaps it was the thousands of dollars likely paid to him. That will make an "expert" out of just about anybody.

Robert Bazell, science reporter, for CNBC, made this report on the Jarvik-Lipitor connection in his March, 2007 report, Is this celebrity doctor's TV ad right for you?

Mr. Bazell writes:

On May 16, 1988, an editorial in the New York Times dubbed the artificial heart experiments, “The Dracula of Medical Technology.”

“The crude machines,” it continued, “with their noisy pumps, simply wore out the human body and spirit.”

Since then, in a series of start-up companies, Jarvik has continued his quest to make an artificial heart — as have several other firms. One competitor recently won FDA approval to sell its device for implantation in extreme emergencies.

Perhaps Jarvik’s chances of success with another artificial heart account for his willingness to serve as pitchman for Pfizer. I inquired, without success, to find the going rate for a semi- celebrity like Jarvik to appear in such ads. Thomaselli of Advertising Age said whatever it is, it is “infinitesimal” compared to Pfizer’s expenditures of $11 billion a year on advertising, much of it for Lipitor.

Why spend so much marketing Lipitor?

Because Lipitor is only one of six drugs in the class called statins that lower cholesterol. Many cardiologists say that for the vast majority of people any one of these drugs works just as well as the other. Two of them, Mevacor and Zocor, have already lost their patent protection so they cost pennies a day compared to $3 or more a day for Lipitor.

In 2010, when Lipitor loses its patent protection, it, too, will cost pennies a day, and Pfizer will no longer need Dr. Robert Jarvik.



So, is niacin so bad after all? Or is this Everyday Health report just another clever piece of advertising for Pfizer?
Tags :

Comments (5) -

  • jpatti

    10/20/2007 8:43:00 PM |

    When you're diabetic, so many drug choices wind up being about that.  For instance, I was switched to carvedilol (at my request) as it's the only beta-blocker that doesn't raise bg and actually seems to improve insulin resistance.

    I think it is true that niacin at doses therapeutic enough to effect lipid panels is a drug, not a vitamin.  This isn't to say it's bad, but that it has to be evaluated as a drug.  And the best I've been able to find wrt to niacin use in diabetics is that 1-1.5 g of extended release only raises bg slightly.  

    However, the increased A1c, even if slight, bothers me.  Even in non-diabetics, A1c is highly correlated with heart disease; very slight changes seem to be significant.  So it is difficult to decide if the increased glycolyation of blood proteins outweighs the benefits of niacin.  

    Have you seen improvements in heart scan scores in diabetics treated with niacin?

  • Dr. Davis

    10/21/2007 12:59:00 AM |

    Yes, dramatic reductions in heart scan scores, in fact.

    I think that the glucose/niacin interaction needs to be evaluated individually, since it can vary enormously from one person to another, though usually small to minimal.

  • over&out

    10/21/2007 11:16:00 PM |

    1500 niacin has lowered my LP(a)from 90 to 28. Also alternate between 10mg and 5mg daily of Lipitor to keep LDL & Trigs about 35. Cardiologist says "less trains = less passengers". HDL at 60-70. Found Immediate release worked best for me. Reading good things about that combo on PUBMED.com. Doing it for 5 yrs now. Thanx for your helpful posts, a must read for me every day. Over&Out

  • Ruth

    11/18/2007 9:11:00 PM |

    I just want to thank you for you site.  I was actually doing some research for a criminal justice class and found more info than I was looking for, I will be back to your site, I have parents in their 80's and my mom is diabetic, I found info on here that will help her, my stepdad and my mother in law.  Have a wonderful day!

  • buy jeans

    11/4/2010 6:35:01 PM |

    Niacin bad. Lipitor good. Even celebrity doc says so. Sounds like bait and switch to me. "You could try niacin--if you dare. But you could also try Lipitor."

Add comment

Loading