Statin Diary

Here are a sampling of some of the comments I've received from people taking statin drugs:


Barkeater said:

On Lipitor since 1997, and pretty sure I had no side effects. Hey, I am a man, I don't complain.

Work has gotten real challenging (but they pay me well). At age 52, 2 years ago, I was fed up with working hard, cranky, and wanted to quit. Very low tolerance for frustration. A year ago, I hit a low spot again, but knowing that quitting was not an option, I started pestering my wife about things married people quarrel about other than money. No matter how great she was, every month or so I would get in a complete funk about it. Meanwhile, my brother had an MI, freaking me out, so at my doctor's suggestion I doubled the Lipitor dose (to 40 mg a day), bringing LDL below 100 and total chol. to 162 (40% below what God's original design of me produced). Plus, I ached a lot after exercise with severe "arthritis" in my hip, and these pains took days to go away, and still I got mad every few weeks at my wife and otherwise into a depressed funk (one morning I wrote an essay about suicide, which was much on my mind). Mood swings could be sudden.

She finally asked whether it might be the Lipitor, which I dismissed as very unlikely because I wanted to believe I was controlling my anger and depression better at that point (not really so) and besides everyone knows that statins have very few side effects. But, I did poke around a bit, and saw that kooky internet people seemed to have a lot of statin side effects, including depression. So, I thought I would quit, as an experiment. Like the JUPITER study, the results were so stunning I had to end the experiment in just 48 hours, except unlike JUPTIER, the clear result was that statins are nasty poisins that were ruining my life. I quickly concluded that no statin would again pass my lips. Depression, gone immediately (I am now 45 days off Lipitor). Relationship with wife, great (maybe "saved" is the word). Athletic performance, vastly better (adjusted for my modest natural abilities), with aches reduced vastly. Ability to withstand frustration, zoomed way way up. I feel totally different, and better; I think of my high cholesterol as my friend, protecting my from the abyss.

The other exciting thing is that I was depending on Lipitor to prevent heart disease, but I see now that it was only a raffle in which I had one ticket, with 75 or 100 other ticket holders in the NNT raffle (to prevent a survivable coronary in the next ten years, but not to prevent death -- that is not a prize in this raffle). There are obviously way better things I can do for prevention, at low cost and no negative side effects (plenty of positive ones, though).

I feel ten years younger. I refer to quitting Lipitor as my "miracle cure." I feel a moral obligation to warn others.




Anonymous said:

It was the craziest thing, my elbows felt like they needed to pop but couldn't. I was taking 20mgs of Zocor, and the first couple of months the elbows were fine, but one day I realized they hurt and wouldn't pop. I enjoy tennis and will occasionally shoot baskets with the boys - working elbows are a requirement for both sports. I told my doctor the problem and he said to stop taking Zocor, and after two weeks he will have me try a different statin. Avoiding Zocor brought relief. After a week of being statin free the elbows stopped aching.

I havn't gone back to my doctor to receive a prescription for that new statin. After learning more about heart disease prevention from this site and others, my starting LDL was low to begin with right around 80, and so decided to take a different natural approach to lower my LDL and more importantly for me raise HDL. I cleaned up my diet and began taking nutritional supplements. It worked, today cholesterol levels are great, and I have working elbows.




Tom said:

Two weeks after I started 10mg/day of Lipitor I developed tinnitus. I had never noticed a ringing in my ears before and now all of a sudden it was LOUD. After three months I saw my doctor for a cholesterol retest (it went way down) and complained of the tinnitus. He said he hadn't heard of this side effect, but I told him the web said 2% complain of it. He suggested I go to 5mg/day to see if it helped. I tried this for a few months, then went totally off for a few weeks, and the tinnitus got better, but never went away. I'm still on a 5mg dose after 9 months and I still have tinnitus. My fear is that the damage is done and the tinnitus will never go away.



Veedubmom said:

I got sun sensitivity from taking Simvastatin. Wherever my skin is exposed to the sun, it turns red and starts itching intensely and my skin looks like giant hives. I have to wear long sleeves, gloves, turtlenecks, etc.



Jegan said:

I was on Lipitor, but as a result of a recent study, asked to go on Simvastatin. I too have never suffered tinnitus until taking statins. I perceive it most at night. It sounds either like a pure high pitched white noise, or often like being stuck in an aviary with a million high pitched birds. I did not suffer any pains, but I clearly am more forgetful. I also feel depressed, and really don;t care about anything... Paying bills, family, cleaning, you name it. Also, my rosacea seems to act up a lot more.



Terri SL said:

Statin side effects are, in my personal experience, vastly under-reported. What Dr. in practice takes the time to fill out FDA complaint forms or contacts independent researchers about a pts. side effects? What pt. even knows that they can do so, whether their Dr. wants them to or not? No surprise about that 80% if you've taken statins!

I've personally taken two different statins (Pravachol, Zocor/Vytorin) and developed horrendous muscle aches even while taking CoQ-10 200 mgs. daily in divided dose. I also experienced mental fuzziness, gait instability and near complete GI shutdown, when Dr. doubled statin dosage against my protests. Stop the drug = complete reversal within ~three days!

What seems to be consistent is the dosage of the statin... the higher the dose, or the more potent the statin (Lipitor, Crestor), the greater the chance of adverse side effects. The other consistency is that Drs. out there in practice are not recommending CoQ-10 to their patients on statins, or at least that has been my experience.



Am I advocating that everyone stop their statin drug? No, I am not.

What I am advocating is that statins be used carefully, after all efforts at correction of lipid/lipoprotein patterns have been made, with an assessment of true coronary risk (not such nonsense as the Framingham score). A more reasonable application of statin drug prescription would shrink the market from its current $27 billion to a tiny fraction of that.

These drugs can be useful but are miserably and tragically overused.
For a discussion of an alternative to statins for LDL cholesterol reduction, see my post, Which is better?

Comments (17) -

  • homertobias

    3/1/2009 4:06:00 PM |

    Dr Davis,

    Please give us your take on KIF6.  I know that the data in some ways is preliminary.  All that I can seem to find is the 3 JACC articles in 1/08.  2 of them simply show a high prevalence of the arg/trp or arg/arg variant. But the study showing a statistical difference in MI/ Cardiac Death in as little as 30 months comparing 40 pravachol vs 80 lipitor is impressive.  Statins do save lives so they are ok with me.  It is just that the number needed treat/ number needed to harm ratio is too high.  KIF6 has the potential to cut the number needed to treat in half.

  • Anonymous

    3/1/2009 5:56:00 PM |

    Co-incidentally I am about to go off my Crestor (40mg) for a "rest". I need to loose weight (5'7" and 195lb) but when I started my p90x program, I found that those annoying muscle aches in my left arm and right hand were such that I could not do a single pull up.  My Dr. asked that I stay on the higher dose of Crestor and supplement with CoQ10.  I will add CoQ10 to the fish oil, Niacin and vitamin D I am taking.  I'm going to start Vitamin K2 supplementation too (Canada does not allow high dose for some strange reason). But more than anything, recognizing some of the side effects I have read here, I think a break from Crestor is  overdue for me.

  • steve k

    3/1/2009 9:44:00 PM |

    there is no shortage of criticism on this blog of statins and they certainly are over prescribed.  the real question is: when and only when should they be tried?  It would be helpful if you posted on this now that you have carefully gone in to some of the negatives of statins, but also, acknowledged their value.

  • Anonymous

    3/2/2009 12:10:00 AM |

    What about women with high cholesterol without (overt) heart disease or a family history of heart disease? Some say that older women with high cholesterol live longer and better. This certainly has been true in my family. The women live to 90's without heart disease, total cholesterols 220-250 LDL certainly higher than the current "normal/optimal" but with high HDL and low triglycerides.

  • Bruce

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

    Hey there, Dr. Davis. Where are all the testimonials from people who have no side effects from statins and are doing just fine with lowered LDL levels?

    Or does your profit incentive prohibit you from being fair and balanced, just like the pharmaceutical industry.

    I dare you to publish this post. Not doing do will reveal your true intentions.

  • Dr. William Davis

    3/2/2009 2:44:00 AM |

    Steve and Bruce--

    I am mindful of the fact that representatives of the pharmaceutical industry troll the blogosphere and internet in order to post comments to counter the rapidly growing rejection of the statin franchise. If you work for Pfizer, AstraZeneca, et al, I would kindly ask you to mind your own business.

    If you do not, then please recognize that what I say is said because of the overwhelming influence of the drug industry. It is a David vs. Goliath world. The drug industry does not need to be defended. They would willingly take as much of your money and your insurer's money as possible. Their goals have little to do with health, but everything to do with profit.

    If you have fallen victim to their brand of Kool Aid, then perhaps it's time for a little reality check.

  • Trinkwasser

    3/2/2009 2:25:00 PM |

    Yet more scary but interesting stuff!

    I was put on lipitor but had a (rare but reported) side effect that in retrospect was BG lowering over and above the reactive hypos I was already suffering

    Switched to simvastatin and have been on it ever since, it appears to do exactly what it says on the tin, halves my LDL without affecting the lethal trigs and HDL (diet fixed them)

    NOW I'm wondering if my apparent senility attacks are in fact not due to advancing age. In typing this I have already done several letter pair reversals. I actually forgot to make an appointment for my blood tests which ironically I am now going to blame on the statin (grins) I was going to drop them for a month prior to the next tests but maybe I am going to drop them now.

    Why? I have also begun getting tinnitus. The trigger factor appeared to be NSAIDS, even ointment was bringing it on. Now I'm getting it even without these.

    I suspect statin side effects are still rare compared to the percentage of people who don't get them BUT with an increasing statinised population there's a low percentage of a huge population now reporting in, hence the apparently increased incidence.

  • steve

    3/2/2009 2:44:00 PM |

    DR Davis:
    i do not work for big pharma or any medical or health related profession, and am only interested when statins should be prescribed since my NMR results showed high small LDL despite my not eating wheat,using fish oils, taking D3 as you suggest. Since my Doc says statin time, i am only trying to get the best info in light of all negative publicity.
    Perhaps you read my comment to fast; it was not advocating them, but asking since you in your post allude to possible cases when it should be used.  Your comment to me is therefore way out of line.

  • Scott Miller

    3/2/2009 9:49:00 PM |

    I fall on the side of believing that statins should never be prescribed.  From my understanding, while there's a slight indication that they can reduce cardiovascular events, they DO NOT reduce all-cause mortality.  This strongly suggests that they are mostly ineffective at doing what they're touted to do, and they introduce a new set of problems that can reduce the patients quality and length of life.

    The purported benefits of statins, in all cases, can be beaten handily by a change of diet and supplements.

    I think your personal practice is a testament to this, and yet you still leave several diet and supplement tactics on-the-table that could improve the results you could achieve. (I base this on reading every entry in your blog, and listening to your podcasts with Jimmy Moore.)

    I love that you're well ahead of 99.999% of the other cardiologists.

    I would like to know of any situation that you can quickly describe in which a statin makes sense.  I have an open mind about this, and perhaps you can convince me that such cases exist.

  • Trinkwasser

    3/3/2009 12:21:00 PM |

    Stop press, dropped last night's statin and already the tinnitus is much reduced. It was never bad but was increasing and I thought its prevalence at night was due to quietness of the environment not to the fact I'd just taken the statin.

    Now in the past I'd dropped the things for a month on month off trial which is why I am confident there were THEN no noticeable side effects.

    SSRI poop-out is a well known phenomenon and the explanation used to be that while they upregulated serotonin, over time they would then downregulate dopamine in some individuals.

    Most statin side effects I've heard of seem to be fairly instant, now I'm wondering if there's a similar temporal effect whereby some side effects don't develop for months or even years. This might explain why reports of problems are increasing over time even faster than the population is becoming statinised

  • Anonymous

    3/14/2009 7:39:00 PM |

    Just wanted to report back on the break I have taken from 40mg Crestor.  Although I posted here on March 1st, I was really hesitant to stop since I was off on a business trip and not going to be too careful about diet.

    Anyhow, full 10 days without Crestor and I have ZERO arm aches and have no issue doing chin ups (well, I can do some and all without the sharp "broken bone" pain).

    I know I'm going to end up back on Statins as I really hate eating meat, but while I am trimming down, I will stay off them for maybe 3 or 4 months then get a blood test before asking the primary care phys for a dose recommendation.

  • drarvay

    8/8/2010 12:24:56 AM |

    An Appeal for Support and Conformation of MRI Results

    My daughter has lived with ALS-like symptoms for almost 3 years. The worst of the symptoms began when her simvastatin was increased to 80mg in 2008.
    Her MRIs show LESIONS in the brain stem, specifically in the PONS area of her brain.
    Of course, her 4 physicians refuse to believe that a statin is involved. They are all satisfied with the diagnosis of “Ataxia”.

    My Appeal is to all those who are/were on statins and have similar brain lesions as shown and documented in MRIs. Please reply here, or contact her father directly: Dr Stephen Arvay, stephenx11@cogeco.ca

  • buy jeans

    11/2/2010 7:35:02 PM |

    What I am advocating is that statins be used carefully, after all efforts at correction of lipid/lipoprotein patterns have been made, with an assessment of true coronary risk (not such nonsense as the Framingham score). A more reasonable application of statin drug prescription would shrink the market from its current $27 billion to a tiny fraction of that.

  • simvastatin side effects

    5/9/2011 1:57:14 AM |

    when taking statins, follow doctors advice, take the drugs according to doctors prescription, the  drug carefully to be safe.

  • Maryland

    7/10/2011 3:56:32 AM |

    Finlaly! This is just what I was looking for.

  • Kassi

    7/10/2011 9:37:58 AM |

    Ya learn something new evreyady. It's true I guess!

  • ppetosxbm

    7/13/2011 3:07:06 PM |

    ky8G9W , [url=http://nxiychlujevf.com/]nxiychlujevf[/url], [link=http://ijpwiebyjghx.com/]ijpwiebyjghx[/link], http://ozrkczkuzcwy.com/

Loading
Wheat Belly Revisited

Wheat Belly Revisited

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.

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.

Loading
Wheat "debate" on CBC

Wheat "debate" on CBC

"Many Canadians plan warm buns, stuffing and pie for their Thanksgiving meals tonight. But I'll speak with a cardiologist who thinks we have no reason to be thankful for any food that contains wheat. William Davis says our daily bread is making us fat and sick."

That's the introduction to my recent interview and debate on CBC, the Canadian public radio system, aired on the Canadian Thanksgiving. Arguing the other side was Dr. Susan Whiting, an academic nutritionist. (I use the word "arguing" loosely, since she hardly argued the issues, certainly hadn't read the book, but was content to echo the conventional line that whole grains are healthy and cutting out a food group is unhealthy.)

I do have to give credit to the Canadian media, including the CBC, who have been hosting some rough-and-tumble discussions about the entire wheat question despite Canada being a world exporter of wheat. I recently participated in another debate with a PhD nutrition expert from Montreal who, in response to my assertion that the genetically-altered high-yield, semi-dwarf strains have changed the basic composition of wheat, argued that the creation of the 2-foot tall semi-dwarf strain was a convenience created so that farmers could see above their fields--no kidding. I stifled my laugh. (The semi-dwarf variants were actually created to compensate for the heavy seed head that develops with vigorous nitrate fertilization that buckles 4 1/2-foot tall wheat stalk, making harvesting and threshing impossible, a process farmers call "lodging." The 2-foot tall semi-dwarf thick, stocky stalk is strong enough to resist lodging.)

In short, debating the nutrition "experts" on this question has been tantamount to arguing with a school age child on the finer points of quantum physics. There has not yet been any real objection raised on the basic arguments against modern genetically-altered wheat. Modern semi-dwarf wheat is, and remains, an incredibly bad creation of the genetics laboratories of the 1970s. It has no business on the shelves of your grocery store nor on the cupboards in your home.

Comments (29) -

  • Tracey Mardon

    10/11/2011 3:03:04 AM |

    Hello Dr. Davis, I had no idea about either you or your book 2 1/2 years ago when I entirely removed gluten from my diet but I wanted to say I experienced all of the positive responses you spoke about. No more migraines, acid reflux, sore painting shoulder, lost 35 lbs without feeling I was dieting. I was also able to incorporate a morning Yoga program every morning and find that I'm naturally more disciplined in thought and action. I would bet that I'm effectively 20 years younger. Thanks for speaking out, it will be worth it if we can do anything about diabetes!

  • arlene

    10/11/2011 5:17:57 AM |

    I heard this interview!  The "debate" was pathetic. The argument by Dr. Whiting amounted to "but what you are talking about is an Atkins diet, so your conclusions don't matter.  Nothing matters except that you are promoting an Atkins diet"  She had NO new information, and nothing to back up her asertions that you can't be right.  I was embarassed for her, but more convinced than ever that there is no sound arguement to spport eating wheat.
    I gave up wheat in April of this year.  I have lost 35 pounds, and 5 1/2 inches on my waist.  I have been eating more, not less calories.  I went from being almost couch bound several days of the week from severe "fibromyalgia" symptoms, to forgetting I even had problems which left me in a fog most days. I see no reason to eat wheat.  After the fact, I am reading your book and discovering the "why" behind my miracle.  I purhcased your book so I can read it, pass it around to everyone I know, and tell them to buy one and do the same!  
    Thank you, Dr. Davis!

  • Soul

    10/11/2011 11:23:28 AM |

    I'm rather chuckling mentioning this, but as you probably picked up I enjoy the 90s group Nirvana.  What originally attracted me to the group was the band's song writer having a bad stomach problem, similar to mine.  I recall reading after he committed suicide, and by the note he left that was due to the stomach problem and drugs being taken to deaden the pain,  that Kurt had worked on avoiding different foods.  He did this with the hope of improving the condition.  Never did see him mention avoiding wheat.  Oranges were a concern of his as "they made his gums bleed."  There were other items he stayed away from too.

    I recall even then, middle 90s, thinking that Kurt probably was a celiac, could have found some pain relief avoiding wheat, and probably would be with us today if he had done so.  Looking back I should have taken my own advice!  I had tried eating wheat free back then, found some relief, but never enough to continue eating that way I thought.  What I didn't realize was that it took more than a month to find significant gut relief.  And it probably would have helped if I had support encouraging me to continue from doctors and family.    

    So, anyway!   This is the 20th anniversary year of when Nirvana's famous album came out.  And with that has come a release of digitally remastered album plus new songs.  I was laughing at the lyrics to this tune, School.  I can relate when witnessing internet debates!    

    Nirvana - School
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xCgwXWEQ10

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/11/2011 12:24:02 PM |

    Yes, sad when the solution may have been so simple: Just avoid the food that all "official" agencies tell us to eat more of.

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/11/2011 12:25:06 PM |

    That's great, Arlene! 5 1/2 inches off your waist is fabulous.

    I, too, was kind of embarassed for her. I don't think she knew what she was getting into!

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/11/2011 12:26:58 PM |

    Hi, Tracey--

    I'm happy you've found this solution. However, you and I remain in the minority. There are people struggling with all manner of health problems, sometimes disabling, not getting answers from their doctors . . . and the solution can be as simple as removing all wheat. So this is a message worth repeating over and over and over again.

  • Jom Crawford

    10/11/2011 1:35:36 PM |

    Dr Davis

    Read your book with great interest. I am a type 2 diabetic and have taken all the steps to control levels. (exercise, weight loss, low carb, etc). My one concern is the elimination of oats. I have received excellent H1N results while consuming my favorie morning oatmeal porridge. Should I stop?

    Jim

  • Mary

    10/11/2011 2:26:49 PM |

    I get sad thinking about how so many people in my life have suffered.  My Mother had Parkinsons with dementia diagnosis and suffered terribly for 7 years til she died.
    I suspected Diabetes because she had peripheral vascular disease and poor wound healing but the blood test always showed her sugar within normal ranges.
    She craved pastries and acted like a crack addict begging for them, then would spend hours in a carb induced coma after eating them.  She died at 89 but suffered many years of her life, she tried to commit suicide before I was born and spent a year in hospital getting electric shock treatments.  She had yearly seasonal depression after that, crying for months in the winter.
    My father lived to be 94 but he had 4 major heart diseases and needed 4 nitroglycerine tabs just to get dressed in AM.  He always said he felt best when he didn't eat.  Now in hindsight I know better.  I have struggled my whole life with stomach pain.  I had a small bowel biospsy 15 years ago but it was negative for celiac.  I facilitated a support group for celiac at a local hospital and lived gluten free for several years but was never one hundred percent better, now I realize because I was drinking soda and gaining weight eating all the gluten free products.  I had surgery this past December and had great difficulty recovering, symptoms of fatigue and chronic muscle pain returned to my life again.   Thanks for your book Dr. Davis, it has reminded me to go wheat free for good.  I know I feel better wheat free, dairy free and sugar free.  I gained 20 lbs after my surgery
    due to inactivity from muscle pain and eating fast food carb meals.  I was caught in a vicious cycle of feeling aweful.  Fibromyalgia symptoms to the extreme, my thyroid function is low and my Vitamin D was at 14.  I have started wheat free for a week now, lost 4 lbs and feeling much better but still residual muscle pain.  I have a doctors appointment to persue thyroid treatment, I have been seeing a Natropath who gave me thyroid and adrenal gland supplements and I feel better but not 100% after 2 months of taking them.  Is it possible for thyroid function to return to normal after a time period of staying strictly wheat free?  I hate the thought of taking medicine the rest of my life.
    Everyday I think of a friend, family member or celebrity that has died who might have been spared by going wheat free.  RIP...Mom, Dad, my husband Joe(non smoker lung cancer, major sugar/wheat addiction) Chris Farley, Steve Jobs (an article I read said he didn't eat animal products).Patrick Swazy. Linda McCartney (vegetarian frozen meals).  I know many of these people have had other vices like drugs and alcohol but I strongly believe that wheat is a gateway substance that can lead to addiction.  My husband drank beer every evening and ate ice cream everyday for 26 years that I knew him.  He was thin and worked hard everyday thus didn't ever see he had a problem.  He had chronic pain, allergies, skin rashes. Addicted to beer, could not stop drinking it even with cancer diagnosis and chemo treatments.  Finally quite when radiation tx damaged his throat but was too late for him.  Sorry to ramble on but just am overwhelmed with all the connections I'm suspecting.  Thanks for having a place to vent.

  • Joe Lindley

    10/12/2011 2:41:01 PM |

    Dr. Davis,
    Go get 'em!   Maybe you can get on the Dr. Oz show!  You and Gary Taubes can sit on the couch while Dr. Oz eats whole grain cereal with Soy Milk!

  • Kane Augustus

    10/12/2011 11:50:51 PM |

    Dr. Davis--

    I think someone has taken you up on your book.  Her name is Melissa McEwen.  I read her article this morning.  You might find it interesting: http://huntgatherlove.com/content/wheat-belly

    Take care,
    Kane

  • john townsend

    10/13/2011 5:06:22 PM |

    I struggled my way through this review ... a bewildering rambling rant that goes nowhere with plenty of distracting irrelevant fillers thrown in for good measure. The pervasive derisive mocking tone is also off-putting. It’s this kind of “noise” that blurs and dilutes an important message unfortunately.  One case in point (amongst a myriad) in the review is the dismissive incoherent treatment of the high glucose and high insulin impact of wheat. Personally this is the one key aspect of Dr Davies thesis that really impressed me, after seeing how one slice of wheat bread caused my blood sugar level to go through the roof. I also have plenty of anecdotal evidence (and growing) that Dr Davies is onto something.

  • Cynthia Ledger

    10/13/2011 6:18:57 PM |

    "Attributes" which get cured......

    Have you seen unintended consequences?

  • alex

    10/13/2011 6:58:19 PM |

    Maybe it has nothing to do with any modification of the plant but maybe the plant itself???

    http://www.livescience.com/14194-egyptian-mummy-heart-disease.html

  • Daniel

    10/13/2011 10:34:16 PM |

    I've been a Registered Dietitian for 7 years and I'm appalled when I look back at my incredibly biased education.  An hour on PubMed disproves a majority of the conventional "wisdom" I was force fed, especially the ongoing demonization of saturated fat.  Its a joke. I'm glad to see more medical practitioners like yourself speaking out.  The studies showing the damaging effect of gliadin on the intestenial wall in supposedly health, non-celiac individuals is alarming to say the least. Keep it up!

  • James Buch

    10/13/2011 11:50:46 PM |

    The USDA has just published an evaluation that the "new varieties" of broccoli have the same vitamin and mineral content of the older ones.
    http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2011/111013.htm

    The headline and first paragraph of the web page are given below. When will they do "wheat"?

    USDA Research Demonstrates New Breeds of Broccoli Remain Packed with Health Benefits
    By Sharon Durham
    October 13, 2011

    WASHINGTON—Research performed by scientists at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and published recently in the journal Crop Science has demonstrated that mineral levels in new varieties of broccoli have not declined since 1975, and that the broccoli contains the same levels of calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, potassium and other minerals that have made the vegetable a healthy staple of American diets for decades.

    http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2011/111013.htm

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/14/2011 12:58:02 AM |

    Good for you, Daniel!

    I am waiting for your and your colleagues to stage a revolt. Let me know and I will hold up the placards and yell with you!

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/14/2011 12:59:06 AM |

    Hi, Cynthia--

    If you mean unintended consequences of wheat removal, yes: the withdrawal phenomenon. This affects somewhere around 30% of people. It is harmless, though no fun to experience.

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/14/2011 1:02:07 AM |

    Hi, Kane--

    I found this about as interesting as saying to someone, "I don't like your face."

    I've stumbled on her blog from time to time and found it interesting and insightful. I was surprised by this blatant "I don't like it because it's stupid" kind of criticism with no real substance. Maybe she had a bad day.

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/14/2011 1:04:10 AM |

    It is absolutely ovewhelming, isn't it, Mary, when you stop and think how many people may have had serious brushes with the wheat demon, yet nobody ever suspected?

    My prediction: Wheat will prove to be among the most powerful provokers of gastrointestinal cancers. Everyone was falsely lulled by comparing whole grains to white flour that showed a relative reduction in risk. Replace something bad with something less bad, the less bad thing looks good. Flawed logic.

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/14/2011 1:05:10 AM |

    Well, it depends on what you mean by excellent H1N (HbA1c?).

    I aim for HbA1c of 5.0% or less, a level at which glycation is not occurring faster than the normal endogenous rate.

  • Cynthia Ledger

    10/14/2011 6:33:14 PM |

    There is a theory that the glutamates in wheat fill a crutial roll in wheat related intestinal porosity .....glutamate prepares epithelial tTg for attachment by wheat-surfafe HWP1.

    Do you have an opinion?

  • Dr. William Davis

    10/15/2011 1:47:16 PM |

    Hi, Cynthia--

    Not being a biochemist, I believe that is true, though I don't believe it is an effect unique to wheat, but shared by other foods.

    Boy, I hope that didn't sound like I was defending wheat!

  • Vasu

    12/12/2011 11:24:39 PM |

    Dear Dr :

    We have been vegans culturally - born and brought up in a Lacto-ovo Vegan society.  Recently, during routine annual blood tests, my husband has been diagnosed with more number of smaller particle sized LDL cholestrol.  He is at 95% level with very high risk.  Rest of the factors - triglycerides, HDL/LDL, overall cholestrol are all normal.  Also, sugar levels are normal.  He has been advised to take the suppressants due to high risk of particle size.  We have never tested this parameter before though.  Wheat, rice and burritos, pizzas and all the stuff you mention here are a part of our daily diet! We also eat Eggs, drink lots of full fat milk, homemade yoghurt .   I also use Coconut oil for most of the cooking which is for most part oil free!  We are worried about whether to wait and watch or start the medication.  If we wait - what is the optimal period to wait and what do we do during the wait period....

    Thanks for any help and a wonderful blog - helps many people like us!

  • Dr. William Davis

    12/14/2011 2:49:09 AM |

    Hi, Vasu--

    The solution for excessive quantities of small LDL particles is diet, not drugs. Please search "small LDL" on this blog and you will see dozens, if not more, posts on just this issue.

  • TheArcher

    1/6/2012 12:40:47 AM |

    I had been trying for a full year to shake free of wheat, but couldn't do it because my fix was always available in the kitchen. My husband, though he has a small wheat tummy, didn't want to quit eating wheat.

    Then we both came down with a gastrointestinal complaint, maybe something we ate? Nausea and loose stools and lack of appetite meant that for several days we drank lots of fluids and only ate to live. We both feel fine now, but thanks to the short period of illness during which time we COULDN'T eat wheat or sugars, we basically skipped the withdrawal period, and we no longer crave wheat.

    I highly recommend quitting wheat during a gastrointestinal illness; for us it was incredibly easy.  Smile

  • Tina Moore

    7/22/2012 3:41:18 PM |

    Dr. Davis:  After reading Wheat Belly and being wheat/glute-free for 2 months.  I've definately noticed less inflammation with my moderate osteoartritis of the knees & less abdominal bloating.  Friend, recently told me about UC Berkeley's Health Newsletter that disputes Wheat Belly.  WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THEIR RESPONSE?  Here's the article:

    Wheatophobia: Will Avoiding Wheat Really Improve Your Health?
      
    Wheat has long been a dietary pariah for the millions of people who have jumped on the low-carb-diet bandwagon or who think they’re allergic (or at least sensitive) to the grain. Now even more people are hesitating about eating wheat after reading the claims made by Dr. William Davis, a cardiologist and author of the bestseller Wheat Belly, which is subtitled “Lose the Wheat, Lose the Weight, and Find Your Path Back to Health.” Not only does wheat make us fat, he says, it is addictive and causes everything from heart disease, diabetes, and obesity to arthritis, osteoporosis, cognitive problems, and cataracts. In fact, it has caused “more harm than any foreign terrorist can inflict on us.”
    Wouldn’t it be great if there was a single villain behind the chronic health problems plaguing us, and if all it took to reverse them was to stop eating wheat? Don’t bet on it.

    Kernels of half-truth
    Here are some of Dr. Davis’s key points—and our counterpoints:

    Claim: Most grains are bad, but modern wheat is the worst because it has been altered over the years via selective breeding and is now a virtual “Frankengrain.” It is loaded with amylopectin A (a starch unique to wheat), which is “worse than table sugar,” Dr. Davis says, boosting blood sugar dramatically and stimulating appetite. Modern wheat also contains other components with adverse effects, and its gluten (a protein) is more likely to trigger reactions than that in older wheat.

    Fact: For well over a century, food scientists have developed hybrid varieties of wheat to be sturdier and have higher yields, better quality, and greater resistance to disease and insects. That’s true of most food crops. There’s no clinical evidence that differences between today’s wheat and older varieties have adverse effects on our health. It’s all supposition on Dr. Davis’s part, and feeds into pervasive fears of modern agricultural methods. We think this particular fear is unfounded.

    Claim: Wheat is the main culprit behind the obesity epidemic.

    Fact: Wheat is a staple in most parts of the world, and there’s little or no correlation between regional intakes (as a proportion of daily calories) and rates of obesity. Per capita wheat consumption in the U.S. has actually dropped since 2000, but there’s no sign that is slowing the expansion of our waistlines. In fact, a century ago Americans ate much more wheat than we do today, and very few were obese (granted, diets and lifestyles differed in many ways then). In any case, the obesity epidemic certainly can’t be attributed to any single factor.

    What about Dr. Davis’s claims that when he told his patients to avoid wheat they lost weight and become healthier? As with nearly all diet books, this is only anecdotal evidence, but it’s not surprising. Had he told his patients to cut out all meat or all sugary snacks, for instance, they might have done as well or better. Nearly all diets work for a while (especially in supervised settings), usually by getting people to avoid whole categories of foods and thus tricking them into cutting calories. Keep in mind, too, that Dr. Davis basically recommends a low-carb diet, and well-designed studies have found that such diets work no better than other diets in the long term.

    Claim: Wheat has played an outsized role in surging rates of diabetes, heart disease, and other chronic disorders.

    Fact: There’s no evidence that wheat bears special blame for these. Blood sugar does rise after eating bread, pasta, and other wheat products. But that’s true of any foods containing carbohydrates—even those in gluten-free products—especially if the grains are refined.
    The effect of carbohydrate-rich foods on blood sugar, which is ranked by the “glycemic index” (GI), depends on many factors, including how much fiber is in the food, how the food is processed and prepared, and what else is in the meal. Wheat ranks moderately high on the GI. But research looking at the effect of a high-GI diet on weight control and the risk of diabetes and heart disease has had inconsistent results.

    Refined wheat, like other starchy or sugary foods, can also have adverse effects on blood cholesterol and triglycerides—for instance, increasing levels of the small, dense LDL cholesterol particles that are most damaging. To avoid this, you needn’t avoid all wheat or go on a very-low-carb diet. Just choose healthier wheat products that are minimally refined or unrefined, and don’t go overboard.

    Claim: Whole wheat isn’t much better than refined wheat, so overweight people and those with chronic diseases should avoid it as well.

    Fact: Many studies have linked higher intakes of whole grains (including whole wheat) with a reduced risk of diabetes, heart disease, and stroke, as well as improvements in blood cholesterol, blood pressure, and blood sugar control. Other studies have found that whole wheat can help people control their weight and/or lose body fat, especially when they eat it in place of refined-wheat products. Thus, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, American Heart Association, American Diabetes Association, and most nutrition experts recommend foods made from 100% whole grains.

    BOTTOM LINE: Unless you have celiac disease or another type of gluten intolerance or sensitivity (see box above), there’s no reason to avoid wheat. No doubt many Americans eat too much refined wheat, usually in the form of cakes, cookies, pizza, and other foods loaded with added sugar and/or fat (which can double or triple the calorie count), as well as lots of sodium. Cutting down on such wheat products can help people lose weight and improve their overall diet, provided they substitute lower-calorie foods. But 100% whole-wheat and other whole-grain products can fit well into a healthy diet, as can many refined-wheat dishes that include nutritious ingredients, such as pasta with vegetables. As with so many dietary matters, moderation is the key.



    Gluten for punishment
    There’s one very good reason to avoid wheat: if you are allergic to gluten because of celiac disease, also known as gluten-sensitive enteropathy or nontropical sprue. Gluten is a protein in wheat that makes dough elastic and smooth; it’s also in rye, barley, and certain other grains.

    In people with this genetic disorder, gluten provokes an autoimmune response that damages the small intestine and may cause symptoms such as diarrhea, bloating, cramps, abdominal pain, weight loss, fatigue, and loss of appetite. Celiac disease has become more common in the past 50 years for largely unknown reasons. It’s now estimated that about 1 in 100 people in the U.S. and Canada have it. If you have a parent or sibling with the disease, your risk rises to 1 in 22; having an aunt, uncle, or grandparent with it increases your risk to 1 in 39.

    Celiac disease can begin at any age and occurs more often in people of European descent and in women. Many people with it go undiagnosed or are misdiagnosed, however, because there may be no gastrointestinal symptoms—and when there are symptoms, they’re often nonspecific (that is, they could be caused by many disorders). Celiac disease causes malabsorption of key nutrients, notably calcium and iron, so it can lead to osteoporosis, anemia, and other serious health problems. People with it are also more likely to have other autoimmune disorders, such as psoriasis, lupus, Crohn’s disease, and certain types of thyroid disease.

    Confusing matters, about 6 percent of Americans are thought to be gluten-sensitive but don’t have celiac disease, according to the Center for Celiac Research at the University of Maryland. There’s much debate about this condition, sometimes called “nonceliac gluten sensitivity,” and about how prevalent it is. Because so many people now believe they are sensitive to gluten, rightly or wrongly, “gluten-free” has become one of the fastest growing sectors of the food industry.

    Before giving up gluten, get tested
    If you have chronic indigestion or other symptoms suggestive of gluten sensitivity, consult your doctor and get tested for celiac disease before going on a gluten-free diet. (Long-term avoidance of gluten can interfere with the diagnostic tests for celiac disease.) A positive result on the blood test should be followed by a biopsy of the small intestine to confirm the diagnosis. If celiac disease is ruled out and you continue to have problems, you can be tested for nonceliac gluten sensitivity via an “elimination and provocation” diet.

    If you have a family member with celiac disease, you should be tested even if you have no symptoms, since diagnosing and treating the disease can help prevent intestinal damage and serious complications. Many gastroenterologists advise initially having a simple genetic test for predisposition to celiac disease.

    Few people are properly diagnosed for gluten problems, however, according to a paper in the Annals of Internal Medicine earlier this year, which warned that many are undoubtedly going on highly restrictive diets unnecessarily.

    It’s best to consult an experienced registered dietitian if you have celiac disease. You can—and should—eat other healthy grains, including corn, rice, oats, buckwheat, quinoa, and amaranth. Look for “certified gluten-free” on labels, since products can be cross-contaminated with gluten. Keep in mind, most “gluten-free” packaged products are made from refined flour (albeit gluten-free flour) and are not particularly nutritious, and many are junk food.

    For more information, you can contact the Celiac Disease Foundation or the Celiac Sprue Association.
    Issue: August 2012

  • Dr. Davis

    7/31/2012 11:54:36 AM |

    Whoever wrote this clearly did not read the book with an open mind. ALL the questions are addressed in the book.

    This is the stuff that the dietitians are arguing, a "rebuttal" based on conventional notions of wheat.

    Rather that have to pick each argument apart to debate with people who clearly do not want to change their opinions, please just read the book.

  • Christoph Dollis

    8/16/2013 1:10:23 AM |

    I don't know if you're right or wrong (about wheat being worse than other starch sources), but am going to give you the benefit of the doubt, remove it, and see what happens.
    P.S. Listened to the debate between you and Timothy Caulfield. What an embarrassing hack he was.

Loading
What would life be like . . . ?

What would life be like . . . ?

What if coronary heart disease could be prevented--no eliminated--applying methods that were accessible, easy, and cheap?

What if coronary heart disease and, thereby, angina, heart attack, sudden cardiac death, ventricular tachycardia, heart failure, and the cerebrovascular equivalent, stroke, could be eliminated using readily available tools available to virtually everyone in the U.S.? And, over a year, it cost less than a once-a-week latte at Starbucks?

How would the healthcare landscape change? What would become of hospitals, manufacturers of the billions of dollars of hospital equipment necessary to supply the cardiovascular hospital industry (e.g., stent manufacturers, catheter manufacturers, defibrillator and pacemaker manufacturers, pharmaceutical manufacturers who no longer have to produce the volume of antiplatelet agents, inotropic drugs, antiarrhythmic agents, etc.)?

How would our lives change? What would the end of life look like if people stopped dying of heart attack, sudden cardiac death, congestive heart failure at age 55, 65, or 75, but lived out their lives to die of something unrelated?

What if the solution had little or nothing to do with drugs but evolved from simple nutritional strategies, supplements meant to correct the deficiencies that accompany modern lifestyles, and a few unique strategies targeted towards the genetic predispositions that lead to heart disease?

What if all this were possible at a cost of a few hundred dollars per year?

It would certainly be a cataclysmic change. Hospitals would shrink to a small remnant of their current gargantuan, dozens-per-city presence. The need for hospital staff would be slashed by over half. The rare cardiologist would tend to congenital heart disease sufferers and other unusual forms of heart disease and he or she might have a colleague or two in all of a major city.

Healthcare costs would plummet, no longer having to sustain the enormous cardiovascular healthcare machine of hospitals, staff, industry, and long-term care. Health insurance, private or public, would drop by 50%.

It would free up nearly a trillion dollars that could be redirected towards other pursuits, like schools and research. Extraordinary leaps forward in quality of life and science would emerge, given that magnitude of funding.

It's not as grand a thought experiment as Alan Weisman's The World Without Us, in which he imagines what the world would be like without humans altogether.

How long would it take to recover lost ground and restore Eden to the way it must have gleamed and smelled the day before Adam, or Homo habilis, appeared? Could nature ever obliterate all our traces? How would it undo our monumental cities and public works, and reduce our myriad plastics and toxic synthetics back to benign, basic elements?

But I believe this thought experiment--what would life be like without heart disease because it was eliminated using inexpensive tools-- is more plausible, more likely to occur. In fact, it has already begun to occur.

See those vines growing up the side of the hospital?

Comments (16) -

  • Jenny

    7/29/2009 12:39:12 PM |

    What would life be like without CVD deaths?

    For a while, the way you describe. But as more people lived into their 80s and 90s the rate of dementia would rise dramatically.

    If you visit any dementia facility you will find it is full of normal weight people many of whom are in otherwise "excellent" health--that's what got them to live to 88 or 92.

    But once demented, their lives are tragic. Saddest are those who are just demented enough to be totally confused, but not enough that they are oblivious to their condition. All people with moderate dementia  need round the clock care which is not covered by Medicare unless they have no assets. This depletes the savings of humble people who have worked for decades who are left with nothing to leave their children.  Depending on the cause of their dementia people may need full time care for a decade. Once they have no money they are turned over to the warehousing of nursing homes, many of which are horrendous  where those who are still conscious may pray daily for death.

    Right now one half of those in the 80-100 age group are demented. The humiliation  dementia inflicts on loved ones is so terrible that anyone who has a relative in this condition (and we have two in our family) will pray that they have enough heart disease to take them out before they go through that long, slow degrading decline.

    Many people have unrealistic ideas that they could take care of a loved one with dementia which stem from not having been put face to face with it since the truly demented are usually locked away somewhere.

    Note too that though there are attempts to blame dementia on diabetes, I don't buy it. The rate of dementia has climbed with the climb in lifespan though "senile dementia" has always been the fat of a good portion of those who lived to be old-old.

    The diabetes diagnosed late in life is part of the gradual failing of their organs and often not the same as diabetes diagnosed in the 40s. It may be associated with dementia but it is far from proven that it is causative.

    Beside that, eliminate CVD and the rate of people dying from the prolonged agony of cancer would go up too, because the older people get the more likely they are to develop cancers. Something many people don't know is that chemotherapy administered to older people id prone to cause dementia. It causes mild cognitive problems  in younger people too, but in the old-old it is much more likely to take out their memories.

    I'm all for eliminating the kind of CVD that takes people out young, especially since it is so often linked to genetic abnormalities.  But for those in their 70s and beyond, eliminating CVD might simply be to trade one condition for another far worse.

    No one lives forever.

  • Lucy

    7/29/2009 1:21:40 PM |

    It sure doesn't seem like that will happen anytime soon, at least not here... I spent all day calling around to local docs (including cardiologists) and NO ONE had even heard of advanced lipid testing...  I'm ashamed to say that I work for a large hospital system that wants to be "cutting edge" and all about research yet they have no knowledge of basic preventative care in regards to the leading cause of death in our country?!!

    Is advanced lipid testing really that advanced?

  • JPB

    7/29/2009 3:25:12 PM |

    That is part of my dream, too. But first, people have to have access to correct information, stop being so passive with medical professionals  and then take an active role in establishing and maintaining their own heath.  The real "health" care reform would do everything that you say but would come directly from the people who are receiving so-called medical "care."

    Of course, the vested interests will fight this tooth and nail but it would be tough to stop if our population would finally wake up to the way they are being manipulated!

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/29/2009 4:26:06 PM |

    Hi, Jenny--

    Thanks for your thoughts.

    But I would rather succumb to dementia at age 90 (that I helped delay with vitamin D and other mental-preservation methods) than heart attack at age 59, bypass at age 60, three stents at 63, four more at age 68, living a life of hospital revolving doors. Don't forget about the defibrillator that aborts the ventricular tachycardia that comes from the scar in your left myocardium from the original heart attack.

    Millions of people live this way and have not been told that it doesn't have to be this way. That's what I'm talking about.

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/29/2009 4:28:29 PM |

    Lucy--

    NOT having advanced lipid testing impairs the identification of the causes of heart disease. It is a big step towards better control over heart disease risk. It identifies treatments that often have nothing to do with more need for medication--that's why your doctors don't know about it.

    You probably already know that the bulk of medical "education" does not come from journals or scientific publications, but from the pretty drug representative with dinner invitation in hand waiting in the doctor's waiting room.

  • Anne

    7/29/2009 4:36:15 PM |

    Dear Dr Davis,

    Your mention of congenital heart disease sufferers made me wonder if you could possibly write a blog about how people with congenital heart disease can improve their heart health please.

    Anne

  • Helena

    7/29/2009 5:51:55 PM |

    Dr. Davis

    I am with you! And to be honest – it is actually horrible WRONG that we are not yet there. We (or at least many people) already know how to escape the dreadful C V and D. Why it is not already implemented in every hospital, doctors’ office, and even in education is scary! But most of it has got to do with a short-term money flow, I would guess.

    As boldly as I think we can put most cardiologists out of business I also believe we can eliminate many cancer diseases by natural remedies!

    No one has to believe me, but sometimes we are to do ourselves a favor and listen to those who have the degrees to say and act upon statements. What about these well selected and bold statements:

    John P. Cook M.D. Ph.D. in his book “The Cardiovascular Cure – How to strengthen your self defense against heart attack and stroke” In his book you can read this: “There is magic within all of us. It comes in the shape of a molecule known as nitric oxide.  A substance so powerful that it can actually protect you from heart attack and stroke.  Best of all your body can make it on its own.  Nitric oxide is your body’s best defense against heart disease.  The body is capable of healing itself.  What you do with the magic is up to you.”

    Dr. Louis J. Ignarro; Nobel Prize Laureate in Medicine, 1998; “NO more heart disease – How Nitric Oxide can prevent, even reverse, heart disease and stroke” and you can read this in the book: "You do not have to wait for the rest of the world to see the light--and the drug companies to put new Nitric Oxide-based prescription drugs on the market--in order to take advantage of what Nitric Oxide has to offer.  Even if you have high blood pressure, have suffered a heart attack, or are at high risk...You can beat the odds.  The power to lead an entirely new and healthier life is in your hands.  Carpe Diem--Seize the day!  Start boosting your Nitric Oxide production right now!“

    Dr. Jonathan S. Stamler; Professor of Medicine; Duke University Medical Center - "It [Nitric Oxide] does everything, everywhere. You cannot name a major cellular response or physiological effect in which [Nitric Oxide] is not implicated today. It's involved in complex behavioral changes in the brain, airway relaxation, beating of the heart, dilation of blood vessels, regulation of intestinal movement, function of blood cells, the immune system, even how fingers and arms move.“
            
    What these gentlemen are talking about is Arginine (arginine transforms into Nitric Oxide once in your body). And Arginine has also been found to: “Improve Memory & Cognitive Functions” (J Physiol Pharmacol 1999), and “May inhibit the division and proliferation of cancer cells” (Br J Surg. 1997)

    The list goes on and on… Arginine 5gr or more a day along with Citruline and antioxidants on a daily regularly basis can do all these things and we can at the same time fight cancer and dementia! It is all out there in the nature for us to use!!!

    Thanks again for a wonderful blog – if anyone is interested in learning about different product options they can email me (don’t want to advertise anything here – this is about people, not money) Helena.mathis@hotmail.com.

  • Helena

    7/29/2009 5:52:31 PM |

    Dr. Davis

    I am with you! And to be honest – it is actually horrible WRONG that we are not yet there. We (or at least many people) already know how to escape the dreadful C V and D. Why it is not already implemented in every hospital, doctors’ office, and even in education is scary! But most of it has got to do with a short-term money flow, I would guess.

    As boldly as I think we can put most cardiologists out of business I also believe we can eliminate many cancer diseases by natural remedies!

    No one has to believe me, but sometimes we are to do ourselves a favor and listen to those who have the degrees to say and act upon statements. What about these well selected and bold statements:

    John P. Cook M.D. Ph.D. in his book “The Cardiovascular Cure – How to strengthen your self defense against heart attack and stroke” In his book you can read this: “There is magic within all of us. It comes in the shape of a molecule known as nitric oxide.  A substance so powerful that it can actually protect you from heart attack and stroke.  Best of all your body can make it on its own.  Nitric oxide is your body’s best defense against heart disease.  The body is capable of healing itself.  What you do with the magic is up to you.”

    Dr. Louis J. Ignarro; Nobel Prize Laureate in Medicine, 1998; “NO more heart disease – How Nitric Oxide can prevent, even reverse, heart disease and stroke” and you can read this in the book: "You do not have to wait for the rest of the world to see the light--and the drug companies to put new Nitric Oxide-based prescription drugs on the market--in order to take advantage of what Nitric Oxide has to offer.  Even if you have high blood pressure, have suffered a heart attack, or are at high risk...You can beat the odds.  The power to lead an entirely new and healthier life is in your hands.  Carpe Diem--Seize the day!  Start boosting your Nitric Oxide production right now!“

    Dr. Jonathan S. Stamler; Professor of Medicine; Duke University Medical Center - "It [Nitric Oxide] does everything, everywhere. You cannot name a major cellular response or physiological effect in which [Nitric Oxide] is not implicated today. It's involved in complex behavioral changes in the brain, airway relaxation, beating of the heart, dilation of blood vessels, regulation of intestinal movement, function of blood cells, the immune system, even how fingers and arms move.“
            
    What these gentlemen are talking about is Arginine (arginine transforms into Nitric Oxide once in your body). And Arginine has also been found to: “Improve Memory & Cognitive Functions” (J Physiol Pharmacol 1999), and “May inhibit the division and proliferation of cancer cells” (Br J Surg. 1997)

    The list goes on and on… Arginine 5gr or more a day along with Citruline and antioxidants on a daily regularly basis can do all these things and we can at the same time fight cancer and dementia! It is all out there in the nature for us to use!!!

    Thanks again for a wonderful blog – if anyone is interested in learning about different product options they can email me (don’t want to advertise anything here – this is about people, not money) Helena.mathis@hotmail.com.

  • Tom

    7/29/2009 5:57:35 PM |

    Alzheimer's and heart disease are thought to be connected -- they may both be the result of arterosclerosis.

    So a world with fewer CHD victims might not be a world with more dementia patients.

  • trinkwasser

    7/29/2009 6:41:32 PM |

    Yes I see both your points. I strongly suspect I am going to die significantly younger than others in my family thanks to the clueless doctors who decided not to diagnose my diabetes, and worse, put me on a high carb low fat diet to "cure" my appalling lipids.

    On the one hand going quick of a heart attack while in my prime would be far preferable to what happened to one of my mother's friends: after a quad bypass she gradually declined from being a fit active sociable person to someone who was blind, deaf and incapable but whose heart would NOT stop and give her the release she prayed for. Once you get into that state they can warehouse you for years.

  • Roger

    7/30/2009 3:10:19 AM |

    My mom was one who met Jenny's tragic fate.  She did Pritikin and McDougall for years, decades actually.  Though she was a lawyer, played piano and read constantly, Alzheimer's (or a similar dementia) overtook her in her 70s.  She spent several years with caregivers in her home, and then six long years in a deluxe nursing home, burning up all the assets she had saved her entire life.  All we could do was watch.

    I believe the low-fat diet she followed wasn't what her brain needed.  She was probably chronically starved for EFAs, especially Omega-3.  But we didn't know what we know now, so we couldn't help.  Of course, I can't know for sure this was the causative factor...maybe this is just my defense mechanism.  But I think Dr. Davis's point is that addressing CVD in no way excludes also addressing dementia.  There's tons of exciting research being done.  Plenty of folks make it to the very end with all their faculties intact.  Why?

  • Tara

    7/30/2009 3:15:35 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    What is your opinion on genetic testing and it's potential effect on the treatment of both CVD and (since it's been mentioned in this discussion) dementia?   I know both my ApoE and KIF6, and find it all very fascinating.  I am a 4/3 and a noncarrier for the risky form of KIF6.  I do think there are some potential ethical concerns with genetic testing, but I do see benefits as well.  For instance, supposedly my KIF6 result means that I would likely not benefit from a statin.  So, it's extra leverage in my mind when discussing treatment options with my cardiologist.

  • trinkwasser

    7/30/2009 3:29:34 PM |

    "I believe the low-fat diet she followed wasn't what her brain needed. She was probably chronically starved for EFAs, especially Omega-3"

    My God, that's an excellent point! Nursing home/hospital food is almost always high carb low fat (and cheap)

  • Miki Ben Dor

    7/30/2009 9:41:55 PM |

    Dr. Davis
    From what I have learned here and in other like minded blogs (Eads, Stephan, Hyperlipid, BG and others)it seem that the whole metabolic syndrome can be prevented + autoimmune diseases and probably many cancers. This has the potential of really emptying out the hospitals and leaving maily the preventative medicine heroes like yourself and Eads in the front where you belong
    I have recently started a blog in Israel, translating to Hebrew some of your (and  the other's) posts. The spreading of ideas resemble sometimes the spread of epidemics. It picks up suddenly so lets be optimistic!
    keep up the good work!
    Miki Ben Dor http//

  • DIB

    8/6/2009 4:31:53 AM |

    Dr. Davis,

    Life without CVD is not something that can be dreamed about, but rather something that existed in the recent past.  I have heard stories from MD's who served in the US military during the Korean and Vietnamese wars, and while over there, and in Japan, during those years, were asked by local doctors to call them when the military MD was treating a patient (usually American) for a heart attack or having a heart problem, because they had never or very infrequently seen those kinds of problems in their practices, and wanted to see what it was all about.  So, some parts of the world escaped CVD problems already!

    DIB

  • Dr. William Davis

    8/6/2009 12:18:28 PM |

    Hi, DIB--

    Excellent point!

    I agree: Many lessons are being RE-learned.

Loading