"Yes, Johnnie, there really is an Easter bunny"

A Heart Scan Blog reader recently posted this comment:

You wouldn't believe the trouble I'm having trying to get someone to give me a CT Heart Scan without trying to talk me into a Coronary CTA [CT angiogram]. Every facility I've talked to keeps harping on the issue that calcium scoring only shows "hard" plaque...and not soft.

I also had a nurse today tell me that 30% of the people that end up needing a coronary catheterization had calcium scores of ZERO. That doesn't sound right to me. What determines whether or not someone needs a coronary catheterization anyway?



There was a time not long ago when I saw heart scan centers as the emerging champions of heart disease detection and prevention. Heart scans, after all, provided the only rational means to directly uncover hidden coronary plaque. They also offered a method of tracking progression--or regression--of coronary plaque. No other tool can do that. Carotid ultrasound (IMT)? Indirectly and imperfectly, since it measures thickening of the carotid artery lining, partially removed from the influences that create coronary atherosclerotic plaque. Cholesterol? A miserable failure for a whole host of reasons.

Then something happened. General Electric bought the developer and manufacturer of the electron-beam tomography CT scanner, Imatron. (Initial press releases were glowing: The Future of Electron Beam Tomography Looks Better than Ever.The new eSpeed C300 electron beam tomographic scanner features the industry’s fastest temporal resolution, and is now backed by the strength of GE Medical Systems. Imatron and GE have joined forces to provide comprehensive solutions for entrepreneurs and innovative medical practitioners.)

Within short order, GE scrapped the entire company and program, despite the development of an extraordinary device, the C-300, introduced in 2001, and the eSpeed, introduced in 2003, both yanked by GE. The C-300 and eSpeed were technological marvels, providing heart scans at incredible speed with minimal radiation.

Why would GE do such a thing, buy Imatron and its patent rights, along with the fabulous new eSpeed device, then dissolve the company that developed the technology and scrap the entire package?

Well, first of all they can afford to, whether or not the device represented a technological advancement. Second (and this is my reading-between-the-lines interpretation of the events), it was in their best financial interest. Not in the interest of the public's health, nor the technology of heart scanning, but they believed that focusing on the multi-detector technology to be more financially rewarding to GE.

GE, along with Toshiba, Siemens, and Philips, saw the dollar signs of big money with the innovations in multi-detector technology (MDCT). They began to envision a broader acceptance of these devices into mainstream practice with the technological improvements in CT angiography, a device (or several) in every hospital and major clinic.

Anyway, this represents a long and winding return to the original issue: How I once believed that heart scan centers would be champions of heart disease detection and reversal. This has, unfortunately, not proven to be true.

Yes, there are heart scan centers where you can obtain a heart scan and also connect with people and physicians who believe in prevention of this disease. I believe that Milwaukee Heart Scan is that way, as is Dr. Bill Blanchet's Front Range Preventive Imaging, Dr. Roger White's Holistica Hawaii, and Dr. John Rumberger's Princeton Longevity Center.

But the truth is that most heart scan centers have evolved into places that offer heart scans, but more as grudging lip service to the concept of early detection earned with sweat and tears by the early efforts of the heart scan centers. But the more financially rewarding offering of CT coronary angiograms, while a useful service when used properly, has corrupted the prevention and reversal equation. "Entry level" CT heart scans have been subverted in the quest for profit.

CT angiograms pay better: $1800-4000, compared to $100-500 for a heart scan (usually about $250). More importantly, who can resist the detection of a "suspicious" 50% blockage that might benefit from the "real" test, a heart catheterization? Can anyone honestly allow a 50% blockage to be without a stent?

CT angiograms not only yield more revenue, they also serve as an effective prelude to "downstream" revenue. By this equation, a CT angiogram easily becomes a $40,000 hospital procedure with a stent or two, or three, or occasionally a $100,000 bypass. Keep in mind that the majority of people who are persuaded that a simple heart scans are not good enough and would be better off with the "superior" test of CT angiography are asymptomatic--without symptoms of chest pain, breathelessness, etc. Thus, the argument is that people without symptoms, usually with normal stress tests, benefit from prophylactic revascularization procedures like stents and bypass.

There are no data whatsoever to support this practice. People who have no symptoms attributable to heart disease and have normal stress tests do NOT benefit from heart procedures like heart catheterization. They do, of course, benefit from asking why they have atherosclerotic plaque in the first place, followed by a preventive program to correct the causes.

So, beware: It is the heart scan I believe in, a technique involving low radiation and low revenue potential. CT angiograms are useful tests, but often offered for the wrong reasons. If we all keep in mind that the economics of testing more often than not determine what is being told to us, then it all makes sense. If you want a simple heart scan, just say so. No--insist on it.

Take trust out of the equation. Don't trust people in health care anymore than you'd trust the used car salesman with "a great deal."

Finally, in answer to the reader's last comment about 30% of people needing heart catheterizations having zero calcium scores, this is absolute unadulterated nonsense. I'm hoping that the nurse who said this was taken out of context. Her comments are, at best, misleading. That's why I conduct this Heart Scan Blog and our website, www.cureality.com. They are your unbiased sources of information on what is true, honest, and not tainted by the smell of lots of procedural revenue.

Comments (13) -

  • Anonymous

    11/30/2007 8:13:00 AM |

    Hmmn - reminds me of a book I read called "Coronary: A True Story of Medicine Gone Awry," recommended by you, Dr. Davis.  Unnecessary procedures for profits.

    It's a scary world out there in medical land.

  • Anne

    11/30/2007 12:35:00 PM |

    The local heart hospital has a "Heartsaver CT" http://www.heartsaverct.com/index.aspx?CORE_ElementID=HSCT_AHH_Home

    Is this the same as the CT Heart Scan?

  • Anonymous

    11/30/2007 1:11:00 PM |

    I saw another car Bill had worked on this month.  My father and I have an auto hobby shop were we'll bang away on making our own hot rod cars and from time to time a friend or friend of a friend in this case will ask to bring a car by for inspection.  The guy has been having many problems with his hot rod and for repairs had been taking it to Bill's place.  I had an idea of what to expect.  Sure enough Bill had done it again.  Bill's scam is that he will splice a weaker gage wire into a hidden unseen area.  The weak gage can not handle the power load for long and once the wire melts and the part stops working, he explains that the engine part broke, new parts need to be ordered and of course that intales hours of labor costs.  
        

    After reading this blog it reminded me of scammer auto shops.  Hospitals have their scams too.    I wish I could walk into a doctor’s office and expect that only the best, least expensive, treatment will be offered me - but I now know that isn't the case.  I can't be lazy.  I need to educate myself in the basics of medical care to ensure I receive the best treatment for me.  Thanks for being a good teacher Dr. Davis.

  • Dr. Davis

    11/30/2007 1:23:00 PM |

    Yes, it looks like it is the real thing, a simple heart scan, judging from their comment that "There are no needles, no dyes, no injections and no exercise." CT angiograms require needles, dye, and injections.

  • Mike

    11/30/2007 3:27:00 PM |

    The CT angiogram makers are generating lots of reports on how great their machines are.

    http://www.theheart.org/viewArticle.do?primaryKey=830205&nl_id=tho28nov07

  • Dr. Davis

    11/30/2007 3:41:00 PM |

    They certainly are. Big bucks, big marketing.

    I do believe, in all honesty, that the new devices really represent great advances in diagnostic imaging. It's their mis-use and over-use that I object to. Of course, the manufacturers keep their lips closed about it because overuse drives more sales.

  • Paul Kelly - 95.1 WAYV

    11/30/2007 5:00:00 PM |

    Hi Dr. Davis,

    I've learned from reading your blog that typically 20% of TOTAL PLAQUE is calcified or "hard". Is that a steadfast rule - or is that an average? What if someone has a calcium score of zero (or close to it)? Can it be assume that that person also has very little in the way of "soft" plaque?

    Thanks!

    Paul

  • Dr. Davis

    11/30/2007 5:12:00 PM |

    Speaking generally, people with zero heart scan scores have heart attack rates of near zero (if asymptomatic).

    The likelihood of detecting pure "soft" plaque in someone without symptoms and a zero heart scan score is <5%. It does happen, particularly when certain severe risks for heart disease are present (e.g., very high LDL/small LDL). It is exceptional, however.

  • noreen

    12/1/2007 12:55:00 AM |

    Since I can't afford the current local price of a 64 slice CT scan ($1100), I've decided to get a lipoprotein breakdown to determine my risk.   I can use your "treatment" protocol of supplements to try and achieve the 60-60-60 values when I see the results.   Is this a good plan?

  • Dr. Davis

    12/1/2007 1:47:00 PM |

    Hi, Noreen--

    I'm afraid that you may regret not getting the scan a few years from now. After you've successfully corrected lipoproteins, you may want to know if you've also successfully controlled plaque growth, the MORE IMPORTANT parameter.

    Have you thought about looking elsewhere for a scan? In Milwaukee, for instance, scans can be obtained for as little as $79. (Though the low-priced scans also come with a sales pitch for CT coronary angiography. Just say "no thanks.")

  • mike V

    12/1/2007 8:49:00 PM |

    I am 72 and pretty healthy.
    This year I have been seeing a cardio because of some nocturnal palpitations. He has subjected me to a series of tests-sleep-ultrasound-both negative, and a nuclear stress test which gave a hint of possible blockage. He recommended either an angiography or a CTA scan. I chose the latter, and was rated "normal".
    I asked if this meant normal for my age. He said "no, normal for any age, I couldn' find any trace of hard or soft plaque". Yes he is part of a large group.

    My father died of a second heart attack at 76.
    I have taken vitamin D, fish oil, magnesium, pantethine, flaxseed, co-Q10, lutein, olive oil, for some years.
    I am trying hard not to feel smug, but should I feel safe?
    We are still working on the nocturnal palpitations which seem to be dependent on sleep position.
    I have bradycardia, and no other obvious health 'problems'.

  • Harry35

    12/2/2007 12:30:00 AM |

    With regard to the 20% value for calcified plaque, if you look at figure 1 from Rumberger’s classic 1995 paper (Circulation. 1995;92:2157-2162.), it shows the plaque area and calcium areas for each of 13 hearts that were examined on autopsy. If you take the points in this graph and determine the areas for each heart, the data shows that the calcium area and calcium percentage increases with plaque area. Unfortunately the paper doesn’t say what the calcium scores were for each heart, only the calcium areas and total plaque areas. However, over the range of plaque areas of the 13 hearts, the percentage of calcium in plaque increased from 0% to 14% for the 9 hearts with with plaque areas less than 150 square mm to 14% to 28% for the hearts with the plaque areas greater than 230 square mm. So from that we can conclude that the 20% value is an average, and that the calcium percentage increases as more and more plaque accumulates.

    Harry35

  • Anonymous

    3/5/2010 5:20:16 PM |

    Sehr interessant!

Loading
Who lost weight?

Who lost weight?

The results of the latest Heart Scan Blog poll are in.


I went wheat-free and I . . .


Gained weight 6 (3%)

Lost no weight 41 (21%)

Lost less than 10 lbs 28 (14%)

Lost more than 10 lbs 34 (17%)

Lost more than 20 lbs 22 (11%)

Lost more than 30 lbs 28 (14%)

I'm still losing weight! 30 (15%)

(189 respondents)


This means that, by eliminating wheat:

24% had no success

31% had moderate success (less than 10 lbs or more than 10 lbs)

25% had extravagant results with 20 lbs or more lost


It would be interesting to know where along the weight-loss spectrum the last category, "I'm still losing weight," group falls. (Anyone with a good story please speak up!)

I believe we can conclude from this casual exercise that, as a simple strategy, wheat elimination is surprisingly effective.

Why would 3% gain weight? Well, without knowing the details, there are several possible explanations:

1) Weight gain developed through other foods. For instance, I've had people eliminate wheat only to replace it with fattening gluten-free alternatives. Remember: wheat-free is not gluten-free. Others load up on the wrong foods, e.g., Craisins and other dried fruit; overdo dairy; or snack on wheat-free but unhealthy foods like ice cream and chips.

2) Too much alcohol

3) Hypothyroidism--A lot more common than you'd think. In fact, this has been the case with a majority of people who have done everything right, yet either failed to lose weight or gained weight.

Those are the biggies.

I'd like to hear your personal stories of wheat elimination--the ups and downs, your success or failure, how you felt during the process, how easy or difficult, your eventual results. Just post them as a response to this blog post.

Comments (30) -

  • Anonymous

    8/1/2009 1:57:23 PM |

    I was one of the persons who gained weight.  I had been a veggie for ages due to my family history of heart disease. The medical evidence backed up the claims so I stated eating cold cuts then sausage.  I totally hate the taste and texture of meat so this was about the only way I was going to do this. I gained around 10 lbs.  Then I reminded myself that this was the kind of diet that got my dad and uncles into trouble.

    I have minimized wheat in my diet (except the one yummy seitan steak) but have dropped the meat.  I have increased fat my intake from coconut oil and butter rather than sunflower oil. Making wheat free bread is sometimes frustrating but pasta without wheat is dirt simple. I've always used plenty of beans and lentils in my diet and that continues.

    Dr D., many thanks for a great information and educational resource

    Trevor

  • Anne

    8/1/2009 2:14:42 PM |

    First I went gluten free 6 years ago. I lost about 10 lbs. I think that was due to the fact I was not sure what I could eat. As time went on, I gained 5 lbs back. A gluten free/wheat free diet can be filled with high carb junk food. Gluten free grains are high in carbs and calories.

    About a year ago I gave up all grains and sugars(except a small square of dark chocolate). That is when I lost about 15 lbs with no effort at all. I have not had any trouble maintaining this weight loss by sticking with a whole foods diet.

  • Nick

    8/1/2009 2:53:52 PM |

    Just fyi, I answered the poll as 'did not lose weight' because I had already lost the ten pounds I needed to lose prior to giving up wheat.  I am at my correct weight, so I don't consider my 'vote' as an indication of lack of success.  I gave up wheat for the health benefits and to avoid gluten.

  • GK

    8/1/2009 4:17:55 PM |

    I went "paleo" in 2007, eliminating all grains.  I am 5'11".  In six months I dropped from 155 to 140 lbs, but regained 5 and have settled in at a very stable 145 for the last year, BMI= 20.2.

  • Anonymous

    8/1/2009 4:57:44 PM |

    wheat free, no change in weight, but my acne cleared up.

  • billye

    8/1/2009 5:22:44 PM |

    It has taken me 10 months to lose 54 pounds.  I am wheat free as well as all grain free, no legumes, limited fresh berries of all types, Limited green vegetables and olive oil, no other type of fruit, no legumes what so ever, a hand full of nuts daily.  I also eat lots of meat (fried in coconut oil)of all types and cuts along with chicken.  I am waiting for the results of an Omega 3 to 6 ratio test that I recently took.  I supplement with 6000 IU vitamin D3, high dose wild Alaskan sockeye salmon oil, super K2, and 325 mg kelp caps.  The evolutionary life style change system I am on and keep refining, is the most positive thing I have done in fifty years of chasing every failing diet I could find.

  • Kurt

    8/1/2009 9:00:49 PM |

    I haven't noticed any big differences since quitting wheat. The only wheat I ate was whole wheat bread and whole wheat pasta, so quitting wasn't difficult. I replaced my morning toast with an oat and nut muesli. I am planning to take a VAP cholesterol test and see if eliminating wheat has helped my numbers.

  • Brock Cusick

    8/1/2009 11:33:41 PM |

    I voted "Lost no weight", which is still more or less true. My waist has narrowed a bit though and I'm down a belt notch since knocking out ALL significant carb sources (not just wheat).

    Body temp in the AM averages 96.6 degrees, so I suspect hypothyroidism. I am trying to convince my local physician to proscribe desiccated thyroid but he's waiting until the TSH/T4/T3 labs come back.

  • Manu

    8/2/2009 12:13:39 AM |

    Is sprouted wheat - or sprouted grains in general - acceptable? I haven't read or heard anything to the contrary. http://brianstpierretraining.com/index.php/the-superiority-of-sprouted-grains/

  • zim

    8/2/2009 12:39:58 AM |

    i've just completed 3 months of this eating plan:

    1. elimination of wheat
    2. near elimination of all sugars (< 20g / day)
    3. concentration on better n-3 / n-6 ratio

    in that time, i've dropped from 225 to 195 lbs., and counting. But more important to me are better heart health and regression of a diagnosed fatty liver.

    next week, I visit the doc for bloodwork and am hoping for some good results.

    the process has been relatively easy for me, especially when compared to prior (misguided) efforts, aka the prudent diet and cardio workouts.

    my energy has been good, i no longer get sleepy in the afternoon, my mood has improved, my frequent headaches have nearly disappeared, and i look/feel healthier. to me, this is not a "diet," but a permanent and positive change in my diet.

  • Van Rensselaer

    8/2/2009 6:48:29 AM |

    Dr. Davis,

    I've made some significant changes in my diet based on the info gathered from your blog and some other valuable sources such as Michael Pollan, Gary Taubes, Whole Health Source, Hyperlipid, and the Westin A. Price Foundation.

    10 weeks ago, I stopped eating *all* cereal grain based products, all legumes, and all starchy tubers.

    I DO eat meat (grass fed or pastured if possible), oily fish, pasture raised eggs, more good fats, fermented dairy products, non-starchy vegetables, *some* nuts (mostly walnuts, almonds, pecans), *some* seeds (pumpkin, flax, hemp), and a little fruit (as berries).

    I am very mindful of my ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 intake.

    I supplement with:

    D3 5000 IU
    K2 as menaquinone-4 5mg
    Lugols solution %5 1 drop
    2-3 grams omega-3 from fish oil (in triglyceride form. 50/50 DHA/EPA).

    I often supplement with curcumin and R-Alpa Lipoic Acid as well.

    Additional fats in my diet come from extra virgin olive oil, raw coconut oil, and grass fed butter.

    The first 5 days of going NO wheat , NO high glycemic load carbs were the hardest: I felt gnawing "hunger" even after I had eaten to fullness.  It was very strange sensation, but it really wasn't so hard for me to get past.  I was fortunate to be raised to have an aversion to sweets and have no great love for bread or pasta.
    Though... I miss beer and pretzels.

    Beyond feeling a little physical discomfort from carb withdrawal, I recall that was a bit of a jerk that week.  Had quite a temper.

    ...days pass...

    In the meanwhile, I would check to see if I was producing ketones (mostly curious, I suppose).  I would really only produce a significant amount of ketones after a period of exceptionally strenuous exercise, such as mountain biking for a few hours; otherwise, I generally produce small readings, if at all.

    ...I began feeling better and better, so I exercised much more intensely and then came across this training approach called "crossfit", which became my new mode of exercise.  Curiously enough, crossfit advocates a paleo-like diet.  Ah-hah!

    ...weeks pass...

    I feel incredible now, as if I'm 10 years younger, at least!  I'm much leaner, stronger, more flexible, have much more energy.  

    I've changed so many variables so I'm giving you quite a loaded anecdote, I realize... but hey, I feel great!

    Unfortunately, I have little in the way of numbers to share with you besides my change weight and blood pressure.

    I'm 40 years old, male, 6'3" tall.

    Beginning weight: 212 lbs

    Current at 192 lbs, approx 10% body fat

    Beginning SYS/DIA  130/84

    Current SYS/DIA 109/70


    Kind Regards,

    Van Rensselaer

  • pmpctek

    8/2/2009 7:39:20 AM |

    I missed the poll.  You can put me down as; "lost more than 20 lbs".

    I lost 25 lbs. (went from 192 to 167) in six months, and it was all fat loss.  As a 5'9" male, my waist size went from 33" to 29".  I'm holding steady at 163 lbs. after 14 months of being grain, sugar, and starch free.

    Although, I didn't eat much wheat and other grains to begin with.  The biggest elimination for me was sugar like from candy, soft drinks, chocolate, etc.  

    The funny thing was though is that I didn't have any of the strong, drug like withdraws and cravings so many others experience with complete elimination... just lucky I guess.

  • Anonymous

    8/2/2009 1:17:33 PM |

    I had no problems giving up wheat, as I noticed it was giving me lower GI symptoms too, I didn't lose much weight, only a little, but I think my body is happier.
    I also got rid of some recalient eczema, which I think is another benefit.
    Jeanne

  • Bekki

    8/2/2009 1:43:06 PM |

    I'm one who lost no weight after going gluten-free.  I did so due to discovering a genetic gluten-intolerance.  I also went off a few other foods that I discovered intolerances to.  I was pregnant at the time, so I didn't expect weight loss.  When that pregnancy ended prematurely, I still didn't lose weight.  My appetite dropped considerably, even while still pregnant, as my gut began to heal and I began to actually digest my food.  I theorize that the reason I haven't lost weight is because I'm digesting my food properly- instead of speeding through my inflamed gut, it's slowly digesting, including all the calories.  And, I haven't really tried.  I admittedly still eat too many sweet things.

    All that to say- I think for some people, proper digestion means they're getting MORE out of their food than they used to, which can cause weight gain or no weight loss.

  • Dr. William Davis

    8/2/2009 8:46:05 PM |

    Thanks, all, for the great stories, positive or otherwise.

    Bekki raises an interesting point: If digestive improves substantially with wheat elimination, is calorie absorption more efficient?

  • fox

    8/2/2009 11:15:11 PM |

    How many didn't lose weight because they traded fat for muscle?

  • Helena

    8/3/2009 1:31:59 AM |

    Hello Dr. Davis.

    I started my diet last Monday (July 27) and have so far lost 2-3kg (6.6 lb) and 3-4 cm (1.6 inches) around my waist. I feel great even though I do have some cravings for some bread and pasta as it used to be in my daily diet, but I am fighting it.

    My exercise have been 60 minute walks a few times over the past week.

    This week I will try to work out more days, but still only 60 minutes at a time.

    I will keep you updated as I did this last year before my wedding, so I KNOW IT WORKS!!!

  • Manu

    8/3/2009 4:20:42 AM |

    No one answered my question (about sprouted wheat). Frown

  • greentree

    8/3/2009 4:47:15 PM |

    Put me in the didn't lose weight camp. I don't think I could lose weight if I starved myself for2 weeks. I am on Synthroid and my TSH is normal but my T3 is showing out of range (low) but I can't get a doctor to address that.

  • Anonymous

    8/3/2009 4:53:15 PM |

    Fourteen of us started low carbing age range 18 to 70 and all have lost weight over the last 7 months average around 21lbs,though some have lost more inches than weight cutting out wheat,pasta rice and upping the good fats,butter extra virgin olive oil but coconut oil (Mct's?) seems to be the best oil for losing weight.
    Some have otimised Vitamin D and Omega 3 others have not.
    Some are still losing weight whilst others seem to vary + or - three or four pounds around their newly found "ideal weight!.".
    More energy,great muscle tone fewer aches less hunger less bloating and mood swings seems to be the benefits and an increasead body temperature.
    a good tip if you are not getting enough protien or are a vegetarian is to use a low carb Whey Protien bodybuilding supplement.

  • Dr. William Davis

    8/3/2009 10:37:47 PM |

    Excellent point, Fox.

  • Anonymous

    8/4/2009 10:02:05 PM |

    I didn't lose weight. OK - maybe I lost 2 or 3 lbs.  I don't even own a scale.  I don't have a goal of losing weight - I only weigh 105 lbs.  My goals are about heart health, not weight loss.

    Bonnie

  • Anonymous

    8/5/2009 10:44:42 PM |

    I marked that I'm still losing weight.

    I gave up wheat, sugar (I may take in less than 10g of carbohydrates in the form of vegetables which I use as a condiment), grains, pulses, and most processed foods.  So I eat a mainly meat and egg diet with the occasional small salad or lacto-fermented veggies. I do eat a lot of fat.

    So far, I've lost 46 pounds, and I hope to lose another 29.  

    I still have limited amounts of soy in grain-free soy sauce, and I still have cheese and cream and butter as well.  Good stuff!

  • puddle

    8/5/2009 11:47:31 PM |

    2002, I was diagnosed with early congestive heart failure; my Cholesterol was 246, and my BP was running about 170/90 or 100.

    I didn't specifically go off of wheat, but doing Atkins, I always need to stay within about 10 to 20 carbs a day. In a year I dropped from 250 to 200.  Over the first two years, my cholesterol dropped to 222, 194, and then to 174. My blood pressure dropped to the 114/80 range.  And my knees stopped aching.

    The doctors have backed off the CHF diagnosis.

    I had Graves Disease in 1986 with a total thyroidectomy, and have been on Levoxyl .175 since then until a month ago when I got my prescription changed to Armour 2 grains.  I think it's going to need to be upped after the blood tests, just based on how I'm feeling. I spent most of my adult life till the Graves on the low side of normal (exact borderline).  Some doctors would prescribe thyroid, others would not.
    I'm almost 69, I feel great, and thank you Dr. Davis!!

  • Alan S David

    8/6/2009 3:47:21 PM |

    I fasted before the wheat elimination, a three day water only fast. I dropped 5 pounds or so. Eliminated 95% or more of the wheat, and corn starch. Added more eggs and fresh vegetables to my diet, and I have been down a total of 15 pounds and have no trouble maintaining that weight. My BMI is 21.
    Hope to see a lowering in my small particle LDL count in the near future. It has gotten better but is still high.

  • Anonymous

    8/8/2009 5:01:04 AM |

    I'm 52 now, had a heart attack at 48 which is rare for a premenopausal woman. Low cholesterol and low blood pressure looks like its an iflammation/ insulin issue for me. I lost just over 20kg in 5 months after reading your blog nearly a kilo a week. Dr Davis, together with my Dr Tessa Jones who is amazing, thank you, you are a life saver. As well as eliminating grains I take the supplements eg fish oil, turmeric, resveratrol, niacin, Vit D) and bioidentical hormones; I am managing hypothyroidism (8 drops/day Lugol's!). My high fasting insulin (dropped from 136 to 80 - but should be 8) and my triglycerides have also fallen dramatically. Breakfast is a whey brewers yeast, egg, nuts berries smoothie. Lunch and dinner is salads and meat/fish. Dark chocolate when I'm craving carbs. But I stopped losing in Jan not sure why and have put on 6kg since then, am very worried. I got a CRP reading of 10.7 My doctor was horrified, gave me a mercury challenge which was so high it poisoned me; she has me taking Far infrared saunas to reduce heavy metals. But still no more weight loss (keeping it just steady) am v obese at 103kg at 5 feet tall. Any advice welcome.

  • psychohist

    8/29/2009 1:43:02 PM |

    I didn't purposely go wheat free, but I dropped pretty much all wheat from my diet in favor of potatoes for a couple years.  I gained about 10 pounds in that time and was on a continuing upward trend.  Note that I was not overweight to start with.

    I then went paleo, dropping the potatoes and strictly removing the wheat.  I lost all the weight I'd gained.

    I suspect some of the gainers replaced the wheat with potatoes or other starchy foods.

  • buy jeans

    11/2/2010 8:42:06 PM |

    I'd like to hear your personal stories of wheat elimination--the ups and downs, your success or failure, how you felt during the process, how easy or difficult, your eventual results. Just post them as a response to this blog post.

  • Megaera

    2/22/2011 7:22:29 AM |

    Interesting, that when facts don't quite fit with your theories your immediate response is to assume that the inconvenient facts are the fault of the unfortunate provider.  That is, when someone says either, I didn't lose any weight on your hobby-horse diet, or even gained weight on it, you immediately pronounce that it must have been that person's fault, he MUST have been doing something very bad.  Well, for what it's worth, I've gone wheat-free, processed-food-free, limit my carbs to leafy greens (no starches) and small quantities of fruit, supplement with fish oils, D3 and iodine.  I drink no juices, eat no nuts or seeds, exercise, in short, do all the "thou shalts" and have omitted just about all the "thou shalt nots" you would seem to insist upon.  I have not quite managed to eliminate dairy, but my intake is minimal.  I don't snack, and my meals are 3/day and small.  My fasting glucose readings are still > 100, and I have not lost a single pound.  I am quite capable of adopting a tough regimen and sticking to it; this is nothing compared to some I've tried.  But it still does nothing, so, thanks for that nothing, I guess.

  • Megaera

    2/24/2011 12:37:08 AM |

    Oh yes, and several months now after starting this process I find I experience none of the magic benefits you keep extolling: no great GI changes for the better, no skin improvements, no "gee, how swell I feel" moments -- in fact, I feel just about as crap as I did before dcing grains and sugars.  So, falsio in unius ...

Loading