Who is your doctor?


Primary care physicians are the initial entry point for healthcare for the majority of Americans.

Develop pneumonia; go to your family or internal medicine physician (internist) to be prescribed an antibiotic. Need your blood pressure or cholesterol checked? Develop a sore knee or swelling in your leg? Once again, go to your primary care physician.

Image courtesy Dedde'


Primary care physicians are a patient’s guide to a bewildering array of technology and specialists. If you require a specific diagnostic test or consultation with a specialist, your primary care physician will help you navigate through the maze, choosing the path that is best for you. He or she will order a chest x-ray for a cough and fever, provide vaccines to prevent flu or pneumococcal pneumonia, perform an annual physical. If you require hospitalization, your primary care physician will admit you. He or she will order diagnostic tests like MRI’s, ultrasounds, x-rays, and blood testing, usually performed in the hospital or a hospital-owned facility. If you require the services of a gastroenterologist, orthopedist, general surgeon, or neurologist, your primary care physician will refer you to the appropriate specialist.

That’s how it’s supposed to work, at least in principle. In fact, during the first eight decades of the 20th century, it did work that work way for the most part. Your primary care physician acted not just as a provider of healthcare, but as your advocate, someone who knew you and worked to protect your welfare. Your family doctor often knew your parents, maybe even delivered you at birth, and cared for your children. His children often went to the same schools as your children. He and his family lived in the same town and sometimes went to the same church.

That hardly happens any more. It’s more likely you got the name of your primary care physician from a doctor referral service provided by a hospital. Or you picked a name off a list provided by your health insurer. It’s also common to see one doctor, only to see another a year later. Two, three, or more different primary care physicians over a five-year period are common. Doctors come and go, since physician turnover in clinics and practices has been on the increase for years. Insurance companies frequently force policyholders to change doctors, requiring you to choose from a list.

The end result of this shuffling of primary care is increasing impersonality of the relationship. You probably don’t know your primary care physician outside of the 10-minute interaction you had six months ago. She probably never met your mother and will likely not care for your children. Two years from now, she will likely not be your doctor any more, replaced by someone else who obtains the details of your health from a chart. Your chart is more likely to be electronic, with the details of your health history listed in a checklist. There’s little room to detail the idiosyncrasies and quirks of your unique personality or health profile. Throw into this impersonal equation the fact that many doctors have become scared of patients because of potential for lawsuits, often over the most trivial of issues, or because of an error of oversight or misdiagnosis.

This flawed and impersonal system, though emotionally unsatisfying, can still work if each doctor who assumes a patient’s care maintains the ethic of putting health and welfare above all.

But what if your primary care physician is not just an advocate for your welfare, but is a representative of the hospital? What if there are hidden, unspoken financial incentives paid to your doctor to direct you to the hospital for diagnostic testing, hospitalization, and referral to specialists? If a headache becomes a $4800 MRI, or chest pain becomes a $4200 nuclear stress test, then a $14,000 heart catheterization, your primary care physician becomes the purveyor of far greater financial opportunity for the hospital. The entire interaction, founded on the proposition that your doctor actually cares about you, collapses in a heap of financially motivated testing and procedures. It appears to work, and you and your family can still obtain access to healthcare. The problem is that you’re likely to get too much of it.

This message has not been lost on the shrewd administrators at hospitals. Take a look at the ranks of primary care physicians who refer patients to some of your local hospitals. It is typical that a hospital system maintains several hundred primary care physicians on their payroll, all of whom are expected to refer patients to the hospital, cardiologists, and other proceduralists. Why so many?

Most primary care physicians today have signed contracts with a hospital. In other words, they are employees of the hospital. This practice is not unusual: the American Medical Association reported that 4 of 5 primary care physicians are now bound by such employment arrangements across the U.S. In effect, 80% of primary care physicians are legally bound by contract to direct patients to cardiologists who work at hospitals.

On top of contractual obligations, there are financial incentives for the volume of procedures that are generated as a result of referrals. The more procedures generated from an internist’s or family practitioner’s practice, the greater the end-of-year productivity bonus will be, not uncommonly totaling tens of thousands of dollars. Dr. Ted Phillips (not his real name, since he declined to allow me to use it) received a bonus check of $9,437 this year for his “productivity,” defined murkily as the return on specialist referrals. While the bonus may have helped him pay for his son’s college tuition, it clearly was a situation that made him acutely uncomfortable when asked.

Several primary care physicians are also quietly dismissed every year from the ranks of employed physicians for not maintaining a minimum flow of patients into the system.

Another hazardous point of entry: Many patients enter the hospital through the emergency room (ER). A patient in the emergency room is at his or her most vulnerable, seeking help for an urgent complaint and usually willing to accept whatever the ER physician advises. Hospitals know this. That’s why many systems insist that the ER physicians be employees of the hospital, with their practice habits subject to control. A patient goes to the ER with chest pain or breathlessness. The worst thing that can happen from a financial standpoint is for the patient to be evaluated and discharged. For this reason, a growing number of hospitals employ ER physicians, then proceed to legislate practice patterns. Consulting a cardiologist is strongly encouraged, since they generally provide access to the downstream revenue-producing procedures offered in the hospital. That way, what might have been a four hour, $2500 ER visit is converted into a $10,000 to $40,000 hospital stay, even when nothing was wrong in the first place. There are millions of people nationwide who have the hospital bills to prove it after being discharged with a diagnosis of indigestion.

Caveat emptor: Buyer beware.

Comments (7) -

  • JPB

    7/27/2008 4:45:00 PM |

    Wow!  This is an incredible conflict of interest!!  No wonder I have felt so much pressure to do this and that despite never being sick and having no symptoms.  

    How did medicine get to this point?  The better question is 'How can doctors live with themselves?'  

    We all know that everyone has to earn their living but but this milking of the system and of patients is truly horrible! It is especially insidious when you are dealing with someone you need to trust implicitly and who tells you that you need to do these things because he/she is worried about your health!

  • Jenny

    7/27/2008 5:15:00 PM |

    I thought you might be interested in this article on a physician in Arizona who is remodeling his practice to offer concierge health care.
    http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2008/07/23/20080723biz-elitedocs0724-ON.html
    As an advocate of free market solutions, I will be looking for a physician in my area with the same philosophy.  But I don't really expect to find one, as I am in an area dominated both by a State University Health System, and a Private University Health System. My own PCP is in the private University system.  We are asked to sign arbitration agreements with the University in case of  some untoward event (I refused, but I believe many patients believe they must either sign or go untreated, or else do not realize what they have signed.) Now the system has implemented a program that is ostensibly designed to help patients develop preventive health practices.  You are provided a liason person ( a nurse I assume) to check in with once/month by phone,and in that conversation you are asked about your goals and what you're doing to reach them, and given the usual status quo, conventional advice about concerns.  (This person will never even set eyes on you, after all.)   Still, it  doesn't sound bad, even sounds as if they are making genuine if nonsubstantive efforts toward helping people be proactive.  But I would not be surprised if the whole scheme were somehow rigged to the advantage of the University insurance plan, such as being enabling them to see if you are receiving more treatment (such as seeing an acupuncturist or chiropractor) than "they" think is appropriate or taking only the drugs "they" approve, and I also suspect that one day it will no longer be voluntary, and that you will be coerced toward only the practices they approve of.  Why are they offering payments for participation, is my question, and what do they do with the information you give them?  I will be opting out of that too.

    As far as free market solutions and the concierge model go, many will argue that it is too expensive and will only provide care for an elite.  The Arizona physician will charge a flat fee of $1500/year, and that will entitle his patients to direct access to him by phone or email, and at least 30 minutes of his time per visit.  His practice will have to be smaller than in the past in order for him to give more to each patient, but he will be able to actually practice medicine rather than be a cog in a corporate machine. Surely there are free market models that can be devised for the average person as well.  To object that the cost of modern health care is prohibitive may be simplistic.  Why is it prohibitive?   Can it be because the market does not function freely under the triple chokehold of insurance, drug company and government collectivism?    If patients and physicians were able to devise alternatives to the present environment of health care and PARTICULARLY if true, effective preventive practices (and many are already available at nominal cost but not promoted) became the norm, costs could plummet.  Hail to the pioneers such as Dr. Davis and the TYP members, and to the Arizona Concierge physician, who are striking out for new territory.  We will all benefit tremendously.

  • Bad_CRC

    7/27/2008 7:27:00 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    Your fellow cardiologist Rich Fogoros also addressed this breakdown of the role of doctor as advocate, but he argues just the opposite: that PCPs today are essentially employees of the health insurance companies, tasked with controlling costs by minimizing tests, procedures, specialist referrals, etc., like claims adjusters.  His version certainly seems to be more true where I live.  I can't speak to the extent to which my PCP is under pressure to stay within a quota (however informal) for monthly rheumatologist referrals, CT scans, etc., or the degree such pressure taints his patient interactions, but I do know that he works in a clinic owned by the same (insurance) company to whom my employer and I pay my premiums, and that the same company also owns the local hospitals.  Clearly the profit-maximizing thing in such case is to maximize (healthy) policyholders and minimize claims (treatment).  There's no profit in gratuitous caths and bypasses when the hospital is the insurance company.  Fogoros claims that this sort of vertical integration became the rule when the HMOs bought up all the community hospitals and clinics in the late '90s.  A friend of mine (under my same plan) suffered a nasty GI tract problem and had to beg and fight her PCP, over 2-3 months of almost constant vomiting and other fun, for a referral to a gastroenterologist, who did finally diagnose and cure her.  The PCP was clearly in over his head, yet kept futilely giving her the same garden-variety pills (antiemetics, PPIs, etc.) and at one point told her, "Look, I can't just send everybody to the GI to have him say, 'Take the Purple Pill!'"  So Fogoros' "covert rationing" seems to go on in my town.  Can you reconcile that with what you're saying?

  • Anonymous

    7/27/2008 9:59:00 PM |

    All my adult life I've been told by doctors I have "borderline hypertension" (about 140/90). None, however, ever even suggested that I take an anti-hypertensive. Now I have atherosclerosis and can but wonder what might have been. Let mine be a cautionary tale.

  • Anne

    7/27/2008 11:34:00 PM |

    Not all insurance plans require a person to go through the PCP for referral to a specialist. I have seen patients who are seeing multiple specialists where it seems no one is in charge of the overall picture. These people may be given duplicate tests and incompatable medications. Doctors don't always communicate with each other. Shouldn't there be one chart that follows the patient from doctor to doctor?

    When I was seeing a university PCP I found it difficult to get tests such as vitamin D, B12 and A1C.
    Anne

  • Michael

    7/30/2008 11:13:00 AM |

    Practicing primary care in the US in the current environment is incredibly challenging, but still very rewarding. As an employed family physician in Massachusetts, I am pulled in many competing directions: the hospital encourages referrals and admissions into the system the patient's insurance company discourages some referrals and limits access to certain medications and expensive tests.  There is more paperwork and bureacracy than ever.  Patients are more informed now, and often come in with information, some of which literally may be based on one person's opinion from a website or blog.  There are often many issues to try to sort through in one visit, a visit which is often limited by time pressure that exist as doctors try to see more and more patients.

    Despite this, I still feel it is a privilege to be chosen as someone's family doctor.  I tell my patients that I will try to treat them like my family and give them the same advice I would give my mother or my daughter.  I see my role as their guide, and I try to lay out the different options, and then tell them which one I would personally choose, but that it is ultimately their body, and they get to make the decisions.

    What it comes down to for me is that medicine is still about the interaction between the doctor and the patient, and if a patient is unhappy with that interaction, then they have the right to try to find a new doctor where they will feel cared for.

    I had to also respond to Jenny's post about concierge medicine.  It is definitely an attractive option for some patients and physicians.  I once read it explained like this: "Imagine you're a plumber, and someone says I will pay you more money to do fewer plumbing jobs, so you can spend more time on each job, and really focus on doing the highest quality work you can, really get back to what it was that drew you to being a plumber."  Who wouldn't want that?  My problem is that it is not extrapolable.  If a primary care concierge physician only has 300 patients, there is going to be a huge shortage of primary care doctors in this country.  My training in both medical school and residency was oriented around taking care of all the patients that needed help, not just the few hundred that could afford an annual fee of several thousand dollars a year.

    There is a group of doctors who have come together in Seattle to practice medicine in a very intriguing model.  It is called Qliance (www.qliance.com).  It has some similarities to a concierge practice, but is much more affordable.  They don't take insurance, there are direct monthly costs that are charged to the patient which covers unlimited visits.  Additional tests are paid for by the patient.  This model financially aligns the patient and physician, and the usually-hidden costs of medicine are out in the open.  One physician who works there described it as very refreshing to feel that you are really working for the patient.  It won't be the answer for everyone, but it may be the answer for many.

  • Anonymous

    3/1/2009 5:06:00 AM |

    Anne posted that some patients are seeing multiple specialists without having a primary care doctor.  

    That's my predicament, and I wish it weren't so.  As an 57 year old woman with multiple annoying health problems including diabetes, hypertension, and some difficult-to-treat chronic pain (chronic daily migraine, neck problems), I can't find a PCP who will stick with me: They are apparently so unnerved by the list of maladies that I must deal with that they decide I must be crazy, not ill, and stop working on my behalf.  

    I just hate trying to be my own PCP!  I'm terrible at it!  The idea of having a PCP who would help me manage all this stuff is a dream!  And I haven't had a physical in over a decade because I can't keep a PCP.  And although my specialists kindly try to fill that gap in my treatment, I know that not having a PCP is dangerous.

    However even with my excellent insurance and ability to pay and living in an area with an unusually high number of doctors/capita, apparently I fall into a category of patient that PCP's just can't deal with.

Loading
Heroin, Oxycontin, and a whole wheat bagel

Heroin, Oxycontin, and a whole wheat bagel

For a substantial proportion of people who remove wheat from their diet, there is a distinct and unpleasant withdrawal syndrome. Here are the comments of Heart Scan Blog reader, Scott, from Texas:

Hello Dr. Davis,

I've been experimenting with diet, converging upon a Paleo type diet, but I keep running into problems. I have isolated the problem to cutting out wheat.

Sugar, rice, fruit, corn, potatoes, etc. are relatively ok to add or remove from the diet, but cutting out wheat in particular brings on a moderate headache with heavy fatigue all day long. This resembles the wheat withdrawal symptoms I found on your blog. As I write this, I'm on day 8 of wheat-free. I consume a fair variety of meat and veggies each day with a moderate amount of white rice for carbs. Perhaps a bowl of corn flakes with milk and half a bar of dark chocolate a day. I've learned from experience over the past 5 months or so that none of these foods affect the withdrawal. It's purely wheat.

My question is, what is the range of times for withdrawal symptoms that you've heard from different people? Has there been anyone who never recovered from the wheat withdrawal symptoms even after many months?

It's very tough to get work done like this, and even though my body and head feel much healthier in general, my sinuses have cleared, don't have to take a big nap after I eat, etc., I don't want to go down a path where this is the way things are going to be forever. 



People who have never experienced wheat withdrawal pooh-pooh the effect. But, for about 30% of people, wheat withdrawal is a real, palpable, and sometimes incapacitating experience.

Beyond removing an exceptionally digestible carbohydrate that yields blood sugar rises higher than nearly any other known food (due to the unique amylopectin structure of wheat-derived carbohydrate), wheat withdrawal is a form of opiate withdrawal, somewhat like stopping heroin, Oxycontin, and other opiates. Stop eating whole wheat toast for breakfast, whole grain sandwiches for lunch, or whole grain pasta for dinner, and the flow of exorphins, i.e., exogenous morphine-like compounds, stops. You experience dysphoria (sadness, unhappiness), mental "fog," inability to concentrate, fatigue, and decreased capacity to exercise. It is milder than withdrawal from prescription opiates. Unlike withdrawal from more powerful opiates like heroine, there are, thankfully, no seizures or hallucinations. There are also no deaths.

In my experience, most people get through with wheat withdrawal in about 5 days. An occasional person will struggle for as long as 4 weeks. Thankfully for Scott, I've never seen it last longer than 4 weeks. (Interestingly, people who survive the withdrawal syndrome are often prone to a peculiar re-exposure phenomenon that I will discuss in future, i.e., they get sick upon re-exposure.)

The modern dwarf mutant variant of Triticum aestivum (that our USDA urges us to eat more of) contains greater proportions of gluten proteins compared to wheat pre-1970; glutens are the source of wheat-derived exorphins.

Incidentally, a drug company should be releasing a drug in the next year that will contain naltrexone, an oral opiate blocking drug, for a weight loss indication. They claim it is a blocker of the "mesolimbic reward system." I say it's a blocker of wheat exorphins.

Comments (27) -

  • Tree

    1/25/2011 1:50:08 PM |

    Celiac disease is often noticed by people who go off wheat for health reasons, then when they try to eat it again, it makes them sick.  

    For the record, Corn Flakes contain barley malt which has the same protein, gliadin, as wheat.  I have celiac and the "formula" is no wheat, barley or rye because they are so closely related and have the same "gluten" protein.

  • Martin Levac

    1/25/2011 1:55:45 PM |

    Isn't it interesting. They treat obesity by fixing the "mesolimbic reward system" because they believe eating too much "food" makes us fat. But then you say wheat isn't food, it's a drug.

    Are we really eating too much "food"?

  • Emily Deans, M.D.

    1/25/2011 2:15:16 PM |

    A heroine is a very different concept than "heroin."  And withdrawal from oxycontin or heroin is unlikely to cause hallucinations or seizures (Trainspotting babies on the ceiling notwithstanding) - though it is exceedingly unpleasant, it is not typically medically dangerous.  Perhaps you are thinking withdrawal from alcohol, barbituates, or benzodiazepines, all of which can cause hallucination, seizures, or death if done without medical supervision.

  • Anonymous

    1/25/2011 2:35:18 PM |

    I have celiac and had similar problems when I first went off gluten.  It took me about a month to stop reacting.  I get quite ill whenever I accidentally am exposed to gluten, say at a restaurant.  My symptoms are migraine and flue like aching in my joints, plus severe fatigue.  None of my doctors thought I might have celiac by the way, because I am slightly overweight (BMI 25) and didn't have severe digestive symptoms, but there is recent research showing that many patients present with migraine as their only celiac symptom.

  • Dr. William Davis

    1/25/2011 2:47:15 PM |

    Oohh. Thanks for catching the typo, Dr. Deans. Fixed.

    By the way, I've seen plenty of hallucinations and seizures with opiate withdrawal, as well as benzodiazepine withdrawal. Or, perhaps it was combination addictions that were at fault.

    That, however, was not the point.

  • Emily Deans, M.D.

    1/25/2011 3:11:53 PM |

    I think the point was well-made - just didn't want anyone to fear that wheat withdrawal was medically dangerous (quite the opposite).  I've had a few cases where I was able to stop night (carb - typically bread) binging with (off-label) use of naltrexone - pretty telling, I would say.

  • Dr. William Davis

    1/25/2011 10:21:46 PM |

    Dr. Deans--

    I am VERY impressed you knew of this effect.

    I have tried this, too, in people who are, despite their best effort, unable to resist temptation to consume this drug-disguised-as-food called wheat.

  • Anonymous

    1/26/2011 12:24:48 AM |

    My health improved dramatically after I stopped eating wheat, grains, and other carbs, I even had a cataract disappear.  But it required nine months before I could adjust to the low carb way of eating. It's worth all the trouble, no more high blood pressure or diabetes medicine.  Most of my arthritic pain is gone, I am able think more clearly. Lost 30 pounds. No more allergies or indigestion.
    Thank you for writing this blog!

  • DK

    1/26/2011 4:08:13 AM |

    I was able to stop night (carb - typically bread) binging with (off-label) use of naltrexone - pretty telling, I would say.

    Nothing at all particularly telling I would say. Other than telling that opioid receptors are part of the reward circuit. Which is obvious and not disputed by anyone. Naltrexone main use is in treatment of alcohol dependence. Using your logic ethanol is an agonist of opioid receptors. Which is self-evidently not true. The effects are indirect.

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    1/26/2011 5:30:17 PM |

    Question here:

    Is the "craving" for wheat due to psychoactive tri-peptides derived from wheat protein ?  If that is the molecule that "dopes" our opiod receptors then decreasing levels of tri-peptides as the day progresses will make some look for their wheat "fix".

    Naltrexone @50mg was FDA approved (1984) in 1984 opiod addition; to block receptors. I think the doctors here are referring to single evening doses of 3 to 4.5 mg.
    for screened patients.

  • BWR

    1/27/2011 3:08:46 AM |

    Here's what I don't understand: Why is it that entire countries of people who eat bread by the basket, like Spain, have exceptionally low levels of heart disease? This is a sincere question. I want to do what's right for my heart, but it seems to me that a naturally occurring sample size of several million people is pretty compelling. What am I missing?

  • Anonymous

    1/27/2011 8:25:08 AM |

    Jack LaLane on sugar:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJVEPB_l8FU

  • Jonathan Byron

    1/27/2011 1:56:02 PM |

    Milk and dairy products are also a source of endorphin-like chemicals. Would it make sense to try to kick a wheat habit by temporarily drinking more milk?

  • Anonymous

    1/27/2011 3:42:20 PM |

    BWR

    It is possible that Spanish bread is made from a much healthier wheat variety.

    The devil is on the details.
    From a HSB comment May 24, 2010
    Here in France, Einhorn( Triticum monococcum) has been cultivated since the 9 th millennium BC in a small area of Haute Provence. It is called petit epeautre and it is truly delicious! It has very little gluten.
    There is much regulation in the cultivation in order to protect the genetic purity of this ancient grain. Like wines it has a AOC (appelation d'origine controlee

    Please note: Higher Mg and Lysine in einkorn

    Modern wheat has had much of the Mg bred out
    http://petitepeautre.com/nutritiona.html

    Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology
    http://www.einkorn.com/toxicity-of-einkorn-gluten/

    Same for casein in milk where A1 milk can be a serious problem and the casein is similar to gluten
    http://www.guernsey.net/~wgcf/PageMill_Resources/Acres_Woodford.pdf

  • Dr. William Davis

    1/27/2011 4:37:27 PM |

    Hi, BWR--

    There are some unanswered questions with this thing called wheat. As the anonymous commenter pointed out, there may be differences in strains grown worldwide. While 99% of all wheat grown today are dwarf variants of Triticum aestivum, there are pockets of agricultural adherence to older cultivars.

  • revelo

    1/27/2011 8:41:02 PM |

    I am perfectly willing to believe than many people cannot tolerate wheat. But this obsession with villifying wheat discredits Dr Davis's very valuable promotion of regular heart scans and other diagnostics, as well as D3, Iodine and other supplements.

    It isn't just the Spaniards. My own ancestors are a mix of French, German and English, and I don't seem to have any problems with wheat, rye, barley, to speak nothing of oats. Furthermore, I believe a heavy grain diet is precisely why I am able to keep my weight down and my test results good. I experimented with going to a somewhat more paleo diet recently and the result was to DECREASE my insulin sensitivity when I went back to eating oats. Now that I'm back to eating mostly oats, my insulin sensitivity has returned to normal. Worse, the paleo diet caused a surge in uncontrollable hunger. One particularly bad day, I ran through a dozen eggs, a pound of meat, another pound of nuts and all sorts of other food before my appetite finally settled down. I never had these uncontrollable appetite problems with my usual mostly oats diet, nor did I have problems when I used to eat mostly pasta (though I was younger then and had higher metabolism than now).

    Appetite is the key. If a food sends appetite soaring, then it doesn't matter how healthy that food is by itself--it will make you fat and thereby reduce insulin sensitivity and thus destroy you in the end. Conversely, if a food depresses appetite, then assuming it isn't absolute poison (like arsenic), eating that food will allow you stay lean, and by staying lean you stay insulin-sensitive (assuming you also do some daily exercise), and that is the ultimate key to avoiding most health problems, from what I understand. For some people, wheat and oats may very well be the keys to appetite suppression, and it is thus a disservice to condemn these foods for everyone.

  • Anonymous

    1/27/2011 10:47:13 PM |

    what do you make of this new study citing adverse effects of a high fat diet?

    http://www.ajcn.org/content/early/2011/01/26/ajcn.110.002758.abstract

  • Onschedule

    1/28/2011 1:21:46 AM |

    @revelo,

    In his practice of Cardiology, Dr. Davis has apparently observed great results with a good number of his patients that choose to avoid wheat. Apparently, an impressive enough effect, in his opinion, to make the statements that he does. These observations, and the recommendations he makes based upon them, hardly "discredit" his professional advice.

    It may be true, as you suggest, that not every single person will have a problem eating wheat, but a person's weight (or appetite) is not the only indicator of potential heart-health related issues. While wheat might not make everyone fat, it may still provoke immune response, inflammation, surge in blood glucose and triglycerides, etc.

    Anecdotally, thanks to Dr. Davis' advice regarding wheat, my 68 year-old mother lost 15% of her bodyweight in four months, without exercise, and without any other change in her diet except to replace the pastas and breads with eggs, vegetables, and meats. She had always taken great pride in the "healthy" foods she ate, but over the past twenty years had very slowly gained weight and a bloated appearance. She started crying during our last visit because she is so happy to "recognize" herself again in the mirror, and is wearing clothes that haven't fit in over a decade. I stopped eating wheat one year ago. Since then, I've dropped from size 34 to 28 pants and get compliments weekly concerning how young I look; I feel great and lab results (blood tests, radiology) are unbelievably improved.

    Wheat avoidance may not indeed be necessary for everyone; but, it's done wonders for *all* of those around me that have given it a good chance.

  • reikime

    1/28/2011 3:53:27 AM |

    Jonathan,
    Subbing milk for the wheat wold NOT work as milk produces a morphine- like substance called caseomorph and wheat produces gliadimorphs. Two different types of exogenous morphines.

    This is one of the rationales for the gluten free- casein free diet that seems to greatly help some children on the autistic spectrum.  Sorry to be a spoilsport!

  • reikime

    1/28/2011 3:55:31 AM |

    oops!  typo alert ...sorry
    Subbing milk for the wheat would NOT work as milk...

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    1/28/2011 7:55:05 AM |

    reikime,
    thanks for the answer.

  • reikime

    1/30/2011 12:39:45 AM |

    You're welcome Might-.

  • Olive Kaiser

    1/30/2011 3:13:16 AM |

    Check out www.theglutensyndrome.net

    I get folks who contact me from my site who have strange neurological symptoms when they either withdraw from gluten/wheat the first time or  flip flop on and off too much. I have a page on temporary adverse effects from going gluten free.

    Our 23 year old nursing student daughter experienced a very strange neurological effect from a 6 week gluten challenge after being strictly gluten free for 6 months.  Ischemia/reperfusion injury is a possibility, and gluteomorphin withdrawal also.  Her story is on the site.  For sure she is very strictly gluten free now, and doing fine 6 years after the experience. http://glutensensitivity.net/cases.htm#ztop

    In the book, "Mendel in the Kitchen, Nina Federoff, a strong proponent of GMO technology, relates how wheat was genetically altered by the 1950's by both x ray irradiation and chemical mutation, and the gluten levels were raised far above older varieties. The wheat today is not the same as our ancestors, at least not here in the States.

    FYI, a new lab (www.Cyrexlabs.com)  has just opened 2 weeks ago with much more complete gluten syndrome testing.  They are testing many more antibodies than previous standard panels, and expected to turn up many more folks with gluten syndrome.  They also teach that gluten can damage multitudes of tissues by molecular mimicry between gluten related antibodies and look alike innocent tissues all over the body.  The villi, which have been the gold standard target tissue in the celiac community, are turning out to be just one of many possible sites of damage.  

    Many folks have gluten/wheat related antibodies, but their main target of autoimmune tissue damage is in places other than the villi, such as the heart, nerves, organs, joint lining, etc.  Villi as the target tissue is found in relatively a few folks, and that is the tissue damage that has gotten most of the attention.

    Dr. Aristo Vojdani, PhD, Immunology, and others have accumulated a lot of research to support these theories, and they fit the gluten syndrome community like a glove.

  • Jonathan Byron

    1/30/2011 3:39:54 AM |

    >> "Subbing milk for the wheat wold NOT work as milk produces a morphine- like substance called caseomorph and wheat produces gliadimorphs. Two different types of exogenous morphines."

    Right, but is the fundamental problem generally the morphine-like effect, or is it some other antigen specific to gliadins? My wife has hashimoto's thyroiditis, and the smallest trace of wheat, barley, or other gliadin grains quickly makes her miserable... she can feel her thyroid swell, she gets cold, she has other problems. Dairy does not have this effect. Since cutting out gluten from grains, her T3, T4, and TSH levels have returned to normal, while her anti-thyroid antibody level has dropped to very near normal.

    I am willing to consider that with some conditions (like autism), both gluten and milk can be a problem. It is not clear to me that if gluten is a problem then milk must also always be a problem. If the casomorph proteins allows some people to quit wheat with fewer withdraw symptoms due to the substitution of endorphin-like molecules, that could be a good thing.

  • reikime

    1/30/2011 10:37:28 PM |

    Jonathan,

    The issues your wife has with gliadin really dont seem related to the morphine like responses some people have with gluten and /or dairy.

    Sure some people that have a wheat/gluten intolerance can ingest dairy just fine...that said, if the microvilli are damaged from wheat and not healed yet, you are much more likely to have a problem with dairy.
    The tips of the villi are where lactase is produced.
    Also, if one is subject to the effects of gliadiamorphins, IMHO one would likely be sensitive to caseomorphins, because the unhealed intesine is permeable.. ie leaky gut syndrome. This allows proteins into the bloodstream that would normally not be there. (and to wreak havoc)

    Willing to say I may be wrong, though. Anyone?

    I spend alot of time on celiac  research issues, so naturally this is where my brain goes!  lol

  • Dr Charles Parker

    3/22/2011 1:02:56 PM |

    Great to see that others have identified gluten as a potential pathogen/allergen that can significantly contribute to both mind and body deterioration through compromised immune dysfunction. I know you, Dr Davis, often think of the heart as the canary in the coal mine, and I see the brain as a canary partner showing first signs of impending acute deterioration.

    This link will take you to a series of interviews I did with Dr Peter Osborne on similar issues as discussed in this posting:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJCZmNzkRNA&playnext=1&list=PLD61FCED98A4A5C66

    Hope this helps encourage more discussion and awareness, and thanks for your excellent work!
    cp

  • Carb Flu « The Paleo Spot

    9/16/2012 4:53:03 PM |

    [...] The first couple of weeks without grains and sugars were not pleasant.  In the beginning, I had a headache nearly every single day.  By body was detoxing and coming off the caffeine, carbs and sugars.  I was crazy tired.  For several days, I was so ravenous I wanted to gnaw my arm right off my body (would somebody please pass the sea salt…?)  If this lifestyle is sooo healthy, why have I been feeling like I’ve been run over twice by a dinosaur?  The answer is simple and thanks to in-depth research before starting my journey, it is something that I anticipated would happen – I have been experiencing the classic symptoms of Low Carb Flu. [...]

Loading