Wheat hell



Can including wheat in your diet create hell on earth?

Was The Inferno nothing more than Danté’s prediction for the state of the U.S. diet circa 2009?

I’m kidding on The Inferno allusion, but the American diet nonetheless sure does create an inferno of unhealthy phenomena.

If we define hell on earth as constant, nagging pain and discomfort; energy depleted sufficient to impair daily function; chronic bloating and diarrhea; leg swelling, peculiar rashes; progression of a multitude of diseases ranging from annoying all the way to fatal . . . well, that’s a pretty bleak picture.

I have indeed witnessed it all. Inclusion of wheat products in the human diet in many (not all--I'd estimate 70% of people) yields devastating health effects. In a few, it shortens life. In the majority, it leads to a slow, miserable hell of inflammatory diseases like arthritis, coronary disease, and cancer.

I have also witnessed dramatic reversal of these phenomena with complete removal of wheat from the diet.

(For clarity, I am not only referring to gluten sensitivity, the immune reaction gone haywire that plagues people with celiac disease. Celiac disease is indeed another variety of wheat-induced hell on earth, but there’s far more to it than that.)

Among the effects I’ve seen with wheat removal:

--Increased clarity of thought—I can vouch for this effect personally. Focus, concentration, the capacity for prolonged application of effort is restored with elimination of wheat.

--ADHD—Marked improvement in attention deficit disorder can occur in children and adults with this focus-depriving condition. Elimination of sugars and cornstarch may be necessary for full effect. While it doesn’t seem to work in everybody, the effect is powerful enough?and the implications so profound?that it is worthy of consideration in any child with this condition.

--Improved bowel health?Many people plagued by chronic bloating, diarrhea, and urgency experience complete relief. In its most extreme form, it is expressed as celiac disease. But there are a larger number of people who do not have celiac who are plagued by this lesser form of intestinal intolerance.

--Weight loss?Patients have told me that they were actually frightened when they eliminated wheat, meaning weight dropped so rapidly that they thought something was wrong. Nothing is wrong. The weight loss simply represents the removal of this bizarre, unphysiologic trigger of appetite, blood sugar, insulin, and weight gain.


Relevant to heart health, wheat elimination effects include:

--LDL cholesterol reduction?Yes, I know that it’s not what the “official” agencies say. “Reduce fat, reduce saturated fat and cholesterol will drop.” That’s barely true; reductions of saturated fat reduce LDL cholesterol, but rarely more than 20 mg/dl. In contrast, elimination of wheat yields LDL reductions of 40, 50, even 100 mg/dl. And the type of LDL reduced is the small particle variety, the kind mostly likely to lead to heart disease. (Cutting fat generally reduces large LDL, the more benign form.)

--Triglyceride reduction?Triglyceride reductions of 50, 100, even 1000 mg/dl can be achieved with elimination of wheat (though elimination of cornstarch, sugars, and other processed carbohydrates may be necessary for full benefit).

--HDL increase?A variable response, but increase of 5-10 mg/dl are common.

--Reduced inflammation?This phenomenon expresses itself in a number of ways, including dramatic reductions of the common inflammatory marker, c-reactive protein. While the media focuses on the JUPITER trial of rosuvastatin’s (Crestor) ability to reduce CRP 50-60%, wheat elimination can easily match this?without drugs.


What's more, you just feel better. Less commonly, I've seen arthritis (both common osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis), skin rashes, and sleep disorders improve. I've had pre-diabetics become non-pre-diabetics, diabetics become non-diabetics.

It's not so much whether that food is carbohydrate-rich or protein-rich. It really comes down to calories, a very simple message.'
— Dr. Frank Sacks

While some advocate the notion that only calories count and diet composition makes no difference, I offer this possibility: Whether or not weight is lost by diet, there can be enormous health effects independent of weight based on the composition of diet. Inclusion or exclusion of wheat is one such crucial factor.


Image courtesy Wikipedia, The Eighth Circle of Hell.

Comments (17) -

  • IggyDalrymple

    2/28/2009 2:41:00 AM |

    Following the advice of Dr Mirkin, I was  already pretty much on your recommended diet, whole intact grains, fruits, veggies, and a little oily fish.  At your urging, I very rarely eat a wheat product.  Have switched from olive oil to canola. http://tinyurl.com/JACC-OliveOil

  • Rick

    2/28/2009 3:01:00 AM |

    I don't doubt you but I'm terribly curious as to why this should be. I'd always thought that cereals--rice, barley, rye, wheat, millet, quinoa--were basically natural foods that have been enjoyed by humans for hundreds of years. Are other grains also dangerous? If not, what's so special about wheat? And how about grains similar to wheat, such as spelt?

  • Anonymous

    2/28/2009 5:15:00 AM |

    Ah, I wish I dropped my weight as easily by eliminating wheat. I have eliminated wheat 95% and no weight loss.
    Dr. Davis, I also had a question for you. Is it safe to take Niacin while you are pregnant or trying to get pregnant?

    P

  • David

    2/28/2009 5:34:00 AM |

    "While some advocate the notion that only calories count and diet composition makes no difference, I offer this possibility: Whether or not weight is lost by diet, there can be enormous health effects independent of weight based on the composition of diet."

    Well said! That is an absolutely crucial point, and one that is brought out well in the recent EJCN study: http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ejcn20094a.html

    Health improved dramatically without weight loss.

    I tell this to young people all the time. What you eat matters, and it matters beyond simply getting fat or not getting fat. Sure, they might be able to drink 12 coca-colas every day and stay thin for now, but what kind of long-term damage is being done beneath the surface?

  • steve

    2/28/2009 3:11:00 PM |

    i will attest that elimination of wheat and for that matter all grains and starches does work.  My small particls dropped from nearly 1800 to 1300 and HDL increased from 40 to 54. TRG dropped to 20 from 41.  So, in my case with no other dietary changes, the elimination of wheat worked.  At a good weight and still lost 4 pounds.

  • Nancy LC

    2/28/2009 5:47:00 PM |

    If you're curious as to evidence of the badness of wheat (or rather, gluten) there's a wonderful collection of peer reviewed studies here:
    htpp://theglutenfile.com

  • Anonymous

    3/1/2009 4:02:00 AM |

    Although I don't doubt the improvements you've seen regarding removing wheat from diet, what about those who don't see any difference?

    I'm not talking about those who would eat muffins, cakes, pastries, tons of carbs, etc. As removing junk food would improve lipids in of itself.

    But in my case, I reduced wheat products, and noticed a minor improvement in lipids, but nothing radical.

    I eliminated wheat completely, and saw no difference. I didn't lose any extra weight, lipids were the same, and I didn't feel any different. But I wasn't overweight to begin with and didn't eat a lot of junk food anyway.

    Are the improvements seen then mostly in those who overindulged in carbs/wheat, then went to a healthy diet (no wheat)? Is it the fact that some people have an almost wheat addiction, and when they eat any wheat products at all, they go overboard? Just wondering if there is any difference between a low carb, low wheat diet vs a diet with no wheat at all.

    In my case, I don't see a big difference between them.

    I'm also curious as to the explanation as to how the Italians and French get away with all the wheat products they eat, yet they have a lower rate of heart attack than Americans. Vitamin D? Better diet in spite of wheat intake? Wine/grape intake?

  • Anonymous

    3/1/2009 4:25:00 AM |

    What about rice?

  • Anonymous

    3/2/2009 3:51:00 AM |

    Dr Davis,

    This is related to some of the other questions on this post, but I'm wondering to what extent this is a purely American thing? When people eat mainly packaged foods, and they all contain wheat and/or high-fructose corn syrup, then eliminating these foods is likely to have a major effect. When on a non-American diet, I wonder if it really matters?

    Also, although you have lots of posts where wheat is mentioned, many of them seem to assume that readers already broadly share your view. But the idea that even wholewheat products are bad goes against everything I've learned over many years; it's such a radical idea that it would be nice if you could go back to first principles and take us through it really slowly. Why should something that we've all seen as healthy and natural be so bad for us?

    I'm just coming to the end of your Track Your Plaque book, and this issue doesn't really figure, so I'm guessing you've experienced a fairly recent conversion? If so, perhaps you could share your experience so that we can see where you're "coming from"?

  • Anonymous

    3/2/2009 3:56:00 AM |

    Sorry, forgot to mention one big reason why the anti-wheat message is difficult to understand: We're often told that the Mediterranean diet is one of the best for heart health. But I understand that pasta, usually made from wheat flour, is a staple there.
    Similarly, the staple in Japan is white rice, but it's said that heart attacks are relatively few there.

  • Trinkwasser

    3/2/2009 1:56:00 PM |

    A small but significant number of Type 2 diabetics report extra high glycemic reactions specific to wheat. Even some Type 1s have problems dosing insulin correctly which don't occur with other grains. I wonder just how widespread this actually is and if some of the symptoms are an effect of the insulin required to process the wheat.

    Wheat is originally a transgenic cross, and has been greatly modified by plant breeders in recent decades so I wonder what effect such modifications (to increase yield, reduce straw length and improve disease resistance) have had on the actual biochemical content of the grains. Similar work on other grains may not have increased their toxicity along with the yield.

    This would be an interesting field of study (pun intended) a friend still grows old varieties for thatching straw and they are over twice the height with far skinnier heads than his modern varieties in the next field, you'd be hard pressed to believe they were the same species

  • Anonymous

    3/4/2009 6:11:00 PM |

    Rick: I'd always thought that cereals--rice, barley, rye, wheat, millet, quinoa--were basically natural foods that have been enjoyed by humans for hundreds of years. Are other grains also dangerous? If not, what's so special about wheat? And how about grains similar to wheat, such as spelt?

    The key phrase is "hundreds of years" -- as opposed to what we were eating before that for much, much longer. Grains (agriculture) have only been around for the blink of an eye on the evolutionary timeline. Wheat and corn cause the most problems overall, especially when the harm they do is too subtle to notice, but I'm convinced that most people would be far healthier if they avoided grain entirely, or only consumed it in sprouted or fermented form.

  • terry

    8/22/2010 7:28:23 AM |

    Thank you so much for this post, it help me a hole lot. As an arthritis sufferer myself, I would like to share this arthritis site I recently discovered. They had tons of great products from all over the world that give maximum pain relief. I've tried them myself and was very pleased with the results. Try out this site

    http://arthritis-osteoarthritis.blogspot.com/

  • Generic Cialis

    9/23/2010 9:01:37 PM |

    I always end up very worried when reading this type of stuff, sometimes I think that everything we eat is bad for health and it would be better not to eat at all and live out of serums.

  • Levitra

    10/7/2010 10:12:01 PM |

    NO I know who the real Enemy is... Wheat. The way you putted wheat is food's Antichrist. I really get a little upset when i read this stuff, at one point you regret all you have eaten in your life.

  • buy jeans

    11/2/2010 7:31:07 PM |

    Weight loss⎯Patients have told me that they were actually frightened when they eliminated wheat, meaning weight dropped so rapidly that they thought something was wrong. Nothing is wrong. The weight loss simply represents the removal of this bizarre, unphysiologic trigger of appetite, blood sugar, insulin, and weight gain.

  • sex pills

    7/27/2011 3:26:58 PM |

    Very good, have a healthy future, a reasonable mix of vegetables, will be able to give us a healthy body. Thank you to share

Loading
More on erectile dysfunction

More on erectile dysfunction

Several facts on erectile dysfunction and coronary plaque:


If you have erectile dysfunction, there's at least a 50% chance you also have coronary plaque.

If you have coronary plaque by a CT heart scan, there's a 50% chance you have erectile dysfunction.

If you have symptomatic coronary disease (chest pains, breathlessness, prior heart attack), there's a 90% chance you also have erectile dysfunction.


Coronary disease is characterized by a dysfunctional state of the "endothelium", or inner lining of the coronary arteries. Erectile dysfunction is characterized by dysfunction of the endothelium of the penile circulation. Same phenomenon, different territories. (There are other differences, of course, but the two conditions share this fundamental phenomenon.)


If you have any doubts about the physiologic effects of the supplement, l-arginine, just give it a try if you have erectile dysfunction. The erection enhancing effects alone should convince you that a genuine artery-dilating effect is exerted by this very powerful nutritional supplement.

If l-arginine fails by itself to restore full erectile capacity, there are additional strategies, both nutritional and medical, that you can consider.

Our newest Track Your Plaque Special Report on erectile dysfunction is coming out any day now.

Comments (8) -

  • Anonymous

    5/15/2007 8:34:00 AM |

    Would you comment on this?

    Implication in contributing to risk of death from heart disease

    A recent Johns Hopkins study testing the addition of L-arginine to standard postinfarction treatment has implicated L-arginine supplementation with an increased risk of death in patients recovering from heart attack.[5] This study has been discussed in some detail in : "Reverse Heart Disease Now" by Stephen T Sinatra MD and James C Roberts MD, publ. Wiley 2006 ISBN 0-471-74704-1 at pp 111 -113.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arginine#Implication_in_contributing_to_risk_of_death_from_heart_disease

  • Dr. Davis

    5/15/2007 11:46:00 AM |

    I actually posted a full discussion of this issue a few months back on the Track Your Plaque website (www.trackyourplaque.com). I still believe what I said then:

    "Should we panic and stop l-arginine based on this report?

    Take a closer look.  We don’t think so. First of all, two of the deaths occurred months after l-arginine treatment was stopped. Two other deaths were due to infections and therefore likely unrelated to heart disease or l-arginine use. This leaves two deaths attributable to heart disease in the l-arginine group.

    "Numbers this small are likely to represent chance statistical effects, especially in view of the small size of the overall trial. In other words, in all likelihood, a larger study would have revealed more reliable numbers not as susceptible to chance effects.

    "What about all the other studies that have looked at l-arginine? We should view this one study in the context of all preceding experiences. No excess dangers have been observed in thousands of participants with coronary disease, angina, peripheral vascular disease, and heart failure over the last decade of investigation.4 Many of the participants with heart failure in these studies were sufferers of prior heart attack, just like the VINTAGE MI participants.

    "Let’s also not forget that l-arginine is a food substance. Do fish, chicken, eggs, and nuts also pose danger? Of course not.

    "As always, each study should be viewed within the broader context of the available scientific and clinical experience. The overwhelming experience, as well as common sense, suggests that the VINTAGE MI Trial is a statistical fluke."

    In other words, I find this so counter to all prior experiences that I think it's a fluke. But, of course, the pharmaceutical industry-friendly media make hay of such reports.

  • Best erection pills

    7/17/2008 3:39:00 AM |

    Absolutely agree with you dr Davis...

  • Roy

    9/5/2008 6:36:00 AM |

    Due to the rising competition in the ED drugs market arena, all the ED drugs are trying to target their customer base by harping on the advantages that they are having over their competitors. Hence you will find ED drugs that either talk about their lasting effects, their minimum side effects or the other benefits that they mete out apart from the cure of ED. Though these claims are not always false one should not completely sway away in these claims. A very good ED drug might also fail to suit a particular patient. ED drugs and in fact any drug should be had only on doctor’s advice. http://www.levitrabliss.com/

  • viagra prescription online

    8/28/2010 6:49:06 AM |

    Thanks for the nice post.This is very informative and well written  post.
    buy cheap silagra

  • order generic propecia

    10/18/2010 5:37:37 AM |

    sexual dysfunction such as ED or impotence can be treatable,some of them in the form of medicines, some in the form of specialized techniques, and some in the form of herbal supplements.
    Regards,
    meltabs

  • Natural ways to cure erectile dysfunction

    3/16/2011 4:04:30 AM |

    Great information! Thank you for the post!

  • Jack Willson

    12/2/2013 4:02:01 PM |

    I am only 40. Started having problems about a year ago. Tried "herbal" remedies, was hit or miss, mostly miss. Also libido was on the down turn, I just didn't feel like I needed or wanted sex... Got a trial pack from http://aroma-health.com/ with 6 pills. The first three I took worked perfectly. Took on empty stomach or at least one hour after a meal. Within an hour, took effect. Makes my face flush and nose run (common side effects) The fourth time I took it, I split the pill in half to see if it would work at lower dose (I was taking a 50mg dose) It works. Also, most of the time, it still has effects several hours after. Even up to the next morning if taken at night.

Loading
Paging Dr. Basedow

Paging Dr. Basedow

A 23-year old man came to my office having experienced weeks of extreme anxiety, palpitations, and 19 pounds of weight loss triggered by an overactive thyroid.

It all happened because of a large dose of iodine received during a CT scan using iodine-containing x-ray dye. (X-ray dyes are made visible on x-ray due to the iodine content.) This is a reaction first described in the 19th century by German physician, Karl Adolph von Basedow. (Jod is German for iodine.)[caption id="attachment_4313" align="alignleft" width="217" caption="Dr. von Basedow. Image courtesy Wikipedia"][/caption]

Now, here's the kicker: Jod-Basedow only occurs when there is pre-existing iodine deficiency. Indeed, this young man had an enlarged thyroid, signaling longstanding iodine deficiency (a goiter).

This example is among the more flagrant examples of something I have been witnessing: the return of iodine deficiency. As Americans cut back on their intake of iodized salt and fail to obtain iodine in sufficient quantities from seafood, seaweed, or supplementation, goiters and iodine deficiency are making a return in all its glory, reminiscent of the early 20th century, pre-iodized salt.

This young man's frightening experience is yet another way iodine deficiency can show itself, by the overenthusiastic thyroid response to a large dose of iodine when iodine deficiency has been present for a prolonged period.

Iodine deficiency and goiters have been lost to memory for most people. Even the FDA, in its advice for Americans to reduce salt and sodium intake, have forgotten to remind everyone to obtain iodine from an alternative source. "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Get your iodine.

Comments (8) -

  • Might-o'condri-AL

    8/6/2011 4:17:48 PM |

    1 gram of Dulse sea weed (Maine coast waters a common clean source)  = 110% daily value of iodine; dulse tastes very pleasant raw  or pan roasted (not burnt black) as a garnish; 1 gram of bulked up dulse (not pulverized into powder) is less than 1/20th  of a cup's volume.

  • Renfrew

    8/6/2011 4:34:07 PM |

    There is a fascinating article about the imprtance of Omega 6.
    Yes, Omega 6, not Omega 3.
    We might have overblown the importance of Omega 3.
    http://jackkruse.com/is-fish-oil-good-or-bad/
    Renfrew

  • Paul

    8/6/2011 11:36:40 PM |

    Sorry to be slightly off topic, but have you seen:

    Thyroid Replacement Therapy and Heart Failure
    http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/122/4/385.full

  • Lisa

    8/7/2011 7:52:10 PM |

    If iodine supplimentation is needed, what is the recommended dosage?  Not FDA, but in your opinion!

  • Dr. William Davis

    8/7/2011 11:55:06 PM |

    Hi, Lisa--

    We've been using 500-1000 mcg with success.

  • cancerclasses

    8/8/2011 6:27:09 PM |

    That''s the fact Jack!  Er, I mean Renfrew.

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    8/9/2011 12:36:32 AM |

    Fats relationship to HOMA-R (homeostasis model insulin resistance index) means a postive  (+) HOMA-R worsens insulin resistance.  Here is a breakdown of this relative to individual poly unsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) from Japan research (2007?).

    PUFAs with a + HOMA-R:
    eicosadienoic (C 20:2 chain) omega 6
    dihomoylinolenic (C 20:3 chain) omega 6
    docosapentaenoic (C 20:5 chain) omega 3
    docasatetraenoic (C 22:4 chain) omega 6

    PUFAs with no relationship to HOMA-R:
    linolenic (C 18:2 chain) omega 6
    arachidonic (C 20:4 chain) omega 6
    eicosapentaenoic ( C 20:5 chain) omega 3 (EPA)
    docosahexaenoic (C 22:6 chain) omega 3 (DHA)
    eicosatrienoic (C 20:3) omega 9

  • Renfrew

    8/9/2011 1:48:02 PM |

    Mighto:
    so what are dietary recommendations for balancing Omega3 / Omega6 ?
    What foods/fats can we eat, what foods/fats should we avoid?
    Renfrew

Loading