Track Your Plaque in 50,000 BC

Imagine we could send you back in a time machine to 50,000 BC.

However, our agreement: no modern tools or equipment. Just your brain, hands, and legs. And your landing spot will be tropical or semi-tropical, the same climate that humans spent much of their evolutionary time in.

Not only might you rub elbows with contemporaries like homo erectus and neanderthalensis, you'd also have to fend for your life and survival.

To eat, you will have to chase and kill wild game, all with your bare hands or crude tools crafted from sticks and stones. You will have to learn what wild berries, roots, and plants are edible and distingusih them from those that make you retch, make your bowels run, or kill you. You won't be able to cultivate grain, at least for a good long time, since you don't have a community that makes such an undertaking easier.

Instead, you are constantly on the run, from the moment you awake until you finally settle back as the sun sets, hopefully with a full stomach, but often empty and growling, anticipating the hunt and forage of tomorrow.

You are outdoors all day, except for the period when you hide in your cave or self-made shelter. You wear what little clothing you can make yourself from your kills, a skin or two. Your skin becomes a dark brown, a 5 foot 10 inch male will weigh 140 lbs, a 5 foot 5 inch woman 95 lbs. There are obvious downsides: your teeth will rot, you will be prone to infections, and predators view you as fair game.

But the result will be that many chronic diseases of modern life will no longer be worries for you. Heart disease? Highly unlikely. Do you need vitamin D? No, because you are outdoors virtually all day with most of your body surface area exposed to sun. Omega-3 fatty acids? You get those from the wild game you eat, since they have higher omega-3 content feeding in the wild, not eating corn like modern livestock. Since your body fat is minimal, just enough for survival, you don't need niacin.

In other words, many of the strategies of the Track Your Plaque program are modern necessities, responses to the "deficiencies" of modern life. Of course, I don't really have a time machine. I also doubt that you wish to hunt wild game every day, forage for plants and roots, run nearly-naked in the sun. You probably also have become accustomed to brushing your teeth and not viewing every animal as a potential threat to your life.

Nonetheless, I find this an interesting exercise for understanding the role of all the tools we use in the Track Your Plaque program for plaque control.

Comments (3) -

  • DietKing2

    6/16/2007 2:51:00 PM |

    You know, I have always made the assumption that our ancestors' teeth didn't rot because they weren't exposed to refined sugars and carbohydrates. I know accessible fluoride wasn't around then, but then again, I'm hearing that even fluoride may not be the best thing for teeth or bones (or humans) anyway.  What about Weston Price's research?
    Good post!
    Adam

  • Cindy

    6/16/2007 11:49:00 PM |

    I agree with DietKing...everything I've read has indicated that dental carries were seen only after the start of agriculture. I've also read several studies that indicate that early man more likely made a big kill and then fed off it for several days....kinda like wild cats do today. I agree that it often took several days to make a kill, but once done, it fed them for more than just 1 day.

    Otherwise I agree....get back to natural as much as possible and you'll fare much better.

  • Ortcloud

    6/17/2007 11:12:00 PM |

    We are very much least we are slaves to our ancestors dna.

    ironic that modern "progress" intended on increasing our survival is in fact killing us. We have built an impressive civilized society but it is not really compatible with our genetics. Maybe we need a genetic software update, nature tries to update our dna by natural selection but we have done everything possible to try to stop it either because of emotions or greed. (democrats or republicans)

Loading
Free the Animal

Free the Animal

Richard Nikoley from the Free the Animal Blog contributes this informative comment:



'Bout 18 months ago, I was at 230 (5'10) and looked awful. I was on Omeprezole for years for gastric reflux, a variety of prescription meds since early 20s for seasonal sinus allergies, culminating finally in the daily, year round squirts of Flonase-esque sprays (the best for control without noticeable side-effects), and finally, Levothroid for about the last 7 years or so, as I had elevated TSH (around 9ish).

My BP was regularly 145-160 / 95-110.

I decided to get busy. I modified diet somewhat, cutting lots of junk carbs, and began working out -- brief, intense, heavy twice per week. BP began coming down immediately, such that within only a couple of weeks I was borderline rather than full blown high. Then after about six months, a year ago, I went to full blown low-carb, high fat, cutting out all grains, sugar, veg oils, etc, and replacing with animal fats, coconut, olive oil. You know the drill. Then, first of the year I felt great and simply stopped all meds, including the thyroid. I also began intermittent fasting, twice per week, and for a twist, I always do my weight lifting in some degree of fast, even as much as 30 hours.

That's when the weight really started pouring off. Take a look:

http://www.freetheanimal.com/root/2008/09/periodic-photo-progress-update.html

http://www.freetheanimal.com/root/2008/08/faceoff.html

In July I figured it's about time for a physical. Here's the lipid panel, demonstrating am HDL of 106 and Try of 47, great ratios all around:

http://www.freetheanimal.com/root/2008/07/lipid-pannel.html

However, my TSH was even higher -- 16ish. It seems odd that I was able to lose 40-50 pounds of fat (10-15 pounds of lean gain for a 30 pound net loss at that time -- now an additional 10 pounds net loss).

One disclosure is that I was drinking too much, almost daily, and quite a bit (gotta save some vices...). Anyway, I'm at the point now where I want to drill down. I know I need to see an endocrinologist and have T3 and T4 looked at, but in advance, I wanted to see if the recent changes I've made could make a difference:

1. Stopped all alcohol.
2. Stopped most dairy, except ghee and heavy cream, and cheese is now used as a "spice," i.e., tiny quantities -- no more milk.
3. 6,000 IU Vit D per day.
4. 3 grams salmon oil, 2 grams cod liver oil.
5. Vit K2 Menatetrenone (MK-4) -- side story: getting off grains reversed gum disease for which I have had two surgeries, then supplementing the K2 DISSOLVED calculus on my teeth within days -- hygienist and dentist are dumbfounded. Stephan (Whole Health Source), who comments here, has an amazing series on K2.



If you view his photos, you'll appreciate just how far he has come.

Overall, Richard's program is wonderful and his pictures clearly display his success. However, Richard, thyroid function is indeed a problem, a problem that needs to be fixed ASAP. Remember, low thyroid function used to be diagnosed at autopsy at which time the coronary arteries and other arteries of the body were found to be packed solid with atherosclerotic plaque, even in young people.

I'd recommend:

1) Consider 200 mcg Iodine per day from kelp if you do not use iodized salt.

2) Seeing your doctor right away for thyroid replacement, hopefully with consideration of your T3 status.

3) A heart scan--Not to lead to procedures, but something for you to track over time as your program improves and thyroid function is restored.

Beyond this, keep up the great work. Great blog, too!

Comments (10) -

  • Nancy LC

    12/4/2008 3:36:00 PM |

    I thought I'd comment on thyroid and sinuses, since that has affected me as well.

    I went through a period of nearly a year of chronic sinus infections once, which ended up in me being under the care of a specialist.  One of the things he mentioned in a letter to my doctor was that under treated thyroid can cause that.  Of course, back then anything like a TSH of 5 was considered just fine, so they put me on antibiotics for 6 months.

    A while back the sinus issues returned and sure enough, I had a TSH of around 5.  I badgered my doctor for higher dose of thyroid meds and the infections went away.

  • Anna

    12/4/2008 4:37:00 PM |

    I wonder if eating grains and a lot of starch (continual "quick energy") somehow "masks" low thyroid  conditions?

  • Jake

    12/4/2008 5:12:00 PM |

    This is from Dr Cannell from the Vitamin D Council about cod liver oil:


    "The italicized passages below are from our paper and are the heart of the reasoning used to issue the warning about vitamin A and cod liver oil. They are the advice of the 16 experts who co-authored the paper with me, not just mine alone:

    Furthermore, the consumption of preformed retinol even in amounts consumed by many Americans in both multivitamins and cod liver oil may cause bone toxicity in individuals with inadequate vitamin D status. Women in the highest quintile of total vitamin A intake have a 1.5-times elevated risk of hip fracture."  Feskanich D, Singh V, Willett WC, Colditz GA. Vitamin A intake and hip fractures among postmenopausal women. JAMA 2002;287:47–54.

    "Indeed, a recent Cochrane Review found that vitamin A supplements increased total mortality rate by 16%, perhaps through antagonism of vitamin D." "

  • rnikoley

    12/5/2008 1:25:00 AM |

    Thanks, Doc.

    I guess I really need to drill down on this now. I'll follow up with a comment here in a couple of weeks, once I've seen an endocrinologist, had free t3 and 4 tested, etc etc.

    I'll also look into a heart scan right away.

  • Fitness Blogger

    12/5/2008 2:09:00 AM |

    That is good work, you seem to be a disciplined person. Did you find that your thyroid, contributed in a significant way to your excess weight.

  • rnikoley

    12/5/2008 6:17:00 PM |

    Fitness Blogger:

    I really can't say whether low thyroid contributed. While TSH is high, suggesting thyroid is probably low, I've yet to have T3 and 4 tested, but I'm going to do so. And, also, my weight loss has only accelerated since stopping my meds last January (I didn't mention this, but I have no more heartburn or sinus problems -- went through last spring and summer without a hitch, for the first time ever in my life I can remember). Now, I would not go so far as to say stopping the Levothroid caused or even contributed to my fat loss accelerating. It's just an association, as other factors were in play, such as my fasting and increasingly better eating.

    Also, I didn't mention this before, but I've looked over and over at the typical symptoms for low thyroid and have never experienced any of them to any significant or regular degree. People talk about sensitivity to cold -- I sit in the 40-50 degree cold plunge in the gym after a workout anywhere from 3 up to 10 minutes and feel wonderful. I just got back from my morning walk in 40 degree weather in shorts and a light sweatshirt. If anything, even in spite of 60 pounds of fat loss, I tend to run hot -- with the exception that I sometimes feel a bit cold sensitive in the middle of a fast before fat burning really kicks in in earnest and/or I'm very inactive during a fast.

    For another people talk about being tired all the time. Since getting off grains and other junk carbs and eating real food only that I typically prepare myself, I'm never tired, and for the first time since college can easily pull a near all-nighter playing cards with friends, for example. I have tons of energy all the time and find it difficult to go to bed before midnight or 1am, but when I do, I sleep like a baby for an average of seven hours, then I'm up and ready to attack the day.

    I'll be interested to see how this all plays out.

  • Anonymous

    12/9/2008 1:57:00 AM |

    Hey Richard,
    Thanks for mentioning K2. I rushed out to my local Health food store and picked up a pricey MK4 which was all they had.  Found the site : www.vitamink2.org  MK7 looks to be very interesting and a further check on the web indicats Twin Labs has a D3/K2 tab available through GNC at a reasonable price.

    thanks

  • rnikoley

    12/20/2008 12:47:00 AM |

    Following up, I just got my heart scan score: 76.89, so pretty low risk from what I can gather (I'm 47).

    Having been 60 pound overweight for the last 15 yeas, now just 10 pounds or so from an ideal weight, HDLs at 106, I'm hoping that score is on the way down. I'll go back in a year.

    I'll also continue the process of drilling down on the hypothyroid issue, but at least I can rest easy that my arteries aren't packed.

  • buy jeans

    11/2/2010 7:52:37 PM |

    1. Stopped all alcohol.
    2. Stopped most dairy, except ghee and heavy cream, and cheese is now used as a "spice," i.e., tiny quantities -- no more milk.
    3. 6,000 IU Vit D per day.
    4. 3 grams salmon oil, 2 grams cod liver oil.
    5. Vit K2 Menatetrenone (MK-4) -- side story: getting off grains reversed gum disease for which I have had two surgeries, then supplementing the K2 DISSOLVED calculus on my teeth within days -- hygienist and dentist are dumbfounded. Stephan (Whole Health Source), who comments here, has an amazing series on K2.

    that's a really nice try

  • Wilson brad

    2/8/2011 5:13:00 AM |

    I thought I'd comment on thyroid and sinuses, since that has affected me as well.
    ................
    BPO services

Loading
Blame the gluten?

Blame the gluten?

Wheat is among the most destructive components of the human diet, a food that is responsible for inflammatory disease, diabetes, heart disease, several forms of intestinal diseases, schizophrenia, bipolar illness, ADHD, behavioral outbursts in autistic children . . . just to name a few.

But why?

Wheat is mostly carbohydrate. That explains its capacity to cause blood sugar to increase after eating, say, a turkey sandwich on whole wheat bread. The rapid release of sugars likely underlies its capacity to create visceral fat, what I call "wheat belly."

But neither the carbohydrate nor the other components, like bran and B vitamins, can explain all the other adverse health phenomena of wheat. So what is it in wheat that, for instance, worsens auditory hallucinations in paranoid schizophrenics? Is it the gluten?

First of all, what is gluten?

Gluten protein is the focus of most wheat research conducted by food manufacturers and food scientists, since it is the component of wheat that confers the unique properties of dough, allowing a pizza maker to roll and toss pizza crust in the air and mold it into shape. The distinctive “doughy” quality of the simple mix of wheat flour and water, unlike cornstarch or rice starch, for instance, properties that food scientists call “viscoelasticity” and “cohesiveness,” are due to the gluten. Wheat is mostly carbohydrate, but the 10-15% protein content is approximately 80% gluten. Wheat without gluten would lose its unique qualities that make it desirable to bakers and pizza makers. Gluten is also the component of wheat most confidently linked to immune diseases like celiac.

The structure of gluten proteins has proven frustratingly elusive to characterize, as it changes over time and varies from strain to strain. But an understanding of gluten structure may be part, perhaps most, of the answer to the question of why wheat provokes negative effects in humans.

The term “gluten” encompasses two primary families of proteins, the gliadins and the glutenens. The gliadins, one of the protein groups that trigger the immune response in celiac disease, has three subtypes: a/ß-gliadins, ?-gliadins, and ?-gliadins. The glutenins are repeating structures, or polymers, of more basic protein structures.

Beyond gluten, the other 20% or so of non-gluten proteins in wheat include albumins, prolamins, and globulins, each of which can also vary from strain to strain. In total, there are over 1000 other proteins that serve functions from protection of the grain from pathogens, to water resistance, to reproductive functions. There are agglutinins, peroxidases, a-amylases, serpins, and acyl CoA oxidases, not to mention five forms of glycerinaldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenases. I shouldn’t neglect to mention the globulins, ß-purothionin, puroindolines a and b, tritin, and starch synthases.

As if this protein/enzyme smorgasbord weren’t enough, food processors have also turned to fungal enzymes, such as cellulases, glucoamylases, xylanases, and ß-xylosidases to enhance leavening and texture. Many bakers also add soy flour to enhance mixing and whiteness, which introduces yet another collection of proteins and enzymes.

In short, wheat is not just a simple gluten protein with some starch and bran. It is a complex collection of biological material that varies according to its genetic code.

While wheat is primarily carbohydrate, it is also a mix of gluten protein which can vary in structure from strain to strain, as well as a highly variable mix of non-gluten proteins. Wheat has evolved naturally to only a modest degree, but it has changed dramatically under the influence of agricultural scientists. With human intervention, wheat strains are bred and genetically manipulated to obtain desirable characteristics, such as height (ranging from 18 inches to over 4 feet tall), “clinginess” of the seeds, yield per acre, and baking or viscoelastic properties of the dough. Various chemicals are also administered to fight off potential pathogens, such as fungi, and to activate the expression of protective enzymes within the wheat itself to “inoculate” itself against invading organisms.

From the original two strains of wheat consumed by Neolithic humans in the Fertile Crescent 9000 years ago (Emmer and Einkorn), we now have over 200,000 strains of wheat virtually all of which are the product of genetic manipulations that have modified the protein structure of wheat. The extraordinary complexity of wheat proteins have therefore created a huge black box of uncertainty in pinpointing which protein causes what.

But there's an easy cure for the uncertainty: Don't eat it.

Comments (17) -

  • lindaharper

    5/14/2010 3:18:04 PM |

    Do you have the same destructive problem making bread from other grains instead of wheat, i.e. rice, barley, spelt? These are all useful for those with wheat intolerance, but I haven't heard you say about using other grains in making your own homemade bread.  I have also read that sourdough leavening is also less destructive.

  • Kevin

    5/14/2010 4:07:03 PM |

    Quote:

    "So what is it in wheat that, for instance, worsens auditory hallucinations in paranoid schizophrenics? Is it the gluten?"

    If wheat is associated with auditory hallucinations, is it also associated with olfactory hallucinations?  I've had them at least 20 years.  For me they go away if I take zinc regularly.  

    kevin

  • Anonymous

    5/14/2010 5:39:38 PM |

    I'd also be interested to know if there is any type of bread (gluten free) which you feel is safe to eat within moderation.

    Rice bread tends to be high-ish in carbs, but at least it avoids the gluten.

    Just wondering if rice bread and other gluten-free alternatives cause small LDL like wheat does.

  • Michael Barker

    5/15/2010 12:51:59 AM |

    What I've never understood is how the Italians have eaten pasta for so many years without, it appears, great problems.

  • Dr. William Davis

    5/15/2010 12:53:57 AM |

    Hi, Linda--

    If you subtract the gluten, you have (mostly) carbohydrates.

    It then boils down to how carb-sensitive you are gauged by, for instance, postprandial blood glucose or HbA1c.

  • Peter

    5/15/2010 11:45:29 AM |

    Another puzzling bit of information is the northern Indians who eat lots of wheat have a fraction of the heart disease of the rice eating southern Indians.

  • Anonymous

    5/15/2010 3:33:12 PM |

    Regarding pasta and Italians -- it was in North America, not Italy, where pasta graduated to main-course portions, probably because it's cheap.

  • Jim Purdy

    5/15/2010 9:24:29 PM |

    "But there's an easy cure for the uncertainty: Don't eat it."

    That makes sense to me.

    But if I have to give up Wheat Chex cereal, can I still eat Corn Chex and Rice Chex?

  • Anonymous

    5/15/2010 11:17:03 PM |

    We've recently gone gluten-free after suspecting gluten intolerance in me and my 3 yr old son. Wow what a difference. After one week off gluten, I gave him one piece of sourdough bread since we were low on groceries and I wasn't able to go out that day. I noticed immediate behavioral changes and changes on his skin (small bumps... my Naturopath says it's a sign he is deficient in certain vitamins, they were going away while he was off gluten). Our lifesavers are quinoa porridge (quinoa, water, milk, egg yolks) and buckwheat pancakes, the kids love them. Makes going grain-free a little easier for my carb-addicted preschooler (we've taken it one step further then gluten-free and eliminated all grains.) Buckwheat pancakes can be used to make sandwiches, as a substitute for bread.  - Valley Mom

  • Chris

    5/16/2010 3:39:29 PM |

    What plant or animal source of food has not been severely manipulated over the last 9,000 years? What if I'm sure I don't have Celiacs Disease or Schizophrenia and I control my daily blood glucose and HbA1C? Isn't wheat just another source of carbs/fiber/protein?

  • Dave

    5/16/2010 3:50:50 PM |

    Just to expand on your last sentence: if there's no upside to eating wheat, and even the remotest possibility of a downside, then the decision is easy.

    Of course there clearly is an upside, or else wheat wouldn't get eaten in the first place. The question is whether or not this upside represents an actual positive impact on health, or a misinterpretation by the brain of signals which normally indicate positive health outcomes. See my blog and ensuing discussion here:

    http://sparkofreason.blogspot.com/2010/05/why-do-you-eat-grains.html

  • Myron

    5/16/2010 6:35:24 PM |

    For People that make excuses or try to talk their way out of avoiding wheat or any other food item, that is the #1 sign of an allergy addiction.

    Take a look at the relationship between low Testosterone and metabolic syndrome and belly fat.

    It's not just a sugar thing, more  related to steroids and stress, IMHO

  • kris

    5/16/2010 8:06:02 PM |

    I do not see a single person around my family who doesn’t have some sort of health issue and they all have northern Indian background. Most of them are diabetics, have heart disease, wheat belly, puffy cheeks, unable to run a mile after the age of 30, hypothyroid, over weight. Just for this topic, if I think about all of the hundreds of people that I know who have northern Indian background, most of them have health issues and they all have high carbohydrate, high wheat based diet. Now there are people within the family who are changing their diet ever since they have seen me improving, about every one of them has made improvements after the change.
    Everyone is entitled to their opinion but,
    I for one believe that the wheat is the one of the biggest culprit in our diet.
    Carbohydrates might be the second in line along with iodine shortages and the list goes on.
    The high glycoside symptoms are very close to the hypothyroid symptoms.
    Every person should own a blood-sugar meter and should have the knowledge to their sugar/carbohydrate reaction profile.
      But I think that finally the time has come where free-will education is being shared in a positive manner which will eventually push the “wanna be Mr Right side” organizations to jump the band wagon sooner or later.
    By the way Dr. Davis, after giving up wheat, taking care of thyroid and weight management which helped me loose 40 some pounds, I am happy to report that after reading your blogs religiously and following that low carb diet, I have lost the last 10 pounds. I have never felt this way in my entire life.
    Keeping my blood sugar level between 4 and 5.5 almost all of skin problems go away which includes but not limited to 10 years old broken hand palm skin, bloody gums, skin inflammation on back of my head, red patch on the facial skin, less bloody shave etc.  Interestingly, if the after meal blood sugar level stays over 6 and around 8 for few days, then most these issues slowly begin to come back. This might explain why I had bloody stomach few years back. Introduction of more fat in my diet may have also helped in all of above.
    All of above is my personal experience so it may not be backed by any study.
    Please keep it up, you are The Doctor.

  • Anne

    5/17/2010 1:21:21 AM |

    Lindaharper - barley and spelt have gluten similar to wheat and need to be eliminated on a gluten free diet. A gluten free diet eliminates wheat, barley and rye and related grains.

    I have gluten intolerance and type 2 diabetes. I can keep my blood sugar in control by limiting carbs. I have not found any grain that will not raise my blood glucose to unacceptable levels. I guess I could eat tiny amount of grain, but why bother. I would rather get my few carbs from highly nutritious low carb veggies.

    Eliminating gluten gave me back my life. Eliminating grains in general further improved my health.

    A great site to read more about gluten is The Gluten File

  • Captain Mikee

    5/17/2010 2:41:49 PM |

    @Jim Purdy: Most breakfast cereals contain barley malt even if they don't have wheat. Barley also contains gluten.

    My family went through a couple months of substituting gluten-free grains before we decided it wasn't worth it and gave up all grains. Gluten-free substitute foods can help you break the addiction, but in the long run I don't think they're very healthy. In fact, in terms of pure nutrition (ignoring the anti-nutrition) no grain can beat wheat. Everything else is worse.

  • Anonymous

    5/20/2010 1:45:25 AM |

    General Mills brand Rice Chex and Corn Chex have been reformulated to remove the barley malt, so they are now gluten-free.  Some (but not all) Erewhon rice crispy cereals are also gluten-free.

  • Aleck H Alexopoulos

    7/20/2010 11:14:29 AM |

    Very interesting information.
    I wonder if there is a compounded problem with fructose consumption.

    I personally believe that we haven't had the time to evolve
    and adjust to the high-carb diets characteristic of agricultural societies.

    Some people are more susceptible to problems of increased carbs, refined-carbs, sugars, and fructose. This susceptibility
    can take a long time to manifest itself. Its not just insulin-resistance, but growth hormone levels, HTA-axis, and other
    hormonal controls but also there
    is a growing realization of the effect of refined carbs and sugars on the inflammation process which suggests connections to atherosclerosis, neuronal damage, and even autoimmune diseases.

    Last note:
    I find it very striking that cancer cells have such a "craving" for sugars that they represent the only cells - other than hepatocytes - that will readily uptake fructose from the plasma.

    Just my thoughts.

    Aleck H Alexopoulos

Loading
Vitamin D Project: Grassroots Health

Vitamin D Project: Grassroots Health

Here's an interesting project a Track Your Plaque Member brought to my attention: Grassroots Health.

Carole Baggerly, Director of GrassrootsHealth, is a breast cancer survivor who has engineered an impressive project to collect and tabulate vitamin D blood levels in thousands, perhaps millions of people, over the next 5 years. Anyone can participate at a cost of $30 twice a year to get a vitamin D home test kit. (A fingerprick is required. I've tried the test kit--it's easy and painless to use.) They simply ask you to provide some basic health information that will be accumulated and analyzed.

Here's a graph they feature on their website showing the vitamin D blood levels distributed among the first 300 participants:











(Click to enlarge.)

Ms. Baggerly is apparently working with vitamin D pioneer, Dr. Reinhold Vieth, of the University of Toronto.

This sounds like a really great idea. Should you enroll, please come back here and let us know about your experience.

Comments (24) -

  • Anne

    3/3/2009 2:32:00 PM |

    The price is reasonable. I enrolled. The kit came in a few days. The instructions were easy to follow. The lancet easy to use and they give you 4 tries to fill the spots with a drop of blood. My results came bact in less than 2 weeks. It was 54ng/ml - the best ever result. I am taking 4000 IU of D3 each day. Before, my level was dropping on 2000 IU.

    I am more than happy to be a part of this project.

  • homertobias

    3/3/2009 3:37:00 PM |

    What is so wonderful about grassroots health is that potentially the health data generated by the participants will further Vitamin D research. All the sponsoring MD's are the "heavy hitters" in Vitamin D academia, from the Garland brothers in San Diego, to Dr. Donald Trump in Roswell Park to Dr. Hollis in Boston.  This is a fantastic way to further preventive medicine research instead of just making a lab or supplement maker richer.

  • Anna

    3/3/2009 5:05:00 PM |

    Even though we can get our level tested through our doctor/HMO network at no cost (perhaps a visit co-pay), I decided to enroll our whole family in the Grassroots Health D*Action program.  The fingerprick blood drop collection at home also easier on our son, instead of a needle/syringe blood draw at the lab.  I really feel it is important to collect enough data about Vitamin D for more research, even if there is some out of pocket expense for us.   We seem to have developed quite a bit of resistance to all the illnesses that are spreading fast around our communities, now that our D levels are up above 60 ng/mL.  

    One of the issues I do have with the current state of Vit D research is that is is primarily epidemiological.  We really need to support more well-designed intervention studies so we can tease out more conclusive evidence about Vit D.

    Of course, we had a laugh completing the D*Action questionnaire for my son, aged 10.  The answer option about number of falls in the past 6 months would only allow for up to 99!  Between skateboarding, soccer, and mad-man bike riding with his friends, we estimated he might have fallen as much as 250 times in 6 months!  No broken bones, though, unlike my 81 yo MIL in the UK, who got out of bed, slipped on a magazine on the floor, and suffered a hairline fracture of the tibia, requiring a full leg cast last winter, with a long recovery.  Of course, she assures me the packet of calcium powder she takes nightly in some water (supplied to the elderly by NHS) also has Vitamin D in it, so she's covered....sigh.

    Nearly everyone I know from teens to seniors, discovers their level is low if they get the test - usually at the bottom of the reference range or even severely deficient.   This is true of my friends and neighbors in the San Diego area as well as my extended family in the Northeast (incl 2 teenage sisters both with levels >20 ng/mL! - one has scoliosis, a vertebra stress fracture, and spondylolithesis!).  

    Other than my husband and son, who now have good D3 levels (65-80 ng/mL) due to taking 3,000 and 8,000 iU daily this winter, only my 74 yo dad also tested with good levels this winter (52 ng/mL), despite his Northeastern location, because he's now taking the amount of Vit D3 I suggested (I sent him a 6 mos supply for his birthday in September).  My dad listens to me  Smile.  The others might, now that their results are in  Wink.

  • Anonymous

    3/3/2009 5:21:00 PM |

    Thank you for posting this.  I just enrolled and will report back when I receive my results.  I'm currently taking 6000 IU of D3 daily, and am very curious as to what my levels will be.

  • TedHutchinson

    3/3/2009 5:39:00 PM |

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0O3L77kgU24
    In this video Carol Baggerly talks about Vitamin D basics.

    This link
    http://tinyurl.com/dfazes
    takes you to the series of 45minutes vitamin d presentations by leading Vitamin d scientists that Grassrootshealth have sponsored.

    They are all excellent but of particular relevance here is
    Vitamin D and Cardiovascular Disease Prevention

    but I think most people will be really shocked when then watch this one
    Skin Cancer/Sunscreen - the Dilemma

  • jumpow

    3/3/2009 5:43:00 PM |

    Hi doc

    I blogged about the kit the other day - http://dadrewrite.blogspot.com/2009/03/daction-vitamin-d-testing-kit.html

    All in all, I have been impressed with the experience.

  • Jenny

    3/3/2009 10:19:00 PM |

    I just sent my first sample off today.  I was a little reluctant to use the lancet on myself, but I collected my courage, and did a much better job than the technician at my physician's office usually does (also, I am not nearly as grumpy).  I feel fortunate to have the chance to participate, and I hope at least some of the friends and family I've told about the project will join in too.  The information to be gained by this study should be very valuable, and moreover the opportunity for individuals to take advantage of this to monitor and supplement Vitamin D on their own  is a chance to take charge of a key parameter of health.  I would like to see much more of this type of grassroots health initiative.  How I wish I could find more ways to remove the government, the insurance companies, and big pharma
    from between me and my pursuit of good health.

  • Suzanne

    3/18/2009 8:25:00 PM |

    How very interesting!  I've been taking 8000 IUs since I was diagnosed with early breast cancer last year, but my level is still only 35.1, so I'm going with 10,000for a while.  Will also join this project, as I don't believe we can afford to leave our health completely in the hands of our health"care" system.

  • JD

    3/19/2009 8:58:00 AM |

    I sent for my kit. It took about 2 1/2 weeks between the time I ordered the kit and when I got my results. My level was 44. I had been taking 2,000 to 4,000 IU per day when I did the test. The one thing I believe they could improve on is how to get the blood drops. I had ordered a home cholesterol test and their method seemed a bit superior. Same lancets but they instructed you to warm your hands by rubbing and also to force the blood by pressing on your hand by applying pressure starting with your palm using the opposite hand and working your way down. Also to do this while standing up.

  • Anna

    3/19/2009 2:55:00 PM |

    I've use lancets a lot for BG tests.  Before my hypothyroidism was treated, getting good blood drops for my BG monitoring was a challenge because of my chronically low temperature.  The Vit D test needs a much bigger blood drop than a BG test does, so it's crucial to prepare the hand for the test to ensure a big enough blood drop.

    People with cold hands definitely need to pre-warm a hand by any means necessary before using the lancet - hot water, rubbing, heating pad, etc.   Swinging the arm in a wide 180° arc a few times forces blood into the hand by centrifugal force, then "milking" the hand, then the finger usually helps, too.

  • Valda Redfern

    3/20/2009 12:43:00 AM |

    I enrolled and have just got my results - 67 ng/ml after about three months of taking 5000 iu per day, plus eating quite a lot of seafood, butter, liver and eggs (seafood once a week, about 8 oz of liver and 6 oz of butter per week in the convenient form of liver pate, and about eight eggs per week).  I had been following a moderately  low carb diet for about a year; but at the same time I started taking the D supplements I also eliminated gluten from my diet and went _really_ low carb.  I guess my vitamin D levels weren't too dusty even before I started supplementing, since I haven't had a cold since January 2008,  but I have certainly noticed an improvement in my feeling of well being since then.  Sunlight probably hasn't contributed much to my vitamin D levels: I'm 51, live in England, work inside all day, and haven't seen any real sunshine since I visited New York for a few days last August.

    I think the GrassRoots Vitamin D project is fantastic - and for anyone in the UK, it's by far the cheapest and easiest way of getting  one's vitamin D levels tested.  I plan to stick with the program.

  • baldsue

    3/25/2009 9:33:00 AM |

    It took a day of psyching myself into lancing my own finger.  But I did it.  That wasn't the worst part of the test.  The worst part was squeezing my finger hard enough to get large drops of blood out.  

    I've been taking between 2000 and 4000 IU's per day and my test came back with my level being 44 ng/mL.  Between now and my next test I'll be taking 4000 IU every day.  It'll be easier 'cause I got capsules filled with 4000 IU so I only have to take it once a day, one capsule.  I'm hoping my level will  go up a bit.  But I'm happy that my level is up from 16 ng/mL which it was 18 months ago.  And I feel better.

  • Anna

    3/25/2009 2:55:00 PM |

    baldsue,

    Thanks for the report that your level was 44 ng/mL after a taking a dose of 2000-4000 for some time, and especially your earlier test of 16 ng/mL.    

    My first D3 test was also 44, after about 8 mos of a 2000-3000iU dose of D3, which had me wondering how low my Vit D status was prior to supplementing.  I'm guessing it could have been similar to yours, in the teens or low 20s.  Despite moving to So Cal 13 years ago, I avoided the sun for a long time after a basal cell carcinoma was removed from my nose 10 years ago.  Some aspects of my health got worse then, too.  

    Lots of little things have improved much since my Vit D level has risen to 70-80 ng/mL, though I can't say for certain that D3 is the only reason.  But I do think it's a significant factor.  I take 5000iU daily now.

  • David

    3/26/2009 12:07:00 AM |

    I've been taking 2000 IU for the last 6 months. My test came today and my level was 29... still too low. I am currently a heart disease patient with 6 stents. My HDL before stents was a lousey 33. It is now 42. I will begin today taking 5000 IU for the next six months to see if I can get my levels closer to 60, both HDL and Vit D3.

  • jellybeanbonanza

    9/23/2009 3:26:14 AM |

    Late to the party, but I've watched a couple of these by Dr Heaney and Dr Holik.  Really great, current information on Vitamin D.  I'm glad to see all of the D-related information posted on this blog, I'm finding it very helpful.  Thanks!

  • baldsue

    10/2/2009 8:52:49 AM |

    Second test results:  75!!!

    I've been taking 5000IU of D3.  I think I'll keep at that level of supplementation or alternate days of 4000/5000.  Or maybe I'll go 6 months at 4000 and see what my results are next March.  Not sure of the strategy to take.  Might just keep status quo.

    In the last 2 years I've gone from 16 (no supplements) to 44 (3000IU supplement) to 75 (5000IU supplement)!  

    And I can't remember the last time I had a cold.  It was definitely more than a year ago.  I think it was Jan '07.

  • Anonymous

    3/7/2010 3:00:53 AM |

    Order your own D test from Directlabs.com. They will email you the test requisition and then you go to any Labcorp for the blood draw. The results can be viewed on your online directlabs account. $69 for the test.

  • Flower

    3/12/2010 3:16:47 AM |

    http://healthy-vitamin.blogspot.com/2010/03/vitamins.html

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 7:34:30 PM |

    People with cold hands definitely need to pre-warm a hand by any means necessary before using the lancet - hot water, rubbing, heating pad, etc. Swinging the arm in a wide 180° arc a few times forces blood into the hand by centrifugal force, then "milking" the hand, then the finger usually helps, too.

  • Anonymous

    1/10/2011 4:31:27 PM |

    This is helpful to hear from others. After reading this blog I asked my doctor to add a Vitamin D test to my quarterly lab for hypothyroid. It was 29 and my 88-year-old Dad was 32 (we live in the Northeast).

    I started bumping up by graduating up to 10,000 IU. After 4 mos, my serum level D is 54. For the first time ever my HDL is over 50 too. All other numbers (except H1AC) were perfect.

    My Dad taking only 4,000 IU per day has yet to be retested.

    My husband recently tested at only 20. He has same diet and his multiple has 2,000 IU in it. I asked him to add 5,000 IU per day until our next test in 3 mos.

  • Zoi

    4/18/2011 9:38:14 PM |

    This is a very exciting project! My mum, aged 62, just enrolled and is very happy to be part of this. Hopefully this way more information can be gathered about this epidemic and awareness can be raised even a little bit!

  • Ally

    7/10/2011 3:45:21 AM |

    To think, I was cnofused a minute ago.

  • Carlye

    7/10/2011 5:32:12 PM |

    Haha. I woke up down today. YouÂ’ve cheeerd me up!

  • Darence

    7/11/2011 3:32:14 PM |

    Hahahaha. IÂ’m not too brhigt today. Great post!

Loading
Hospitals: Then and Now

Hospitals: Then and Now

It's 1920. The hospital in your city is a facility run by nuns or the church. It's a place for the very ill, often without hope of meaningful treatment, but nonetheless a place where surgeries take place, babies are born, the injured and chronically ill can find care. No one has health insurance and there's no Medicare. Everyone pays what they can. The hospital is accustomed to doling out plenty of care without compensation. For that reason, they welcome donations and sometimes will build new additions or other facilities in honor of a major donor.

Volunteeers are common, since the wards are understaffed and generally suffering from a shortage of trained nurses and personnel associated with the church. Drugs, such as they are, are often prepared from basic ingredients in the hospital pharmacy. Product representatives hawking medicines and devices are virtually unheard of.

Though their therapeutic tools are limited, the physicians are a proud group, dedicating their careers to healing. The majority of the medical staff volunteer large portions of their time to care for the poor who come to the hospital with very advanced stages of disease: metastatic tumors, advanced heart failure, debilitating strokes, overwhelming septicemia, etc.

Hospitals are usually governed by a board of clergy and physicians who make decisions on how to apply their limited resources and continually seek charitable donations.


Fast forward to present day: Hospitals are high-tech, professional facilities with lots of skilled people, complicated equipment,and capable of complex procedures. While they still house people with advanced illnesses, the floors are also filled with people with much earlier phases of disease. In general, they do a good job, with quality issues scrutinized by a number of official agencies to police practices, incidence of hospital-related infections, medication errors, care protocols, etc.

The hospital of 2006 is a more more effective place than the hospital of 1920. But its aims and operations are different, also. Though some churches are still involved in hospitals, more and more are owned by publicly-traded companies that answer to shareholders--shareholders who want share value to increase. Though donations are still sought, much of the revenues are obtained by concentrating on profitable, large-ticket procedures. More procedures are often generated by advertising.

Because they operate to generate profits, several hospitals in a single city or region compete with one another. The 21st century has therefore witnessed the phenomenon of hospital-owned physicians: more and more practicing physicians are employees of their hospital. That way, the physician brings all his patients and procedures to his hospital, not to a competitor. The top of the funnel is the primary care physician, who tends to see all disease when it first occurs. The primary care physician then sends the patient to the specialist, who is obliged (by contract) to perform his/her procedure in the hsopital paying their salary.




Representatives from companies manufacturing and selling expensive hospital equipment and drugs are everywhere, falling over themselves to gain attention of the physicians using their equipment and the hospital buyers who make purchasing decisions. Millions of dollars can be transacted with just one sale.

The number of volunteers has dwindled. The poor and uninsured are commonly diverted elsewhere, often to a government-funded, and often second-rate, institution. Hospitals measure success by comparing annual revenues and numbers of major procedures.

The hospital of 2006 is a vastly different place than 1920. If you're expecting charitable treatment, compassion, and selfless care, you're in the wrong century. In 2006, the hospital is a business. You don't expect charitable treatment at Wal-Mart or from your car dealer. Don't expect it from your hospital. They are businesses and you are a customer. Recognize this fact, lose the nostalgia for the hospitals of yesterday, and a lot more will become clear to you.
Loading
When is a calorie not a calorie?

When is a calorie not a calorie?

One ounce of raw almonds (about 23 nuts) contains:


6 grams protein

14 grams fat

6 grams carbohydrate

3.5 grams fiber

For a total of 163 calories per ounce.


(From the USDA Nutrient Database)


Calorie content of foods is determined by summing up the calories from each constituent: 1 gram of fat = 9 calories; 1 gram protein = 4 calories; 1 gram carbohydrate = 4 calories. Calorie content can also be directly measured using a device called a burn calorimeter, in which the amount of energy released from a specific food is measured by literally burning it and gauging precisely how much energy is released.


The problem with both of these methods is that it is assumed that all foods are digested with equal efficiency. That is, it assumes that a potato chip is as readily digested and absorbed as energy from table sugar, a pretzel, oatmeal, a piece of steak, or a handful of nuts. In real life, of course this is not true. Different foods are absorbed with varying efficiency.

For a long time I've suspected that some foods are very inefficiently absorbed. I've particularly suspected that raw nuts are relatively poorly absorbed and thus yield only a fraction of the calories ingested.

Among the studies recently reported at the Federation of the Association of Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) meetings I attended in San Diego this past week were several devoted to almonds.

One study, to my surprise, documented this phenomenon. In Manipulation of lipid bioaccessibility of almonds influences postprandial lipemia in healthy human subjects, it was determined that, of 100 calories ingested from the fat fraction of almonds, only about half was actually absorbed. The remaining half passed out in the stool. (They did this by collecting stool samples and comparing the fat composition after eating the different almonds prepartions. This is not discussed in the limited text of the abstract.) In addition, postprandial (after-eating) surges in triglycerides were much less with whole almonds compared to the oil separated from the nut (i.e., broken down into almond oil + defatted almond flour). The researchers attributed the difference to the inhibitory effects of the almond nut's "food matrix," or the structural properties of chewed foods.

Add to this the fact that, of 6 grams of carbohydrate per ounce of whole almonds, 3.5 grams are indigestible fibers. This means that 6 - 3.5 = 2.5 grams of digestible carbohydrates are present per ounce (assuming 100% release).

If we follow the reasoning that only about half the fat fraction of almonds are absorbed, and assume that the protein and carbohydrate (minus the indigestible fibers) are absorbed efficiently (100%), then we would re-calculate the calorie content of almonds to be 97 calories per ounce, or 40% less than calories calculated by composition or measured with a calorimeter.

If we were to assume that protein and carbohydrates were, like fats, inefficiently absorbed because of the effects of the food matrix, then one ounce of almonds yields 88 calories per ounce, or 46% less. This is, in fact, a likely scenario, since the food matrix is largely created by the cell wall and should impede digestive access to fat, protein, and carbohydrate equally.

My point? Almonds and other nuts at first appear to be calorically dense due to fat composition. However, this simplistic view of nuts is misleading because of the confounding effects of the food matrix. Stated differently: Whole foods yield less calories. And, judging by the postprandial triglyceride effects: Whole foods yield less undesirable effects, such as postprandial rises in triglycerides.

Some other observations with almonds included:

The effect of almonds on plasma lipids in persons with prediabetes This study confirmed the LDL-reducing and modest HDL-raising effects of almonds.

Almonds (Amygdalus communis L.) as a possible source of prebiotic functional food This curious observation suggests that almonds modify the bacterial flora of the intestinal tract in a positive way (like the cultures in yogurts).



Copyright 2008 William Davis, MD

Comments (8) -

  • Anna

    4/11/2008 1:46:00 AM |

    I often soak raw almonds (and other nuts) about 24 hours in filtered water with sea salt, then dry them a day or two at about 150°F in the oven.  I doubt the studies take this kind of "processing" into account, but any idea how that might change the absorption scenario?

  • Anonymous

    4/11/2008 4:27:00 PM |

    I'm glad you posted this.  A few women I know have been wary of eating many nuts for fear that fatty nuts would cause them to gain weight.  

    Really like the little bit on healthy gut flora caused by almonds too.  A healthy gut is important to me.

  • Peter

    4/11/2008 8:19:00 PM |

    I would certainly agree that it is possible to eat enormous quantities of nuts without absorbing all of their calories. I noticed I could remain weight stable while sedentary and eating 3,500 calories back when I used to eat large quantities of nuts. Even when well chewed a proportion of them end up you-know-where! Just flush...

    Peter

  • brian

    4/12/2008 4:22:00 PM |

    Dr. Davis, this is a great example. Thanks for posting it. I have a question on the 88 calories. I tried to work through the calculations to demonstrate this to one of my clients. I couldn't come up with 88 calories per ounce.

    I kept coming up with 80 and here's how. 50% calories from fat is 63. I used 50% for protein and digestible carbs - based on the info provided. For protein, that leaves 3 gms or 12 calories. For carbs, half of 2.5 gms is 1.25 gms, which equals 5 cals. These add up to 80 (63 + 12 + 5).

    I’m probably making a silly mistake but I’d like to come up with the same numbers when demonstrating this to clients – makes me feel kind of silly.

    Thanks again for the blog, I greatly appreciate the information you post.

    Brian

  • Anne

    4/13/2008 9:57:00 PM |

    Does pasteurization affect the positive effect almonds have on gut bacteria? Last year it became manditory that all California almonds must be pastuerized by one of these methods: fumigation with propylene oxide, blanching and oil roasting. This is to prevent salmonella. http://www.almondboard.com/Programs/content.cfm?ItemNumber=890&snItemNumber=450

    I eat a handful of almonds just about every day. I have wondered if there benefits have been compromised.

  • Anonymous

    4/14/2008 12:25:00 PM |

    The study was sponsored by The Californian Almond Association

  • Katherine

    10/21/2008 6:30:00 AM |

    In the era of the 64-oz. soda, the 1,200-calorie burger, food companies now produce enough each day for every American to consume 3,800 calories per day as compared to the 2,350 needed for survival. Not only adults but kids are also consuming far more calories than they can possibly use. http://www.phentermine-effects.com

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 6:53:22 PM |

    For a long time I've suspected that some foods are very inefficiently absorbed. I've particularly suspected that raw nuts are relatively poorly absorbed and thus yield only a fraction of the calories ingested.

Loading
Mercury and fish oil

Mercury and fish oil

As time passes, the dose of fish oil advocated in the Track Your Plaque program is going upward.

While epidemiologic studies, like the Chicago Western Electric Study and the Nurses' Health Study suggest that decreases in mortality from heart disease begin by just eating fish a couple times per month, there are newer data that suggest greater quantities confer greater benefits.

In the last Heart Scan Blog post, I discussed the recently-released ERA JUMP Study that demonstrated a relationship between higher omega-3 fatty acid blood content and reduced quantities of carotid and coronary plaque. The JELIS Study demonstrated a 19% reduction in cardiovascular events when fish-consuming Japanese added 1800 mg of EPA (only).

However, the suggestion that increased quantities of fish oil potentially yield greater protection from heart attack and facilitate coronary plaque regression is also stirring up worries about mercury exposure. So I dug up a Heart Scan Blog post from a year ago that discussed this issue and reprint it here.


I often get questions about the mercury content in fish oil. I've even had patients come to the office saying their primary care doctor told them to stop fish oil to avoid mercury poisoning.

Manufacturers of fish oil also make claims that this product or that ("super-concentrated", "pharmaceutical grade", "purified", etc.) is purer or less contaminated than competitors' products. The manufacturers of the "drug" Omacor [now Lovaza], or prescription fish oil, have added to the confusion by suggesting that their product is the most pure of all, since it is the most concentrated of any fish oil preparation (900 mg EPA+DHA per capsule). They claim that "OMACOR is naturally derived through a unique, patented process that creates a highly concentrated, highly purified prescription medicine. By prescribing OMACOR® (omega-3-acid ethyl esters), a prescription omega-3, your doctor is giving you a concentrated and reliable omega-3. Each OMACOR capsule contains 90% omega-3 acids (84% EPA/DHA*). Nonprescription omega-3 dietary supplements typically contain only 13%-63% EPA/DHA."

How much truth is there in these concerns?

Let's go to the data published by the USDA, FDA, and several independent studies. Let's add to that the independent (and therefore presumably unbiased) analyses provided by Consumer Reports and Consumer Labs (www.consumerlab.com). How much mercury has been found in fish oil supplements?

None.

This is different from the mercury content of whole fish that you eat. Predatory fish that are at the top of the food chain and consume other fish and thereby concentrate organic methyl mercury, the toxic form of mercury. Thus, shark, swordfish, and King mackerel are higher in mercury than sardines, herring, and salmon.

The mercury content of fish oil capsules have little to do with the method of processing and much more with the animal source of oil. Fish oil is generally obtained from sardines, salmon, and cod, all low in mercury. Fish oil capsules are not prepared from swordfish or shark.

Thus, concerns about mercury from fish oil--regardless of brand--are generally unfounded, according to the best information we have. Eating whole fish--now that's another story for another time. But you and I can take our fish oil to reduce triglycerides, VLDL, IDL, small LDL, and heart attack risk without worrying about mercury.



I am not advocating ad libitum eating of fish. Sadly, this may be related to excessive accumulation of contaminants. I am suggesting that greater quantities of omega-3 fatty acids from relatively contaminant- and mercury-free fish oil capsules.

More on this in an upcoming webinar on the Track Your Plaque website: Fish Oil and the Track Your Plaque Program - Is More Better?

Comments (9) -

  • Anne

    8/2/2008 2:39:00 PM |

    I take omega-3 fish oil supplements and I eat lots of oily fish, generally around 400g salmon, 200g sardines and 200g trout per week. I'm not worried about the mercury content of the fish I eat, partly because these are fish low in mercury anyway but also because I did a fair bit of research and discovered that a lot of the mercury content of fish and how it affects a person depends on the age of the person and how many years they have been eating fish. I, for example, only started to eat fish a couple of years ago in my early 50s, and by the time any serious level of mercury might have built up in my body I will be an extremely old lady...but I'm not worried.

    I've also read that the mercury in the bodies of children growing up in the Pacific who eat a lot of fish is much higher than the rest of the world but they are not damaged by it, and the beneficial effects of the fish outweigh the effects of the mercury. Here's one comment about that:  'Mercury, fish and you: what to do ?': http://tinyurl.com/5ddkbs

    Anne

  • Jim

    8/2/2008 2:53:00 PM |

    I have been increasing the amount of salmon in my diet, but it is getting harder to find wild salmon in my area (Tulsa, Oklahoma), and when I do find it, it is much higher in price than farmed salmon. So, as a result, I eat a lot of farmed salmon, which probably does not offer much of a health benefit.

  • Jenny

    8/2/2008 2:54:00 PM |

    Are there good quality large scale studies linking the use of fish oil capsules with improved outcomes?

    Studies like the Japanese one you cited are of people eating fish, not taking the oil separately, and it's worth noting that the Japanese who are always cited as the good health example for fish do eat shark and just about anything else that swims.

    It is also a fact that the people I mentioned who needed chelation therapy for proven mercury poisoning were eating mostly salmon and cod.

    I do use fish oil capsules. But so many nutrients have proven ineffective when taken apart from the foods they are embedded in that one has to wonder.

    Vitamins A, C and E supplementation has not tested out but foods high in those nutrients do.

    So that makes me wonder how much of the benefit of eating fish is from the oil and how much from  other factors associated with fish eating. Has the benefit of fish oil eaten without the rest of the fish and not as part of a meal been shown in high quality research not funded by fish oil merchants?

  • Ross

    8/2/2008 7:19:00 PM |

    What you want is molecularly distilled fish oil.  The molecular distillation process reduces the amount of mercury to a level that is not detectable with modern instrumentation.  Since our bodies can tolerate detectable quantities of mercury without harm, using molecularly distilled fish oil is pretty much mercury free.

    So which brands use molecular distillation?  Carlson's, LEF, and pretty much all of the major brands do.  If you're not sure, take a look at the label.  It should be written somewhere on there.

    Any product claiming to have "lower mercury levels" than other quality sources is just blowing smoke.  None of them contain measurable amounts of mercury.

  • Red Sphynx

    8/2/2008 9:29:00 PM |

    Is rancidity a significant problem with capsules?

  • Anne

    8/3/2008 8:37:00 AM |

    The omega-3 fish oil I take is not in capsule form but a liquid - Eskimo-3. It says it has been purified so that mercury and other environmental contaminants are well below current acceptable levels and this has been confirmed by independent studies. It has not been chemically modified. You have to store it in the fridge once opened. They press the oil from sardines caught in deep seas from the Antarctic and south Atlantic.

    Anne

  • Dr. Brad

    8/3/2008 11:28:00 PM |

    the data on mercury toxicity from fish is very interesting- basically, the toxicologist (in lieu of epidemiologists) defined the 'upper limits'. Toxicologists routinely assume 1/10th the level where problems were identified as their upper limit threshold-- if you look at the original data, however, you'll find that it was based on people who's primary food was pilot whale and another group and in both cases there was at best, minimal cognitive changes noted.  they then took this threhold and lowered the limit by 10 fold--- the result of this national public policy--- 3/4 of all pregnant woman eat insufficient amounts of omega3FAs-- had epidemiologist looked at this issue and been involved in creating the recommended guidelines you would have seen 5-10x higher levels of mercury consumption permitted.  i'll find the original data on this and send it your way abit later.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 2:54:54 PM |

    The mercury content of fish oil capsules have little to do with the method of processing and much more with the animal source of oil. Fish oil is generally obtained from sardines, salmon, and cod, all low in mercury. Fish oil capsules are not prepared from swordfish or shark.

  • moseley2010

    12/6/2010 6:09:56 PM |

    I also get these mercury remarks or concerns every time I encourage friends to start taking fish oil supplements. I always explain that as long as they come from clean waters, like the ones surrounding New Zealand, it's ok. I guess I gave them the wrong explanation. Now I know what to tell them.

Loading
Do you eat wheat? I thought so.

Do you eat wheat? I thought so.

I'm itching to say that face-to-face to anyone from the wheat industry--agribusiness, baking, retail distribution . . . anybody. Because it's obvious; it's written on the face . . . and belly, and brain, and knees, and hips. And I believe I will soon have the opportunity.

Taking such a controversial stand in my new book, Wheat Belly, i.e., that wheat products, whole or refined, have NO ROLE IN THE HUMAN DIET whatsoever, was bound to provoke criticism and counterattacks. The wheat world has already taken a blow to the chin with the growing popularity of the (misguided) gluten-free movement and they're going to have to get into the business of media damage control.

Take a look at this press release from the Grain Foods Foundation:

RIDGWAY, COLO. — The Grain Foods Foundation has unveiled plans to counter media publicity attracted by “Wheat Belly.”

“Mullen, working with key members of the Grain Foods Foundation’s scientific advisory board, is addressing ‘Wheat Belly’ through proactive media outreach and its ongoing rapid response program,” said Ashley Reynolds, a Mullen account executive. “In particular, the public relations team will be contacting health and nutrition reporters at print and on-line media outlets, as well as editors at major women’s magazines to influence any diet-related stories that may be published in the coming months.”

. . . Ms. Reynolds, a registered dietitian, noted the author relies on anecdotal observations rather than scientific studies; wheat elimination “means missing out on a wealth of essential nutrients;” six servings of grain-based foods are recommended daily in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans; healthy weight loss depends on energy balance rather than elimination of specific foods; and elimination of wheat products makes sense only for those with medical diagnoses such as celiac disease or gluten sensitivity.

She said the group will lean on its scientific advisory board members to “discredit the book and ensure our messages are backed by sound science. “


Here's some of their starting salvos on their Six Servings Blog.

This reminds me of the fight with Big Tobacco in the '70s: "No, sir, we in the tobacco industry know of no research demonstrating that smoking is bad for health," complete with shots of tobacco executives puffing away on cigarettes.

So brace yourself for a fight. These people are protecting a multi-billion dollar franchise, not to mention their livelihoods and incomes. It could get ugly.

Comments (85) -

  • Peter Silverman

    9/2/2011 3:32:14 PM |

    I don't eat wheat, at your suggestion.  But while it's clear to me that processed foods are a huge health problem, it's not clear to me if the biggest problem is wheat, or sugar, or processed meat, or processed vegetable oils, or some other problem due to factory food production.  It does seem like cultures with traditional diets are better off before they start eating American processed foods, but I don't know of any research that pinpoints the problem.

  • Linda

    9/2/2011 3:57:05 PM |

    @Peter
    Good point, however, I feel that if a person DOES give up all wheat products and then sees/feels a dramatic change in their body or the control of a particular disease or just a feeling of improved over-all well being, then something is definitely going on.

    The older I get, the less confidence I have in either the majority of physicians I see or in the advice/guidelines from my government.

  • Amy

    9/2/2011 4:23:17 PM |

    This reaction just means you're onto something important.  Keep fighting the good fight!  Loved your interview on The Paleo Solution this week.  I ordered your book and can't wait to read it.

  • Melissa

    9/2/2011 4:37:46 PM |

    On the Six Servings blog they write, "Cutting out one specific food is not only unrealistic, it’s dangerous. Omitting wheat entirely removes the essential (and disease-fighting!) nutrients it provides including fiber, antioxidants, iron and B vitamins."

    . . . um, yeah . . . because you can't get fiber, antioxidants, iron or B vitamins *anywhere* else. How uninformed do they think people are?

  • Chowstalker

    9/2/2011 4:52:35 PM |

    Dr. Davis, I'm really curious, what do you mean by the "misguided" gluten-free movement?

  • Mike

    9/2/2011 5:09:08 PM |

    I am looking forward to reading your book and adding it to my growing health-related library of books. I just visited that blog you referenced and here is something they stated,
    “Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the gold standard of scientifically-sound nutritional advice…”

    That is laughable...if it wasn't so scary when you think about it's implications.
    Keep up the good work!

  • Patty Amidon

    9/2/2011 5:09:15 PM |

    I received my copy of  "Wheat Belly"  yesterday. It is even better than I expected Dr. Davis. Very readable and amusing too. You have really started a fire storm and you have alot of people behind you including me!

  • Tyler

    9/2/2011 5:10:07 PM |

    I am doubting this comment will make it past the moderation on the SixServings.org website, but here is what I posted (all of which I believe is absolutely true):

    I haven’t read Wheat Belly, but this quote strikes me as odd:

    “Omitting wheat entirely removes the essential (and disease-fighting!) nutrients it provides including fiber, antioxidants, iron and B vitamins.”

    What about the lectins, phytates, gluten, and blood-sugar elevation?

    Please correct me if I’m wrong, but can’t you simply get more fiber, more antioxidants, more iron, and more B vitamins (amongst others) from fruits and veggies? Without them being fortified and bound up with the anti-nutritious phytates in our digestive system?

  • Daren

    9/2/2011 5:10:53 PM |

    Chow -- Dr. Davis has talked a lot about most "gluten-free" foods are almost as bad as wheat.  In other words, the replacement grains they use to make "gluten-free" baked products (pizza, bread, cereal, etc.) are just not good for you.  Of course, if you just stick to whole foods - fruit, veggies, nuts, meat - primarily found in the outer supermarket aisles, you can be gluten free and healthy.
    I also loved the assertion that cutting classes of food is "unrealistic."  Huh?  it is very easy to do, provided you want to.  I quit cold turkey on a dime last year after following the Paleo movement (primarily Art Devaney) and once I noticed how much better I felt -- especially with no wheat and grains -- I was motivated to continue to quit.  I don't feel "cheated" or "deprived".  I feel liberated.  Keep up the great work, Dr. Davis.

  • Dave, RN

    9/2/2011 5:27:25 PM |

    Yup. Next door neighbor works for one of the largest bakeries in the US here in Fort Worth Texas.  And yes, it shows.

  • Dave, RN

    9/2/2011 5:43:25 PM |

    I'll bet my comment on their website doesn't make it either. Funny how their post was days ago yet there are no comments. I wonder how many they've removed? All of them... either that or people aren't jumping in to sing the praises of grains.

  • fredt

    9/2/2011 5:59:22 PM |

    If there was no evidence, the grain lobby would be in a legal process to shut you down, not a media process of discrediting. Keep up the fine work.

    No sugar, no grain, no omega 6 oil.

  • Chowstalker

    9/2/2011 6:10:29 PM |

    Thanks Daren, I thought that might be it, but wasn't quite sure.

  • Princess Dieter

    9/2/2011 6:12:23 PM |

    I put a review up as fast as I could at Amazon, convinced 3 folks already (they bought the book). Last night my sister calls me that she read about Wheat Belly in Woman's World and is gonna try the wheat free thing to see how she feels, as she looked back at her life and realized whenever she gave up bread, she felt BETTER. (This after weeks of me pleading with her to try gluten free, as she and my other sister both have lupus, I have Hashimoto's and asthma/allergies, and our family is riddled with auto-immune stuff. She'd been tested "allergic" to wheat ages ago.) So, hopefully, the message really branches out. I just want my family to get better. As the third of three sisters, two with lupus, and a mom dead from auto-immune aplastic anemia, and a niece sans hair with alopecia, if we can tame the autoimmune beast, we'd do ourselves a huge service.

    Thanks for the good word.

  • cancerclasses

    9/2/2011 6:14:28 PM |

    @Tyler @Melissa,  Fruits and vegetables aren't much better than grains for mineral bioavailability again because they are locked up by phytates, and vitamin content of fruits & vegies is lower today than 50 years ago because of the nutrient depleted soils they are grown in.

    Just Google 'Phytates are Mineral Magnets', here's a cut & paste:    "Iron and other minerals required for cellular respiration aren’t usable by humans if they are ingested in plant or vegetable foods, because plants contain phytates. Phytates biochemically lock up the minerals with the plant fiber, rendering them unusable. This makes minerals, as well as the fiber, UNUSABLE BY HUMAN cells. That’s why it was shown, and reported in the “Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2000,71:446-471,” that WOMEN EATING THE MOST FIBER AND THE LOWEST AMOUNT OF FAT HAD 20% LOWER CALCIUM RETENTION.

    Eating meat did NOTHING to increase colon cancer risk. Yet this shocking result hasn’t been reported in the popular press. “Fiber fiction” has run rampant in America for many years.

    An exceptional article was written for the general public in 1997 by “Albion Research Notes – A Compilation of Vital Research Updates on Human Nutrition”, Albion Laboratories, Clearfield, UT (Vo.. 6, No. 2, June 1997). Here is what it said:

    “Natural sources of fiber, such as cereals and fruits, generally have a DEPRESSING EFFECT on absorption of minerals such as calcium, iron, zinc, and copper.” Imagine taking mineral supplements and still going into a negative balance for the very minerals that are being supplemented! Too few of us saw this important paper.

    Minerals can’t be separated from the fiber in human digestion so, because you aren’t a cow with four stomachs designed to accomplish that difficult task, you can’t make effective use of the minerals in plants. “Consumer Reports on Health” reported on this – in fact, the magazine actually published the statement that eating spinach was worthless for obtaining necessary iron. It’s “in there” but not usable for a human being.

    We keep getting misled with what sounds good, but isn’t based on science.

    Phytates TAKE OUT MINERALS (the respiratory co-enzymes Dr. Warburg speaks of) – JUST THE OPPOSITE of what we desire and require to avoid contracting cancer.

    Think of fiber as bad “mineral magnets”, removing the precious minerals from your body and inhibiting oxygen transfer through the blood, whereas Essential Fatty Acids  are the good “oxygen magnets” helping bring an abundance of needed oxygen into your cells."

  • Dave, RN

    9/2/2011 7:01:21 PM |

    Huh, that's funny. All my comments on the sixservings grain website got deleted. Must be a technical glitch.

  • Rob K

    9/2/2011 7:11:55 PM |

    It's called "Reasoned Discourseâ„¢". It's what happens when organizations make claims on their blog, and the other side shows up with overwhelming logic and scientific evidence that pounds them into the ground. It's pretty obviously broken out there.

  • cancerclasses

    9/2/2011 7:30:23 PM |

    @Peter Silverman;  There's plenty of research out there if you know how to look for it or if you have  sources you can trust to give you the real truth and scientifically solid references.  

    Also you must realize that the term "biggest problem" is relative to time and degree of disease progression, in other words it depends on how fast and how bad you want to get sick or suffer the effects of an industrial foods diet.  For my money the "food" that is the biggest problem in having the most immediate negative effect on humans is the nutrient depleted & stripped white flour used in ALL processed "foods" that is known to cause severe dental decay and physical degeneration and under development as was clearly established by Weston Price in his 1938 book "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration."  To see the entire book for free just google 'nutrition and physical degeneration online', it's the first result, and at least look at the pictures and read the captions to see how the effects of processed "foods" can be seen with the outcome of just the next pregnancy!  Both wheat flours and sugars are carbs, and as ALL carbs reduce to glucose molecules they are essentially one and the same, which is why a diet high in just breads even from the much lauded whole grains can quickly rot your teeth.  In the section about the Arctic Inuit in his book, Weston Price details how the Inuit eating their native diet would go their entire lives and only get maybe one or two dental cavities, and their teeth would eventually repair themselves and get even harder as the people got older.  

    As bad as the almost immediate physical degeneration effects of industrial flours are, the other "biggest problem" has to be the toxic, adulterated, pre-oxidized trans molecule fats in partial & fully hydrogenated vegetable oils that are KNOWN to be a direct cause of cancer and arterial plaque formation.  Can't find it now but I once saw a chart somewhere overlaying the use of trans fat vegetable oils & margarines with the incidence rates of cancer & heart disease since the introduction of the bad oils into processed "foods" around 1920 and the curves matched almost exactly.  The problem with industrial oils is that the latency period of cancer and heart disease progression due to trans fat intake is measured in decades, so people tend to not see the association of those diseases with those oils until they are shown the facts, such as the fact that at the turn of the century in 1900 when most people subsisted on a pre industrial  "farm style" diet of eggs, butter & whole milk & cream, cancer and heart disease affected only 3 percent of the population and obesity was only 5 percent (google 'margarine vs. butter newsflash' see the top hit).

    As for processed meats just google ' avoiding nitrates in foods is unnecessary', you'll see this:  "No one mentions that nitrate is naturally occurring in greens such as lettuce and spinach. The article, “Bad Rap for Nitrate: Infamous Preservative Maj Help Defend Against Bacteria,” by J.R. Minkel, Scientific American Biochemistry Section, September 2004, page 24, details that “they” were wrong again and sets the record straight. It was known in 1994, that the stomach contains lots of nitric oxide. Nitric oxide kills germ in the bloodstream. Therefore, it is obvious that nitrate is a helpful substance. Why this has taken ten years to be publicized is astounding, Here are some key points from the article:

    ” … [D]ietary nitrate is actually part of the body’s inherent defense against infection ….

    “Bacteria in the mouth convert nitrate to nitrite, which gets swallowed, so the stomach can naturally produce nitric oxide …. “

    ”’We’ve gone from considering all of these things to be toxic and carcinogenic to realizing that [nitrates are] playing a fundamental homeostatic role [safe and required, and NOT cancerous],’ says microbiologist Ferric Fang of the University of Washington.” (Emphasis added.)"

    Hope that answers your question and helps round out the nutritional picture.  Live long and prosper.

  • Renfrew

    9/2/2011 7:32:44 PM |

    "Wheat Belly" arrived today at my door (in Germany). Great reading and a real eye opener. I am distributing the message here as well and will loan the book to others. Would make a good candidate for translating into other languages. How about Nihongo?
    Renfrew

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/2/2011 7:55:08 PM |

    Thanks, Amy! Be sure to come back and share your impressions.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/2/2011 7:56:22 PM |

    Hi, Chow--
    I was referring to the terrible practice of replacing wheat/gluten with cornstarch, rice starch, tapioca starch, and potato starch that make you diabetic, give you cataracts, arthritis, and heart disease. We should be eating wheat-free and low-carb.

  • Gary

    9/2/2011 8:08:05 PM |

    Dr. Davis, is it true that there are no sound scientific studies referenced in the book that support your case?

  • Steve Brecher

    9/2/2011 8:17:09 PM |

    I haven't looked at the book, but I have the same question.

    I've been a subscriber to this blog for a while, and I recall when Dr. Davis solicited reader experiences, along the lines of, "if you stopped eating wheat and it helped your health let me know!" I don't recall any solicitations along the the lines of, "if you stopped eating wheat and nothing happened, let me know!"  In sum, I suspect that the grains marketing group's criticism of the book's advice being based on anecdotal evidence may be substantially correct.

    I should mention that for a variety of reasons, I don't eat wheat.

  • Don

    9/2/2011 10:11:34 PM |

    Are there studies to show the current version of wheat is safe? It would seem to me the burden is on the produce of a new food.

  • Don

    9/2/2011 10:12:38 PM |

    Make that "producer of a new food"

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    9/2/2011 11:03:07 PM |

    Hi cancerclasses,
    Maybe (?) you'd like last week's Oncogen journal's full "Dynamic epigenetic regulation of ... tumorigenesis" ,see  http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/vaop/
    current/full/onc2011383a.html

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/2/2011 11:43:16 PM |

    Hi, Don-

    Absolutely none. Of course, wheat lobby defending the status quo will quote the studies that say things like replacing white flour products with whole grains yields less diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, and colon cancer--that is indeed true. What they fail to ask is what happens when you replace wheat products with NO wheat products? The products of "traditional breeding methods" have also been assumed to be safe for human consumption, essentially no questions asked.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/2/2011 11:44:24 PM |

    Noted. However, Steve, I would reserve judgement until you read the book. It is not just a compilation of anecdotes; all the science is laid out as plain as day.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/2/2011 11:46:41 PM |

    Hi, Gary--

    No, of course not. There are several hundred relevant references over 16 pages. And that was just a partial compilation of the literature already published.

  • Serge

    9/3/2011 12:09:46 AM |

    I think you need to package your book with Tom Naughton's "Fat Head" movie.  It could be the Fat Head/Wheat Belly combo!

    (Seriously.)

  • LINDA

    9/3/2011 12:30:17 AM |

    Dear Doctor Davis,
    I'm so glad that  you've published your book. I will be buying it for myself and others. Also,my library is waiting for it to come in, 5 people are waiting for it!.  I have a calcium score of 206. I HAVE HASHIMOTO THYROID and b 12 intrinsic factor problems,,,I HAVE ALSO HAD LYME DISEASE AND BABESIA A FEW YEARS AGO ,,I have been wheat (and grain -free) since 4/11 and I'm down to 130 pound (from 150) and with a thyroid problem.....this is amazing.  MY lipids have dropped significantly .  Thank you...I hope to contact your office to look at my NMR in the future....Linda

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    9/3/2011 1:29:21 AM |

    Wheat adherents are mostly orientated to a nutritional perspective; and so miss out on Doc's point that unique byproducts of wheat digestion affect the brain, irregardless of one's intestinal and/or metabolic response. His clinical results seem to indicate that some wheat digestion byproducts acting in the brain influence the gene BDNF (brain derived neuro-trophic factor) to either encode different proteins for expression &/or down-regulate the DNF total output; BDNF is inherently related to being overweight and obesity (but not "morbid" obesity).

    BDNF experimentally  injected into the cerebral ventricle affects circulating triglycerides,  the size of adipocytes and most importantly visceral fat mass ( see Doc's recent 27 Aug post "Good Fat Bad Fat" for orientation on non-nutritional relevance of visceral fat). When there is more BDNF produced the lower the blood glucose levels go and the more peripheral insulin sensitivity improves; as well as the less visceral fat there is. The mechanism whereby BDNF expression works is  apparently via a cortico-trophin releasing hormone (CRH)-urocotin-CRH R2 pathway in the hypo-thalamus PVN (para-ventricular nucleus). Nutritional needs on a fad diet isn't the same as practicing medicine; Doc elsewhere said no one diet is right for every person (nor all life long, I'd add).

  • Kurt

    9/3/2011 2:17:32 AM |

    My comment at sixservings.org has also not appeared.

  • Tracy

    9/3/2011 2:52:59 AM |

    Dr. Davis,  What do you think of The Esselstyn diet?  They are making some of the same claims you are but with a different diet with about the only thing the same is to eat lots of fresh vegetables.

  • Might-o'chondri-AL

    9/3/2011 3:17:20 AM |

    2 days ago in  "Adipose Tissue Dysregulation in Patients with Metabolic Syndrome" from Sept.  Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism lead author ( I. Jialal, 34 years in endocrinology , quote) " ... some body fat may actually be toxic. .. dysfunction in the fat of people with metabolic syndrome is more than can be explained by obesity. " Report shows when fat cells outgrow their supply of blood those cells have macrophage crusts crowning them; the macrophage inflammation has cardiovascular implications. Team previously found those with metabolic syndrome visceral fat have less endothelial progenitor cells to preserve blood vessel lining functional integrity.

  • Chuck

    9/3/2011 3:25:21 AM |

    I like how Ashley at SixServings.org infers in her statement that being a vegan or vegetarian in "not only unrealistic, but dangerous." And she's their crack PR person - what a joke. Wheat Brain!

  • Helen

    9/3/2011 3:38:06 AM |

    I so need to get your book.  I test positive for the DNA that leads to Celiac disease and was diagnosed with IBS (before I went low-carb, now I'm symptom-free).

    My only concern is my kids.  They have my genes, LOL.  Is there a resource for feeding them properly so they're not getting wheat, or spelt, but still get to eat "bready" style things?  Basically I guess I mean a cookbook.

  • pam

    9/3/2011 4:17:01 AM |

    yes, this book deserved to be translated into multiple languages!
    am going to order one!
    my colleagues won't believe me that "wheat is evil" & causes "man boobs" & belly.

  • Steve L AU

    9/3/2011 5:06:23 AM |

    comments I just posted (awaiting moderation) at Six Sevings:


    No Comments
    Steve L says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    September 3, 2011 at 4:45 am
    So, cutting wheat is not a cure all for coeliac disease??

    Well, I have coeliac disease.

    Sure, there are other sources of gluten in western diets, but wheat is by far the most important source…by a country mile.

    So, maybe cutting wheat is not a cure all for coeliac disease, but it goes pretty damn close.

    Steve L AUS 20110903.14.45

    Reply
    Steve L says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    September 3, 2011 at 4:58 am
    …further to my comment (above) regarding the nonsense in this article about coeliac disease, let’s also consider the value of wheat (and other grains) for various nutrients.

    Look at nutrient density tables. Wheat is only a good/cheap source of energy/calories, especially if your government subsidises its production. Maybe fibre too, depending on how heavily its processed. As to other nutrients, its a pretty poor source compared to vegetables and meat (incl poultry and fish).

    This is without getting into more contentious issues such as whether wheat (and other grains) damage the gut of even non-coeliacs, causing leaky guy syndrome and possibly being involved in the pathogenesis of some autoimmune diseases….

    Then there is the high glycaemic load wheat provides in the diet, with metabolic consequences.

    Remember too that there is not unanimity amongst experts regarding official dietary guidelines: far from it. So, you can’t reasonably appeal to a consensus among experts.

    But leave that aside, and also the damage it does to coeliacs (I was VERY ill for 10 years because of wheat), wheat is a pretty poor source of nutrients apart from calories.

    Steve L Australia 20110902.1500

  • rhinoplasty

    9/3/2011 7:52:58 AM |

    It does seem like cultures with traditional diets are better off before they start eating American processed foods.
    These days people are becoming more and more health conscious as well conscious about their outer look. Skin care is part of healthy lifestyle.How do we ensure that we have all that we need to have a healthy living? This is a big question among everyone. We need proper nutrition and a fit and healthy body. Good Health is all that one craves for. Becoming healthier and fitter though not very difficult needs dedicated efforts.u can see some more suggestions on:

    rhinoplasty
    in this u will surely find out some important tips to be healthy.

  • Michia

    9/3/2011 10:20:56 AM |

    Challenge them on Twitter and Facebook. Ask them why they are not allowing comment on the Wheat Belly post.

  • Debbie B in MD

    9/3/2011 11:46:23 AM |

    What struck me from this post is the "concern" that those who do not eat wheat are missing out on essential nutrients, but there seems to be none of this concern for those who do not eat wheat because of celiac disease or gluten-intolerance. So does that mean that since I have celiac, I wouldn't "suffer" by eliminating that nutrious wheat? Eliminating that wonderful wheat has transformed me. I was constantly in pain, muscular and headaches, terrible heartburn, skin issues, etc. Eliminating that nutritious wheat has been amazing. I believe that everyone can take in all of the nutrients they need by eating the good stuff. I can't wait until my copy of "Wheat Belly" arrives. It will be on my 17 year od son's reading list too.

  • Debbie B in MD

    9/3/2011 11:49:18 AM |

    Sadly lots of people are that clueless.

  • Debbie B in MD

    9/3/2011 11:59:05 AM |

    Check out everydaypaleo.com. I don't know about wating "bready" things but that blog is all about getting the kids on board.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/3/2011 1:42:14 PM |

    Hi, Debbie--

    Yes, a crucial point. Provided wheat calories are replaced with real foods like vegetables, nuts, avocados, cheese, eggs, etc., there is absolutely no deficiency that develops. Of course, Mary Q. Dietitian automatically assumes that you replace lost calories with Slurpies, Twinkies, and French fries--the default position being we're stupid.

    Be wheat-free, be healthy!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/3/2011 1:42:38 PM |

    Yes, Michia. We should all do that and not let up!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/3/2011 1:44:35 PM |

    Thank you, Steve. I find it incredible, also, that for every person who knows he/she has celiac disease, nine others don't know it.

    Keep on punching away!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/3/2011 1:45:19 PM |

    Thanks, Pam. This is why I wrote Wheat Belly: to bring to light all that is ALREADY known about wheat and its relationship with human health.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/3/2011 1:47:16 PM |

    Hi, Helen--

    The world is indeed a field of wheat landmines, especially for kids who eat at friends' houses, school cafeterias, etc. There's little to do except educate them and help them understand why they shouldn't eat the foods their friends are eating.

    Rodale has mentioned the possibility of a Wheat Belly Cookbook, but it's still pretty early, only 5 days after release of the book! So stay tuned . . .

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/3/2011 1:47:47 PM |

    Yes, indeed: impaired, foggy, wheat-added thinking!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/3/2011 1:48:53 PM |

    Yes, Might: a crucial issue in understanding how visceral fat is bad, bad, bad, unlike the fat, say, on the arms or backside.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/3/2011 1:52:02 PM |

    Hi, Tracy--

    A strict vegetarian low-fat diet can be better than an average American diet--minus fast food; junk food; hydrogenated fats; meats from warehouse-raised livestock given corn, hormones, and antibiotics--but it is far from an ideal diet. Esselstyn and Ornish, while they have great intentions, are beating a dead horse in this diet. This is the diet, by the way, that made me diabetic 20 years (yes, 20 years! that's how long they've been preaching this nonsense), made me gain 30 lbs, and gave me lipid distortions: HDL 27 mg/dl, triglycerides 350 mg/dl. It all reversed when I stopped following their advice.

  • Mike

    9/3/2011 5:04:58 PM |

    I just checked that blog you referenced and they didn't post my comment that questioned their approach...interesting.

  • Peter Silverman

    9/3/2011 7:10:37 PM |

    Since people eat clusters of foods rather than single foods (wheat, sugar, vegetable oil; hot dogs, hot dog buns, Coke; brown rice, tofu, broccoli) it must be hard to single out individual foods as being lifesavers or villains.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/3/2011 9:31:58 PM |

    HI, Peter--

    Nope, I don't think so.

    Wheat stands apart at many levels, unique in its protein content (glutens, gliadin, and others), carbohydrate (amylopectin A), and glycoprotein lectins (wheat germ agglutinin).

    Parallel to this is allergy: You can have fatal allergy to peanuts but not to walnuts. That's a bit difference, though on the surface they seem roughly similar. Food composition is a crucial factor in human tolerance and foods cannot be lumped together willy nilly.

  • CathyN

    9/3/2011 11:48:39 PM |

    Great interview with Robb Wolf. I have been waiting for Wheat Belly to come out, so we're getting ours and several others to share ASAP. LIke many, many others, eliminating wheat (and other bad juju) from my diet dramatically changed my health (it's been almost 2 years, now).

    The Go with the Grain commentary was rubbish. And I find it very telling that they are not printing the critical comments. Not to mention that their site is sponsored by the Grain Foods Foundation. I'm sure they only have everyone's best interest at heart - yeah, right.

    Thanks for your bold move with this book. It is needed.

  • Corina

    9/4/2011 12:04:42 AM |

    I have just gotten started in your book (around 50 pages) and am really enjoying it.  Who would have thought a book about wheat and science would be such a page turner!

    I have a question though:  Why?  Why are the doctors/dieticians/nutritionists so uninformed?   Why is this seemingly such a 'fad' diet to so many?  Is it really just about money and keeping the cycle going?  I just find this concept so hard to fathom.  Do 'they' really want us sick and fat or have they just created a mess that is far too big to clean up and now they are just saving face?  

    I also posted over at that six serving's blog and thought something was a bit fishy when I didn't see any other comments.  It is clear that she/they can't take any form of reasonable, informed rebuttal.  Mostly though, my thought was: that's it?  That is all you are coming with?  That is your review?  Saying nothing would have been better than what she tried to pass off as an honest review of your book.  I would be very surprised if she even read it.  If you had, one can't remain that misguided can they?

  • Fat Guy Weight Loss

    9/4/2011 1:44:33 AM |

    Hmm, wonder if my comment will ever get approved on the sixservings.org site Smile

  • Tony Plank

    9/4/2011 3:12:54 AM |

    I was struck by the tenor of the wheat-industrialist organs in that they seem a bit defensive. If I were in charge of their message, I would have a very low key response. I would make some low level noise about the science being on our side and use some back handed compliments directed at “fringe nutritional ideas”.

    In other words, I think it is a mistake for them to act provoked. It is actually in their power to control this because in my experience, people do not want to listen to the message of wheat-belly. If the noise level stays down a bit, people will keep on eating their “healthy whole grains” and downing Twinkies when no one is looking because fundamentally they do not want to change. Everyone wants to know what I did to transform my health, but when I tell them, they look at me like someone who escaped from a mental institution and generally, they never bring it up again. I understand that completely too, because at one time, I would’ve said you’ll have to pry the baguette from my cold dead fingers.

    The best thing that can happen for you, Dr. Davis, is a full scale onslaught by the evil empire. That is the only way people like me will take note of the message in a serious way.

  • Susan Moles

    9/4/2011 4:20:48 AM |

    Hi Dr. Davis,

    This is my comment I left at sixservings.  I am pretty sure it will not get posted either:

    Honestly,
    If you don’t start posting some of the comments coming your way from the folks that have been commenting about their experiences regarding wheat consumption, then people are just going to think of this organization as a bunch of intellectual cowards! What is so hard about defending your position?

    Or, are you just having technical challenges?
    Susan Moles

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/4/2011 1:16:23 PM |

    Thanks, Susan.

    It looks like they've censored--CENSORED--all of our comments, so I posted a challenge on their Facebook page (though I had to "Like" them to do it).

    I'm itching to engage these people. I'm not hoping to convert them, just to allow me to bring all the incredible and damning evidence against wheat out into the open.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/4/2011 1:18:04 PM |

    Hi, Tony--

    You clearly understand the ways of the world! I am going to hammer away and try to embarrass and shame them into responding!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/4/2011 1:18:53 PM |

    It looks like they've blocked all of our comments. I've counted 5 people who say they've posted comments, none show on their blog. Yes, I believe they are practicing CENSORSHIP.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/4/2011 1:21:06 PM |

    Thank you for joining the fight, Corina! You are absolutely correct: NONE of our comments are showing up.

    They are choosing to not engage in the fight face-to-face. I suspect they will never engage in a public debate, since it will allow me and others to publicly air all the damning evidence against wheat. Instead, they will rely on the misleading and deceptive research showing that whole grains are better than white flour.

    All I want is not to convert them to our way of thinking, but a chance to articulate these ideas to the broader public.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/4/2011 1:22:55 PM |

    Thank you, Cathy. "Wheat and other bad juju" . . . that made me laugh!

    I knew the fight was coming. It would be nice if they would not just say nasty things and then run away, but confront me and others face-to-face.

  • Ari

    9/4/2011 3:15:03 PM |

    Dr. Davis,

    I just wanted to tell you how much I enjoyed Wheat Belly.  Not only was it informative, but it was fantastically well written as well.  Over at Tom Naughton's blog, I joked that your huge number of synonyms for "extreme" and "extremely" show that you must have either a massive vocabulary or the Deluxe Edition of Roget's Thesaurus.

    But in all seriousness, it is a great book!

  • damaged justice

    9/4/2011 3:43:12 PM |

    Who profits? Follow the money:

    http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/Publications/DietaryGuidelines/2010/Meeting2/CommentAttachments/GrainFoodsFndn-182REF.pdf

    ConAgra, Pepperidge Farm, various milling companies.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/4/2011 4:08:49 PM |

    Yes, indeed, Damaged. And a LOT of money--hundreds of billions.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/4/2011 4:09:42 PM |

    Thanks, Ari. I'm extremely happy you like Wheat Belly!

  • Alexandra

    9/5/2011 12:49:44 PM |

    Sarah  from Everyday Paleo did a great podcast over at The Paleo Solution, here is the link:
    http://robbwolf.com/2011/01/11/the-paleo-solution-episode-62-everyday-paleo/

  • Leslie

    9/5/2011 9:10:22 PM |

    So why don't they go after vegans and vegetarians?

  • Leslie

    9/5/2011 9:23:32 PM |

    How can these people live with themselves?

    Rhetorical question, yes ... sigh.

    Looking forward to reading WB after being blown away by Dangerous Grains.  Have been eating a paleo diet for 6 months and the improvement in my health is nothing short of astonishing.  In my 50s, I look and feel 20 again, actually better.  I truly believe if everyone dumped grains from their diet for a month, you could kiss Cargill, Monsanto and ADM good-bye.

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/6/2011 12:14:15 PM |

    Hi, Leslie--

    Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. Feel and look like in your 20s while in your 50s? That's great!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/6/2011 12:14:52 PM |

    I think they're worried about Wheat Belly"s head-on attack. This is the most direct attack they've suffered yet.

  • Leslie

    9/6/2011 1:03:18 PM |

    Don't take it personally  ... in looking over all the blog posts on that site there are no comments on any of them.  Comments likely encounter a script that reads, "send acknowledgement message then delete"  Wonder what happens if someone posts a positive comment?  Smile

  • Karn

    9/9/2011 12:51:31 AM |

    I posted a comment over there, I loved that 99% of the comments were anti-wheat.  This is awesome.  Great book and great interview on LLVLC.

    Thanks for all you do!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/9/2011 2:18:37 AM |

    Hi, Karn--

    The battle being waged over at Good Grains Foundation has been nothing short of an anti-wheat rally with placards reading: "We won't eat wheat!"

  • Curmujeon

    9/9/2011 11:56:01 AM |

    Read a bit of "Wheat Belly" while in the bookstore taking a break from flood traffic.  I probably won't buy it for awhile since I already have a long reading list and consider myself in the "choir" since I've been eating Paleo/Primal for almost a year.  I do have three diabetics in the family that are so stuck in conventional wisdom that I don' t think it would be much help for them.  Lent Mom my Paleo book at her request but she never got around to reading it.  I had hoped that she would take to it and become n=2 and turn their T2D and Dad's congestive heart failure around, but maybe they are two far down that path.  Time is running out and all they do now is treat the diseases and resulting symptoms and are clueless about the underlying causes.  Death by Conventional Wisdom and "Modern Medicine".   I was happy to see the book make the NYTBS list.  This may be a good shot at getting the health/healthcare situation turned around.  Unfortunately, 99.99% of people are not paying attention or are fixed on the CW way.  "Eat less fat!  More healthy whole grains!  More cardio!"  The rest just wants food thats cheap and tastes good(sweet or salty).  Just waiting for the other shoe to drop and the book get recalled from the stores and the Kindles since it presents such radical, subversive information and viewpoints.   The book will become a black market item and will only be shared in meetings of the anti-wheat cell groups in private homes of those trying to stop the Great Amirican Wheat Machine.

  • m

    9/12/2011 10:49:07 AM |

    Your book is great!
    I happened upon your blog through another blog 6 months ago.
    I am gluten free but became fat from all the new products and assumed I was eating real food.
    With a bit of reading, I connected the sugar
    being the problem. I am a 58 yr old woman who runs 5 miles 5 days a week and who by accident through trial and error happen to eat your diet and was convinced to by another doctor friend to go for the higher fats.
    My old body is back less 2 sizes in 5 mos. I feel wonderful again. I too feel like a lean machine again while jogging. It feels great!
    The body fat is so noticably gone that people in the large community I live in have asked me how I did it.
    I have directed them to read your book. Better understanding of the real reasons to get fit may change their old beliefs and give it a try.
    I am curious to see Dr. Oz's new live show today. He will be discussing how to lose belly fat. I hope you
    are his guest!!! congrats to you on your contributions to a better life!

  • Dr. William Davis

    9/12/2011 11:49:39 PM |

    Thanks, M!

    I, too, had to stumble my way to find the path to a diet that truly works. So why are given this information at the outset? Why do we all have to inadvertently commit egregious errors of dietary misbehavior to learn from mistakes?

  • Momof2Groks

    11/22/2011 7:46:58 PM |

    I agree so much Dr. Davis.  In fact, I often think that the replacing of gluten containing products with other very processed starches is the reason why so many parents and studies have concluded that GFCF diets do not work for kids on the autism spectrum.  GFCF was where we started with my son, but he did not show significant improvement until we went grain and sugar free, including severely limiting fructose.  Low carb GAPS/Paleo or Primal diets are much more helpful for kids with neurological and digestive issues, but do not get nearly the press.  Love your blog.  Keep it up.

Loading