Was I Wrong About Gluten? Part 2 - Critical MAS

Was I Wrong About Gluten? Part 2 - Critical MAS

Sep 26, 2013 by MAS 5 Comments

For those that haven’t read Part 1,
please do so now. In it I describe how I removed gluten from my diet
and experienced positive health benefits. Then I reflected on how I
became sensitive to gluten and how I am in a better position now to
handle small amounts of gluten.

Has the fear of gluten been exaggerated? Is it just one of a long
list of foods that have been demonized unjustly? In the past year there
have been many smart individuals that believe this is the case. The new
wave of gluten defenders seem to be falling into 2 camps.

Diet Recovery / Broken Metabolism

Matt Stone is a fan of using wheat to jump start a metabolism wrecked
by excessive dieting. If someone has a history of food restriction and
has developed unhealthy attitudes about food, then food typically
thought of as “junk food”
can be both metabolically and psychologically beneficial. The thinking
here is that by increasing metabolism, so many other health markers move
in a positive direction that total health benefits in spite of the
wheat. Here wheat is used as a convenient tool to solve a greater
problem.

I really don’t have much to comment here. It’s an area of health I
know little about, but if one can eat cookies to boost metabolism to
restore health then, why not? It isn’t denying the possible health
issues with gluten, it is about addressing a larger health issue
quickly.

“It’s only 10%”

The other group of gluten defenders state that Celiac represents just
1% and when you add in those with any gluten intolerances that number
is only 10%. I’ve talked to a local naturopath whose research suggests
that number is 30%. On a recent Robb Wolf podcast with Dr. David Perlmutter MD,
author of Grain Brain, also uses the 30% number. Regardless of the
number, this camp feels that gluten issues have been overstated. As a
side note, I’ve noticed the people in this camp are almost all coming
from a fitness background. They tend to be resilient as do their
clients.

When I listened to Evil Sugar Radio Episode 9,
Antonio Valladares and Alan Aragon were mostly dismissive of gluten
issues. Alan shared his research stating that 90-91% of the population
does not have any gluten issues, so therefore gluten is fine and that
projecting these problems out to everyone is absurd.

I have a few problems with the logic here. One is 10% is not a small
number. What if it really is 30%? That is a tremendous number. Something
is going on and even if I wasn’t gluten intolerant, I’d be taking
notice. Why are so many people having so many issues with a food that is
so prevalent? And what does “fine” really mean? Do we know? I have
trouble believing that a food would be harmful to 10% (or 30%), but
beneficial to 90% (or 70%).

Maybe Alan is right and the much of the gluten demonization is about
praying on the insecurities of the fitness culture? God knows they’ve
done it before. For me the numbers are too high to ignore and too many
smart people have raised concerns that in my opinion have not been fully
addressed. Robb Wolf, Paul Jamient, Chris Kresser, and others have gone into great detail why they feel gluten is best avoided.



Grain Brain: The Surprising Truth about Wheat, Carbs, and Sugar–Your Brain’s Silent Killers is by Dr. David Perlmutter who sat down with Robb Wolf for a podcast interview on the book. The second half of the interview deals with his neurological concerns related to grains.

Moving from 100% GF to 99% GF

As I covered in Part 1, I believe I have to some degree healed my
body’s ability to handle gluten. It took years, but I’m now more resilient.
But just because I’m not showing symptoms when I have soy sauce or 4 oz
of beer, does not mean that I’ve accepted that gluten is beneficial. I
haven’t.

Even if the only benefit I’m receiving from removing gluten these
days is that I’ve replaced those calories with more nutrient dense and
nutrient diverse foods, then that is still a benefit. And if someday we
all learn that gluten was innocent then we can resume eating it at that
time. I doubt that will happen, but I’ll keep an open mind.

Filed Under: Nutrition Tagged With: gluten

Comments

1. 
   
   
   
   
   

   
   

   Txomin says

   Sep 26, 2013 at 2:39 pm

   
   
   

   There is a lot of room between making grains the core of one’s
   diet and eliminating them all together. I find that extreme positions
   demand more effort than they are worth. So, unless you have a health
   issue, I say follow a 90/10 or even an 80/20 rule. You will receive more
   benefit/damage from what you choose as your dominant diet than what
   floats on the periphery. And so, my diet is dominated by foodstuffs that
   humans can digest as found (vegetables, fruits, nuts, meats, fish,
   etc). That alone is my bet and so far so.. great, in fact.
   
   
2. 
   
   
   
   
   

   
   

   MAS says

   Sep 26, 2013 at 7:14 pm

   
   
   

   @Txomin – Well said. I also suspect traditional methods of grain
   preparation play a significant role in tolerance over a long period.
   
   
3. 
   
   
   
   
   

   
   

   Glenn Whitney says

   Sep 27, 2013 at 10:23 am

   
   
   

   Not all gluten is created equal.
   
   I would guess there’s a huge difference between eating a Twinkee and a slice of organic sourdough bread from a artisan baker.
   
   
4. 
   
   
   
   
   

   
   

   MAS says

   Sep 27, 2013 at 3:44 pm

   
   
   

   @Glenn – I agree. Thanks for the link you sent me. I think I’m going to one more gluten post.
   
   

Be Kind to Your Grains...And Your Grains Will Be Kind To You - Weston A Price Foundation

Be Kind to Your Grains...And Your Grains Will Be Kind To You - Weston A Price Foundation

Written by Sally Fallon and Mary G. Enig, PhD

Saturday, 01 January 2000 14:57

Read this in: Czech The science of nutrition seems to take a step backwards for every two steps it takes forward. When the study of vitamins was in its infancy, researchers realized that white flour lacked the nutrients that nature put into whole grains. One of these researchers was Dr. Weston Price who noted in his studies of isolated, so-called "primitive" peoples that when white flour and other devitalized foods were introduced into these communities, rampant tooth decay and disease of every sort soon followed. But defenders of the new refining process argued that phosphorus in whole grains was "too acid" and was the true cause of bone loss and tooth decay. Warnings against the use of white flour went largely ignored. Only in recent decades has Dr. Price been vindicated. Even orthodox nutritionists now recognize that white flour is an empty food, supplying calories for energy but none of the bodybuilding materials that abound in the germ and the bran of whole grains. We've take two important steps forward—but unfortunately another step backward in that now whole grain and bran products are being promoted as health foods without adequate appreciation of their dangers. These show up not only as digestive problems, Crohn's disease and colitis, but also as the mental disorders associated with celiac disease. One school of thought claims that both refined and whole grains should be avoided, arguing that they were absent from the Paleolithic diet and citing the obvious association of grains with celiac disease and studies linking grain consumption with heart disease. But many healthy societies consume products made from grains. In fact, it can be argued that the cultivation of grains made civilization possible and opened the door for mankind to live long and comfortable lives. Problems occur when we are cruel to our grains—when we fractionate them into bran, germ and naked starch; when we mill them at high temperatures; when we extrude them to make crunchy breakfast cereals; and when we consume them without careful preparation. Grains require careful preparation because they contain a number of antinutrients that can cause serious health problems. Phytic acid, for example, is an organic acid in which phosphorus is bound. It is mostly found in the bran or outer hull of seeds. Untreated phytic acid can combine with calcium, magnesium, copper, iron and especially zinc in the intestinal tract and block their absorption. This is why a diet high in improperly prepared whole grains may lead to serious mineral deficiencies and bone loss. The modern misguided practice of consuming large amounts of unprocessed bran often improves colon transit time at first but may lead to irritable bowel syndrome and, in the long term, many other adverse effects. Other antinutrients in whole grains include enzyme inhibitors which can inhibit digestion and put stress on the pancreas; irritating tannins; complex sugars which the body cannot break down; and gluten and related hard-to-digest proteins which may cause allergies, digestive disorders and even mental illness. Most of these antinutrients are part of the seed's system of preservation—they prevent sprouting until the conditions are right. Plants need moisture, warmth, time and slight acidity in order to sprout. Proper preparation of grains is a kind and gentle process that imitates the process that occurs in nature. It involves soaking for a period in warm, acidulated water in the preparation of porridge, or long, slow sour dough fermentation in the making of bread. Such processes neutralize phytic acid and enzyme inhibitors. Vitamin content increases, particularly B vitamins. Tannins, complex sugars, gluten and other difficult-to-digest substances are partially broken down into simpler components that are more readily available for absorption. Animals that nourish themselves on primarily on grain and other plant matter have as many as four stomachs. Their intestines are longer, as is the entire digestion transit time. Man, on the other hand, has but one stomach and a much shorter intestine compared to herbivorous animals. These features of his anatomy allow him to pass animal products before they putrefy in the gut but make him less well adapted to a diet high in grains—unless, of course, he prepares them properly. When grains are properly prepared through soaking, sprouting or sour leavening, the friendly bacteria of the microscopic world do some of our digesting for us in a container, just as these same lactobacilli do their work in the first and second stomachs of the herbivores. So the well-meaning advice of many nutritionists, to consume whole grains as our ancestors did and not refined flours and polished rice, can be misleading and harmful in its consequences; for while our ancestors ate whole grains, they did not consume them as presented in our modern cookbooks in the form of quick-rise breads, granolas, bran preparations and other hastily prepared casseroles and concoctions. Our ancestors, and virtually all pre-industrialized peoples, soaked or fermented their grains before making them into porridge, breads, cakes and casseroles. A quick review of grain recipes from around the world will prove our point: In India, rice and lentils are fermented for at least two days before they are prepared as idli and dosas; in Africa the natives soak coarsely ground corn overnight before adding it to soups and stews and they ferment corn or millet for several days to produce a sour porridge called ogi; a similar dish made from oats was traditional among the Welsh; in some Oriental and Latin American countries rice receives a long fermentation before it is prepared; Ethiopians make their distinctive injera bread by fermenting a grain called teff for several days; Mexican corn cakes, called pozol, are fermented for several days and for as long as two weeks in banana leaves; before the introduction of commercial brewers yeast, Europeans made slow-rise breads from fermented starters; in America the pioneers were famous for their sourdough breads, pancakes and biscuits; and throughout Europe grains were soaked overnight, and for as long as several days, in water or soured milk before they were cooked and served as porridge or gruel. (Many of our senior citizens may remember that in earlier times the instructions on the oatmeal box called for an overnight soaking.) Bread can be the staff of life, but modern technology has turned our bread—even our whole grain bread—into a poison. Grains are laced with pesticides during the growing season and in storage; they are milled at high temperatures so that their fatty acids turn rancid. Rancidity increases when milled flours are stored for long periods of time, particularly in open bins. The bran and germ are often removed and sold separately, when Mother Nature intended that they be eaten together with the carbohydrate portion; they're baked as quick rise breads so that antinutrients remain; synthetic vitamins and an unabsorbable form of iron added to white flour can cause numerous imbalances; dough conditioners, stabilizers, preservatives and other additives add insult to injury. Cruelty to grains in the making of breakfast cereals is intense. Slurries of grain are forced through tiny holes at high temperatures and pressures in giant extruders, a process that destroys nutrients and turns the proteins in grains into veritable poisons. Westerners pay a lot for expensive breakfast cereals that snap, crackle and pop, including the rising toll of poor health. The final indignity to grains is that we treat them as loners, largely ignorant of other dietary factors needed for the nutrients they provide. Fat-soluble vitamins A and D found in animal fats like butter, lard and cream help us absorb calcium, phosphorus, iron, B vitamins and the many other vitamins that grains provide. Porridge eaten with cream will do us a thousand times more good than cold breakfast cereal consumed with skim milk; sourdough whole grain bread with butter or whole cheese is a combination that contributes to optimal health. Be kind to your grains. . . and your grains will deliver their promise as the staff of life. Buy only organic whole grains and soak them overnight to make porridge or casseroles; or grind them into flour with a home grinder and make your own sour dough bread and baked goods. For those who lack the time for breadmaking, kindly-made whole grain breads are now available. Look for organic, stone ground, sprouted or sour dough whole grain breads (we have many brands listed in our yearly Shopping Guide) and enjoy them with butter or cheese. Copyright: From: Nourishing Traditions: The Cookbook that Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet Dictocrats by Sally Fallon with Mary G. Enig, PhD. © 1999. All Rights Reserved.  To order Nourishing Traditions, go to www.newtrendspublishing.com.

Was it Gut Flora?....Was I Wrong About Gluten? (Part 1) - Critical MAS

Was I Wrong About Gluten? - Critical MAS

Was it Gut Flora?

Why was I handling gluten exposure much better in 2013 than I did
from 2010-2012? Was my body more resilient? If so, what was going on?
Last month Chris Kresser did a podcast on What Are the Hidden Costs of Modern Hygiene? that helped me connect the pieces.

…it’s possible that if we still had the Paleolithic
microbiome intact, we could tolerate grains and all of these compounds
with no problem. And perhaps that explains why some people are able to
tolerate those foods with apparently no problems. But given that the
microbiome has changed so significantly because of things like
sanitation and hygiene and also increased use of antibiotics and decline
in the consumption of fermented foods and fermentable substrates that
lead to a better gut microbiome…

In 2008, I began taking a lot of antibiotics to deal with rosacea. Is
it possible that my gut flora was in a far worse state to digest gluten
because of the meds? And starting in early 2010 I began making kimchi
and sauerkraut, both fermented foods to support gut flora. However, I didn’t get into dairy kefir
on a regular basis until December 2012. Since that time, I haven’t had a
single incident where trace exposure has triggered ill effects.

Bring on the Bread?

I needed to do a test to support the theory that my gut flora was
destroyed by antibiotics in 2008 and healed via fermented foods from
2010 to present. So last Saturday, I went to a microbrewery and drank a 4
oz ale. Beer makes more sense than bread, since beer is fermented and
tastes better.

This was the first beer I had since 2010. I had no issues. No
headache, no stomach ache. I slept fine. Granted this is only one point
of data, but a very encouraging one.

I’ve read several accounts of individuals that have reversed their
gluten insensitivity, so this idea isn’t new. Although it is doubtful
this will help Celiacs, being less sensitive to wheat is a step towards
greater resilience.

This post is getting long, so I’ll explain in Part 2 why I do not have any plans to resume eating bread and what the new wave of gluten defenders have gotten wrong.