Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wheat and It's Dangers?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wheat and It's Dangers?

    Here's what I found initially. Greens contain a simple sugar, galactose, that binds to four types of lectins but not including the type that wheat has (source 1). N-Acetyl glucosamine and sialic acid are two compounds that bind with wheat lectin (source 2 and 3), and there is some evidence that supplementation aids in protecting the gut.

    This glucosamine is supposedly found in the yeast and bacteria of bread itself as well as arthropod (insect and shellfish) shells, shark and beef cartilage, and shitake mushrooms to name a few foods. Actually, the body can even create its own!

    Sialic acid is a rabbit hole in itself. Apparently, there are two types of sialic acid, Neu5Ac and Neu5Gc. Neu5Gc is converted to Neu5Ac with an enzyme that all primates have except for humans. We produce Neu5Ac, but we must consume meat and dairy for Neu5Gc. If consumed, we fight it with antibodies and have inflamation. Supposedly, this could be one of our main genetic weaknesses for cancer (source 4). Furthermore, "most of the diseases we loathe are only able to attack humans by acting like our sialic acids." A lack of Neu5Gc usage in our body makes us more susceptible to most of the worst human diseases, unlike most other mammals? Who knew... Getting back to the question of lectin binding, perhaps the bad gluten lectin and the bad meat/dairy sialic acid could bind in the gut and render them both neutral?

    This is all very interesting, but it saying nothing about gluten. Gluten has two main components, gliadin and glutelin (source 5). Gliadin incompatibility causes the major diseases like Celiac, and glutelin causes most of the allergies to gluten. I would need to spend more time in research databases and maybe textbooks to figure out if anything dietary can neutralize these in the gut. An initial search brought nothing, so that might either mean people haven't studied it much, or there simply are no binding agents for gliadin or glutelin.

    The only other compound supposedly dangerous in wheat is phytates, but as I understand it, they are already bound to minerals within the plant, so they will not affect your absorption of other foods.

    Sources:
    1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lectin
    2. The interaction of wheat germ agglutinin with sialoglycoproteins. The role of sialic acid. - ResearchGate
    3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat_Germ_Agglutinin
    4. Evidence for a human-specific mecha... [Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI
    5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluten
    Last edited by wiltondeportes; 08-19-2013, 04:19 AM.

  • #2
    Cliffs: Gluten is the one clear enemy in wheat that remains unsolved for normal circumstances (ie non-Celiacs). This could be very simply worked around by eating non-gluten grains or even changing the *type* of wheat that you eat. Modern dwarf wheat supposedly has much worse form of gluten than ancient wheat.

    "The old fourteen-chromosome-containing Einkorn wheat codes for the small number of gluten proteins, and those that it does produce are the least likely to trigger celiac disease and inflammation. The new dwarf wheat contains twenty-eight or twice as many chromosomes and produces a large variety of gluten proteins, including the ones most likely to cause celiac disease."
    Mark Hyman, MD: Three Hidden Ways Wheat Makes You Fat

    Comment


    • #3
      No comments? I thought I answered some questions and debunked a couple things that linger in this community.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by wiltondeportes View Post
        The only other compound supposedly dangerous in wheat is phytates, but as I understand it, they are already bound to minerals within the plant, so they will not affect your absorption of other foods.
        I'd understood that, assuming you are gluten tolerant, the big problem with wheat, and all other grains, was phytates, because they bind with minerals in the human body and thus prevent their absorbtion in the human body. ( Not that they are already bound in the source food. That may be but so there are plenty of excess phytates to cause mineral malabsorbtion to humans.) Humans do not make the phytase necessary to digest phytates. Ruminants do. Phytates are toxins to humans.
        Foods High in Phytates | Healthy Eating | SF Gate

        All plants have phytates, as I understand, but some have many more than others. Mark has excluded all grains and legumes because of their high phytate content.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytic_acid

        Einkorn wheat (T. monococcum) is diploid (AA, two complements of seven chromosomes, 2n=14), Emmer has 28. Modern wheat that we eat today has forty-two chromosomes are the most recently evolved and most used types of wheat.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat
        Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/the-nat...#ixzz2cSEnOo6b
        Last edited by Cryptocode; 08-19-2013, 03:27 PM.
        "When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power." - Alston Chase

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cryptocode View Post
          I'd understood that, assuming you are gluten tolerant, the big problem with wheat, and all other grains, was phytates, because they bind with minerals in the human body and thus prevent their absorbtion in the human body. ( Not that they are already bound in the source food. That may be but so there are plenty of excess phytates to cause mineral malabsorbtion to humans.) Humans do not make the phytase necessary to digest phytates. Ruminants do. Phytates are toxins to humans.
          Foods High in Phytates | Healthy Eating | SF Gate

          All plants have phytates, as I understand, but some have many more than others. Mark has excluded all grains and legumes because of their high phytate content.

          Phytic acid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

          Einkorn wheat (T. monococcum) is diploid (AA, two complements of seven chromosomes, 2n=14), Emmer has 28. Modern wheat that we eat today has forty-two chromosomes are the most recently evolved and most used types of wheat.

          Wheat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
          Read more: The Natural History of Wheat: Information from Answers.com
          First of all, the history books show that ancient stoneage people did eat grains, and they did thrive on them. This eliminates the "paleo hypothesis" that we did not evolve while eating grain, therefore we shouldn't eat it. Until we have enough science to know one way or the other, grains are fine *in this context* (seasonal, only part of a varied diet, non-GMO, non-20th century mutant grains, prepared properly for eating).


          Re: Phytic acid
          What is it?

          "Phosphorus and inositol in phytate form are not, in general, bioavailable to nonruminant animals because these animals lack the digestive enzyme phytase required to remove phosphate from the inositol in the phytate molecule."
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytic_acid

          That was what I was saying before. The phytic acid is not biovailable to humans because it is bound with something in the food. However, this was a misunderstanding on my part. I thought that meant non-bioavailability would eliminate any mineral leaching, aka chelating.

          " Moreover, phytic acid chelates and thus makes unabsorbable certain important minor minerals such as zinc and iron, and to a lesser extent, also macro minerals such as calcium and magnesium; phytin refers specifically to the calcium or magnesium salt form of phytic acid."

          Ok, so phytic acid *will* chelate minerals in your gut as far as I know.

          Where is it?
          "Phytic acid was not detected in the endosperm."
          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC396417/

          Other sources say it's mostly in the bran. Well, white flour is just the endosperm of the grain, so there will be zero phytic acid in that anyway. Ancient cultures *did* actually do some work on their grains. Sorghum is apparently big enough to take off the bran and hull by hand. We may have always had the white flour.

          Now, let's continue for the sake of the argument that we should eat the whole grain.

          How bad is it?
          "Phytate consumption had a protective effect against osteoporosis, suggesting that low phytate consumption should be considered an osteoporosis risk factor."
          Phytate (myo-inositol hexaphosphate) and risk fac... [J Med Food. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI

          Here's how it supposedly works: (IP6=phytic acid)
          "IP6 attaches to heavy metals such as mercury, lead and cadmium, as well as loose iron, copper and calcium. [J Agriculture Food Chemistry 47: 4714-17, 999] IP6 is a selective chelator -- it does not attach to potassium, sodium or magnesium, important electrolyte minerals required for heart rhythm. IP6 does not remove calcium from bones or iron from red blood cells."

          Can it be reduced?
          Wikipedia uses a book that I don't have access to for this statement:
          " In-home food preparation techniques can break down the phytic acid in all of these foods. Simply cooking the food will reduce the phytic acid to some degree. More effective methods are soaking in an acid medium, lactic acid fermentation, and sprouting."
          Phytates in Cereals and Legumes - Google Books

          The WAPF gives a clearer answer.
          "Soaking grains and flour in an acid medium at very warm temperatures, as in the sourdough process, also activates phytase and reduces or even eliminates phytic acid."
          Living With Phytic Acid - Weston A Price Foundation

          It appears that reducing the phytic acid is pretty straight forward.

          Conclusion
          Overall, any attempts to claim grains, legumes, and seeds are off limits because of phytic acid is intellectually dishonest. There is more work to be done and a bigger picture to show than *just those foods*. Phytic acid is in many, many foods. It can be avoided, reduced/eliminated within if you don't avoid it, and even if not avoided, it may not be so bad after all.


          Re: Gluten
          I don't believe gluten tolerance is a yes/no question. I think everyone has a certain amount of intolerance. Some are completely intolerant, and some are tolerant enough they can digest satisfactorily. However, gluten is one thing. Dwarf wheat, GMO wheat has gluten that is a whole different matter. Thanks for the correction on the chromosome number. As I understand it, the new wheat produces much more gluten, and tougher strains of gluten than the Einkorn does, for instance. I will come back to this thread and research more after I have a few pieces of gluten-free sourdough with slathered butter. (Ironic but true!)
          Last edited by wiltondeportes; 08-19-2013, 05:23 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            I agree with both Weston A. Price and Mark Sisson. Raw or just cooked (with no other pre-processing) grains and legumes are bad for you. However if you are willing to follow Price's instructions for the old-fashioned methods of processing and preparing grains and legumes, then they are safe to eat. They are especially safe if you start with the original strains of the grains (einkorn for wheat) or legumes (teosinte for corn). http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/25/sc...ture.html?_r=0 Some research shows that properly prepared and processed einkorn is even safe for celiacs: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread89160.html

            I'm told by members here that the processing required is really not all that difficult, but the process requires time for soaking, sprouting, fermenting, whatever. So far I find iteasier to do without them.
            Last edited by Cryptocode; 08-19-2013, 05:38 PM.
            "When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power." - Alston Chase

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cryptocode View Post
              I agree with both Weston A. Price and Mark Sisson. Raw or just cooked (with no other pre-processing) grains and legumes are bad for you. However if you are willing to follow Price's instructions for the old-fashioned methods of processing and preparing grains and legumes, then they are safe to eat. They are especially safe if you start with the original strains of the grains (einkorn for wheat) or legumes (teosinte for corn). http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/25/sc...ture.html?_r=0 Some research shows that properly prepared and processed einkorn is even safe for celiacs: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread89160.html
              But if you have just the endosperm (aka white flour), you don't need to soak or ferment it for phytic acid because there's no phytic acid there in the first place.

              This brings us back to gluten. In fermented dairy, casein (milk protein) is broken down into aminos. It's very possible that fermented gluten (also a protein) could break down into aminos too, rendering them harmless. This would be backed up by your link that Einkorn is Celiac-safe if properly prepared. It's not the lectin or phytic acid Celiacs worry about. It's the gliadin in the gluten. Have we solved the problem?? Possibly.

              Comment


              • #8
                Yes, it's my opinion that it's the gliadin in wheat that is the problem.
                Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

                Griff's cholesterol primer
                5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
                Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
                TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
                bloodorchid is always right

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by magicmerl View Post
                  Yes, it's my opinion that it's the gliadin in wheat that is the problem.
                  It seems that it's the glutelin that causes most of the problems for everyday, non-Celiacs.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    There is this Wheat Belly guy (Dr W. Davis I think) who describes all the problems with the wheat components (proteins, lectins and starch). Maybe someone can read (or has already read) his book ? I have not but the content of his blog, which I skimmed a couple of years ago, was quite "alarming" ... as a French, it sounds too dramatic, I grew up on baguettes, croissants, etc. But maybe the wheat strain was different than the semi-dwarf stuff ? Don't know, I never felt bad eating French wheat but I don't eat it anymore because I started to grow fat and realized that wheat was taking too much space in my diet a few years back ... I knew nothing about paleo / primal at the time. I simply got back to a more traditional ancestral diet (as practiced by my direct ancestors who were Berbčres, i.e. North-African natives) and felt amazingly better. I knew it had to be the right thing due to my genetic background, it just made sense

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      WiltonDeportes, wait, wait, wait. Here this:What Science Really Says About the Paleo Diet – With Mat Lalonde, in which both Matt and Chris say that yes, the phytates in grains are primarily bound with minerals in the plant and therefore do not leach minerals from the human body.

                      However, towards the end of the talk the are strongly recommending Price's cooking procedures for all seeds (legumes), I think.

                      Now, I'm a little confused, or a lot.

                      What do you think of this?
                      "When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power." - Alston Chase

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by magicmerl View Post
                        Yes, it's my opinion that it's the gliadin in wheat that is the problem.
                        Yup...

                        For the most part. And I don't think the "history books" prove any such thing except that people may have chewed on some grass much the way a farmer would.

                        Grains come in.... health declines. It could just be a coincidence, but I'm not overly concerned since we do have ample evidence of HG societies thriving without disease and without grains. Rather just live the HG way.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Cryptocode View Post
                          WiltonDeportes, wait, wait, wait. Here this:What Science Really Says About the Paleo Diet – With Mat Lalonde, in which both Matt and Chris say that yes, the phytates in grains are primarily bound with minerals in the plant and therefore do not leach minerals from the human body.

                          However, towards the end of the talk the are strongly recommending Price's cooking procedures for all seeds (legumes), I think.

                          Now, I'm a little confused, or a lot.

                          What do you think of this?
                          Good job! That was my original source for thinking phytates are bound. He's correct to say that phytates don't leach minerals *from the body* (from the bones or something). The question is whether or not they bind to other food minerals eaten concurrently. Again going back into my memory bank, I've read recommendations to not eat your high mineral food (meat) at the same time that you eat possible mineral-binding food (grain). However as we saw with my searching on lectin information, meat and grain neutralize some of each other's bad effects.

                          There's no clear evidence to stick to a definite meal timing, and but there is clear evidence that phytates can limit a few minerals you might absorb in a meal if you don't do something to "kill" the phytates (cooking, sprouting, fermenting are options to be explored).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                            Yup...

                            For the most part. And I don't think the "history books" prove any such thing except that people may have chewed on some grass much the way a farmer would.

                            Grains come in.... health declines. It could just be a coincidence, but I'm not overly concerned since we do have ample evidence of HG societies thriving without disease and without grains. Rather just live the HG way.
                            Having mortar and pestles with significant grain remains is not "a farmer chewing on grass here and there". That's 20,000 year old evidence we've found. Secondly, stone age Californian natives gathered wild grains by the bushel! Read "Tending the Wild" by Kat Anderson.

                            As for the argument that HG societies were healthier, correlation does not imply causation.
                            1. HG Societies have a natural bottleneck. Infant mortality is so high that only the fittest genes have a chance at life. Modern civilization, by contrast, allows virtually a person with any level of fitness to live.

                            2.Then, the HG society spend a life of exercise in the elements. Modern civilization, by contrast, spends no time in the elements and exercises for a maximum of 1 hour per day (on average).

                            3. Grains never come to civilization alone. Along with them comes: excessive grain consumption, refined sugars, refined oils, and now, freak GMO plants with megadoses of gluten and starch.

                            4. Let me emphasize something from my last point "excessive grain consumption"!!!! I'm not advocating daily grain consumption. In the wild, everything rotates due to the seasons. The body needs variety.

                            4. HG societies do have disease. However, there are a few differences. One, they don't have the same bacteria and viruses that our civilization has had. That's why the North American natives were wiped out. Two, their degenerative diseases onset later than our civilization. Three, the vast, vast majority of tribal people do not live to the age of 60 or 70 or 80 for these degenerative diseases to come about. Four, the natives do not know what cancer is, therefore "natural causes" could have easily been actually "cancer".
                            Last edited by wiltondeportes; 08-22-2013, 03:26 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by wiltondeportes View Post
                              It seems that it's the glutelin that causes most of the problems for everyday, non-Celiacs.
                              On what basis do you make that assertion? Have you seen this?


                              (also, your thread title is equivalent to "Wheat and It is Dangers?". just saying)
                              Last edited by magicmerl; 08-22-2013, 03:25 PM.
                              Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

                              Griff's cholesterol primer
                              5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
                              Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
                              TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
                              bloodorchid is always right

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X