Limited Time: Grab your FREE Box of Dark Chocolate Almond Bars Get Yours>>Close
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Wheatophobia? Opinion please

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    West Yorkshire ( UK)

    Wheatophobia? Opinion please

    Hi All

    I'v been near on 95% primal for three months now and love it. I feel great and have lost 22 lbs. I'm now 172lb ( 5'9")

    I often get drawn into discussions regarding my weight loss and how I'v done it. Naturally I explain the PB lifestyle and the cutting out of grains from my diet. Most people think the weight loss is great but think I'm nuts for not eating bread.

    My calorie intake has dropped dramatically as I don't feel hungry and my usual intake of sugary crap has stopped. So I can't say all of my loss is down to no wheat can I?

    I'v checked out the net for more information on the pro's and cons of wheat and recently found this

    Wheatophobia: Will Avoiding Wheat Really Improve Your Health? | Wellness Letter

    Are these claims a fair statement or just misinformation as per usual in an attempt to deffend the wheat industry?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Washington state
    What's to defend about eating Round-Up?
    Steak, eggs, potatoes - fruits, nuts, berries and forage. Coconut milk and potent herbs and spices. Tea instead of coffee now and teeny amounts of kelp daily. Let's see how this does! Not really had dairy much, and gut seems better for it.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Quote Originally Posted by Knifegill View Post
    What's to defend about eating Round-Up?
    I feel the same about vegetables
    Make America Great Again

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    I find the wheat hate over done here, and in paleo. No doubt wheat is bad for a number of people, and it takes up too much space in millions of peoples diets (when they should be eating more veggies, meat, eggs etc) but wheat isn't behind the obesity epidemic and it doesn't give people cancer.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Eagle River, Alaska
    It doesn't take into account how activity levels have dropped. Everyone agrees that people with high activity levels can eat virtually unlimited carbs and get away with it. Americans for the most part lead very sedentary lives. Comparing us to people in less developed nations that get a lot more exercise than us isn't apples to apples. Also my guess would be they are making bread and stuff from minimal ingredients which lessens their exposure to all the crap we put in our processed foods. Wheat is just part of our problem in the US.
    High Weight: 225
    Weight at start of Primal: 189
    Current Weight: 174
    Goal Weight: 130

    Primal Start Date: 11/26/2012

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Seekins View Post
    Hi All

    My calorie intake has dropped dramatically as I don't feel hungry and my usual intake of sugary crap has stopped. So I can't say all of my loss is down to no wheat can I?

    Eating wheat and sugar makes people want to eat more wheat and sugar.

    Have you ever noticed that you can mindlessly eat a box of oreos in one sitting, but its almost impossible (and undesirable) to do the same with steak and avocado? (I'm not speaking for the people who's hunger signals and metabolism are *broken*. Based on your success you aren't one of those people)

    People aren't going to believe you (or want to believe you) that it can be as simple as eliminating wheat. So tell them a truth they can wrap their brain around...that by eating real food, and avoid refined grains and sugars most of the time, you are less hungry and more satisfied, so you eat less. Let them think its purely willpower.
    *My obligatory intro

    There are no cheat days. There are days when you eat primal and days you don't. As soon as you label a day a cheat day, you're on a diet. Don't be on a diet. ~~ Fernaldo


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    SF Bay Area, California
    When it comes to daily diet it usually isn't practical to isolate variables to the extent required to prove causality.. Best you can do is take on a defined set of empirical approaches you feel reasonably positive about, test the results & adjust as required...which leaves the door open to endless arguments about which aspects of your plan actually "work" and which are merely incidental. In others' minds you're always "just eating less" or "just avoiding chemicals in processed food" or "just getting more vegetables"--or whatever "just ____" sits most comfortably with their own preconceptions about health and their resistance to change. In my case, everyone seizes upon exercise once they find out I've walked over 1000 increasingly hilly miles since starting. That way I'm succeeding despite the high fat intake and grain deprivation, not because of it.

    I like reading the theories about why this works, but I've mostly given up trying to convince people 1 on 1 unless they are clearly interested in pursuing the same path and want the gory details. Did you do this to become a seasoned advocate & debater, or to get healthy? I'm no celiac but wheat makes me feel brain-fogged and inappropriately hungry, so I avoid it...and there are obviously a lot of people in the same boat.

    I like turning it around and asking grain-pushers what's so all-fired essential about wheat that I can't get elsewhere--I mean, fiber? calories? some paltry amount of B vitamins? Please! But ultimately, if someone wants to brandish the UCB Wellness Letter & USDA MyPlate pamphlets while eating wheat morning noon and night, and they're happy & fit doing it, then more power to 'em--but if they're fat and depressed and prediabetic and wonder why the hell they just can't stop eating pasta, point them to Sisson, Taubes, Davis et al. and let them decide.
    6' 2" | Age: 42 | SW: 341 | CW: 198 | GW: 180?

    “Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards.”
    ― Søren Kierkegaard

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    New Zealand
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Seekins View Post
    Are these claims a fair statement or just misinformation as per usual in an attempt to deffend the wheat industry?
    First of all, this.

    They aren't flat out lies, but I think that they are no more factual than the statements they are debunking necessarily. Some examples:

    "There’s no clinical evidence that differences between today’s wheat and older varieties have adverse effects on our health. "
    Except that modern wheat is much higher in gluten, and gluten sensitivity is a real thing (ironically, the article doesn't get around to discussing gluten sensitivity until after the end of the article proper). I personally think that *everyone* is gluten sensitive, just to a greater or lesser degree. And if you're gluten sensitive and there's more gluten in modern wheat, then .....

    "Many studies have linked higher intakes of whole grains (including whole wheat) with a reduced risk of diabetes, heart disease, and stroke, as well as improvements in blood cholesterol, blood pressure, and blood sugar control. "
    Whole wheat being good is is relative. Better than what? That 'whole wheat diets' in the most studies I have seen are displacing refined wheat. It's the same as a clinical trial of filtered cigarettes vs unfiltered cigarettes finding that the filtered cigarettes are 'heart healthy' because they are better for you than what they are being compared to (the unfiltered cigarettes).

    "BOTTOM LINE: Unless you have celiac disease or another type of gluten intolerance or sensitivity (see box above), there’s no reason to avoid wheat. "
    This sentence is true. I just happen to thing that nearly everyone is gluten sensitive to some degree. Some people can tolerate it very well. And what's the arguement *for* wheat precisely? Why do I *need* it in my life?

    I agree with their rebbutal of wheat and obesity. I do think that cutting out processed food and caloric drinks is the way people lose weight on paleo/primal/wheatbelly. There's nothing particularly unholy about wheat when it comes to weight gain other than the fact that it's very calorie dense, non-satisfying, and nutrient poor (remind me why I should eat it again?).
    Last edited by magicmerl; 01-09-2013 at 05:36 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

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Delaware Valley
    Quote Originally Posted by magicmerl View Post
    There's nothing particularly unholy about wheat when it comes to weight gain other than the fact that it's very calorie dense, non-satisfying, and nutrient poor (remind me why I should eat it again?).
    When I am talking about my weight loss, I limit my discussion of wheat to this, plus one more thing - so many snack foods, party foods and binge foods contain wheat, that once I got out of the habit of eating wheat, all those tempting diet cheats had much less hold on me. Most people "could never", but every now and then someone is like "oh yeah, every one of my diet derailers includes wheat".
    50yo, 5'3"
    CW-125, part calorie counting, part transition to primal
    GW- Goals are no longer weight-related

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    I think I got a much better understanding of the flaws of that book from this link:
    Wheat Belly | Melissa McEwen on food anthropology, economics, and culture

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts