In the sixth chapter, Wheat Belly reviews celiac disease. Celiac disease is a serious disease and if you have it you should avoid wheat and all gluten containing products. Yet the book tries to make a case that wheat is the primary cause of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), another, much more common condition. Yet when you dig down through the book and its sources, there is simply no scientific evidence to support this theory. Every study cited that shows benefits of going glut
One of the sub-chapter headings of chapter five of Wheat Belly is “WHOLE GRAINS, HALF TRUTHS.” You could have titled the chapter, “UNTRUTHS ABOUT WHOLE GRAINS” and that would have been much more accurate. The book abandons all pretense of actually responding to the scientific literature and just makes up stories. Once again, it leads with the unsurprising fact that Americans are fat, which is not a news flash. But the book is responsible to explain, using the available scient
In the fourth chapter, the book continues its habit of constant conjunction of wheat with dangerous things and obesity. Wheat is “like drinking the Kool-Aid at a Jim Jones revival meeting.” Wheat has a hold on people “not unlike the hold heroin has over a desperate addict.” Wheat is the “Haight-Ashbury of foods, unparalleled for its potential to generate entirely unique effects on the brain and nervous system. There is no doubt: For some people, wheat is addictive.” Addiction
The third chapter of Wheat Belly spends more time on the negative health effects of wheat, but again, the focus is almost entirely on celiac disease. The crux of the book’s argument against wheat is its high glycemic index. Glycemic index is a calculated figure used to determine how much a person’s blood sugar will be affected by eating a given food. But wheat doesn’t cause diabetes or chronically high blood sugars even though its glycemic index is high as we will see. As Dr.
The second chapter of Wheat Belly talks about the changes in wheat over the years and how common the grain is in the American diet. The book tries to build a case that Americans consume too much wheat by measuring the length of grocery store aisles and listing the names of foods that contain wheat. I could do the same for cheese, but it would tell you nothing about whether cheese is a healthy food or not. The book then claims, “It is, by a long stretch, among the most consume
The first chapter of Wheat Belly points out that Americans are fat. We can all agree on this. It’s not debatable. Unfortunately, the book spends a lot of time establishing that there is an epidemic, rather than showing what caused it. Yes, there is an obesity epidemic and yes, it is very bad for people. The question we have is what evidence links this epidemic to wheat consumption? Instead of explaining this in depth, Wheat Belly uses a lot of misdirection. It hopes you won’t
Now we get to the third point in the list from the foreword to Wheat Belly. “3) Direct connections between wheat consumption and conditions such as diabetes, both type 1 and type 2, had been conclusively made … but virtually nobody had collected the data into one place nor dared question conventional advice that advocates essentially unconstrained consumption of the new modern strains of wheat.” There definitely are direct connections between wheat and both types of diabetes.
The last post we discussed the claim that wheat and the gliadin protein have undergone substantial and serious genetic change since modern hybrid wheat was developed. We showed that wheat isn’t isolated and that chicken has had more than eight times more genetic changes than wheat has. The second claim from the foreword to the paperback is “2) These changes have been associated with various effects on humans, such as intestinal inflammation outside of celiac disease and an as
Wheat Belly and Grain Brain, a Review I am starting a series of blog posts reviewing the books, Wheat Belly by Dr. William Davis, MD and Grain Brain by Dr. David Perlmutter, MD. Dr. Davis practices “preventative cardiology” and Dr. Perlmutter practices “integrative neurology.” Both books seem very similar in cover art, writing style, informational content and in message, even though they were published by different publishing companies. Both are clearly intended to be read by