Blog

5

WSJ recently published an article about gluten. Read it and come back here.

[Try not to have any conniptions when they refer abstaining from wheat and dairy as "restricted".]

Anyhow, what jumped out at me was:

In a novel study, researchers at the Mayo Clinic tested blood samples taken from 9,133 young Air Force recruits in the 1950s and found that about 1 in 700 had undiagnosed celiac disease at that time. Tests on subjects exactly the same age now found that the rate was nearly five times as high today.

"Human genes haven't changed that much, so there has to be something pervasive in the environment that is making this disease more common," says Joseph Murray, a Mayo gastroenterologist who led the study, published in the journal Gastroenterology last year. It may be that people are more susceptible because we are eating much more wheat today—or that wheat is being processed or cultivated differently.

I think there is something to this argument. Namely, environmental factors have changed.

My totally-shoot-from-the-hip guess is that modern wheat has been bred for higher gluten content and therefore gluten's malicious effects are likely amplified.

Is there any evidence for this? If this is the case, why would this be?

Also, anyone know if there were/are substantive differences between European/American wheat? I have an inkling there is/was.

For bonus fun: Anyone have any data on differences in wheat between now and antiquity?

flag
2 
Bonus fun: the below article explores cultivating ancient wheat varieties that are not toxic to celiac patients. – Kamal Sep 17 2010 at 4:30
4 
Molberg Ø et al. "Mapping of gluten T cell epitopes in the bread wheat ancestors; implications for celiac disease." – Kamal Sep 17 2010 at 4:30
1 
Excellent link Kamal -- YOU ROCK!! – grace Sep 18 2010 at 4:34

13 Answers

6

Several things come to mind. First, the most obvious. It says right in the article, Americans eat more wheat now than they did in the past. More wheat equals more celiac. They probably answered their own question, at least in part.

Another potential issue:I read somewhere that in the recent past, like maybe one generation ago, yeast for making bread was all slow rise, which gave it more time to predigest the poisons in grains. So all the bread was probably more healthy than it is now, because it fermented for a LOT longer than it does now.

Another thing, the rest of our diet is much less healthy now. We have given up most saturated fat, which has been shown to be protective in a variety of ways. We have replaced it with PUFAs which has been shown to be just the opposite. And we are tanking up and tons of sugar and high fructose corn syrup (now called 'Corn syrup' if the manufacturers have their way). I suspect that if have a myriad of lifestyle changes that might further weaken general health and gut health, then you are more likely to develop leaky gut and celiac.

Our parents ate healthy real food. Many of them lived before tv dinners were invented. They ate meat and butter and lard and veggies and much less grains. Grain recipies back then had you soak the grains before cooking, cutting out much of the phytic acid and sometimes partially fermenting them which would have helped make them safer. Bread was made with slow rise yeast. Much less sugar was consumed making for different gut flora. High fructose corn syrup was not even yet on the map. Really, I don't see the reason for increased celiac rates as being any kind of mystery at all. Just about every change in diet from our parent's time has probably contributed to it.

link|flag
I don't think it is a 'mystery' either - but am distinctly curious as to changes in the food landscape at the producer level in 20th century. – Patrik Sep 17 2010 at 4:15
I believe it's going to be 'corn sugar'. – Nico Sep 17 2010 at 5:21
2 
Nico, for a while now, I've had a sneaking suspicion that 'corn sugar' is the ultimate crap food. It does not even taste good yet people are slurping it down. Weird and creepy! Real sugar tastes much much better. A local sandwich shop is even importing sodas from Mexico because they are still made with real sugar and taste so much better. I can at least understand why poeple like sugar. it tastes good. But why are they eating the corn syrup? Must be some kind of addiction thing cuz it can't be the taste. PUFAs may be bad for you but I have never seen evidence of them as addictive. – Eva Sep 17 2010 at 6:05
Patrik, yes, I am sure there are many other diffs that we don't yet understand, everything from fast rise yeast to GM mods to hormonones and chemicals, to soil depletion to PUFAs to lack of omega 3! One prob is there are so many likely culrits! – Eva Sep 17 2010 at 6:08
Actually it looks like wheat consumption is down compared to a hundred years ago: ers.usda.gov/briefing/wheat/consumption.htm – kilton Sep 17 2010 at 11:55
show 2 more comments
6

Dr. Davis (Heartscan Blog) did a couple of blogs about modern wheat v. neolithic wheat. Apparently, the three original varieties of wheat available to Neolithic man, have become over 25,000 varieties over the past 30 years, thanks to hybridization and genetic tinkering.

http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/emmer-einkorn-and-agribusiness.html

Dr. Davis did a little experiment using Einkorn wheat, which is supposedly one of the earliest cultivated varieties, and found dramatically improved blood sugar responses.

http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2010/06/in-search-of-wheat-einkorn-and-blood.html

link|flag
This is in his book Wheat Belly too. – The Quilt Oct 8 2011 at 21:20
5

One thing is for sure -- soil quality has decreased dramatically over the last 50 years or so. This affects wheat and everything else we grow. We should expect some repercussions.

Per http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19013359 :

"The concentrations of zinc, iron, copper and magnesium remained stable between 1845 and the mid 1960s, but since then have decreased significantly, which coincided with the introduction of semi-dwarf, high-yielding cultivars."

link|flag
4

For the ground wheat (e.g. flour) to flow bromides are used -- these affect thyroid and autoimmunity.

To prevent pests, wheat and other grain crops are GMO (which has its own host of issues and toxicity) and pesticide-soaked.

Wheat flour is bleached -- again changing the food and oxidizing vitamins, minerals and organic components in horrible ways. Chlorine, peroxides and other nasties are employed. Again, reactive halides like chlorine will fill in for iodine which is necessary for thyroid, adrenals and many of our vitally functioning glands and detoxification systems. Yeah. Testes and ovaries INCLUDED! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flour_bleaching_agent

There are MANY factors why Western (and now Eastern) civilizations ruin their health on wheat grains...

Russia is now moving toward GMO wheat after their recent drought. Sad.

link|flag
1 
I have to say that I was horrified to find out about bromides. I don't have the option of eating wheat anyway because of gluten intolerance, but yet another halide is not what people need. Thyroid problems are a growing epidemic! It's my understanding that bromated flour is illegal in the EU. – Nicole Sep 26 2010 at 19:26
1 
The EU is also trying to not permit genetically modified crops as well. Here in the US we are overrun by GMO crops which are killing national and global biodiversity (tomatoes, potates, canola, soy, wheat, corn CORN CORN, etc). Nicole, we are ruining future generations by the bromides. I think of it this way... as I was pregnant gobbling bromides and wheat, my babies' DNA and epigenomes were formed. These epigenomes affect my daughters' children and even potentially their respective children. The damage? Who knows but many rare diseases have increased exponentially in 15yrs! – grace Sep 26 2010 at 23:56
Grace one of the clinical findings of the use of bromides and wheat is that is cause a very special skin flare up on the face and trunk. Often it is associated with atopic dermatitis and asthma too. I have seen it more in younger people than older and the Derms are missing it. – The Quilt Oct 8 2011 at 21:24
2

With respect to European vs. American wheat, a USDA scientist says there is little difference:

"The gluten content of flours is related to the amount of protein they contain. Because of growing conditions European wheats are often lower in protein when compared to North American wheats. However this is not always true. Also it is a common practice in Europe to add gluten to flour at the mill. Thus the protein and gluten content of flours is very similar on both sides of the Atlantic."

A recent paper (Van den Broek 2010) found higher gluten content in the wheat of today vs the wheat of 100 years ago. The paper is called "Presence of celiac disease epitopes in modern and old hexaploid wheat varieties: wheat breeding may have contributed to increased prevalence of celiac disease"

But I wonder how much of the increased celiac is due to wheat differences vs just wheat dominating the grain landscape these days.

link|flag
Interesting. What time-frame was the USDA scientist referring to with regard to Europe and USA? – Patrik Sep 17 2010 at 4:13
1 
He didn't specify :( This is his page; he is a grain science researcher with some good info: allexperts.com/ep/1425-24140/Food-Science/… – Kamal Sep 17 2010 at 4:26
Slightly aside the topic, but I remember a few years ago, hubby asked me WHY I was putting "vital wheat gluten" in foods, and I told him, "what's the big deal - it's protein!" Argh....if we could only take back some words! But I have learned, and now I know better, I do WAY better. – GHarkness Sep 17 2010 at 19:58
2

This doctor's blog is interesting:

http://glutendoctors.blogspot.com/2010/08/celiac-is-more-prevalant-today-than-30.html

link|flag
2

Did anyone catch this towards the end of the article?

"Fruits, vegetables and meat are naturally gluten-free, so experts advise loading up on those rather than relying on packaged products."

Yay!

link|flag
people generally gain weight after going gluten free. This is often celebrated as many are diagnosed when they are underweight and nearly all are malnourished. The weight gain is partially from increased absorption and partially from the amount of sugar in most gluten free "products" – Moonablaze Oct 9 2011 at 6:18
1

http://www.kew.org/science/ecbot/papers/nesbitt2001wheat.pdf Is the core of the review I am putting together, but it is a great historical read to start with!

link|flag
0

I read somewhere that when humans first cultivated wheat there were only two strains. The same source said that during the 20th century scientists started trying to produce higher yield strains so now there are over 10,000 differing types. So they said you really never know what you're eating any more.

I can't come up with a link though... So take that with a grain of sea salt.

link|flag
0

Meat isn't always gf. Some companies use fillers that contain wheat to plump up their product...:(

link|flag
0

I dont know how its changed in the last 60, but VTech and Monsanto are going to ensure it changes over the next 60

http://www.grainnet.com/articles/Virginia_Tech_and_Monsanto_Partner_to_Develop_Better_Wheat_Varieties-101498.html

link|flag
0

take a look at this article printed in McClean's magazine (Canada). Sept. issue, 2011

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/09/20/on-the-evils-of-wheat-why-it-is-so-addictive-and-how-shunning-it-will-make-you-skinny/

link|flag
0

I lived in Algeria for 6 years, then France for 12 years. I returned to the U.S. and immediately began to have IBS symptoms which are somewhat relieved by avoiding wheat. Is it the GMO's? what is different between US and European wheat (or food in general)? Watching my diet helps but it doesn't entirely irradicate my difficulties. I would love to find out exactly what makes me sick. I eat very little processed foods as a result.

link|flag

Your Answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.