So the NY Daily Times posted this article http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/health/2010/05/22/2010-05-22_following_glutenfree_diet_without_having_celiac_disease_can_be_harmful_to_health.html
It says that going gluten free as a non celiac is bad since non-gluten containing grains are unfortified and have less fiber. It says nothing about eliminating grains. I guess this is more of a discussion opener than a question.
I would be willing to believe that replacing wheat with buckwheat/rice "frankenfoods" from the gluten free section isn't going to help you much, but replacing wheat with whole vegetables and fruits seems like it makes major improvements.
Yeah, this is just total BULL. Vegetables and fruits beat grains hands-down in terms of not only nutrient density, but nutrient AVAILABILITY. They're not chock full of antinutrients like grains and legumes are. Also, about the fiber thing, are ya kidding me? There is TONS of fiber in veggies and fruits, along with chemical compounds shown to be anti-carcinogenic, anti-atherogenic, and just damn good for you!
My guess is that Monsanto paid this guy, or that he's simply ignorant and needed something to write about, and so used some pieces of the Wikipedia article to create an article of his own.
Paleo FTW! lol
This whole PR thing saying basically "HAHA, look at the idiots going gluten-free who don't have a REAL diagnosis" is very dangerous and disheartening. And I'm very disappointed that newspapers have taken the bait despite that these reports are all funded by the wheat industry.
It means that people will have an excuse not to take others seriously when they say they can't eat gluten, despite the fact that non-celiac gluten sensitivity is now recognized by mainstream medical journals. When I was in the hospital my food needs were not taken seriously, I shudder to think about how much worse it would have been if the nurses had read these condescending articles. As far as I'm concerned, with all the mystery surrounding many diseases, they should allow patients to exclude whatever they want from their diets.
Drew is spot on.
Add to that the brutal intestinal inflammation and scarring grains cause... even to those who think they aren't allergic. More and more people become allergic to grains daily, it used to be about 1 in 10, it is now creeping towards 80-90% of people. Frankly I think they should be avoided 100%, gluten free or not.
Listen to your body! There is a reason why so many people that go paleo feel so amazing, the grains were impeding all their bodily functions.
And yes, just like drug companies trying to prove that vitamins are bad for you through bullshit weighted studies. Monsanto does the same garbage with their toxic GMO strains of soy and grains.
Here's the simple answer: Folks eating real meat and produce don't need anything "fortified", grains or otherwise.
This is a shining example of how messed-up the dominant nutritional paradigm is, and a big reminder of how much work we have to do.
Many of the gluten free products are high in sugar and starch. Wheat may be the worst offender so replacing it with other almost as bad offenders will probably be just a wee tad better for most, and probably a fair amount better for those who have serious gluten allergies. So I don't think there is any harm in the whole gluten free movement and it may help a tad because it is shining more light and attention on the problems of wheat and lectins and food allergies and that may slowly open the door to more knowledge on the general problems of grains and sugars in general. I think it might also help people be more open minded to people have specific eating requirements and that just guzzling down whatever without thinking about it might not be a good idea. So overall, although I think gluten free is only a small piece of the puzzle, I do think the general trend might help lead us in the right direction. -Eva
THis paragraph is just so SAD (if you'll excuse the pun): "When wheat flour is fortified with vitamins and iron, it boosts the nutrient content of the diet. When it’s a whole grain, it also adds fiber. But eliminating wheat flour, which means forgoing pasta, bread, and cereals, can cause flagging energy levels and those low-blood-sugar induced headaches that occur when not enough carbs are eaten."
So.. wheat flour boost your nutrient intake IF IT HAS VITAMINS SPRAYED ON IT! WHy not just take the vitamins directly and skip the wheat? Is that so hard? And veggies have plenty of fiber so it's not like we depend on wheat for fiber. But then the real kicker, if you don't eat gluten, then you could get hypoglycemia!! As if rice and the celiac replacement carbs don't also effect blood sugar and as if having spiralling blood sugars is normal and the only solution is high glycemic foods! And in the other part of the article about gaining weight, why would swapping one carb for another make any major changes in body weight? The article makes no sense. I think the author is just making stuff up in this article. One can only cry when thinking about how just about any clueless moron is allowed to write articles giving health advice.
To be honest I haven't read the article, but just for the idea - I think that eating grains is such a staple that for most people eating gluten-free is only acceptable if it's a result of a disease. then you have no choice... but by yourself? why would you do that to yourself? deprive your body of delicious bagels and fortified morning cereals?
I am now in a moment when I have to decide. I was diagnosed celiac when I was a baby (after I almost died b/c they thought it was blood poisoning and couldn't figure out what was wrong with me), then my Mom thought I was "cured" and happily ate gluten ever since. Now I want to switch completely, but wanted to have a "proof" - but the tests I made came back negative. So now I want to be gluten free completely, the only difference is - if I am not really celiac nothing horrible would happen if once in a while I would eat a small amount of gluten and then get back on track. But if I am celiac - even this tiny amount can be dangerous.
What??? Sugar is bad for you? 8 Answers
Has Paleo affected how you take your news? 16 Answers
New Paleo Articles 5 Answers
The Virgin Diet 5 Answers