Why a no-wheat diet?
Basically, because my doctor told me so.
To be more specific as to the unhealthiness of wheat flour, check out the answers to Is unbleached flour bad for you? and Is enriched wheat flour bad for you? Or take a look at this discussion on Recipezaar.
Now that I’ve been avoiding wheat flour for over a year, I feel absolutely terrible when I do make exceptions. The last time I ate pasta I asked Agus to please remind me how awful it made me feel in case I ever got a pasta craving again.
The good thing is, there are alternatives to wheat. Namely, alternative flours like soy, corn, and rye, which work for most baking recipes. And soy and rice pasta.
The hard thing is getting over the wheat addiction. On the Recipezaar forum, SWalker posts “I was reading the Karinas Kitchen blog the other day and wasn’t shocked when she said that after 6 years of being gluten free she no longer likes the smell of the bakery department.”
Ha. I can’t wait for that day. Freshly baked wheat bread still smells SO good to me.
What about whole wheat flour?
Whole wheat is probably a good option for most people, but the doctor asked us to avoid all wheat. So we try to.
Es común también utilizar, frente al uso de la harina de trigo, la harina de garbanzos o la harina de espelta (un cereal milenario). Aunque no conozco sus propiedades como harinas de repostería, sé que con la última se elabora pan de espelta (de apariencia similar al pan de centeno), muy apreciado en hogares con inquietudes ecológicas.
!!Y con la primera, unas croquetas riquísimas!!
I’m so glad someone who’s opinion I respect is arguing for a gluten-free diet. Not because I necessarily agree that gluten is evil, but because I know I’ll get some good information from you.
I read the two articles you posted on Facebook and neither of them actually said that gluten is bad for you. One article said that white flour has nothing to offer and may even cause diabetes, and the other one said that no amount of enriching can replace the vitamins, minerals and fiber removed from the wheat in enriched flour. Both articles hinted that whole wheat is actually healthy. I see from your comment above that you’re not necessarily opposed to whole wheat and I totally respect your decision to cut wheat out altogether, but sometimes I feel like proponents of gluten-free diets demonize wheat for no good reason. I mean, reading those two articles should lead to the conclusion that white and enriched flour should be avoided at all costs not that wheat is pure evil which is the sentiment I see on the chat site you also posted.
I really am trying to educate myself on this matter and I’ve been on a serious whole grain kick for the last few years and honestly I don’t miss white bread at all. It’s just that I feel the glaring eyes on me at the co-op when I’m buying my whole wheat flour like I just clubbed a baby seal. Can you tell me specifically what gluten is supposed to cause? I’m asking because I can see that the chemicals used to process white flour are clearly bad as is the removal of all of the nutrients contained in the germ, but I haven’t seen any specifics on the gluten itself yet.
I’m being serious and not trying to provoke ire or anything, just healthy debate. I really want to know this stuff. Guess you might have figured I would push a few buttons huh? Sorry for the length of this comment.
Holly, what about past made from quinoa? It is really tasty! Also, spaghetti squash (don’t kn ow if that is available in Argentina) in place of spaghetti noodles is good, and I recently read a friend’s blog that suggested using jaicama in place of pasta, including for ravioli. I haven’t tried it, but she says all you have to do it slice it tinly fill, fold over, and cook, and it will hold itself closed!
First off, thank you all for your comments!
Just to make myself clear: I don’t think wheat is evil. Nor do I think gluten is evil.
Some people have a wheat allergy.
Some people have gluten intolerance.
Not quite sure what I have. I think my issue is more with wheat than with gluten. It all started out by my doctor telling me not to eat wheat, and then noticing that I really felt terrible when I did make exceptions. Other grains seem to be fine for me.
Agus is allergic to wheat, rye, and oats, which are three grains that have gluten.
So between us, we have some serious grain limitations, and I only cook or bake using alternative flours such as soy, rice, corn, or tapioca.
Whole wheat is clearly a healthier alternative, and it may work for some people, but not for either of us.
Here’s a description of what gluten is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluten
And a description of celiac disease: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coeliac_disease
Michelle, pasta made from quinoa sounds GREAT, but I haven’t come across anything like that down here. I have purchased soy/rice and rice/egg pasta, both of which were very good substitutes for wheat pasta.
Haven’t seen spaghetti squash down here, and Agus has never heard of it. So it most likely does not exist here. Jicama also does not exist down here, but I used to eat it all the time in Mexico, and it sounds interesting as a pasta substitute!
Calamar, hice un experimento (pizza) con la harina de garbanzo que me salió mal, pero quiero intentar algo nuevamente. He escuchado de la harina de espelta, pero nunca la vi aquí en Buenos Aires. La voy a buscar, a ver si la encuentro.
Gracias!!
Thanks for all the comments!!
Hey Holly,
I know you don’t think that wheat is evil and I know that you have an actual problem consuming it. I also realize that wheat and gluten allergies are pretty common and I would never expect anyone with such an allergy to even think about eating wheat.
What’s been bothering me is all the bad press wheat is currently getting here in California. Gluten intolerance has become almost a “fad” allergy here in the last couple of years. Currently a gluten-free diet is being pedaled as a cure-all for just about anything that ails folks, and of course I’m just not buying it. I guess the one good thing about it is that people may be finding out for the first time that they’re allergic, which would certainly be nice to know. I just want to know what the potential benefit for someone who doesn’t have an allergy would be. I really am curious about this stuff.
Ever since I read “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” (which if you haven’t read you should) I’ve been questioning a lot of things relating to food. I’ve almost completely changed my eating and buying habits as a result and now I’m faced with the question of wheat. I sure do like bread but if I know consuming it is really bad for me…well…you get the picture.
Just thinking out loud
Hey Lar,
First off, thanks for the book recommendation. I haven’t read it, but it’s been recommended to me enough times that I think I should.
Well, I think the best thing would be for you to give up all gluten for a month and see how you feel.
This post makes a good point: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_is_wheat_gluten_thought_to_be_bad_for_you
“Gluten do not belong in the “original” human diet as we used to be hunter/foragers. Our intestines do not tolerate gluten as well as other foods.”
That’s not the first time I heard that.
I didn’t realize GF cooking was such a fad in the US. I guess they had to come up with something new.
I’m going to do some more research, and post if I find anything interesting. Though, I would recommend trying a GF diet for 3-4 weeks, just to see how you feel without it, and how your body reacts when you re-introduce gluten products into your meals.
Thanks for all your comments!!
Okay, here’s something more from one of my Zone books (I am a HUGE fan of the Zone, and have been since a doctor/friend recommended it to me three years ago):
“Ten thousand years ago there were no grains on the face of the earth. During mankind’s evolution, our ancestors were exposed to two food groups only: low-fat protein and low-density carbohydrates (fruits and vegetables). As a result, this is what we are genetically designed to eat. When grains were first introduced into the human diet 10,000 years ago, the archaeological record clearly reflects three immediate and dramatic changes in grain-eating societies:
a. Mankind shrank in height from lack of adequate protein.
b. Diseases of “modern civilization,” such as heart attacks, first appeared.
c. Obesity first became apparent.”
That’s a pretty good argument for a non-wheat diet, in my opinion.
Alright, now we’re talking!
This is good stuff and I read these same arguments in the links you posted yesterday. I like the reasoning behind some of it, but I’m not convinced by many of the arguments due to a lack of scientific evidence to support them.
First things first. The statement that grains didn’t exist 10,000 years ago is fallacious. Humans didn’t cultivate them at the time, but they did exist although not in the forms they do today. When humans became agrarian they learned to selectively breed the existing grains to come up with the ones we have today.
OK now the arguments,
a. As a person who is short in stature I have never cared for the argument that humans shrinking was a bad thing. It may just be that the smaller body was better equipped to handle the rigors of the farming life and hence was selected as humans chose to farm. There is also no proof that the shrinkage (which definitely seemed to happen) was caused by a lack of protein. That kind of data is hard to extract from fossils. As a side note: Show me where in the animal kingdom that the shrinking of a species over time has hindered it. It is not necessarily the case that taller is better or even more evolved.
b. With the fossil record being the only data we have on early civilizations this statement cannot be proven. How does this person know that heart attacks didn’t occur 10,000 years ago in humans? To prove that statement you would need either ancient heart tissue or anecdotal evidence. That tissue doesn’t exist and unfortunately earlier civilizations couldn’t have reported on causes of death because they didn’t know about those things. Pure speculation.
c. There’s little doubt that humans have gotten progressively more obese over time and that has been proven with data from fossils. To blame it all on the type of food consumed is short-sighted though. Yes, grains provide a lot of empty calories and should not be a primary part of anyone’s diet, but people have become less and less active over those millennia too. Farmers have discovered ways of increasing the energy stored in their crops while also decreasing the amount of physical labor it takes to grow them. That spells disaster especially when you consider that most people don’t even farm anymore!
Like I said, I’m not completely swayed by the arguments for a no-wheat diet but I’m certainly reconsidering my intake of grains. Some of the reading you’ve sent me has been fascinating stuff, thanks Holly. I promise I won’t continue to clog up your blog with this stuff.
Please, Larry, I’m thrilled to have comments, and especially from someone with a science background who can argue everything I’m posting here.
First, I think he says that grains were introduced into human diet 10,000 years ago.
a. Good point. Shrinkage is not necessarily a bad thing, though IF it is due to grain consumption (among other diet changes), that is still kind of freaky.
b. I agree.
c. Clearly, obesity has to do with 1. diet and 2. lack of exercise. Which is why I like that the Zone guy (Barry Sears) makes it clear in his books that exercise is important. And, if I remember correctly, he also recommends meditation. Which is a nice holistic recommendation for good health.
In any case, because this is an important issue for me, I’m going t0 keep researching and I’ll post what I find here on this blog.
Thanks again for your comments!!
Hey Holly,
Glad my comments aren’t making you wish you didn’t know me.
Yup, I agree that grains were introduced into the human diet around 10,000 years ago. The statement you posted earlier said something else which is why I jumped at it.
In the literature you provided I was particularly struck by the notion that humans were not meant to eat grain. On the surface I totally agree with this statement and it’s easy to prove with so many people still not being tolerant of grain 10,000 years after its introduction into the diet. Where I disagree is with the statements that follow which blame the consumption of grain for essentially all of humanity’s ails. I haven’t seen any medical data that supports these claims, just speculations.
They’re very clever conclusions and I was initially in full agreement until I sat back and thought about it for a while. How would nature allow farmers to succeed over hunter/gatherers if the former group was so weakened by their consumption of grains? It doesn’t make sense. Also, how is it that the average human lifespan (let’s not talk quality of life because that’s a different story) has increased since the hunter/gatherer times if we’re continuously poisoning ourselves with grains? The human body will eventually learn to cope with grain but it’ll probably take many thousands of years. In the meantime I’m still going to eat my bread, but I may cut down a little. I’m learning a lot here!
I’m not familiar with “The Zone.” Could you send me some info about it?
The consumption of grain is probably not responsible for essentially all of humanity’s ails. Clearly the average human diet has gone from bad to worse over the years, especially in the past fifty or so. I don’t think grain is the greatest, though if we’re going to talk about junk food, HFCS is most likely far worse than grain consumption. And the average American gets a LOT of HFCS in their diet.
So how did the average human lifespan increase over the years with all this grain consumption? One one hand, we’ve probably been slowly adapting. On the other hand, some aspect of Western medicine may have helped in recent years (though I can’t quite think of what at this moment). Though you mention quality of life, which is not exactly the greatest during at least the last ten years for the average American.
Again, like you said, we’ll definitely adapt to not only grains but the rest of the junk we’ve been eating…though it will clearly take a while.
The Zone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_diet) is a diet developed by biochemist Barry Sears (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Sears). A doctor/friend recommended it to me back in 2006, and I started it after getting my first book, A Week in the Zone (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_10?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=a+week+in+the+zone&sprefix=a+week+in+).
I felt like I had a lot more energy after getting on this system (let me clarify I had never been on a diet before and didn’t get on it to lose weight, I just thought it sounded healthy), mainly because it forced me to eat smaller, more frequent meals. Before the Zone, I had the bad habit of going far too long between meals, then stuffing myself once I finally sat down to eat.
I have also seen people with really bad acid reflux experience full relief from their problems on the Zone.
Take a look at it, and see what you think. The book I linked to is a short, quick read. He has a whole series of books on the subject, but I think this one is the best. It’s got all the basics.
Enjoy!