[ddjembe mutombo]

Living in Denver, I know exactly how he feels when joking that consuming gluten is similar to being viewed as a Satanist. I've known gluten is a protein found in grain products for quite some time. However, I guarantee you that the majority of my friends and acquaintances that participate in a gluten free diet have no idea what it actually is.

Celiacs is the medically proven intolerance to gluten and it affects only 1 of every 141 people.

I personally don't believe in "gluten sensitivity" because I believe in the incredible power that our brain possess over our body (If we sincerely believe we are sensitive to something, then our body will follow suit after our thoughts).

Any thoughts on this rapidly growing fad diet & sensitivity?


EDIT: Goddammit. Typo in the title... should be Kimmle. He isn't a cop you idiot!

[Basil Ransom]

Say someone thinks broccoli is the devil, a poison unfit for human consumption. They go on to assiduously avoid eating it. If it works for them, why should I give a fuck that they aren't eating broccoli?

But no, now we have people reacting to the gluten free trend, in a gambit to show what a brilliant skeptic they are.

Even if there was no issue with gluten, a commitment to eating whole foods paired with an elimination of wheat from your diet will almost always result in you eating healthier and losing weight if you're fat.

I hate the term gluten free. No one even knew what gluten was five years ago, aside from a tiny minority of people. Just say wheat free. Me, I don't eat wheat.

[cooledcannon]

Imo gluten containing foods really arent that natural. Meat, fruit and vegetables have been eaten forever, animals also eat them too, while grains are only really made for food during agriculture.

[weambulance]

(05-07-2014 07:07 PM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  

Say someone thinks broccoli is the devil, a poison unfit for human consumption. They go on to assiduously avoid eating it. If it works for them, why should I give a fuck that they aren't eating broccoli?

Should you care? No. What does get pretty god damn annoying is when they proselytize, which in my experience is very common with fad diet zealots. I am a live and let live kind of guy; I really don't give a shit what anyone else does if it's not hurting other people. In return, I ask that people stop telling me how to live my life. That's why I ignore 99% of the world now: it's mostly just assholes trying to tell me what I'm doing wrong.

My problem with the gluten free people who don't have celiac is the common expectation that I accommodate their weirdness. Same deal with vegetarians. I don't hang out with people like that generally, because it means something as simple as getting a meal becomes a big fucking deal. I'm mostly talking about the people who let being "gluten free" or "paleo" become an important part of their identity. They're people who don't have much else going on in their lives, so bending a dietary preference is taboo because it, like, violates who they are, man!

[komatiite]

This map shows prevalence of Celiac across the world. At the end of the day, it's surprisingly common in Caucasians.


http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/807727

A hidden benefit behind those people who go gluten free as part of some 'fad' diet is that restaurants will start providing GF options for those people, which in turn provides a restaurant option for people who actually suffer from the disease.

[Veloce]

Just watched that bit earlier today, pretty funny.

Once had a woman inform the kitchen that she was allergic to glucose. You know, that stuff your body metabolizes for brain function.

[TigerMandingo]

(05-07-2014 09:10 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

Just watched that bit earlier today, pretty funny.

Once had a woman inform the kitchen that she was allergic to glucose. You know, that stuff your body metabolizes for brain function.

Lol. thedude I cant even imagine the kind of crazy BS requests you get from customers.

[Basil Ransom]

I'd rather be someone taking action about my life that's fuzzy on the details than be the keyboard jockey taking pot shots from the sidelines. Would you rather look like those men interviewed, or the average man? Besides, knowing what gluten is irrelevant. You don't need to know the number of protons in an atom of mercury to realize that consuming foods with it is a bad idea.

The only thing you need to know is gluten = wheat, and therefore gluten free means avoiding wheat. I get fat fucks at the office questioning me about what I eat all the time, but at the end of the day, i'd rather look like the dudes pictured than Jimmy Kimmel - who is slim today apparently, but he may return to his fatter self, who knows.

PS: OP hating on people for not knowing something irrelevant and then making the same mistake twice.

[bounce]

So, what is the deal with gluten (wheat)? Should I avoid it even though I'm not gluten intolerant?

I see how it could be more harmful than meats, fruits, vegetables because it must be processed before it can be consumed.

whats the damn verdict?

[TigerMandingo]

(05-07-2014 06:29 PM)ddjembe mutombo Wrote:  

EDIT: Goddammit. Typo in the title... should be Kimmle. He isn't a cop you idiot!

Kindergarten Cop reference. Sweet.

[Swedreams]

(05-07-2014 11:39 PM)bounce Wrote:  

So, what is the deal with gluten (wheat)? Should I avoid it even though I'm not gluten intolerant?

I see how it could be more harmful than meats, fruits, vegetables because it must be processed before it can be consumed.

whats the damn verdict?

Gluten are some proteins found in wheat, barley and rye. While the processed foods made from wheat etc. can be unhealthy (donuts, pizza, wonder bread), gluten itself is not bad for you unless you have celiac disease.

So you might be eating healthier cutting out wheat based products, but if you trade your donuts for gluten free donuts; all you get is a way more expensive, worse tasting processed product with the same nutritional value.

http://www.webmd.com/diet/healthy-kitche...out-gluten

[ddjembe mutombo]

(05-07-2014 07:53 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

My problem with the gluten free people who don't have celiac is the common expectation that I accommodate their weirdness. Same deal with vegetarians. I don't hang out with people like that generally, because it means something as simple as getting a meal becomes a big fucking deal. I'm mostly talking about the people who let being "gluten free" or "paleo" become an important part of their identity. They're people who don't have much else going on in their lives, so bending a dietary preference is taboo because it, like, violates who they are, man!

My personal favorite are the people that don't even know how limited their diet is. Denver is practically a beer mecca. We also have a ton of gluten-free diet people around the center of the city. That creates a quite humorous combination. There is nothing like eavesdropping in on another table at a restaurant and hearing them discuss being gluten-intolerant (or even ordering a gluten free pizza crust) immediately followed with them ordering a Titan IPA or some other local craft beer.

It's funny how those with celiacs wish they could consume gluten, and those on the gluten-free diet wish they had celiacs so they had a real reason to avoid gluten.

(05-08-2014 06:13 AM)Swedreams Wrote:  

So you might be eating healthier cutting out wheat based products, but if you trade your donuts for gluten free donuts; all you get is a way more expensive, worse tasting processed product with the same nutritional value.

That hit the nail on the head with what is whacky about the gluten free diet.

[Bad Hussar]

If your allergy isn't confirmed by the standard pinpricks on the arm test that doctors perform, you aren't allergic to whatever you imagine you are. If you avoid some particular food and it works for you that's great, but don't debase language by calling it an allergy.

Peanuts is the other food devil of the moment. For the older guys here think back to your childhood. How many of your friends and classmates where allergic to peanuts? If you're like me you'd answer practically none, or even none. I can't actually remember a single friend or classmate who had a peanut allergy. A couple who had other food allergies, but never peanuts. But now, a couple of decades later supposedly, I don't know, 20% of children in some upper middle class suburbs are supposedly allergic to peanuts and could go into anaphalactic shock if eating half a peanut. I simply don't believe it. Their mothers are just ticking a box on a form because it's fashionable.

[weambulance]

I believe one theory regarding increased incidents of peanut allergies is that paranoid parents who don't expose their kids to peanuts at a young age (<3 years old) are increasing the chances of said kids developing the allergy. It makes sense to me that if kids are raised like hot house plants they'll be fragile.

I'm in my late 20s and I didn't know many people with significant allergies or other weird problems growing up, but it seems like all the kids just 3-4 years younger than me are very delicate, with all sorts of conditions to worry about. I could give many guesses as to why... The biggest problem I'd guess is kids stopped spending so much time outside as computer games and the internet really took off in the late 90s. I honestly feel like there is a huge cultural gulf between people my age (28) and the 23-24 year olds I've worked with, and I think it comes down to rapidly changing technology in 90s and early 00s. Ubiquitous cell phones, the internet explosion, etc. all fundamentally changed the way they learned to communicate and what activities they enjoyed as kids compared to my childhood and adolescence.

[MidniteSpecial]

Read the book 'grain brain' and 'wheat belly'. They most definitely do have an affect on everyone.

[Tail Gunner]

(05-08-2014 01:26 PM)MidniteSpecial Wrote:  

Read the book 'grain brain' and 'wheat belly'. They most definitely do have an affect on everyone.

An amazing amount of ignorance displayed in this thread. I am just finishing reading "Grain Brain," a book written by Dr. Perlmutter, who is the only doctor in the United States who is both a board-certified neurologist and a fellow of the American Board of Nutrition. So, he is both a medical doctor and a nutrition expert. (Most doctors are lucky to have taken a single basic nutrition course by the time that they graduate from medical school).

The scientifically documented stories of people cured of serious disease simply by doing nothing more than eliminating gluten is amazing. Things like serious cases of Tourette's syndrome, with uncontrollable tics and grunting noises, literally cured within days of beginning a gluten free diet.

In terms of producing the greatest surge in blood sugar, eating a slice of wheat bread or white bread is worse that eating a tablespoon of white sugar or a Snickers Bar! Yes, you read that right. It is documented in the book (on page 66). I can hear the thundering echo from your minds being blown. That is why gluten is a huge public health threat that will create a tremendous future increase in diabetes cases.

This stuff is no joke. Read this book. It is one of the best health-related books that I have read in awhile.

[cooledcannon]

(05-09-2014 12:05 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

In terms of producing the greatest surge in blood sugar, eating a slice of wheat bread or white bread is worse that eating a tablespoon of white sugar or a Snickers Bar!

To be fair, a slice of bread is quite a lot bigger, so it shouldnt be too surprising, if you know gluten is bad.

[weambulance]

(05-09-2014 12:05 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 01:26 PM)MidniteSpecial Wrote:  

Read the book 'grain brain' and 'wheat belly'. They most definitely do have an affect on everyone.

An amazing amount of ignorance displayed in this thread. I am just finishing reading "Grain Brain," a book written by Dr. Perlmutter, who is the only doctor in the United States who is both a board-certified neurologist and a fellow of the American Board of Nutrition. So, he is both a medical doctor and a nutrition expert. (Most doctors are lucky to have taken a single basic nutrition course by the time that they graduate from medical school).

The scientifically documented stories of people cured of serious disease simply by doing nothing more than eliminating gluten is amazing. Things like serious cases of Tourette's syndrome, with uncontrollable tics and grunting noises, literally cured within days of beginning a gluten free diet.

In terms of producing the greatest surge in blood sugar, eating a slice of wheat bread or white bread is worse that eating a tablespoon of white sugar or a Snickers Bar! Yes, you read that right. It is documented in the book (on page 66). I can hear the thundering echo from your minds being blown. That is why gluten is a huge public health threat that will create a tremendous future increase in diabetes cases.

This stuff is no joke. Read this book. It is one of the best health-related books that I have read in awhile.

I haven't read the book yet, but I'll probably take a look when I have time.

However... here's the fundamental problem with most dietary advice. Beyond the obvious fact that the nutrition experts change their advice and dire warnings every 5 years (including many 180 degree turns), there really aren't any proper studies to cite that I've ever seen. Oh, we can look at anecdotal data and find various correlations, but they're not scientifically rigorous studies.

I'm a scientist. I'm not a nutritionist or a doctor but I know how to do solid, rigorous research. There are serious ethical issues involved in doing medical studies on humans, because what do you do if your experimental group gets screwed up over your 15 year study? Besides that, there are nontrivial logistical issues. Do you just stick people in a compound for the length of the study and monitor their every move? Obviously not, because even if you did it would affect the validity of the study! So the scientists have to rely on self reporting, not direct observation, which is a major source of error. It obviously also becomes very difficult to conduct double blind studies on real humans. This is why so much medical research is done on animals, because it can be conducted in a much shorter period of time with much more control. There are a bunch of other problems but you get the idea.

So, when people come out and make blanket statements like wheat is bad and it fucks you up, I just roll my eyes. The only rational approach to nutrition is to pay attention to your diet and how it affects you, personally. There is no one size fits all solution, because there is so much variation within the human population. What works like magic for one person (steak and eggs diet, for instance) can make another person feel like shit and develop heart disease.

I personally feel my best when I avoid simple sugars and eat a lot of meat, fats, greens, and fruit. I am not paleo, and I do eat wheat about once a week. I love homemade pizza, and I'm not going to make my pizza on a god damn zucchini crust. I break all kinds of dietary "rules" pushed by "experts" and I somehow still remain very healthy. Why is my anecdote not worth just as much as the guy who was cured of Tourette's by cutting out gluten?

[Tail Gunner]

(05-09-2014 12:56 AM)weambulance Wrote:  

Why is my anecdote not worth just as much as the guy who was cured of Tourette's by cutting out gluten?

Because you are healthy and would be trying to prove a negative. What does that prove?

Someone who has been to numerous doctors and been diagnosed with a serious illness, who was then cured within a matter of days (when the only behavioral change was not eating gluten) is not an anecdote, but a specific case study where only a single variable was changed.

A case study is a commonly accepted scientific methodology. It is defined as "a descriptive, exploratory or explanatory analysis of a person, group or event." It is used all the time in the medical field.

[weambulance]

(05-09-2014 01:20 AM)Tail Gunner Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:56 AM)weambulance Wrote:  

Why is my anecdote not worth just as much as the guy who was cured of Tourette's by cutting out gluten?

Because you are healthy and would be trying to prove a negative. What does that prove?

Someone who has been to numerous doctors and been diagnosed with a serious illness, who was then cured within a matter of days (when the only behavioral change was not eating gluten) is not an anecdote, but a specific case study where only a single variable was changed.

A case study is a commonly accepted scientific methodology. It is defined as "a descriptive, exploratory or explanatory analysis of a person, group or event." It is used all the time in the medical field.

Er... so you're saying we should let outliers dictate common practice? That is, quite literally, insane.

I'm an earth scientist. I use geochemistry to find ore deposits by geostatistical analysis of rock samples. I see outliers regularly. You know what I do with them? I toss them out. Outliers have no statistical significance. That doesn't change just because we're talking about medicine, not geology. If doctors use outliers as more than last ditch, "why not try this because we are stumped" tools, then I have absolute confidence in saying they have a poor grasp of statistics and science in general. Doctors use case studies because rigorous medical research isn't logistically or ethically possible, not because case studies are actually a substitute for said research.

You know what other kinds of outliers there are? People who just get better from severe diseases for no apparent reason. Maybe we should just stop treating cancer patients because 0.001% of cancer patients miraculously go into remission without treatment?

"That is why gluten is a huge public health threat that will create a tremendous future increase in diabetes cases."

Really? Humans have been eating wheat for thousands of years. What are the differences between today and 100 years ago? People are fat as fuck, sedentary, and live a lot longer. I'm gonna go ahead and say those factors are a heck of a lot more relevant than gluten when it comes to type 2 diabetes. Gluten doesn't make people fat. Overeating crappy processed food and sitting on the couch watching mind numbing reality TV for 30 or 40 years does.

I just took the type 2 diabetes risk test at the American Diabetes Association website. It didn't ask me one question about what I eat, hmm...

Edited for typos.

[Benoit]

It's all well and good to say "nutritionists have discovered a miracle cure - and it's related to food!" but I'm sure there are also surgeons out there looking for what they can take a scalpel to in order to 'cure' diabetes and food intolerance.

The ancient Greeks had pretty good anecdotal records of the gods curing people of many illnesses. Strangely the gods never reattached severed limbs though.

When all you have is a hammer...

[Basil Ransom]

"I personally feel my best when I avoid simple sugars and eat a lot of meat, fats, greens, and fruit. I am not paleo, and I do eat wheat about once a week. "

Lol. Functionally speaking, you are gluten free yourself, as much as you'd like to fight the label. A typical American has several servings of wheat a DAY - toast or a donut in the morning, a sandwich for lunch, pizza for dinner. They're consuming 20x the wheat you are.

"What are the differences between today and 100 years ago? People are fat as fuck, sedentary, and live a lot longer. "

Activity levels havent changed much in the past couple decades while we have gotten much fatter over the same period.

Everyone should try eliminating wheat from their diet and see what happens, and then take note when they reintroduce it. Massive amounts of people would just stop or severely curtail their wheat consumption.

[weambulance]

(05-09-2014 08:47 AM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  

"I personally feel my best when I avoid simple sugars and eat a lot of meat, fats, greens, and fruit. I am not paleo, and I do eat wheat about once a week. "

Lol. Functionally speaking, you are gluten free yourself, as much as you'd like to fight the label. A typical American has several servings of wheat a DAY - toast or a donut in the morning, a sandwich for lunch, pizza for dinner. They're consuming 20x the wheat you are.

"What are the differences between today and 100 years ago? People are fat as fuck, sedentary, and live a lot longer. "

Activity levels havent changed much in the past couple decades while we have gotten much fatter over the same period.

Everyone should try eliminating wheat from their diet and see what happens, and then take note when they reintroduce it. Massive amounts of people would just stop or severely curtail their wheat consumption.

As much as I'd like to fight the label? I don't label myself that way, period, because I think it's fucking retarded to use my dietary preferences to define myself. Somehow what I eat doesn't seem all that important compared with my list of accomplishments, experience, conquests, values, skills, and interests.

You say activity levels haven't changed much in the last few decades. I'm going to call bullshit on that, because I know within my own lifetime kids went from playing outside every day and being very active to being couch potatoes. I addressed that in a previous post. If people are active and not overeating, Diabolical Dr. Gluten isn't going to make them fat. As recently as 5 years ago I ate half a loaf of bread a day in sandwiches and I was built and cut, because I lifted weights and rowed 12 to 30 km every day. Lately, I went through a sedentary period of about 6 months and barely ate any gluten at all (less than now, in fact) but still put on 30 pounds. Too bad I can't just point my finger at Big Wheat and absolve myself of my guilt over my fat belly!

And that, my friends, is one of my major issues with the gluten debate. People are using gluten as a scapegoat to excuse their own laziness. Yes, for some people gluten is a problem. For the overwhelmingly vast majority, gluten is a nonissue compared to the hours they spend watching American Idol and Househunters instead of getting outside and doing anything at all active.

Look, I'm not saying going gluten free isn't useful for people. I could go into why it's a useful psychological tool to enable them to change, but I'm not really in the mood. That doesn't mean going gluten free is a miracle cure from a nutritional standpoint.

All I've been saying all along is blanket statements about nutrition are meaningless, and that people should do what works for them. I really do not see how people can take issue with such a statement. Yet, people continue to argue with me. Fascinating.

I'm about to leave for the weekend to go be manly in the woods, shoot guns, fish, split wood, etc, so I'm done with this debate. Take it easy.

[TigerMandingo]

As for that bit about a slice of wheat bread being a horrible food choice, I think you need to differentiate between that shitty Wonderbread, cotton candy-textured garbage that most North Americans consume and REAL bread that you can get from your local bakery etc. Look at France. Those bastards consume more baguettes than anyone else and are doing just fine health-wise. Im guessin theres several factors at work there but you get the idea.

PS. Im no scientist and this is all based on observation.

[rottenapple]

@Weambulance: You are right that scientifically speaking nutrition and diet is a tough subject due to the way studies are done and the limited knowledge about digestion and the gut in general. However the fact that it is not scientifically proven, does not mean it is not valid, only that within the scientifical framework so far it is hard or impossible to prove. Nevertheless many books do give scientific background, some have been mentioned, so I believe it is not just a fad. There is some data behind it and that data will increase.

You mention that it is useless to discuss about these things as there is no one solution for all. I disagree, these days with statistics you can easily differentiate between groups and find strong and valuable correlations which do give you a broad idea. A lot of nutritional advice (when done right) is based on that, correlations of effects in specific groups of the population. Is it a double blind meta study? No. Can it have value? Yes.

'Really? Humans have been eating wheat for thousands of years. What are the differences between today and 100 years ago? People are fat as fuck, sedentary, and live a lot longer. I'm gonna go ahead and say those factors are a heck of a lot more relevant than gluten when it comes to type 2 diabetes. Gluten doesn't make people fat. Overeating crappy processed food and sitting on the couch watching mind numbing reality TV for 30 or 40 years does.'

Don't forget the fact that wheat now is a lot different from wheat a 100 years ago due to genetic modifications. This is one of the main arguments in 'wheat belly'. Indeed the original wheat was just a normal food, it is the fact that it changes so much which makes it hard to digest causing problems within the body. So yes gluten does make you fat most likely. Processed food as well. And sitting on the coach too. Dont think sitting in the couch and not eating right are not interrelated though, but you already know that. When I eat a bunch of gluten, I lose all energy and then I go sit in the couch.

'All I've been saying all along is blanket statements about nutrition are meaningless, and that people should do what works for them. I really do not see how people can take issue with such a statement. Yet, people continue to argue with me. Fascinating.'

You call them blanket statements because they are not scientific. Only you utilize a narrow view on what is science I believe, strong correlations are indications and are to be taken into account as well as argued before. People should do what works for them. Yes correct. That is not an easy thing to figure out though, it took me years to realize that a big part of my health problem was gluten (i am not celiac btw). Food is a difficult matter, I can only applaud decent attemps of general media to clarify the impact of food.

And indeed it is a bit ironic that you are eating more gluten free probably than 95% of the Western population :-) and feel in great shape, but good for you nonetheless.