An interesting take on the book.
In the comments section, he goes on to say other studies the book used were incorrectly stated also.
I would read the blog if the author were as cute as Denise Minger.
Whatever. It’s up to the individual to determine if they’re reactive to wheat products. I know for a fact whole wheat fucks me up.
I trust the testimonies of the N=1 participants more than people who critique scientific literature.
The hard part about scientific studies is that they often leave out very valuable information about the control variables. For example, in these studies were there other foods that were consumed that could have prevented weight loss - what was their alcohol, fructose, lactose, and omega 6 intake like?
We cannot just look at the effects of one chemical in the body but how each chemical works or interferes with each other and the body’s processes.
There is no such thing as a “one size fits all” diet. We all have our own tolerances to certain toxins.
N=1 is all that matters.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
N=1 is all that matters.[/quote]
For the individual yes, to make broad recommendations, probably not. Don’t get me wrong, I hate wheat as much as anyone on these boards, but after the hoopla has died down, we must realize the answers to most things tend to lie in the middle somewhere.
That and anonym’s replies in previous thread cast some credibility issues on the book. Again though, IMO Americans would greatly improve their health by cutting down if not eliminating wheat from their diet.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
I would read the blog if the author were as cute as Denise Minger.[/quote]
You sir are a correct
call me crazy, but ive been eating pasta and bread lately (wheat omgosh!) and feel better than when i was on a gluten free diet. c-razy.
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
call me crazy, but ive been eating pasta and bread lately (wheat omgosh!) and feel better than when i was on a gluten free diet. c-razy.[/quote]
just the excitotoxins 
Those are just the opioids messing with your mind. 
I feel warm and fuzzy too when I eat pasta but it always hurts (in my gut) 24 to 48 hours later when I have abstained from wheat and no longer feel the opioid effect.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
call me crazy, but ive been eating pasta and bread lately (wheat omgosh!) and feel better than when i was on a gluten free diet. c-razy.[/quote]
just the excitotoxins :D[/quote]
LOL. i still laugh at the fact that the author related the “wheat high” to opiates. i dont understand how somebody buys that nonsense.
Not opiates. Opioids.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Not opiates. Opioids.
The separated peptides were tested for opioid-like activity by competitive binding to opioid receptor sites in rat brain tissue in the presence of tritium-labeled dihydromorphine.
i dont know if the author used this study as an example in the book, but note the bold portion. do you have dihydromorphine in your system when you consume wheat? cause i know i dont.
No this experiment showed that peptides compete for space in the opioid receptor cites with tritium-labeled dihydromorphine meaning they have the same opioid-like effects. Even without competition they would take up those same receptor cites.
“The peptides showed considerable differences in activity; while some peptides exhibited no activity, 0.5 mg of the most active peptides were equivalent to 1 nM of morphine in the binding assay. The most active peptides were derived from the gliadin fraction of the gluten complex.”
Don’t forget the effect that high carbohydrate foods tend to increase serotonin (the happy neurotransmitter) levels!
And regarding the blog post - it may be very well likely that Davis took some liberties (or perhaps made some errors in his recounting) with regards to certain studies; however does this equate to disregarding his ENTIRE message within the book? I don’t think so…
[quote]hungryone wrote:
Don’t forget the effect that high carbohydrate foods tend to increase serotonin (the happy neurotransmitter) levels!
And regarding the blog post - it may be very well likely that Davis took some liberties (or perhaps made some errors in his recounting) with regards to certain studies; however does this equate to disregarding his ENTIRE message within the book? I don’t think so…[/quote]
It damn sure means it isn’t the Holy Grail of nutrition.
I don’t eat much bread at all just because I don’t like it. I get it on a hamburger bun or on a pizza, but that is about it…but I do not believe in the “avoid all gluten” fanatic club.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]hungryone wrote:
Don’t forget the effect that high carbohydrate foods tend to increase serotonin (the happy neurotransmitter) levels!
And regarding the blog post - it may be very well likely that Davis took some liberties (or perhaps made some errors in his recounting) with regards to certain studies; however does this equate to disregarding his ENTIRE message within the book? I don’t think so…[/quote]
It damn sure means it isn’t the Holy Grail of nutrition.
I don’t eat much bread at all just because I don’t like it. I get it on a hamburger bun or on a pizza, but that is about it…but I do not believe in the “avoid all gluten” fanatic club. [/quote]
blah blah blah cheeseburger blah blah blah… we get it dude
[quote]hungryone wrote:
Don’t forget the effect that high carbohydrate foods tend to increase serotonin (the happy neurotransmitter) levels!
And regarding the blog post - it may be very well likely that Davis took some liberties (or perhaps made some errors in his recounting) with regards to certain studies; however does this equate to disregarding his ENTIRE message within the book? I don’t think so…[/quote]
I love getting high, but this blog still made me think.
While I never thought of wheat or grains as unhealthy gluten free nuts did push me to believe that cutting it out would make me drop weight. I just wondered why everybody I know looked the same months later. He did point out that several other studies listed were false too but he didn’t feel like addressing the whole list.
What is the ENTIRE message?
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
[quote]hungryone wrote:
Don’t forget the effect that high carbohydrate foods tend to increase serotonin (the happy neurotransmitter) levels!
And regarding the blog post - it may be very well likely that Davis took some liberties (or perhaps made some errors in his recounting) with regards to certain studies; however does this equate to disregarding his ENTIRE message within the book? I don’t think so…[/quote]
I love getting high, but this blog still made me think.
While I never thought of wheat or grains as unhealthy gluten free nuts did push me to believe that cutting it out would make me drop weight. I just wondered why everybody I know looked the same months later. He did point out that several other studies listed were false too but he didn’t feel like addressing the whole list.
What is the ENTIRE message? [/quote]
Well unfortunately weight and fat loss doesn’t have a single “magical” cure… Though cutting out grains and gluten is definitely a step in the positive direction. And just because a food is gluten free, doesn’t mean it won’t make you fat - take potatoes for example; very high in starches with a high glycemic index.
Anyways, Davis’ message is that you should limit, if not eliminate grains from your diet. Not just for weight loss, but for a myriad of other health related reasons.
Ultimately it comes down to being a very personal thing (as many people have mentioned). Some will get great results from it. Other will cut out breads and pastas, but still eat things with hidden gluten sources, and claim that going gluten-free does nothing. Still others will need to address different issues with weight loss (ie. insulin or cortisol, for example).
The sad truth is, there’s no easy answer to weight loss. If there was a solution that worked for everyone, we’d have found it by now. Weight loss is a puzzle, of which, going gluten free seems to be a large piece.
I just realized most people who call themselves gluten free still eat shitty “gluten free” products that are made of processed crap.
Gluten avoidance is only one aspect of a healthy diet. Removing it and not replacing it with “gluten free” substitutes should be a disclaimer.
[quote]
“The peptides showed considerable differences in activity; while some peptides exhibited no activity, 0.5 mg of the most active peptides were equivalent to 1 nM of morphine in the binding assay. The most active peptides were derived from the gliadin fraction of the gluten complex.”[/quote]
1nM = 1 x 10^-9 M.
Morphine has a molar mass of 285.34 g/mol; this means that every .5mg of the “most active peptides” are equivalent to .28534 x 10^-6 grams (.0002834 mg) morphine.
Let us assume a high-end estimate of 65.4 mg/g gliadin in wheat, per:
From this, we see that every gram of wheat has the “hit” of (65.4/.5x.0002834 = ) .037mg of morphine.
Now, assuming a typical starting dose of 5mg (po) q4h for morphine (drugs.com), we see that 5/.037 = 135g wheat in the “best case scenario” (i.e., all gliadin are the “most active peptides”) will elicit this “high”.
135/56 = 2.4 servings of spaghetti to achieve this (extremely modest) effect. 14.4 servings per day to achieve the total dose (almost two boxes of spaghetti).
Now, I know for a fact that no one has actually read this study, so I won’t be getting any details as to what the “realistic” breakdown for these gliadin peptides are; so, let’s assume it’s .34 “no activity”, .33 “some activity”, and .33 “high activity”.
Let’s define “some activity” as half as potent as “high activity”.
We then modify our equation so that (65.4x.33/.5x.0002834 = ) .0122mg morphine from the “most activity” peptides and (.0122mg/2 = ) .006mg from the “some activity” ones.
For every gram of wheat, this gives the “hit” of .0122 + .006 = .0182mg morphine.
We now need (5/.0182 =) 274g wheat – 5 servings – to achieve this effect, even with the (still generous) estimations.
Now, if we consider the graph I posted on page one of the “Ain’t So Bad! … for Real?” thread, and see that the average per capita wheat consumption in the US is ~750 kcal, we conclude that the Average Joe gets about (750x100/1096 = ) .68 x 5 = 3.5mg opioid activity per capita per day.
Once we factor in tolerance (innate and acquired), we see that this opioid activity is trivial even as a single dose… over the course of a day, it is almost nonsensical to even pretend it is an issue.
As well, when we consider that that graph I posted was said to be food “availability” rather than “consumption”, the realistic opioid intake for the typical American plummets even further, and then even more so when we keep in mind that our gliadin/gram content was the highest-end estimate from the posted study.
I’ll find something else to lose sleep over tonight.