Paleo / Gluten Free Diets

pattyproulx

OMG, unless you have a medically diagnosed condition, DO NOT go gluten free. It is unhealthy and unnecessary. As someone who has to be gluten free, it makes me want to punch people who hop on the gluten free fad diet band wagon. You will get fat, and you will deserve it.

I'd love to hear how going gluten-free is not healthy. I can entertain arguments about gluten not harming one's health and about being perfectly healthy while eating gluten; however, I can't possibly understand how anyone could believe that I am harming my health by not eating gluten.

I've been Primal/Paleo for 3 years now and do not plan on going back to eating grains (note: I'm not religious about it and I'll cheat once in a while, but grains will never be part of my daily diet). I also don't seem to have much intolerance to them as many do, but I just feel better and maintain my weight better without it.

Bumbeen

Wheat is not even edible by humans without excessive processing by the way. The more refined grains are the better they are for you simply because they become less and less the plant and more just a simple carbohydrate. There are not enough vitamins in them in the first place to speak of. If you wanted vitamins in your food you would eat offal and tubers not whole wheat and corn.

Wheat grains are not edible without excessive processing? So why on earth would man begin farming and eating it? Are you getting this 'information' from commercial diet books or published meta analyses and longitudinal population studies?

I don''t eat or recommend wheat, white potato or corn/ maize to nutrition clients for the vitamin content, don't actually know any healthcare professional who does. What a bizarre and misleading statement. How do you know whether I do or do not eat whole wheat, corn, tubers or offal?

Let me apologize. I wasn't trying to say that I knew what you consumed. Man began farming and eating wheat because it was a source of food, not because it was easy to process. It saved millions of lives from starvation and famine. However, If you go try to eat raw wheat you will puke your guts out. The stuff has evolved to be difficult to consume by animals.

I'm pretty sure most people would have trouble eating many nuts without first removing the shell. And most prefer bananas and most citrus with the outer layer removed. Quite a few even like to remove the outer layer of meat and eggs before eating. The fact that edible portions are contained within an outer layer that is not edible or palatable is not evidence that the food needs eliminated from the diet.

I didn't say you shouldn't eat it only because the outer layer isn't edible or palatable.

So what was your point re: the whole plant being difficult to consume?

The plant has evolved to be destructive to animals who would try to consume it. This is not the case with things like fruit which use animals to reproduce. Eat berries, go somewhere else, **** the seeds out, good for you good for the plant. Hope this helps.

bcattoes

Wheat is not even edible by humans without excessive processing by the way. The more refined grains are the better they are for you simply because they become less and less the plant and more just a simple carbohydrate. There are not enough vitamins in them in the first place to speak of. If you wanted vitamins in your food you would eat offal and tubers not whole wheat and corn.

Wheat grains are not edible without excessive processing? So why on earth would man begin farming and eating it? Are you getting this 'information' from commercial diet books or published meta analyses and longitudinal population studies?

I don''t eat or recommend wheat, white potato or corn/ maize to nutrition clients for the vitamin content, don't actually know any healthcare professional who does. What a bizarre and misleading statement. How do you know whether I do or do not eat whole wheat, corn, tubers or offal?

Let me apologize. I wasn't trying to say that I knew what you consumed. Man began farming and eating wheat because it was a source of food, not because it was easy to process. It saved millions of lives from starvation and famine. However, If you go try to eat raw wheat you will puke your guts out. The stuff has evolved to be difficult to consume by animals.

I'm pretty sure most people would have trouble eating many nuts without first removing the shell. And most prefer bananas and most citrus with the outer layer removed. Quite a few even like to remove the outer layer of meat and eggs before eating. The fact that edible portions are contained within an outer layer that is not edible or palatable is not evidence that the food needs eliminated from the diet.

I didn't say you shouldn't eat it only because the outer layer isn't edible or palatable.

So what was your point re: the whole plant being difficult to consume?

The plant has evolved to be destructive to animals who would try to consume it. This is not the case with things like fruit which use animals to reproduce. Eat berries, go somewhere else, **** the seeds out, good for you good for the plant. Hope this helps.

Helps with what?

Micahroni84

Hi there - I went gluten free 22 days ago due to medical reasons and feel so much better. I have lost 5lb (not a huge amount but its not been long) but more importantly I have lost the bloated feeling and look. I am far less slugish and people have already noticed. It is hard though. I have been out to eat with me kids a couple of times and not been able to have anything as wall all bread or pasta or sauces that contain gluten. It does take a huge amount of will power and on occasion I have been snappy (I now understand why giving up smoking is so hard!) but for me it wasn't a choice and after 3 weeks I have calmed down and feel so much better.

Not looking six months pregnant anymore was my favorite part of going gluten free. the bloat was so uncomfortable. That and not feeling like im in a fog walking through glue all of the time.

VelociMama

Hi there - I went gluten free 22 days ago due to medical reasons and feel so much better. I have lost 5lb (not a huge amount but its not been long) but more importantly I have lost the bloated feeling and look. I am far less slugish and people have already noticed. It is hard though. I have been out to eat with me kids a couple of times and not been able to have anything as wall all bread or pasta or sauces that contain gluten. It does take a huge amount of will power and on occasion I have been snappy (I now understand why giving up smoking is so hard!) but for me it wasn't a choice and after 3 weeks I have calmed down and feel so much better.

Not looking six months pregnant anymore was my favorite part of going gluten free. the bloat was so uncomfortable. That and not feeling like im in a fog walking through glue all of the time.

My mother has Celiac's disease also, and the same thing happens to her. You may very well have it yourself if this is what is happening to you. There is a genetic link between siblings and parents. If a parent has it, you are more likely to have it. I know it took many years for her to be diagnosed. Celiac's isn't easy to pinpoint.

Micahroni84

Hi there - I went gluten free 22 days ago due to medical reasons and feel so much better. I have lost 5lb (not a huge amount but its not been long) but more importantly I have lost the bloated feeling and look. I am far less slugish and people have already noticed. It is hard though. I have been out to eat with me kids a couple of times and not been able to have anything as wall all bread or pasta or sauces that contain gluten. It does take a huge amount of will power and on occasion I have been snappy (I now understand why giving up smoking is so hard!) but for me it wasn't a choice and after 3 weeks I have calmed down and feel so much better.

Not looking six months pregnant anymore was my favorite part of going gluten free. the bloat was so uncomfortable. That and not feeling like im in a fog walking through glue all of the time.

My mother has Celiac's disease also, and the same thing happens to her. You may very well have it yourself if this is what is happening to you. There is a genetic link between siblings and parents. If a parent has it, you are more likely to have it.

Yes, my doctor just decided to test me for celiacs today after my liver enzymes were bad and my cholesterol were up in my recent blood work even though my cholesterol intake, fat intake and sugar intake on a daily basis are all in a healthy range. a wheat allergy is the next best guess as to why I'm having the bad blood work.

VelociMama

Hi there - I went gluten free 22 days ago due to medical reasons and feel so much better. I have lost 5lb (not a huge amount but its not been long) but more importantly I have lost the bloated feeling and look. I am far less slugish and people have already noticed. It is hard though. I have been out to eat with me kids a couple of times and not been able to have anything as wall all bread or pasta or sauces that contain gluten. It does take a huge amount of will power and on occasion I have been snappy (I now understand why giving up smoking is so hard!) but for me it wasn't a choice and after 3 weeks I have calmed down and feel so much better.

Not looking six months pregnant anymore was my favorite part of going gluten free. the bloat was so uncomfortable. That and not feeling like im in a fog walking through glue all of the time.

My mother has Celiac's disease also, and the same thing happens to her. You may very well have it yourself if this is what is happening to you. There is a genetic link between siblings and parents. If a parent has it, you are more likely to have it.

Yes, my doctor just decided to test me for celiacs today after my liver enzymes were bad and my cholesterol were up in my recent blood work even though my cholesterol intake, fat intake and sugar intake on a daily basis are all in a healthy range. a wheat allergy is the next best guess as to why I'm having the bad blood work.

It's not fun to deal with, but if you can stick to the diet, it is manageable. Good luck to you!

ecw3780

OMG, unless you have a medically diagnosed condition, DO NOT go gluten free. It is unhealthy and unnecessary. As someone who has to be gluten free, it makes me want to punch people who hop on the gluten free fad diet band wagon. You will get fat, and you will deserve it.

I'd love to hear how going gluten-free is not healthy. I can entertain arguments about gluten not harming one's health and about being perfectly healthy while eating gluten; however, I can't possibly understand how anyone could believe that I am harming my health by not eating gluten.

I've been Primal/Paleo for 3 years now and do not plan on going back to eating grains (note: I'm not religious about it and I'll cheat once in a while, but grains will never be part of my daily diet). I also don't seem to have much intolerance to them as many do, but I just feel better and maintain my weight better without it.

Ok, I feel I should have been a little more detailed. A lot of people assume that gluten free food is healthier. For example, gluten free bread vs. real bread. That is what I mean be going gluten free if you aren't gluten intolerant. If you want to limit your grain intake, go for it, just know that real gluten free means 100% removing wheat, rye, and barley from your life. If you just try to avoid grains, that is not the same thing. if you are just eating gluten free products instead of regular packaged food you are throwing money away. They are more expensive and not any healthier for you. The contain less fiber, more calories, and many nutritional voids.

Bumbeen

Helps with what?

I'm just trying to explain that the fact you have to peel something doesn't make it bad for you, but you HAVE to do severe processing to grains in order to keep them from being unhealthy. In fact the only grain I would consider un-harmful is white rice.

caribougal

Haven't had the need as I don't have issues with gluten. If you have gluten issues, then it makes sense to limit or eliminate gluten.

Have you tried eliminating it for a time and the reintroducing it?

No, why would I do such a thing?

It's an N=1 experiment for yourself. I never thought I had gluten issues, and I didn't suffer from any of the common gluten-related ailments like IBS, joint pain, gall-bladder issues, etc. My motivation to eliminate gluten at first was because I wanted to cut out all the stuff I commonly overate... I personally do better with a diet that is more black and white than shades of moderation gray.

Anyway, I was shocked after eliminating gluten to find that when I reintroduced it, I had such a strong reaction to it. Like... in the bathroom for 2 days kind of reaction. I realized that while eating gluten, I probably was always fighting a low-level of gut irritation. When I eliminated it for several months and then reintroduced it, my gut rebelled (or actually, I probably had an onslaught of antibodies race to address those gliadins, which caused inflammation and gastric distress).

Since then, I've learned that I can eat small amounts of gluten without the severe reaction I got at first. I'm fortunate that I don't have to worry about contamination like Celiac-sufferers do, but it has made me think hard about how much I really need/want to have gluten in my life. Is that piece of cake worth it? Is that bread worth it? Is that slice of pizza worth it? Sometimes, in fact, the answer is yes. But most times, it's not. Now that I did my little N=1 experiment, I'm more educated about how my body reacts to things.

Here's another example. Since eating Primal (Paleo + small amounts of dairy), I have discovered that I have a reaction to oils used in restaurants. Probably canola oil, although I'm not 100% sure. But what I know is that I used to get pretty significant chest congestion after eating fast food. Within 5 minutes of finishing a fast food meal, virtually any meal (I never ordered fast food salads), I had a loose, productive cough. It would last for about 30-40 minutes, and go away. I wasn't sure what caused it, but it only ever happened at fast food places. Now that I've eliminated not only fast food, but have eliminated almost anything made with canola or seed oils, I have learned that I now have that congested reaction any time I eat something cooked with oils in any kind of restaurant. I never have that reaction with anything I cook at home with coconut, avocado, or olive oil... only at restaurants where I can't control the type of oils they use. Even nice restaurants. So... not earth shattering, but I wouldn't have known that about myself if I hadn't taken the time to try an elimination protocol.

Anyways... just my input on WHY it's interesting to do an elimination diet (which is essentially what strict Paleo is) every once in a while... you learn about how your body reacts to foods in ways that you might not have noticed before. If nothing happens when you reintroduce gluten, or dairy, or whatever... then great. You've learned something.

You had a reaction because your body has specific enzymes and bacteria to digest certain foods. When you eliminate certain foods like you did, the body stops making those enzymes. Then when you reintroduce the food, you can't properly digest it, and you have a bad reaction to it. The same thing happens to someone who eats meat regularly, then decides to go vegan for a year. After the year they decide to have a nice big steak, and promptly get extremely sick. It's not that meat always made them ill, it's because their body stopped making the necessary enzymes to digest meat because there was no need for it for a year. I'm willing to bet that was your real issue, and you saying that you can eat small amounts with no issue really points to that.

Actually, I agree. What you eat absolutely affects your gut flora. Changing the diet changes the gut flora, and sometimes reintroduction can be a shock. So it's possible that was my issue. It's also just as possible that before, I was living with a constant low-level inflammation due to gluten/gliadin in my gut. When I eliminated it, my antibody production settled down, and then I experienced a more severe inflammation due to increased antibodies when I reintroduced it. Since I didn't measure my IgG antibodies before and after, I won't know.

But here's how I think about it...

1. I may or may not be sensitive to wheat/gluten. If I am, I'm probably subjecting myself to chronic inflammation if I eat it regularly, which over time can cause serious health issues. If I'm not gluten sensitive, I still prefer to avoid grains because...
2. I feel less bloated when I don't eat grains
3. I eat more vegetables in place of the grains
4. Any nutrients, macro or micro, that I might have from grains I can generally get from veg, fruit, or meat in a more nutrient-dense format. More nutrient-dense = usually more filling = less snacking = less chance to go over cal goal.
5. I don't miss eating grains. When there's something I really want, I eat it. Sometimes I enjoy it because it was really worth it. Sometimes I realize that it wasn't that good, and not "worth it" from a calorie/carb standpoint. But because it's pretty rare that I eat grains, I don't feel guilty when I decide to indulge.
6. I'm at high risk for diabetes. I notice a positive affect on my blood sugar stability when I eat lower carb. Eliminating grains helps me lower my carbs. I get plenty of carbs from from fruit and veg.
7. This is probably the biggest one for me. I have trouble moderating my intake when it comes to grains. I never over-consume vegetables or meat, but I very often managed to over-consume carbs, especially grains, resulting in weight gain and cycles of cravings. For me, elimination is easier than moderation. It does not cause me to binge or feel deprived... actually, quite the opposite. I feel more in control of my consumption by eliminating grains (and added sugars) than I ever felt when I tried to moderate my food.

Good luck to all.

bearwith

`whatever you decide to do make sure it is sustainable and good for your long term health. I went on a diet about a decade ago that had long term health implications for my bone density.

It is not a bad thing to reduce your intake of processed gluten in things like shop bought bread, biscuits, cakes etc because they use the cheapest bleached flours. This does not mean that you cannot have cous cous or wholegrain rice.

It is not ideal to cut out all good sources of gluten because the outside of wholegrain has vitamin E and you need that for your skin - vital to keep skin supple when dieting or it will go dry.

Firefox7275

Please don't make me go pull hundreds of links to peer-reviewed journals I really hate doing that and it makes me look like a tool.

I am not a raw food paleo, cooking improves the bioavailability of most foods. You seem to think I eat this way for some philosophical or mystic reasoning that I can't explain. That would not be the case.

If you sprout/soak then they are at least edible, though with various degrees of negative health effects.

Well we are animals, raw wheat can really only be consumed by birds. It makes cows sick, it makes us sick.

I'm asking you to explain and back up your claims, you are refusing to do so, what would you have us think? Again numerous foods are cooked or otherwise prepared before they become edible/ palatable/ safe. Soaking is hardly excessive processing! You don't need to post hundreds of studies, meta analyses and longitudinal population studies will do fine. It doesn't make you look like a tool, I have worked in and studied biological disciplines and have specifically asked for evidence. for the sweeping statements you are making.

Depending on the food and the animal consuming it cooking can make nutrients less bioavailable. There are plenty who hold all domestic cats should be entirely raw fed as their wild and zoo cousins are, cooked diets are less bioavailable they even need supplementing with taurine. If cooking most foods makes nutrients more bioavailable for humans that might suggest we begun evolving and adapting to our new varied diets .... no?

mmapags

So, if one doesn't have to eliminate something to know if it's causing issues, what did you mean by "you don't know if you don't try it. So don't pretend like you know you have no issues with gluten"

What I meant by that statement is you can't say "X doesn't cause me any issues" if you have always eaten X. Maybe it doesn't, but you have no way of knowing that because you've always eaten it.

I don't understand. If you eat X and don't have any issues, then why can't you say "X doesn't cause me any issues"?

Dairy can cause acne, gluten can cause leptin resistance. Maybe it's easier for you to diet down to leanness if you eliminate gluten. But why would you know that if you've always eaten it. I'm saying you could be living with some issue that you think is just genetics but possibly you could resolve it by eliminating wheat.

Agreed. IF one has an issue for which they have no known cause, it's certainly possible that X could be the cause. Just as it's possible that A, B, C or red meat could be the cause. But if one has NO issues, then what would be gained by eliminating X?

Nothing, I just find it unlikely that someone consuming wheat has no issues from it. Especially later down the line when it will start taking its toll in the form of atherosclerosis and autoimmune diseases.

And this is the crux of the fallacy of your thinking. There are many people who live to a ripe old age consuming wheat and have no sign of autoimmune diseases or abnormally high atherosclerosis. There are some who do. To generalize a universal solution from the a specific exception is completely faulty logic.

Do some folks have issues with and benefit from eliminating gluten? Yes. But, some people have gluten issues=/= everyone should eliminate gluten. But that is what you jsut cannot believe. What do you think? That people who do not have gluten issues and show all positive health markers relating to autoimmue disorders and heart disease are just kidding themselves?

binknbaby

I am gluten-free, though I wouldn't say it's a "diet". For me, it's the treatment of a medical condition, and like others have said, I'm not myself when I have gluten. Rather than obvious symptoms of bowel distress (as many who have Celiac experience), my condition is much more subtle and has to do with my hormones and my neurological health. So for me, it's not the choice of a diet in hopes I'll lose weight (although that did happen when I first went GF), but the treatment for a chronic condition that I will never "get over"--it's going to be what I must eat for the rest of my life.

To add to the discussion on "bioavailability", my nutritionist says that CERTAIN foods do release more nutrients with cooking (for example, bones while being made into broth release more calcium, gelatin from cartilage, and marrow that is deep in the bones), and some other foods are simply easier to digest when cooked, but it's more important that they are with some kind of fat to release the fat-soluble vitamins (for example, dark leafy greens and cruciferous veggies).

Other "processing" methods, like fermentation, creates probiotics which are very healthy for the gut, promote immunity, and make foods easier to digest.

This is a wealth of information and has a lot of research on a variety of areas regarding food preparation: http://www.westonaprice.org/beginner-videos

Bumbeen

Please don't make me go pull hundreds of links to peer-reviewed journals I really hate doing that and it makes me look like a tool.

I am not a raw food paleo, cooking improves the bioavailability of most foods. You seem to think I eat this way for some philosophical or mystic reasoning that I can't explain. That would not be the case.

If you sprout/soak then they are at least edible, though with various degrees of negative health effects.

Well we are animals, raw wheat can really only be consumed by birds. It makes cows sick, it makes us sick.

I'm asking you to explain and back up your claims, you are refusing to do so, what would you have us think? Again numerous foods are cooked or otherwise prepared before they become edible/ palatable/ safe. Soaking is hardly excessive processing! You don't need to post hundreds of studies, meta analyses and longitudinal population studies will do fine. It doesn't make you look like a tool, I have worked in and studied biological disciplines and have specifically asked for evidence. for the sweeping statements you are making.

Depending on the food and the animal consuming it cooking can make nutrients less bioavailable. There are plenty who hold all domestic cats should be entirely raw fed as their wild and zoo cousins are, cooked diets are less bioavailable they even need supplementing with taurine. If cooking most foods makes nutrients more bioavailable for humans that might suggest we begun evolving and adapting to our new varied diets .... no?

Cooking came around long before we started consuming wheat as a population. I may or may not find the research for you. I'll just shoot you a PM.

Bumbeen

And this is the crux of the fallacy of your thinking. There are many people who live to a ripe old age consuming wheat and have no sign of autoimmune diseases or abnormally high atherosclerosis. There are some who do. To generalize a universal solution from the a specific exception is completely faulty logic.

Do some folks have issues with and benefit from eliminating gluten? Yes. But, some people have gluten issues=/= everyone should eliminate gluten. But that is what you jsut cannot believe. What do you think? That people who do not have gluten issues and show all positive health markers relating to autoimmue disorders and heart disease are just kidding themselves?

That is why I said it is *unlikely*. I never said *everyone*. In fact I specifically said that there are some folks that are completely adapted to it and probably have no health issues whatsoever. I just think that % is much lower than you do. Less than 50% at least.

Firefox7275

Please don't make me go pull hundreds of links to peer-reviewed journals I really hate doing that and it makes me look like a tool.

I am not a raw food paleo, cooking improves the bioavailability of most foods. You seem to think I eat this way for some philosophical or mystic reasoning that I can't explain. That would not be the case.

If you sprout/soak then they are at least edible, though with various degrees of negative health effects.

Well we are animals, raw wheat can really only be consumed by birds. It makes cows sick, it makes us sick.

I'm asking you to explain and back up your claims, you are refusing to do so, what would you have us think? Again numerous foods are cooked or otherwise prepared before they become edible/ palatable/ safe. Soaking is hardly excessive processing! You don't need to post hundreds of studies, meta analyses and longitudinal population studies will do fine. It doesn't make you look like a tool, I have worked in and studied biological disciplines and have specifically asked for evidence. for the sweeping statements you are making.

Depending on the food and the animal consuming it cooking can make nutrients less bioavailable. There are plenty who hold all domestic cats should be entirely raw fed as their wild and zoo cousins are, cooked diets are less bioavailable they even need supplementing with taurine. If cooking most foods makes nutrients more bioavailable for humans that might suggest we begun evolving and adapting to our new varied diets .... no?

Cooking came around long before we started consuming wheat as a population. I may or may not find the research for you. I'll just shoot you a PM.

Since you boasted of "hundreds of links to peer-reviewed journal" articles, I am sure you will find a couple of meta analyses and longitudinal population studies supporting each point. Please post them here in this thread alongside your claims so that others can review them too.

If you accept cooking was a key part of our history and adaptation why is it anathema to cook or prepare grains before eating just as we do tubers, meats, seafood, beans and lentils?

PaleoPath4Lyfe

`whatever you decide to do make sure it is sustainable and good for your long term health. I went on a diet about a decade ago that had long term health implications for my bone density.

It is not a bad thing to reduce your intake of processed gluten in things like shop bought bread, biscuits, cakes etc because they use the cheapest bleached flours. This does not mean that you cannot have cous cous or wholegrain rice.

It is not ideal to cut out all good sources of gluten because the outside of wholegrain has vitamin E and you need that for your skin - vital to keep skin supple when dieting or it will go dry.

There is nothing in grains that can not be obtained from other sources (fruits and vegetables) and in higher quantities.

We don't need gluten or grains to get enough Vitamin E.

Sunflower seeds, Almonds, Paprika, Red Chili Powder, Pine nuts, Peanuts, Basil, Oregano, Dried Apricots, Pickled Green Olives, Cooked Spinach and Cooked Taro Root.

Also, here is a list of other foods that are abundant in Vitamin E.

http://www.healthaliciousness.com/articles/vitamin-E.php#vitamin-E-rich-foods

MaraDiaz

I have an idea. If someone wants to try one of these programs, they should read everything reputable they can find, then decide if they still want to try it, and if they do, they should try it. If it works, great, if it doesn't, try something else.

We aren't all the same. What works for you might not work for me and vice versa. So why do so many people around here have their hackles up over this lately? It's not like anyone is suggesting an arsenic diet or anything.

mmapags

And this is the crux of the fallacy of your thinking. There are many people who live to a ripe old age consuming wheat and have no sign of autoimmune diseases or abnormally high atherosclerosis. There are some who do. To generalize a universal solution from the a specific exception is completely faulty logic.

Do some folks have issues with and benefit from eliminating gluten? Yes. But, some people have gluten issues=/= everyone should eliminate gluten. But that is what you jsut cannot believe. What do you think? That people who do not have gluten issues and show all positive health markers relating to autoimmue disorders and heart disease are just kidding themselves?

That is why I said it is *unlikely*. I never said *everyone*. In fact I specifically said that there are some folks that are completely adapted to it and probably have no health issues whatsoever. I just think that % is much lower than you do. Less than 50% at least.

And what would you have in the way of reliable data in the form of peer reviewed studies that support your supposition of a percentage of over 50% that have issues with gluten?