Grain of Truth: The Real Case For and Against Wheat

Grain of Truth: The Real Case For and Against Wheat by Stephen Yafa

Why did Gluten become public enemy number one. It has been trendy to adopt a gluten free diet. There are some people that suffer from celiac disease. Gluten produces significant negative consequences in their lives. Avoiding gluten is critical for their health. Tests can help identify their condition.

There are also many others that think the may be suffering from gluten intolerance. The only test here is self-reporting. These people are the trendy ones. They are willing to adopt the cardboard-like gluten substitutes because they think it makes them feel better. Does it? If so, why?

The author of this book is not a fan of those that declare a single item as the source of all our problems. There is a long history of those pointing to the evils of fats, carbs, gluten and many other substances. They typically have convincing arguments and stories. They then suggest their diet that leads to improvements. Many people follow them. Some achieve short term benefits. Very few people enjoy it or stick with it for the long term.

The problem with wheat ends up being complex. Gluten can be problematic. However, thee biggest problem is the way that we consume wheat. It is most often heavily processed white flour without the bran. Breads have also been fermented quickly. These factors together have helped to cause our modern wheat to be more problematic for our bodies. A whole wheat sourdough bread would not create as many issues with many people as a commodity white bread. Our nutrition research has been focussed on the single bullet, but our bodies and nutritional needs are much more complex than that. Our great ability to isolate and fortify may be our undoing. Attempts to solve problems by further isolation and banishment is a continuation of the same problem.

The Gluten Effect

It is important to look for the true "source" of medical problems rather than simply treat the symptoms. However, a book simply saying that would not sell very well. So, the authors focus on gluten. They provide a very well done biological background of how gluten can cause impacts throughout the body. Then, the next 80% of the book identifies just about every possible symptom of gluten sensitivity. While the language is couched in reluctant probability, the reader will still come out thinking they must be gluten sensitive.

One of the authors has spoken a few times at our office. Her public lectures are much more balanced than the content of the book. In these she brought up many of the key points (such as seeking the root cause), but didn't go overboard in trying to tie every ailment under the sun to gluten. (She hardly mentioned gluten in the lectures.)

To be fair, some of the 'symptoms' attributed to gluten are even said to impact only a very small percentage of the population. However, the amount of space devoted to these ailments makes it seem much more significant. (Its like a car add where they show all these "bad" things that the car can do, while having a small disclaimer run across the screen.) Luckily, the book also has bold headings for every paragraph, making it simple to skim through the lame parts.