|
Post by circumspice on Jun 18, 2012 2:52:25 GMT -5
"The cultivation of ancient grains whose makeup hasn’t been amended as much as modern wheat could allow the gluten-intolerant to have their bread and eat it, too." I found this article on one of the anthropology websites that I read daily. The following paragraph really caught my eye: “Things like goat grass were introduced into the wheat strain, and there’s evidence that some degree of intolerance comes from goat grass,” says Klein. If you look at earlier varieties, he explains, you don’t see that problem. “You have this modern phenomenon of lots of people becoming intolerant to gluten, and it’s indisputable. But it’s also very hazy as to what it is exactly, and whether it’s one cause or many. One theory is that we’re responding not to the grain itself but the refinement, and I’m in that class.” Link for the rest of the article: www.psmag.com/health/do-heritage-grains-hold-promise-for-the-gluten-sensitive-42612/
|
|
|
Post by keen101 (Biolumo / Andrew B.) on Jun 18, 2012 7:41:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by atash on Jun 18, 2012 12:05:30 GMT -5
What eventually developed into wheat was already highly developed by the time gluten showed up in it's current form. Spelt for example is already an amphiploid hybrid. If it weren't highly developed, it would not be wheat. It would have smaller grains, and would not make bread.
Many people but not necessarily all who are gluten-intolerant can tolerate the gluten in Spelt because it has a different chemical structure.
Gluten allergies have probably exploded for the same reasons probably for the same reason as allergies (as well as autism and asthma) have in general: changes in our lifestyle that compromise the functioning of our immunity system. The Amish who still mostly lead rural agrarian lifestyles have much lower rates of allergies than the rest of us. Interestingly, they're surrounded by common allergens.
|
|
|
Post by Walk on Jun 19, 2012 6:34:36 GMT -5
Food sensitivities may be severe allergies like those who go into shock from peanuts or have celiac disease or may be mild and less easy to pinpoint. Most people probably fall into the latter category, or somewhere in between. I've seen food sensitivity test results for patients at the holistic doctor's office where I work. People can have problems with many foods besides the common food allergens including some you wouldn't think of like pineapple or kidney beans. For those with lesser reactions to proteins, etc. that cause problems in the digestive tract, they may function on an OK level for decades, but normal aging, a lifetime of toxic exposures and challenges to the immune system, or a sudden health crisis may bring the problem to the forefront where the issue can be identified at last and dealt with. Since every individual is so unique in their food tolerances, it can be helpful to do an elimination diet to track down suspected food problems rather than waiting for more serious and expensive health care interventions. If you feel better when you're not eating something, you should listen to your body and not be driven by mass media or mainstream culture to determine what you consume. Eat the foods that make you feel the most well and your health will benefit.
|
|
|
Post by MikeH on Oct 24, 2013 3:22:05 GMT -5
Looks like the old grains have more going for them than the gluten issue. Recent analysis of 160 years of crop samples from Rothamsted Research Station near London discovered that levels of essential micronutrients remained consistent in wheat grain from 1844 to the late 1960s, but then began a decline that continues to this day.
The nutrient decline began when traditional long-straw wheat varieties where phased out in favour of higher-yielding semi-dwarf varieties.
As wheat plants have grown smaller since the 1960s, grain nutrient density has continued to decrease.
Compared to the old long-straw varieties, Rothamsted’s modern dwarf wheat grain carries on average 20-30 per cent less zinc, iron, copper and magnesium.
For zinc, a critical human nutrient, the decline is even more pronounced if the most recent five years of data are compared, with average nutrient levels in wheat harvested from 1844-1967.
The actual study itself is a fascinating read - www.era.rothamsted.ac.uk/index.php?area=home&page=index&dataset=4But what got my attention was micronutrient deficiency, zinc and iron in particular, are implicated in health problems across the developed and developing worlds alike. The Heritage Grain Conservancy has been mentioned elsewhere here a few times as a source of old varieties but I've never been much interested because of the apparent difficulty in threshing. But that may not be entirely the case: There are some old wheat grains that are hulless. I was given some "banatka" from Hungary and another from france by Eli Rogosa in MA who has had a grant to collect and evaluate ancient strains. These are both hulless. I had about 20 seeds from each and grew them out. Sure enough, they fall free from the husk. This was a post yesterday in Steve Solomon's Yahoo Group Soil and Health. Has anyone grown Banatka or Rouge de Bordeaux? Do they "fall free from the husk"?
|
|
|
Post by nathanp on Oct 24, 2013 7:31:51 GMT -5
Michael Pollan refers to the decrease in nutrient content in modern foods as the result of breeding for qualities such as increased yield. michaelpollan.com/books/in-defense-of-food/I agree and wonder if some of this is partly not just breeding for yield, but the result of fertilizing only with macronutrient chemical fertilizers instead of organically. Organic fertilizers and soil improvements replace micronutrients in a way that macronutrient chemical fertilizers do not. End result is food without essential micronutrients as you refer to.
|
|
|
Post by MikeH on Oct 24, 2013 10:08:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by canadamike on Oct 25, 2013 23:14:23 GMT -5
There is more than one topic in that discussion.....we know know that modern high yielding cultivars ( also shorter) have a very high content of gliadine-A, one of many molecules that are in the complex make up of gluten. This one seems to be the culprit. BUt, as far as sensitivities go, it has now been proven in a few studies that children starting their ''gluten consumming life'' with older wheats bread etc...also containing some gliadine-a but much much less, tend to be more OK later on. As for why we as humans are more sensitive....I guess we all agree on environmental factors. The nutrient content is another topic. Soil is almost dead on most of our modern agricultural acreage....and since glyphosates are so popular, it will be like that for a long long time. These glyphosates, once in the ground, resume the life they were planned for before MOnsanto and all added adjuvants to them that made them become weed killers: they were created as chelating agents, and that is exactly what they do in the soil: they chelate ( read lock up) minerals in the soil. They can show up in the soil analysis but they are rendered unavailable to the plants, hence mineral deficit in grains. This is different from gliadine-a, but still very saddening. These mineral deficiencies are also creating serious fungal problems. Grains grown for human ( and also animal btw) consumption now have serious problems with phytotoxins...thanks to the lack of minerals...weak plants are a smorgasborg for fungal and bacterial diseases...
|
|
|
Post by MikeH on Oct 26, 2013 3:26:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by blackox on Oct 26, 2013 8:09:20 GMT -5
We've been gluten free for probably... a little over 10 years. My mom and I have bad gluten intolerance and my sister and my dad are both celiacs. My dad's uncle died from intestinal bleeders, he was a celiac but never knew it. We can't eat any grain closely related to wheat (barley, rye, spelt, etc.). We stick to other grains that many gluten intolerant or celiac people have probably never heard of before. We use grains such as rice, amaranth, quinoa, sorghum, etc. were we would have other wise used wheat. So I would have to say that the solution lies in the use of the more unusual alternative grains than the use of heritage wheat and similar grains. Heritage wheat may actually work, but how are gluten intolerant/celiac people that live in an area where the newer types are regularly cultivated supposed to save the seeds of their heritage grain? It would get awfully expensive buying it...
|
|
|
Post by olddog on Nov 9, 2013 22:02:44 GMT -5
interesting discussion on wheat, yes, it seems they have improved it, to our detriment.
|
|
|
Post by freeholder on Jan 22, 2014 11:51:45 GMT -5
Very interesting discussion....especially about the correlations between higher yield, shorter stalks, and decreased nutritional content. My youngest daughter and I (and my mother) all have either celiac disease (my daughter and mother) or are gluten intolerant (me); since I'm also borderline diabetic, daughter and I try to eat low-carb as much as possible. When I do bake, I usually use coconut flour, but that's not exactly something that we could grow here. I'm going to try hull-less oats if I can make room this year (too many things to plant, far from enough places to put everything!). We can eat small amounts of oats as long as we can be sure they aren't contaminated with gluten.
One of my friends here has a forty-acre field that he usually plants and harvests -- last year he grew rye, which does well enough in this climate. He gave me a barrel of floor sweepings for the chickens. I need to start sprouting it for them, I think. But it has gluten, so we can't eat it.
Kathleen
|
|