Wheat is the Devil: A Resurgence of My Former Frustrations

My Aunt Kathy sent me a birthday card with an article in it she photocopied from Maclean's Magazine, and asked for my opinion on it. I had read it, was slightly outraged, gave it to one of the Public Health Nutritionists at work to also have a wee giggle at this Doctor's extremist view. Then I forgot about it. 

Today, on Facebook, a holistic nutritionist who taught me while I attended the Canadian School of Natural Nutrition (CSNN) posted this article in support of it. A resurgence of all the fear mongering and lack-of-research based instruction I received while attending this school came flooding back. For the record, I enjoyed the experience but am still questioning the information I was taught - I crave factual backing to my education and they were unable to provide it. With that said, I have no problem with views that are different than mine - to each their own. What I do take issue with is when those views are published in widely circulated magazines and presented as fact (people will believe what they are told if they perceive the person doing the telling to be a professional).

Breathe.

Okay... so,

I am hesitant to promote an idea that could potentially scare people away from consuming foods that have nutritional value to them. Whole grains contain important nutrients such as B-vitamins (breads and cereals are largely enriched with vitamins that help to prevent health problems such as those developed by deficiencies like neural tube defects in newborns with a folate deficiency), vitamin E,  and soluble and insoluble fibre. The consumption of whole grains is recommended by such health bodies as the Mayo Clinic, Health Canada, the Harvard School of Public Health, Dietitians of Canada - and more! It is true that some people have food sensitivities and allergies and perhaps that is why they gain weight when consuming grains (as per the claims in the Maclean's article), although with celiac disease, people tend to be underweight, but celiac disease is just one type of allergy-related (gluten) health condition. Sensitivities and allergies present with numerous different signs and symptoms, so narrowing down which type and to which food (or other factor) a person might be reacting to can be tricky and require some allergy testing (although sensitivities may not show up in allergy testing). 

But I digress.

I think energy would be better spent focusing on the bigger picture - high cost of healthy foods, low cost of unhealthy foods, high fat high sugar foods, physical inactivity, obesogenic environments such as drive thrus... the list goes on. The scare tactic used to compare the consumption of wheat to tobacco use is, I believe, only hindering the progress of the credibility of the field of nutrition. Readers will see that the interviewee, Dr. Davis, is a medical doctor and will therefore believe, without question, that he is presenting research-supported facts. Some people can be sensitive to components of grains - and of many other foods as well - but the extremist view that wheat is largely responsible for present-day obesity, I feel, is unjustified. I had a biology teacher in high school who presented in class his idea that the reason North Americans have such a high rate of heart disease, is that we have flush toilets. His theory was based on the fact that people living in remote arctic regions do not have indoor plumbing and have also very low rates of heart disease. Therefore, they have a causal relationship.

Oh my. 

Perhaps if my teacher had done his research, he would learn that this relationship is actually correlational and not causational (if it is causational, I'll need to see the peer-reviewed research to prove it), and that perhaps the high quantity of healthy fats in the diets of Inuit peoples, healthy fats which have been proven to help mitigate atherosclerosis, are actually responsible for the low heart disease rates. Additionally, I do believe that there are fewer fast food restaurants in the arctic, restaurants, and grocery stores, so perhaps there is an absence of obesogenic opportunities to partake in up North. But regardless of what my biology teacher believed to be fact, at least his idea wasn't published in a national magazine.

I agree with the idea that wheat products are no longer the original crop that our ancient ancestors grew and consumed. However, I am interested to know why Dr. Davis isn't attacking the other 70-75% of foods that are in some way, shape, or form influenced by genetic modification?

Nutrition and Dietetics is a field where misinformation and incomplete information runs rampant. Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, author of the blog Weighty Matters, said it best when he commented on how some people feel they are qualified to provide nutrition advice simply because they eat. It is necessary for nutrition professionals to step-up to the plate to bat away... clarify... what is factual and what isn't. Not long after Dr. Davis' interview was published in Maclean's, a Dietitian was interviewed on CBC Radio and was given the chance to more calmly explain what Dr. Davis was talking about - better explaining his logic and whether or not she supports it. The PH Nutritionist whom I shared the article with originally heard this interview on CBC Radio and said she did a good job of talking down the accusations in Dr. Davis' interview and stating that she doesn't support his overall opinion of whole grains, including wheat, though agreed that it is no longer the same crop that it once was. However, in comparison to the viral spread of the Maclean's magazine, and my inability to find the CBC Radio interview online, I fear that this Dietitian's interview will not be heard.