Gyro, I respect your right ho hold any opinion you desire to. That said, I think you have been led down a devious path. You have been taken in by a con man, who, as most con men do, used a little bit of truth and twisted it and built on it to make a false picture for people to see. His little bit of truth is nothing more than expounding on the Atkins diet, and picking out wheat as the bad guy to stone in the public square.
We all know that many North Americans are carb addicts, and that a lifetime of over-eating carbs has damaged many of us, including, possibly, me, but wheat is not the bad guy here, the over-consumption of carbs is.
You have made all the converts here you are going to make, and are now beating a very dead horse.
You started this thread, and I think it's time you stopped it. So leave it alone, and rest easy in the fact that you are right and everyone else is wrong.
Karl.

"and rest easy in the fact that you are right and everyone else is wrong".


as usual.....

If this is all a fraud maybe Dr. Davis is conducting mass hypnosis or something,... otherwise how is this happening to me?

 -- Losing weight again, 8 lbs so far.  Using new holes on most belts.
 -- No more headaches (this after 40 years of several headaches per week).
 -- Tinnitus is diminishing, but I'll admit it might be from not taking aspirin and caffeine anymore.
 -- Bruises and cuts heal faster, but, again, this might be from no aspirin.
 -- How do I phrase this next one?,... well,.. let's just say that after decades of inconsistent fecal combat, I now enjoy a serene, gentle, and tidy regularity.
 -- Joint pain and stiffness are markedly reduced.  With motorcycles and gyrocopters, the ability to crank my head around in traffic to look for other traffic behind me (like I did in my 30's) is huge.  Getting up off the floor while assembling RYCA bikes is a lot easier.
 -- I've stopped taking allegra, since the allergy symptoms have mostly disappeared.  
 -- More stamina/energy.  A couple weeks ago, for example, I pushed a lawn vac around a acre of lawn to get up all the leaves, bagged the leaves, mowed that acre with a push mower, removed all the concrete from a mailbox post hole and installed a new mailbox post doing all the new concrete, took my current wife out for three hours of lunch and shopping, and washed two cars.  In September, that amount of work would have reduced me to a quivering mass (I'm 64), assuming I would have had the mental energy to even contemplate it.
 -- Appetite has diminished noticeably.  Hunger pangs don't happen anymore.  The current wife calls me "to-go-box Bob" because I get full so much sooner,.. always needing a "to go" box.  It has gotten to the point where I have to eat when the schedule calls for it rather than because I feel hungry.  I have skipped meals altogether a few times and not felt it at all.
 -- No more Tums.  I've always had occasional heartburn,.. maybe a few times a month.  Every once in a while it would get pretty bad and sustained for days,.. so bad I'd have to get some prescription antacids.  Maybe 7 weeks is too soon to draw any firm conclusions, but I'm liking it now.
 -- I've stopped taking melatonin to help fall asleep.  No more sominex, etc., either.  Now when I hit the sack, a few minutes after my head touches the pillow, I am out.  I can sleep in a moving car now, for decades a feat impossible for me.
 -- No more caffeine required in the morning.  This newfound energy level has replaced my need to get the brain started after waking up all groggy.
 -- Blood pressure might have decreased a little.  I am reluctant to actually use this one because the numbers are close (130/85 -> 120/75), and because I am using the machine at Walmart.  Maybe the numbers aren't perfectly accurate, but if I am using the same machine over and over again, a steady decrease is still a decrease.  

I am keeping a file on the improvements.  That is what is copy/pasted above.  I find I am needing to explain these things over and over again so I got tired of having to recreate it.  This morning I added the items about heartburn and blood pressure.

Keep in mind I am following the guidance in the book pretty closely.  Absolutely NO wheat, and almost no other grains (oats, rice, corn, barley, etc.) at all.  Lots of veggies, some fruits, some dairy, and lots of eggs and meat/fish/fowl.  Very little manufactured food.  No sugar or aspartame at all.  Still exercising three or four days a week.

I'm liking it a lot, and I'm sorry arteacher seems so discouraged.

Gyro you need to exercise more, then you can enjoy food like everyone else,And you want have the heath problems you have.

Ok I finished reading the wheat book.  I read it with a skeptical eye, playing spot-the-bullshit, and really didn't find much.  The author commands a terrific knowledge of chemistry as it relates to digestion, fat, diabetes and heart disease.  A lot of this stuff goes right over my head so I had to take his word for much of it.  However, I am also reading the "Paleo" diet book and many of the points in that book (regarding our body chemistry) corroborate with the wheat book. Where 'wheat belly' and 'Paleo' seem to part philosophies is with the dairy foods, so I'll be paying extra attention to why that is.  

I noticed an exaggeration where Davis calls a correlation with r^2 value 0.4something a "very strong correlation."  Nah.. one only needs to look at the graph to see the data is quite scattered, with many points going opposite the general trend. To his credit, Davis does a very good job of documenting the research that this book is standing on, and is up front about the data he uses to reach his conclusions, often presenting it in a figure.

The claim that a couple slices of bread cause your blood sugar to spike worse than 2 spoonfuls of straight sugar seems incredible to me, and I am still not sure if it's true.  Sure, wheat is loaded with amylopectin-A, a "most obnoxious" carb, which breaks into sugar very early in the digestive process.  But I don't understand how that is worse, in terms of blood sugar spikes, than ingesting the same number of calories worth of sugar. But I DO understand how one might falsely come to that conclusion.

Whenever you are trying to characterize any effect that comes and goes within a certain timeframe, you have to collect data points at a short enough interval to capture the profile, the measured value with respect to time. The "spikier" the data, the shorter the point collection interval must be in order to capture the true peak. In my line of work we use data acquisition cards that are flat out awesome.  For seismic data we'll have them collect a point every 0.1~0.2 milliseconds. For detailed radar data (w/spikes passing by at the speed of light) the collection interval is less than one nanosecond.

What does that have to do with your blood sugar? Well, we know that certain foods cause it to spike to different magnitudes, but we don't know exactly when the peak occurs.  The maximum is assumed to be 2 hours after eating, but I think that's a bad assumption.  The best time to take the reading is probably different for different foods.  I would guess an interval of 15 minutes would be sufficient to reasonably plot the shape and magnitude of blood sugar spikes, but the data behind the wheat vs. sugar claim is just a single point collected a fixed time after the food is ingested (GB please correct me if that's wrong). Perhaps by the time the wheat spike is in its prime, the spike from the table sugar has come and gone.  The claim that wheat yanks your blood sugar the worst would have a lot more credibility if a full blood sugar profile was presented.

Anyway, that might explain how arteacher got different readings for wheat vs. corn.  I also think arteacher is right in that the no-wheat thing sort of piggybacks on Atkins.  Many of the health problems cascade from high carbs from any source, not just wheat.  But the book also covers other things that are more or less specific to wheat, like the harmful effects of gluten and that morphine receptor phenomenon.  Food does seem to have less pull when you are off wheat.

If I was doing an Amazon review I'd rate the book 3.5-4 stars.

" I would guess an interval of 15 minutes would be sufficient to reasonably plot the shape and magnitude of blood sugar spikes"
The accepted interval, according to my doctor and my specialist, is 20 min., so you are close. For example when my blood sugar crashes badly ( getting near coma territory) I am supposed to eat 15 mg of sugar immediately, check my sugar in 20 min, and then eat a peanut butter sandwich, wait another 20 min and check my sugars again. By this time they are near normal. The protean in the peanut butter causes the carbs in the bread to be absorbed more slowly over a longer period of time, preventing a blood sugar spike.
The insulin I take is called "30-70", 30% fast acting, to prevent a spike immediately after eating, and 70% long term slow release, to keep the sugars even for about 12 hrs.

"Nonsense" "Screed"

and...

"If you'd read the book, rather than just drinkin the koolaid, you might have a different outlook on all this."

Bob, your self-serving self-righteous diet assertions are simply inconsistent with scientific facts (as your political opinions are inconsistent with reality.)

It's interesting that every accepted scientific nutritional study published over the years is in your opinion 'drinking Kool-Aid, while you read some half baked, crackpot diet fad book and then swear that you now know the absolute truth about nutrition so help you God, and everyone else (including the science community) is dead wrong.

I might add that your ‘anti-science’ bias is quite typical of those on the extreme right. I would bet that you don't believe in evolution and climate change either. Having said that I now expect that you will post a bunch of junk science about evolution and climate change, (stuff that no one but right wing hacks take seriously) and believe that you are doing all of us a big favor by imparting your intellectually superior opinions to us poor stupid motorcyclists. I wish to inform you that this site is filled with intelligent, caring, thoughtful people who unlike you consider other people's opinions enough to at least consider.

You call the president a 'buffoon' constantly while asserting the wisdom and intellect of those on the right-wing lunatic fringe of politics. (I guess you haven't noticed), the Republicans are now the “How great is it to be stupid” party. In perpetrating the idea that there’s no intellectual requirement for the office of the presidency, the right wing of the party offers a Farrelly Brothers “Dumb and Dumber” primary in which evolution is avant-garde.

Sarah Palin, who got outraged at a “gotcha” question about what newspapers and magazines she read, is the mother of stupid conservatism. Another “Don’t Know Much About History” Tea Party heroine, Michele Bachmann, seems rather proud of not knowing anything, simply repeating nutty, inflammatory rhetoric she memorizes by rote. Then take the current right-wing candidates. Looks like your Newton will be the next to drive the clown car after everyone has self destructed do to their ignorance. They're anti-education, anti-science, anti-book-lurnin, and they wear their ignorance like a badge of honor.

So you see, as much as you hate other people's opinions whether it's food or politics, or anything else, other people see you as just as misinformed and wrong as you see everyone else.

Think about it.....(end of rant)