Tag Archives: Celiac Disease

The Quickest Path to All the Diseases of Modern Man

Monsanto’s Clandestine Chemical Terrorism

Would you drink Roundup if you could? Probably not, I least, I wouldn’t. Would you eat something that it’s been doused in? If you knew what it was, you probably wouldn’t touch that either.

Do you realize that every bite of bread you take you’re eating Roundup and massive amounts of it. Every corn chip you eat, you’re eating massive amounts of glyphosate with it. It’s in the nature of how this herbicide is used.

Who knew that our greatest terrorism threat would be a clandestine threat from inside our country and it doesn’t carry a gun or bomb, or any kind of explosives, for that fact. This threat is a completely hidden threat, making it the worst threat we’ve ever faced. This threat is in your diet. It’s in something you eat multiple times a day. In all actuality, your hunger cycle is the instrument of your destruction, with this threat. It’s your hunger cycle that’s locks you into the cycle of destruction that glycation is responsible for as its the glucose that’s responsible for all inflammation, which in turn, is responsible for all modern disease.

All this damage from the enzyme inhibitors in the glyphosate, that’s done to your hormones, is no small matter. These hormones are important hormones affecting digestion, hunger and sleep. (Those are the very same things affected by your diet. also.) Where’s the similarity? It’s explained in the way it affects its targeted enzymes, like tyrosine, tryptophan and phenylalanine. These are all enzymes that influence your hunger, digestion and sleep hormones. If you have problems in any of these areas, this is your answer why.

It involves your consumption of glyphosate. (I’ll bet you didn’t know that, did you?) Would you eat it in the first place, if you knew? You probably would because you’ve been addicted to this substance without you even knowing it. This was literally done right under your nose, when you were fed, as a baby. The industry makes certain that this substance gets into most all baby food. This ensures that you have no choice in this addiction. It ensures your lifetime of compliance in feeding the addiction. It also guarantees your compliance  in the second half of the glucose ruse, the need for pharmaceuticals for a good portion of your life.

This is displayed by all the graphs below as the increase of glyphosate usage mirrors the increase in disease. Are you one of these statistics? If you eat bread, I’m afraid you are.

Targeted enzymes influence the senescence of plants also influence the senescence of your body. They are important enzymes your body uses for digestion and controlling hunger; Glyphosate is absorbed through foliage, and minimally through roots, and transported to growing points. It inhibits a plantenzyme involved in the synthesis of three aromatic amino acidstyrosinetryptophan, and phenylalanine. Therefore, it is effective only on actively growing plants and is not effective as a pre-emergence herbicide. An increasing number of crops have been genetically engineered to be tolerant of glyphosate (e.g. Roundup Ready soybean, the first Roundup Ready crop, also created by Monsanto) which allows farmers to use glyphosate as a post emergence herbicide against weeds. The development of glyphosate resistance in weed species is emerging as a costly problem. While glyphosate and formulations such as Roundup have been approved by regulatory bodies worldwide, concerns about their effects on humans and the environment persist. Many regulatory and scholarly reviews have evaluated the relative toxicity of glyphosate as an herbicide. The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment toxicology review in 2013 found that “the available data is contradictory and far from being convincing” with regard to correlations between exposure to glyphosate formulations and risk of various cancers, including non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).  A meta-analysis published in 2014 identified an increased risk of NHL in workers exposed to glyphosate formulations. In March 2015 the World Health Organization‘s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic in humans” (category 2A) based on epidemiological studies, animal studies, and in vitro

  • In November, 2015, the European Food Safety Authoritypublished an updated assessment report on glyphosate, concluding that “the substance is unlikely to be genotoxic (i.e. damaging to DNA) or to pose a carcinogenic threat to humans.” Furthermore, the final report clarified that while other, probably carcinogenic, glyphosate-containing formulations may exist, studies “that look solely at the active substance glyphosate do not show this effect. In May 2016, the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues concluded that “glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure through the diet”, even at doses as high as 2,000 mg/kg body weight orally.
These targeted enzymes are important for digestion and hunger
  • 1Tyrosineinfluences hunger by controlling enzymes that control how receptors react to stimuli that controls your hunger. Tyrosine is a precursor to Dopamine, your primary hormone influencing hunger. This is the hormone triggered by leptin, your satiety hormone. If it takes more leptin to trigger the dopamine, it’s going to take more food to trigger the leptin. Was this engineered intentionally?
  • 2Tryptophanis also a precursor to serotonin and melatonin. Serotonin is another feel good hormone that’s affected by glyphosate. Melatonin is the hormone that allows you to sleep. without it, you’re going to have trouble sleeping. Is it no wonder why so many people suffer from insomnia now? (They sell medicine for that, don’t they?)
  • 3Phenylalanine Phenylalanine is a precursor for tyrosine; the monoamine neurotransmitters  dopamine,  norepinephrine  (noradrenaline), and epinephrine (adrenaline); and the skin pigment melanin. That was according to Wikipedia. All of those enzymes influence your hunger.

The WHO has finally recognized glyphosate as a Group 2 Carcinogen, meaning that it probably causes cancer. We know that it affects your sleep, hunger and digestion, let’s see if these chemicals can  be responsible for cancer. The evidence for this lies in the multiple graphs showing the increase of glyphosate increasing right alongside the increase of multiple disorders and disease, including autism.

Monsanto’s Glyphosate Ruse

In Monsanto’s desire to spread as much of this on the earth as possible, they’re poisoning every bit of food you eat, unless you grow your own and raise and butcher your own. All forage for feed is sprayed multiple times, maybe even more than the grain used for your bread. Cattle slaughtered for beef, never live long enough to get cancer, yet it goes into their food supply. 1,8 billion lbs in 20 years has been dumped on your food supplies. Ultimately, it goes into your body in multiple avenues, increasing the amount you consume, thereby increasing the amount of enzyme inhibitors affecting your health. This has brought the pharmaceutical industry record profits, not to mention what it’s brought Monsanto and their crop seed companies, pharmaceutical companies, and chemical wing of their manufacturing. Monsanto has engineered clandestine distemper on our health without us even knowing or approving of it.

It’s not been good for the unsuspecting public who are still condemned to eating this food to feed their addiction as evidenced by these studies from PMC;

Glyphosate is a likely cause of the recent epidemic in celiac disease. Glyphosate residues are found in wheat due to the increasingly widespread practice of staging and desiccation of wheat right before harvest. Many of the pathologies associated with celiac disease can be explained by disruption of CYP enzymes. Celiac patients have a shortened life span, mainly due to an increased risk to cancer, most especially non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, which has also been linked to glyphosate. Celiac disease trends over time match well with the increase in glyphosate usage on wheat crops.

Glyphosate is also neurotoxic. Its mammalian metabolism yields two products: Aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) and glyoxylate, with AMPA being at least as toxic as glyphosate. Glyoxylate is a highly reactive glycating agent, which will disrupt the function of multiple proteins in cells that are exposed. Glycation has been directly implicated in Parkinson’s disease (PD). Glyphosate has been detected in the brains of malformed piglets. In a report produced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), over 36% of 271 incidences involving acute glyphosate poisoning involved neurological symptoms, indicative of glyphosate toxicity in the brain and nervous system.

In the remainder of this paper, we first introduce the link between glyphosate and manganese (Mn) dysbiosis, and briefly describe the main biological roles of Mn. We then describe how glyphosate’s disruption of gut bacteria may be a major player in the recent epidemic in antibiotic resistance. We then explain how glyphosate can influence the uptake of arsenic and aluminum, and propose similar mechanisms at work with Mn. In the next section, we describe how Mn deficiency can lead to a reduction in Lactobacillus in the gut, and we link this to anxiety disorder. We follow with a discussion on mitochondrial dysfunction associated with suppressed Mn superoxide dismutase (Mn-SOD), and then a section on implications of Mn deficiency for oxalate metabolism. The following section explains how Mn deficiency can lead to the overexpression of ammonia and glutamate in many neurological diseases. The next two sections show how Mn accumulation in the liver is linked to cholestasis and high serum low density lipoprotein (LDL), and how this can also induce increased susceptibility to Salmonella poisoning. We then identify a role for Mn in chondroitin sulfate synthesis, and the implications for osteomalacia. The next two sections explain how glyphosate exposure can lead to Mn toxicity in the brain, and discuss two neurological diseases that are associated with excess Mn, PD and prion diseases. After a section on the link between male infertility and Mn deficiency in the testes, we discuss evidence of exposure to glyphosate and end with a short summary of our findings.

The report goes on to detail how this herbicide is involved in suppressing dopamine which leads to an overactive thyroid. It’s also involved in ;

  1. MICROBIAL ANTIBIOTIC INTOLERANCE

Manganese (Mn) is an often overlooked but important nutrient, required in small amounts for multiple essential functions in the body. A recent study on cows fed genetically modified Roundup®-Ready feed revealed a severe depletion of serum Mn. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup®, has also been shown to severely deplete Mn levels in plants. Here, we investigate the impact of Mn on physiology, and its association with gut dysbiosis as well as neuropathologies such as autism, Alzheimer’s disease (AD), depression, anxiety syndrome, Parkinson’s disease (PD), and prion diseases. Glutamate overexpression in the brain in association with autism, AD, and other neurological diseases can be explained by Mn deficiency. Mn superoxide dismutase protects mitochondria from oxidative damage, and mitochondrial dysfunction is a key feature of autism and Alzheimer’s. Chondroitin sulfate synthesis depends on Mn, and its deficiency leads to osteoporosis and osteomalacia. Lactobacillus, depleted in autism, depend critically on Mn for antioxidant protection. Lactobacillus probiotics can treat anxiety, which is a comorbidity of autism and chronic fatigue syndrome. Reduced gut Lactobacillus leads to overgrowth of the pathogen, Salmonella, which is resistant to glyphosate toxicity, and Mn plays a role here as well. Sperm motility depends on Mn, and this may partially explain increased rates of infertility and birth defects. We further reason that, under conditions of adequate Mn in the diet, glyphosate, through its disruption of bile acid homeostasis, ironically promotes toxic accumulation of Mn in the brainstem, leading to conditions such as PD and prion diseases

  1. MANGANESE DYSBIOSIS DUE TO GLYPHOSATE

Remarkably, Mn deficiency can explain many of the pathologies associated with autism and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The incidence of both of these conditions has been increasing at an alarming rate in the past two decades, in step with the increased usage of glyphosate on corn and soy crops in the United States, as shown in [Figures 

  1. ANALOGY WITH ARSENIC AND ALUMINUM

Chronic kidney disease is clearly associated with multiple environmental toxicants. There has been an epidemic in recent years in kidney failure among young agricultural workers in Central America, India, and Sri Lanka, particularly those working in the sugar cane fields. A recent paper reached the unmistakable conclusion that glyphosate plays a critical role in this epidemic. A growing practice of spraying sugar cane with glyphosate as a ripener and desiccant right before the harvest has led to much greater exposure to the workers in the fields. The authors, who focused their studies on affected workers in rice paddies in Sri Lanka, identified a synergistic effect of arsenic, which contaminated the soil in the affected regions. This paper is highly significant, because it proposes a mechanism whereby glyphosate greatly increases the toxicity of arsenic through chelation, which promotes uptake by the gut. Glyphosate also depletes glutathione (GSH) and glutathione S transferase (GST) is a critical enzyme for liver detoxification of arsenic. As a consequence, excess arsenic in the kidney causes acute kidney failure, without evidence of other symptoms such as diabetes usually preceding kidney failure.

  1. ANALOGY WITH ARSENIC AND ALUMINUM
  2. MN-SUPEROXIDE DISMUTASE AND MITOCHONDRIAL DYSFUNCTION
  3. GUT BACTERIA DYSBIOSIS AND ANXIETY
  4. AMMONIA, GLUTAMATE, AND NEUROTOXICITY

In this section, we will show that both glutamate and ammonia are implicated as neurotoxins in connection with autism and other neurological diseases, and we will offer the simple explanation that Mn deficiency leads to impaired activity of glutamine synthase and arginase, both of which utilize Mn as a cofactor. Mn deficiency can also explain the increased risk to epilepsy found in autism, due to the fact that Mn decreases T2 relaxation time. Mn-deprived rats are more susceptible to convulsions.

Many diseases and conditions are currently on the rise in step with glyphosate usage in agriculture, particularly on GM crops of corn and soy. These include autism, AD, PD, anxiety disorder, osteoporosis, inflammatory bowel disease, renal lithiasis, osteomalacia, cholestasis, thyroid dysfunction, and infertility. All of these conditions can be substantially explained by the dysregulation of Mn utilization in the body due to glyphosate.

It may seem implausible that glyphosate could be toxic to humans, given the fact that government regulators appear nonchalant about steadily increasing residue limits, and that the levels in food and water are rarely monitored by government agencies, presumably due to lack of concern. However, a paper by Antoniou et al. provided a scathing indictment of the European regulatory process regarding glyphosate’s toxicity, focusing on potential teratogenic effects. They identified several key factors leading to a tendency to overlook potential toxic effects. These include using animal studies that are too short or have too few animals to achieve statistical significance, disregarding in vitro studies or studies with exposures that are higher than what is expected to be realistically present in food, and discarding studies that examine the effects of glyphosate formulations rather than pure glyphosate, even though formulations are a more realistic model of the natural setting and are often orders of magnitude more toxic than the active ingredient in pesticides. Regulators also seemed unaware that chemicals that act as endocrine disruptors (such as glyphosate often have an inverted dose–response relationship, wherein very low doses can have more acute effects than higher doses. Teratogenic effects have been demonstrated in human cell lines. An in vitro study showed that glyphosate in parts per trillion can induce human breast cancer cell proliferation.

  1. PARKINSON’S DISEASE
  2. PRION DISEASES
  3. OSTEOMALACIA AND ARTHRITIS

This is only a partial list of what this herbicide is responsible for. Visit the link at the head of this section for the full story. You should visit it, if only for your health’s concern. This just points out the fact that what you eat has more impact on your health than anything else. It would be nice if you could get away from it, but you can’t. The pollution is everywhere you go for food. You have to produce your own food to be completely free from this curse.

It’s cursing you not only through the grains you eat, but through the damage done to feed crops, contaminating beef, pork, chicken, turkey and even dairy cows, poisoning even the cheese, milk and butter you buy. The only way you can get round this ruse is to grow your own food and raise and butcher your own meat. Monsanto has every other path sewn up, tighter than a drum. To eat grains is to court death. It’s become that simple.

  • Glyphosate, pathways to modern diseases II: Celiac sprue and gluten intolerance

Celiac disease, and, more generally, gluten intolerance, is a growing problem worldwide, but especially in North America and Europe, where an estimated 5% of the population now suffers from it. Symptoms include nausea, diarrhea, skin rashes, macrocytic anemia and depression. It is a multifactorial disease associated with numerous nutritional deficiencies as well as reproductive issues and increased risk to thyroid disease, kidney failure and cancer. Here, we propose that glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide, Roundup®, is the most important causal factor in this epidemic. Fish exposed to glyphosate develop digestive problems that are reminiscent of celiac disease. Celiac disease is associated with imbalances in gut bacteria that can be fully explained by the known effects of glyphosate on gut bacteria. Characteristics of celiac disease point to impairment in many cytochrome P450 enzymes, which are involved with detoxifying environmental toxins, activating vitamin D3, catabolizing vitamin A, and maintaining bile acid production and sulfate supplies to the gut. Glyphosate is known to inhibit cytochrome P450 enzymes. Deficiencies in iron, cobalt, molybdenum, copper and other rare metals associated with celiac disease can be attributed to glyphosate’s strong ability to chelate these elements. Deficiencies in tryptophan, tyrosine, methionine and selenomethionine associated with celiac disease match glyphosate’s known depletion of these amino acids. Celiac disease patients have an increased risk to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, which has also been implicated in glyphosate exposure. Reproductive issues associated with celiac disease, such as infertility, miscarriages, and birth defects, can also be explained by glyphosate. Glyphosate residues in wheat and other crops are likely increasing recently due to the growing practice of crop desiccation just prior to the harvest. We argue that the practice of “ripening” sugar cane with glyphosate may explain the recent surge in kidney failure among agricultural workers in Central America. We conclude with a plea to governments to reconsider policies regarding the safety of glyphosate residues in foods.

  • Gut bacteria

We then show that glyphosate is associated with an overgrowth of pathogens along with an inflammatory bowel disease in animal models. A parallel exists with celiac disease where the bacteria that are positively and negatively affected by glyphosate are overgrown or underrepresented respectively in association with celiac disease in humans.

  • CYP Enzyme impairment and sulfate depletion
  • Retinoic acid, celiac disease and reproductive issues
  • Anemia and iron

Glyphosate’s chelating action can have profound effects on iron in plants (Eker et al.2006; Bellaloui et al.2009). Glyphosate interferes with iron assimilation in both glyphosate-resistant and glyphosate-sensitive soybean crops (Bellaloui et al.2009). It is therefore conceivable that glyphosate’s chelation of iron is responsible for the refractory iron deficiency present in celiac disease.

  • Molybdenum deficiency
  • Selenium and thyroid disorders
  • Indole and kidney disease
  • Nutritional deficiencies

Glyphosate disrupts the synthesis of tryptophan and tyrosine in plants and in gut bacteria, due to its interference with the shikimate pathway (Lu et al.2013; María et al., 1996), which is its main source of toxicity to plants. Glyphosate also depletes methionine in plants and microbes. A study on serum tryptophan levels in children with celiac disease revealed that untreated children had significantly lower ratios of tryptophan to large neutral amino acids in the blood, and treated children also had lower levels, but the imbalance was less severe (Hernanz & Polanco, 1991). 

  • Cancer

Chronic inflammation, such as occurs in celiac disease, is a major source of oxidative stress, and is estimated to account for 1/3 of all cancer cases worldwide (Ames et al.1993; Coussens & Werb, 2002). Oxidative stress leads to DNA damage and increased risk to genetic mutation. Several population-based studies have confirmed that patients with celiac disease suffer from increased mortality, mainly due to malignancy (Nielsen et al.1985; Logan et al.1989; Pricolo et al.1998; Cottone et al.1999; Corrao et al.2001; Green et al.2003). These include increased risk to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, adenocarcinoma of the small intestine, and squamous cell carcinomas of the esophagus, mouth, and pharynx, as well as melanoma. The non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma was not restricted to gastrointestinal sites, and the increased risk remained following a gluten-free diet (Green et al.2003).

  • Proposed transglutaminase-glyphosate interactions
  • Evidence of glyphosate exposure in humans and animals
  • Kidney disease in agricultural workers

In another study in the PMC database of over 164 studies done on this subject;

Biochemical analyses confirmed very significant chronic kidney deficiencies, for all treatments and both sexes; 76% of the altered parameters were kidney-related. In treated males, liver congestions and necrosis were 2.5 to 5.5 times higher. Marked and severe nephropathies were also generally 1.3 to 2.3 times greater. In females, all treatment groups showed a two- to threefold increase in mortality, and deaths were earlier. This difference was also evident in three male groups fed with GM maize. All results were hormone- and sex-dependent, and the pathological profiles were comparable. Females developed large mammary tumors more frequently and before controls; the pituitary was the second most disabled organ; the sex hormonal balance was modified by consumption of GM maize and Roundup treatments. Males presented up to four times more large palpable tumors starting 600 days earlier than in the control group, in which only one tumor was noted. These results may be explained by not only the non-linear endocrine-disrupting effects of Roundup but also by the overexpression of the EPSPS transgene or other mutational effects in the GM maize and their metabolic consequences.

 

Our findings show that the differences in multiple organ functional parameters seen from the consumption of NK603 GM maize for 90 days escalated over 2 years into severe organ damage in all types of test diets. This included the lowest dose of R administered (0.1 ppb, 50 ng/L G equivalent) of R formulation administered, which is well below permitted MRLs in both the USA (0.7 mg/L) and European Union (100 ng/L). Surprisingly, there was also a clear trend in increased tumor incidence, especially mammary tumors in female animals, in a number of the treatment groups. Our data highlight the inadequacy of 90-day feeding studies and the need to conduct long-term (2 years) investigations to evaluate the life-long impact of GM food consumption and exposure to complete pesticide formulations.

Tumors are reported in line with the requirements of OECD chronic toxicity protocols 452 and 453, which require all ‘lesions’ (which by definition include tumors) to be reported. These findings are summarized in Figure 4. The results are presented in the form of real-time cumulative curves (each step corresponds to an additional tumor in the group). Only the growing largest palpable growths (above a diameter of 17.5 mm in females and 20 mm in males) are presented (for example, see Figure 5A,B,C). These were found to be in 95% of cases non-regressive tumors (Figure 5D,E,F,G,H,I,J) and were not infectious nodules. These arose from time to time; then, most often disappeared and were not different from controls after bacterial analyses. The real tumors were recorded independently of their grade, but dependent on their morbidity, since non-cancerous tumors can be more lethal than those of cancerous nature, due to internal hemorrhaging or compression and obstruction of function of vital organs, or toxins or hormone secretions. These tumors progressively increased in size and number, but not proportionally to the treatment dose, over the course of the experiment (Figure 4). As in the case of rates of mortality (Figure 6), this suggests that a threshold in effect was reached at the lower doses. Tumor numbers were rarely equal but almost always more than in controls for all treated groups, often with a two- to threefold increase for both sexes. Tumors began to reach a large size on average 94 days before controls in treated females and up to 600 days earlier in two male groups fed with GM maize (11 and 22% with or without R).

  • Glyphosateformulations induce apoptosis and necrosis in human umbilical, embryonic, and placental cells.

We have evaluated the toxicity of four glyphosate (G)-based herbicides in Roundup formulations, from 10(5) times dilutions, on three different human cell types. This dilution level is far below agricultural recommendations and corresponds to low levels of residues in food or feed. The formulations have been compared to G alone and with its main metabolite AMPA or with one known adjuvant of R formulations, POEA. HUVEC primary neonate umbilical cord vein cells have been tested with 293 embryonic kidney and JEG3 placental cell lines. All R formulations cause total cell death within 24 h, through an inhibition of the mitochondrial succinate dehydrogenase activity, and necrosis, by release of cytosolic adenylate kinase measuring membrane damage. They also induce apoptosis via activation of enzymatic caspases 3/7 activity. This is confirmed by characteristic DNA fragmentation, nuclear shrinkage (pyknosis), and nuclear fragmentation (karyorrhexis), which is demonstrated by DAPI in apoptotic round cells. G provokes only apoptosis, and HUVEC are 100 times more sensitive overall at this level. The deleterious effects are not proportional to G concentrations but rather depend on the nature of the adjuvants. AMPA and POEA separately and synergistically damage cell membranes like R but at different concentrations. Their mixtures are generally even more harmful with G. In conclusion, the R adjuvants like POEA change human cell permeability and amplify toxicity induced already by G, through apoptosis and necrosis. The real threshold of G toxicity must take into account the presence of adjuvants but also G metabolism and time-amplified effects or bioaccumulation. This should be discussed when analyzing the in vivo toxic actions of R. This work clearly confirms that the adjuvants in Roundup formulations are not inert. Moreover, the proprietary mixtures available on the market could cause cell damage and even death around residual levels to be expected, especially in food and feed derived from R formulation-treated crops.

This poses a major question in my mind; can the target in this ruse, be you and your money? It’s obviously what the end result is and that’s displayed in the record profits of the pharmaceutical industry. The more disease caused by this herbicide, the more medicine the pharmaceutical industry sells. Monsanto owns the crop seed companies, produces the herbicide and owns the pharmaceutical corporations, so they’re profiting much more than two or three times in this ruse. It’s that simple. Only you can control this transformation of your health, this travesty of justice. Only you can say no to the grains that this herbicide poisons. It’s your choice to remain a slave to Monsanto, or be free. All you have to do is to give up the grains.

 

Is Your Diabetes Curable or Just Treatable?

Can Your Diabetes be Cured or Just Treated?

Diabetes can be the worst scourge to ever hit mankind. It’s complications have magnified in the last 30 years or so and have set more souls up for shortened lives, than any other disorder, as this disorder is the gateway to future drug use and continued treatments, ultimately until death. The death is always premature. The grain industry and the pharmaceutical industry has made certain of this with a passion seldom matched by even our greatest artists, athletes and musicians, they are inflicting their will upon an unsuspecting public.

The desire of these industries to dominate our food supply and our pharmaceutical supply is ginormous. Their motivation has pushed them to force as many farmers as they can to grow their GMO seed, simply to sell more of their Roundup Herbicide. You know how dangerous that is by now. You should know that 1.3 million tons of it has been sprayed on your food or on feed for feed lots that goes directly into your meat. It’s this desire that has made carbs more glycemic today than they’ve ever been in history. This is what’s driving the diabetes pandemic today.              Get the book now!

The whole premise behind these posts is to prove that the only way you can prevent these horrendous diseases, is to stop the glycation that is responsible for them and the only way you can stop the glycation is to stop feeding it. It’s really a simple solution, just not an easy one because of the addiction factor. However, YOU and only YOU have control over this and it all depends on what YOU put in you mouth when you eat.

I’ll admit that that can be hard when you have a whole industry trying to get you to eat more of what it is that glycates. This is because they are connected to another industry that feeds off of the unsuspected that buy into this ruse, all those whom the glycation affects, the public.                                    Get the whole story!

With over 123,250 studies and reports available when I searched for diabetes and carbs on PubMed, it appears that this has been known for some time. There are studies on diabetes and carbohydrates dating from 1946. How could it have taken this long to put these pieces together?

The good news here, is that there is a cure for diabetes. Thank you Dr Davis for pointing it out for us. If you’re tired of treating your diabetes and poking yourself all the time, all one has to do to cure it or avoid it in the first place, is to not eat the food that is responsible for creating it and that is the starchy carbohydrates.

From PMC and PubMed,

Evidence of your carb intake and Diabetes

The only way out of this dilemma is to curb the carb usage completely. The following reports detail how carb ingestion leads directly to type2 diabetes, which ultimately leads to every modern disorder or disease;

The first one I looked at was from 1952; This study was so old, they still called glucose dextrose;

This was a difficult study to read and it only showed 8 diabetic patients. It didn’t mention which type they were either. It basically showed that an increase in carbohydrate consumption led to added glycogen and far stored in the body, clearly showing the link between carbs and fat. This study is older than I. Why have I not heard anything about it? Where were the warnings? Where they too afraid of upsetting an industry, so safeguard the public’s health?

This again is evidence that carbs and diabetes were being researched in 1945, as this report is from May,1945.

This is PubMed’s explanation of carbohydrates and how the glycemic index works. It helps to know how diabetics are thinking and how they need to keep track of the glucose levels in their blood.

  • Issues in Nutrition:Carbohydrates.

Carbohydrates include sugars, starches, and dietary fibers. Resistant starches resemble fiber in their behavior in the intestinal tract, and may have positive effects on blood glucose levels and the gut microbiome. Fibers are classified as soluble and insoluble, but most fiber-containing foods contain a mixture of soluble and insoluble fiber. Soluble fiber has been shown to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. Many artificial sweeteners and other sugar substitutes are available. Most natural sources of sweeteners also are energy sources. Many artificial sweeteners contain no kilocalories in the amounts typically used. Sugar alcohols may have a laxative effect when consumed in large amounts. Glycemic index and glycemic load are measurements that help quantify serum glucose response after ingestion of particular foods. These measurements may be affected by the combination of foods consumed in a given meal, and the glycemic index may vary among individuals eating the same meal. Eating foods with a low glycemic index may help prevent development of type 2 diabetes. There is no definitive evidence to recommend low-carbohydrate diets over low-fat diets for long-term weight loss; they are equally effective.

They stop short of say that if you don’t eat carbs you can avoid diabetes, so let me be the first to tell you, you don’t need to eat carbohydrates. Carbs, the way they’re grown today, makes them as dangerous as arsenic.

This article published online on Dec 10, 2016 disputes the importance large amounts of carbohydrates in the diet;

Carbohydrates are essential nutrients that are used as a primary source of energy. Carbohydrate utilization should be properly controlled, as abnormal regulation of carbohydrate metabolism is associated with diseases, such as diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and stroke. These metabolic syndromes have become a serious problem in developed countries, and there is an increased need for research examining the influence of carbohydrates on animal physiology. Diets enriched in glucose, a major carbohydrate, are also associated with accelerated aging in several model organisms, including yeast and Caenorhabditis elegans (C. elegans). Genetic factors that mediate the effects of high glucose diets on aging have been identified during the last decade, mostly through the use of C. elegans. In this review, we describe studies that determine the effects of carbohydrate-enriched diets on aging by focusing on the mechanisms through which evolutionarily conserved pathways mediate the lifespan-altering effects of glucose in C. elegans. These include the insulin/insulin-like growth factor-1, sterol-regulatory element-binding protein, and AMP-activated protein kinase signaling pathways. We also discuss the effects of various carbohydrates and carbohydrate-derived metabolites on aging in model organisms and cultured mammalian cells. Finally, we discuss how dietary carbohydrates influence health and aging in humans.

Would you consider this evidence that carbs should be, for the most part, limited to small portions…as small as possible.

  • Effect of type and amount of dietary carbohydrate on biomarkers of glucose homeostasis and C reactive protein in overweight or obese adults: results from the OmniCarb trial.

OBJECTIVE:

The glycemic index (GI) of dietary carbohydrate is thought to affect glucose homeostasis. Recently, the Effect of Amount and Type of Dietary Carbohydrates on Risk for Cardiovascular Heart Disease and Diabetes Study (OmniCarb) trial reported that a low-GI diet did not improve insulin sensitivity. We conducted this ancillary study of the OmniCarb trial to determine the effects of GI and carbohydrate content on glucose homeostasis and inflammation.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:

OmniCarb was a randomized cross-over feeding study conducted in overweight or obese adults without diabetes (N=163). Participants were fed each of 4 diets for 5 weeks with 2-week washout periods. Weight was held constant. Diets were: high GI (GI≥65) with high carbohydrate (58% kcal), low GI (GI≤45) with low carbohydrate (40% kcal), low GI with high carbohydrate, and high GI with low carbohydrate. We measured glycated albumin (GA), fructosamine, and high sensitivity C reactive protein (CRP) at baseline and following each dietary period. These biomarkers were compared within-person between diets.

RESULTS:

The study population was 52% female and 50% black. Mean age was 53 (SD, 11) years; mean body mass index was 32 (SD 6) kg/m2. Reducing GI had no effect on GA or fructosamine, but increased fasting glucose in the setting of a high-carbohydrate diet (+2.2 mg/dL; p=0.02). Reducing carbohydrate content decreased GA in the setting of a high-GI diet (-0.2%; p=0.03) and decreased fructosamine in the setting of a low-GI diet (-4 µmol/L; p=0.003). Reducing carbohydrate while simultaneously increasing GI significantly reduced both GA (-0.2%; p=0.04) and fructosamine (-4 µmol/L; p=0.009). Neither reducing GI nor amount of carbohydrate affected insulin or CRP.

CONCLUSIONS:

Reducing carbohydrate, regardless of high or low GI, decreased GA and fructosamine. This suggests that reducing carbohydrate content, rather than GI, is a better strategy for lowering glycemia in adults at risk for diabetes.

Would you consider this as evidence that carbs should be, for the most part, limited to small portions…as small as possible. Need I say more?

  • [Composition of macronutrients in the diabetic diet].

The diabetic diet is one of the pillars of diabetes treatment. The rapid development of knowledge relating to the treatment of diabetes also includes diet. The paper focuses on the importance of a diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes and prevention of atherosclerosis. Its main goal is to assess the impact of a composition of macronutrients on individuals with type 2 diabetes. The paper is divided into several parts, each of which ends with a conclusion. The first part examines weight reduction. The diet aimed at a weight loss is effective, it can effectively prevent diabetes, it leads to improvements in glucose control and reduction of the risk factors for atherosclerosis, however it will not impact on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality until after more than 20 years. The second part deals with “healthy” foods. The studies exploring this area are not convincing. The only really rational component of food in relation to atherosclerosis is dietary fibres. Important is a balanced diet combined with regular physical activities. The third part focuses on the composition of macronutrients. It turns out that, considering a low-calorie diet, the effects of high- and low-carbohydrate diets on people with diabetes are similar with regard to weight loss and lowering of HbA1c, however the low-carbohydrate diet is associated with lower glycemic variability and a reduced need for anti-diabetic drugs. We do not know how the comparison of the two extreme diets would come out regarding individuals with a high energy diet. Currently it is useful to focus on the quality of individual macronutrients. Choose foods containing carbohydrates with a low glycemic index and high fibre foods, prefer fats that contain a low proportion of saturated fatty acids. The fourth part discusses the recent recommendation of the Czech Diabetes Society regarding the composition of macronutrients in the diabetic diet. As compared with the diet proposed earlier, lower intake of fibre-rich carbohydrates and higher intake of proteins and fats with a low content of saturated fatty acids is now recommended. Experts’ recommendations on this subject are included. Key words: atherosclerosis – diabetic diet – HbA1c – macronutrients – low-carbohydrate diet – obesity – dietary fibres – high-carbohydrate diet – health food.

  • Adverse effects on insulin secretion of replacing saturated fat with refined carbohydrate but not with monounsaturated fat: A randomized controlled trial in centrally obese subjects.

BACKGROUND:

Current dietary guidelines recommend the replacement of saturated fatty acids (SAFAs) with carbohydrates or monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs) based on evidence on lipid profile alone, the chronic effects of the mentioned replacements on insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity are however unclear.

OBJECTIVE:

To assess the chronic effects of the substitution of refined carbohydrate or MUFA for SAFA on insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity in centrally obese subjects.

METHODS:

Using a crossover design, randomized controlled trial in abdominally overweight men and women, we compared the effects of substitution of 7% energy as carbohydrate or MUFA for SAFA for a period of 6 weeks each. Fasting and postprandial blood samples in response to corresponding SAFA, carbohydrate, or MUFA-enriched meal-challenges were collected after 6 weeks on each diet treatment for the assessment of outcomes.

RESULTS:

As expected, postprandial non-esterified fatty acid suppression and elevation of C-peptide, insulin and glucose secretion were the greatest with high-carbohydrate (CARB) meal. Interestingly, CARB meal attenuated postprandial insulin secretion corrected for glucose response; however, the insulin sensitivity and disposition index were not affected. SAFA and MUFA had similar effects on all markers except for fasting glucose-dependent insulin tropic peptide concentrations, which increased after MUFA but not SAFA when compared with CARB.

CONCLUSION:

In conclusion, a 6-week lower-fat/higher-carbohydrate (increased by 7% refined carbohydrate) diet may have greater adverse effect on insulin secretion corrected for glucose compared with isocaloric higher-fat diets. In contrast, exchanging MUFA for SAFA at 7% energy had no appreciable adverse impact on insulin secretion.

Carboholics and Diabetics; This is your warning to steer clear of carbs, if you want to control your diabetes. There is no literature that can  definitively prove that you must eat carbs to survive.

Are these enough reports to prove how directly influence diabetes? After reading this can you see the logic in controlling your diabetes by controlling your carb intake? Where are the warnings from the FDA and the USDA? Don’t they care about what they’re recommending? Don’t they understand because of their recommendations, they sending millions of Moms and Dads, sisters and brothers, husbands and wives to their slow, expensive, painful deaths?

These are free reports that are available to everyone. All you have to do is search for them at the National Library of Medicine in the National Institute of Health. There are literally 100s of thousands of reports on the effects of glycation that remain hidden in the PubMed and PMC databases except to the few who look through them.  The only ones looking through this database are the drug companies looking for more ways to make money. Nobody is looking to warn anyone of the dangers of this food.

My question is why? The answer I get is, “there’s no money in it”. That’s is why I said in my first book, it would be a shame if profits and money weren’t the primary motivating factors in our society, but they are, and we have to live with it. That’s why I choose not to buy into it. It’s the same choice you have.

Why No Warnings from the FDA About gluten and sugar?

FDA’s Assessment of Gluten and Sugar.

It would be nice if this was a problem with just the grain industry but it’s not. It also involves the FDA and what has influenced them to not issue warnings for this allergen. The more I look at it, the more I see that it is a problem with overextending corporate entities. Knowing the dealings that Monsanto has had in the past with competitors and their own judicial systems, it’s not hard to fathom at all the involvement they would have, in the cover up of these studies. It’s actually easy to see their involvement the same as the sugar industry. They didn’t just cover up the studies condemning gluten , they initiated reports themselves that showed gluten was healthy. That is a complete falsehood from the truth of what gluten does.

grunge-cracked-fda-approved-background-some-smooth-lines-69009424

Gluten does the same thing as sugar. Why won’t the FDA recognize that? They have all the studies that point to it. Don’t they read them?

The following is an excerpt from an FDA study on Gluten as an allergen (1 of 173 studies).

What is the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act (FALCPA) of 2004? 

FALCPA is an amendment to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and requires that the label of a food that contains an ingredient that is or contains protein from a “major food allergen ” declare the presence of the allergen in the manner described by the law.

Gluten

  1. Why is there a concern about gluten? 

Gluten describes a group of proteins found in certain grains (wheat, barley, and rye.) It is of concern because people with celiac disease cannot tolerate it. Celiac disease (also known as celiac sprue) is a chronic digestive disease that damages the small intestine and interferes with absorption of nutrients from food. Recent findings estimate that 2 million people in the U.S. have celiac disease or about 1 in 133 people.

  1. What does FALCPA require with regard to gluten?

FALCPA requires FDA to issue a proposed rule that will define and permit the voluntary use of the term “gluten free” on the labeling of foods by August 2006 and a final rule no later than August 2008.

  1. What has FDA done in response to the FALCPA mandate?

FDA held a public meeting in August 2005 to obtain expert comment and consultation from stakeholders to help FDA develop a regulation to define and permit the voluntary use on food labeling of the term “gluten-free” (Public Meeting On: Gluten-Free Food Labeling). The meeting focused on food manufacturing, analytical methods, and consumer issues related to reduced levels of gluten in food.

FDA’s gluten-free definition, is that the food contain less than 20 ppm of gluten. It seems their concern is more with labelling than it is with safety. If it were with safety, they’d be warning us about the dangers that I’ve listed, yet they don’t, as if they were influenced by an outside source.

They consider wheat and gluten as undeclared allergens yet they refuse to acknowledge its allergenic properties to the extent that they won’t require a warning label for it. Yet they know what damage it does. All they require is a mention of wheat in the ingredients and nothing more. That is their warning. Consider this your warning; Grains are poison, and that includes wheat.

Their negligence in regards to our health in this manner is unconscionable. I can only assume that they’ve been influenced by the other side of the industry that provides crop seed for the farmers that grow the food that the FDA approves for us to eat. The other side of this industry, owned by the same corporations, is the pharmaceutical industry. They provide us with all of the drugs that we take to fight the disease caused by the food provided their sister pharmaceutical industry.

What I wonder is, what does the FDA consider stakeholders? Are they the corporate entities who have an interest in proliferating wheat and gluten? Since we now know that this happened with sugar, why wouldn’t the same thing happen with gluten? We know that gluten breaks down to nothing more than glucose (sugar), I can see where the same situation would exist today, that existed 50 -60 years ago. In fact, I believe it’s an ongoing problem.

Just like in the tobacco industry, “selling a product that is already sold for them as it’s addictive”, the same mantra is heard in the grain industry concerning their gluten.  “How can people refuse to buy our products? They’re addictive so people will want them more.

I salute the FDA for monitoring products claiming to be gluten free yet have more than a trace of gluten in them, such as the Investigation into General Mills for selling Cheerios that had more than the allowed limit of 20 ppm of gluten. Yet knowing what damage gluten does to the body, I have to wonder why do they still allow it to be marketed without any warnings? The tobacco companies can’t market their products without warnings. Why it the food industry allow to? The evidence lies within the vaults of the FDA, showing all the damage it does. Why do they ignore that evidence?

What evidence, you say? This evidence lies in the excerpts below, from three of their 173 studies on gluten;

  1. “Gluten is the protein that naturally occurs in wheat, rye, barley, and crossbreeds of these grains.Most people can eat gluten, but in people with celiac disease, gluten intake gradually damages the intestines, prevents the absorption of vitamins and minerals, and can lead to other health problems. Symptoms can include diarrhea, fatigue, headaches, abdominal pain, brain fog, rashes, nausea, vomiting, and other reactions.”
  2. “People who have an allergy to wheat run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they eat wheat. Symptoms may include swelling, itching or irritation of mouth or throat, difficulty breathing, nasal congestion, itchy or watery eyes, rash or hives, headaches, nausea, vomiting, cramps, diarrhea, or anaphylaxis, a potentially life-threatening reaction.”What I can’t understand, with this kind of disruption of bodily functions, why doesn’t this require a warning like cigarettes? It’s clearly killed more people.
  3. ”Unlike food allergies, clinical signs and symptoms do not appear to be reliable markers of disease activity because many individuals affected with celiac disease may be entirely asymptomatic. This tells me that a lot more people suffer from the disease than what have been diagnosed. Furthermore, although biomarkers of genetic susceptibility (e.g., presence of DQ2 and/or DQ8 HLA alleles) and gluten exposure [e.g., antibodies for gliadin (AGA), endomysial (EMA), and tissue transglutaminase (tTG)] have been defined for use in noninvasive diagnosis of individuals with celiac disease, these biomarkers have not been shown to correlate with disease severity nor to be useful in assessing daily responses to gluten exposures. Rather, evidence of intestinal mucosal inflammation is the gold standard biomarker for diagnosis of celiac disease and for assessment of disease severity. Intestinal mucosal inflammation may occur long before the development of clinical signs or a rise in antibody titers following a gluten challenge. Intestinal inflammation is assessed by intestinal biopsy, which is an invasive procedure, associated with false negatives (due to sampling error), and is impractical for frequent monitoring of disease activity or severity.”     Revised Threshold Report Page 58 of 108
  4. “Unpublished data described in Moneret-Vautrin and Kanny (2004) show that 83% of wheat allergic children reacted to less than 2 g of wheat flour while only 18% of wheat allergic adults responded at this level. Unpublished data described in Moneret Vautrin (2004) on wheat flourchallenges using 32 children and 32 adults with wheat allergy, reported a LOAEL of ≤ 1.8 mg protein for allergic children (the lowest tested dose) and 52.8 mg protein for allergic adults. Scibilia et al. (2006) reported that 2 of 13 responders reacted to the lowest dose of wheat flour tested (100 mg of a mix of bread and durum flour, approximately 15 mg protein) in DBPCFCs. In total, 31% of the patients who reacted did so to challenge doses less than or equal to 240 mg of wheat protein.” Approaches to Establish Thresholds for Major Food Allergens My question how many people eat this amount? Most people eat around 150mg of wheat products in a day, not enough to express symptoms of celiac disease, but enough to do unnoticed damage.
  5. “The foods of concern for individuals with, or susceptible to, celiac disease are the cereal grains that contain the storage proteins prolamin and glutelin (commonly referred to as glutens in wheat), including all varieties of wheat (e.g., durum, spelt, kamut), barley (where the storage proteins are called hordiens), rye (where the storage proteins are called secalins), and their cross-bred hybrids (such as triticale). The proportion of individuals with celiac disease that are also sensitive to the storage proteins in oats (avenins) has not been determined but is likely to be less than 1% (Kelly, 2005).”
  6. “The clinical manifestations of celiac disease are highly variable in character and severity. The reasons for this diversity are unknown but may depend on the age and immunological status of the individual, the amount, duration, or timing of exposure to gluten, and the specific area and extent of the gastrointestinal tract involved by disease (Dewar et al., 2004). These clinical manifestations can be divided into gastrointestinal, or “classic,” and non-gastrointestinal manifestations. Gastrointestinal manifestations usually present in children 4 to 24 months old and include abdominal pain and cramping, bloating, recurrent or chronic diarrhea in association with weight loss, poor growth, nutrient deficiency, and (in rare cases) a life-threatening metabolic emergency termed celiac crisis, characterized by hypokalemia and acidosis secondary to profuse diarrhea (Farrell and Kelly, 2002; Baranwal et al., 2003). Non-gastrointestinal manifestations are more insidious and highly variable and are the common presenting signs in older children and adults. These manifestations are frequently the result of long-term nutrient malabsorption, including iron deficiency anemia, short stature, delayed puberty, infertility, and osteoporosis or osteopenia (Fasano, 2003). In children, progressive malabsorption of nutrients may lead to growth, developmental, or neurological delays (Catassi and Fasano, 2004). Extra-intestinal manifestations such as dermatitis herpetiformis, hepatitis, peripheral neuropathy, ataxia, and epilepsy have also been associated with celiac disease (Fasano and Catassi, 2001). Individuals with untreated celiac disease are also at increased risk for potentially serious medical conditions, such as other autoimmune diseases (e.g., Type I diabetes mellitus) and intestinal cancers associated with high mortality (Farrell and Kelly, 2002; Peters et al., 2003; Catassi et al., 2002). For example, individuals with celiac disease have an 80-fold greater risk of developing adenocarcinoma of the small intestine, a greater than two-fold increased risk for intestinal or extra intestinal lymphomas (Green and Jabri, 2003) and a 20-fold greater risk of developing enteropathy-associated T cell lymphoma (EATL) (Catassi et al.,”
  7. “There is no standard protocol for gluten challenges, and challenge studies have varied greatly in amount and duration of gluten exposure. Although some studies have been designed to determine the acute effects (i.e., after 4 hours) of exposure to gluten (Sturgesset al., 1994; Ciclitiraet al., 1984), most challenges consist of an open challenge to a fixed or incremental dose of daily gluten over a minimum period of 4 weeks. Many challenge studies use a high exposure (≥ 10 g/day) to gluten, because this is believed to shorten time to disease confirmation or relapse and, therefore, to minimize discomfort to subjects (Rolles and McNeish, 1976). However, some studies have shown that low daily exposures to gluten also can elicit a disease response (Catassi et al., 1993; Laurin et al., 2002; Hamilton and McNeill, 1972).”      
  8. “At this time there is no correlative information on the efficacy of using these tests to predict or help prevent adverse effects in individuals with celiac disease.”
  9. “Although gluten-free diets are considered the only effective treatment for individuals with celiac disease, it has been recognized that it is difficult, if not impossible, to maintain a diet that is completely devoid of gluten (Collinet al., 2004). Therefore, several attempts have been made to define gluten-free in regulatory contexts. Efforts by the Codex Alimentarius to define an international standard for “gluten-free” labeling date back to 1981. At that time, due to the lack of sensitive, specific analytical methods, a threshold value of 0.05 g nitrogen per 100 g dry matter was set for wheat starch, on the assumption that wheat protein would be the only source of nitrogen in starch (Codex Standard 118-1981). The Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses is developing a revised standard. The current draft proposal would define three categories of gluten-free foods: processed foods that are naturally “gluten-free” (≤ 20 ppm of gluten), products that had been rendered “gluten-free” by processing (≤ 200 ppm), and any mixture of the two (≤ 200 ppm). The Australia New Zealand Food Agency (ANZFA) defines gluten to mean “the main protein in wheat, rye, oats, barley, triticale and spelt relevant to the medical conditions, Coeliac disease and dermatitis hepetiformis.” ANZFA recognizes two classes of foods, gluten-free foods (” …no detectable gluten”) and low-gluten foods (” …no more than 20 mg gluten per 100 gm of the food”) (ANZFA Food Code Standard 1.2.8). The Canadian standard for “gluten-free” is more general, simply stating that “No person shall label, package, sell or advertise a food in a manner likely to create an impression that it is a “gluten-free” food unless the food does not contain wheat, including spelt and kamut, or oats, barley, rye, triticale or any part thereof” (Canadian Food and Drugs Act Regulation B.24.018).”     Approaches to Establish Thresholds for Major Food Allergens and for Gluten in Food. III, IV, V.Now that you know what grains this involves you can get an idea of what not to eat.
  10. ”Like food allergies, celiac disease affects only a small proportion of the U.S. population (estimated at 1%, 3.1 million) (NIH, 2004). Susceptibility to celiac disease is genetically determined and is linked to the presence of the DQ2 or DQ8 HLA alleles. However, carrying these alleles does not necessarily lead to celiac disease. Both acute and chronic morbidity have been well documented for individuals with symptomatic celiac disease. A gluten-free diet has been shown to greatly reduce the risk for cancer and overall mortality for these individuals. The potential benefit of a gluten-free diet has not been established for individuals with silent or latent celiac disease.”

I submit that this is a disease of a much grander scale, meaning a lot more people suffer from it than what’s reported, as far too often this disease goes completely unrecognized and thus undiagnosed. I hear complaints from many carboholics about many of the disorders at the top of this list. That tells me that they each have an allergic intolerance to gluten and they don’t even know it.  Because of its addictive nature, they’ll never know it, unless they can give it up.

The above paragraphs apply to those with celiac disease, yet I contend that everyone experience some of the above reactions to some degree. This happens even more so if you consume more of their products. I thought I could eat this food for 58 years until I learned that I had allergies to it. Now I know that I have allergic intolerances to this food. It presents itself every time I try to eat it again.

My guess is 90% of the population is exactly the same as I am, allergic to the protein in gluten. I contend that the obesity and diabetes rates that exist today confirm this. The death rates of all the diseases caused by gluten prove it. That forces me to ask, with all the evidence available in your archives, why doesn’t this food require a warning?

This is what the FDA claims they’re concerned about;

“In 21 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 117 (part 117), we have established our regulation entitled “Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk Based Preventive Controls for Human Food.” We published the final rule establishing part 117 in the Federal Register of September 17, 2015 (80 FR 55908). Part 117 establishes requirements for current good manufacturing practice for human food (CGMPs), for hazard analysis and risk-based preventive controls for human food (PCHF), and related requirements.”

After reviewing over half of the documents available and an examination of all the titles of the documents, I see nothing that bans the inclusion of any of these dangerous foods in our food products made for public consumption (processed foods, including bread). It seems their interest lies only in compliance with the labeling of the product. They want to make sure that a package that’s sold as gluten free has to have less than 20ppm gluten in the product.

They don’t even feel that it’s important enough to warn you that a product contains gluten, yet they don’t feel it important enough to warn you of the dangers of gluten on the package, like they do with the dangers of cigarettes. They recognize the danger of tobacco, why can’t they recognize the dangers of gluten and wheat? It seems that they’re content with warning you how  much a product is gluten free, but not how much gluten it has in it, as if it does no harm at all. “C’MON MAN.” I have access to the same studies they have. They’re all located at PUBMED.COM and they all explain the dangers this food presents. If I can learn about what this food does, they have to know. Why are they so willing to ignore it? Why are they so willing to treat this food as though there’s nothing wrong with it.

The first page of studies I opened brought me to this study, the twelfth study out of 1797 studies on the list and reveals the dangers of just breathing the dust from these cereal grains. The grain induced asthma which affects those who work in the various fields in the grain industry, as stated by the Allergy, Asthma & immunology Research:

“Asthma caused by allergy to proteins from cereal grains is one of the most common types of occupational asthma (OA) and its prevalence does not seem to be declining.1 The main professions affected are: bakers, confectioners, pastry factory workers, millers, farmers, and cereal handlers. Although wheat is the most commonly involved cereal, other grains (e.g. rye, barley, rice) also play a role. In addition, flour from other sources (e.g. soya, lupin), pests, and several flour additives used in the baking industry to improve fermentation and elasticity of the dough, as well as to improve storage of the bread, may also give rise to IgE-mediated allergy.”  “This disorder has been classically considered a form of allergic asthma mediated by IgE antibodies specific to cereal flour antigens, mainly wheat, rye and barley,”

In the tenth study the on list published, in July 2009, it’s been found that the globulins in wheat can cause type 1 diabetes. T1D is an autoimmune disorder that was thought to have no cause. At least, all the studies I’ve looked at didn’t reveal this. According to BioMed Central;

“Taken together, the results indicate that a diverse group of globulins exists in wheat, some of which could be associated with the  pathogenesis of T1D in some susceptible individuals.Taken together, the results indicate that a diverse group of globulins exists in wheat, some of which could be associated with the pathogenesis of T1D in some susceptible individuals. These data expand our knowledge of specific wheat globulins and will enable further elucidation of their role in wheat biology and human health.

I have read elsewhere that it might be thought that an allergen might trigger an autoimmune response that shuts down the hormones that trigger insulin manufacture in the pancreas. It appears that this is that finding. Wheat can be responsible for type 1 diabetes. Have you seen any warnings for that? I haven’t. Have any been issued? I haven’t seen them. Why haven’t they been issued? How many parents have fed their kids bread to find out that their children are diabetic because of this auto-immune disorder? Why is bread still considered by so many to be a necessity of life?  It doesn’t appear so. It appears more likely to be a destroyer of life.

This is what I’m concerned about;

47,397 deaths daily from CVDs

47,397 people died each day, worldwide, from cardiovascular disease in 2013.  That breaks down to over 1800 Americans that died every day from cardiovascular disease in 2013. That’s 17.3 million annually, worldwide. That was up from 12.3 million (25.8%) in 1990According to Wikipedia“Coronary artery disease and stroke account for 80% of CVD deaths in males and 75% of CVD deaths in females.[1] Most cardiovascular disease affects older adults. In the United States 11% of people between 20 and 40 have CVD, while 37% between 40 and 60, 71% of people between 60 and 80, and 85% of people over 80 have CVD.[10] The average age of death from coronary artery disease in the developed world is around 80 while it is around 68 in the developing world.” This rate is increasing each year by

This points to the fact the this food which is eaten on a daily basis does so little damage incrementally to the consumer that it’s never noticed until it’s too late. The disease has already manifested itself and the price is now being paid for a lifetime of consumption. The question I keep asking myself is why does this have to keep happening? Why hasn’t the FDA warned us about the dangers of this food? They have access to all of the same reports that I do, yet they still refuse to acknowledge that this food is dangerous.

Does their interest lie elsewhere? Is there corporate influence involved with this like there was with sugar?

The sugar industry actively took steps for years to influence public’s perception of the nutritional value of their product, when they clearly knew of the dangers it posed. “Food companies have spent billions of dollars to cover up the link between sugar consumption and health problems. That’s the conclusion of a new report from the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).”

According to The Guardian;

Sugar lobby paid scientists to blur sugar’s role in heart disease – report

“New report highlights battle by the industry to counter sugar’s negative health effects, and the cushy relationship between food companies and researchers”. ” Influential research that downplayed the role of sugar in heart disease in the 1960s was paid for by the sugar industry, according to a report released on Monday.

This actions are responsible for more deaths that all the world wars combined. Their actions have killed, hurt or harmed more than 500,000,000 people in the last 30 years alone. (At 17.3 million for heart disease alone, 500 million is a lowball estimate for death coming from cancer and  dementia as well.) All total, the death rate for ECC is over 24,000,000 each year. That’s over 65,753 deaths each day, simply from excessive carbohydrate consumption. (Remember carbs = sugar.)

With backing from a sugar lobby, scientists promoted dietary fat as the cause of coronary heart disease instead of sugar, according to a historical document review published in JAMA Internal MedicineThis was criminal, yet nothing was done about it.

Though the review is nearly 50 years old, it also showcases a decades-long battle by the sugar industry to counter the product’s negative health effects. Why isn’t this agency being held accountable?

The findings come from documents recently found by a researcher at the University of San Francisco, which show that scientists at the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF), known today as the Sugar Association, paid scientists to do a 1967 literature review that overlooked the role of sugar in heart disease. Wasn’t that a clear case of bribery that should have been prosecuted?

SRF set an objective for the review, funded it and reviewed drafts before it was published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which did not require conflict of interest disclosure until 1984. The three Harvard scientists who wrote the review made what would be $50,000 in today’s dollars from the review. Because of this bribery, over 500,000,000 have suffered from this diseases that sugar is responsible for. From diabetes to heart disease to arthritis to cancer to…you should know the list by now.

“Marion Nestle, a nutrition, food studies and public health professor at New York University, said the food industry continues to influence nutrition science, in an editorial published alongside the JAMA report When will it stop? Never, until we let this industry know that we won’t accept their definition of healthy food and stop buying their versions of it.

 “Today, it is almost impossible to keep up with the range of food companies sponsoring research – from makers of the most highly processed foods, drinks, and supplements to producers of dairy foods, meats, fruits, and nuts – typically yielding results favorable to the sponsor’s interests,” Nestle said. “Food company sponsorship, whether or not intentionally manipulative, undermines public trust in nutrition science, contributes to public confusion about what to eat, and compromises Dietary Guidelines in ways that are not in the best interest of public health.”

The cushy relationship between food companies and researcher has been captured in recent investigations by the Associated Press and New York Times.The AP revealed in June that candy trade groups were funding research into sweets. And in 2015, the New York Times showed how Coca-Cola has funded millions in research to downplay the link between sugary beverages and obesity.

The Sugar Association said in a statement that SRF “should have exercised greater transparency” in its research, but also accused the study authors of having an “anti-sugar narrative”.

“We question this author’s continued attempts to reframe historical occurrences to conveniently align with the currently trending anti-sugar narrative, particularly when the last several decades of research have concluded that sugar does not have a unique role in heart disease,” the Sugar Association said. “Most concerning is the growing use of headline-baiting articles to trump quality scientific research – we’re disappointed to see a journal of JAMA’s stature being drawn into this trend.”

The findings were based on documents found by Cristin Kearns, a postdoctoral fellow at UCSF, in library archives.

The scientists and executives involved are no longer alive.

In recent years, the link between fat and heart disease has become a more contentious topic – a 2010 review of scientific studies of fat in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that “there is no convincing evidence that saturated fat causes heart disease”. The role of sugar in heart disease is still being debated.”

Even according to Mother Jones“The industry’s tactics—similar to those used by Big Tobacco in downplaying the adverse health effects of smoking—were explored by Gary Taubes and Cristin Kearns Couzens in the 2012 Mother Jones investigation “Big Sugar’s Sweet Little Lies.” But this latest report draws on some newly released documents submitted as evidence in a recent federal court case involving the two biggest players in the sweetener industry: the Sugar Association and the Corn Refiners Association (the trade group for manufacturers of high fructose corn syrup). ”

The evidence is piling up.

The FDA can’t hide their complicity much longer.

Even according to Mother Jones“The industry’s tactics—similar to those used by Big Tobacco in downplaying the adverse health effects of smoking—were explored by Gary Taubes and Cristin Kearns Couzens in the 2012 Mother Jones investigation “Big Sugar’s Sweet Little Lies.” But this latest report draws on some newly released documents submitted as evidence in a recent federal court case involving the two biggest players in the sweetener industry: the Sugar Association and the Corn Refiners Association (the trade group for manufacturers of high fructose corn syrup). ”

“Obesity and diabetes mellitus are often linked to cardiovascular disease,[53] as are a history of chronickidney disease and hypercholesterolaemia.[54] In fact, cardiovascular disease is the most life-threatening of the diabetic complications and diabetics are two- to four-fold more likely to die of cardiovascular-related causes than nondiabetics.”

According to the World Heart Association ;

“Up to 90% of cardiovascular disease may be preventable if established risk factors are avoided.[65]“ Their goal is 25 by 25. “25×25, achieving a 25% relative reduction in overall mortality from cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes or chronic respiratory disease by 2025. In September 2011, the United Nations held a High-Level Meeting in New York on the subject of NCDs, including cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancers, diabetes and chronic respiratory diseases.“

They’re actively taking steps to lower the death rate of CVDs by recommending everyone to eat right, quit smoking, and exercise, all of which will lower this number one killer of people. Eating right, in my opinion is by far the best way to combat CVDs, diabetes, obesity, hypertension, high cholesterol (which is really a problem of unbalanced cholesterol), arthritis and worst of all, dementia and Alzheimer disease.

In all of my research, I can’t find anything that says to limit the use of bread and starchy carbohydrates made from grains. Yet all research I’ve look at from PubMed and even the FDA show that this food does cause these disorders. Every time I look at the data, I’m forced to ask myself, why hasn’t’ the FDA, WHA, or the ADA condemned this food? These agencies have to know what’s going on, yet they refuse to act. Who is blocking this action?

After researching my book It’s Time For A Cure, I’ve learned that this food is at the base of all of the diseases listed above, forcing me to ask, why hasn’t the FDA, or the WHF warned us of this food. The only reason I can come up with is that it is being protected from prosecution by the industry that provides the crop seed for the farmer as well as the drugs to combat the arthritis caused by what their seed grows into.

From PubMed’s study; Characterization of Proteins from Grain of Different Bread and Durum Wheat Genotypes: “Wheat is unique among the edible grains because wheat flour has the protein complex called “gluten” that can be formed into dough with the rheological properties required for the production of leavened bread [9]. The rheological properties of gluten are needed not only for bread production, but also in the wider range of foods that can only be made from wheat, viz., noodles, pasta, pocket breads, pastries, cookies, and other products [10]. The gluten proteins consist of monomeric gliadins and polymeric glutenins. Glutenins and gliadins are recognized as the major wheat storage proteins, constituting about 75–85% of the total grain proteins with a ratio of about 1:1 in common or bread wheat [3,11] and they tend to be rich in asparagine, glutamine, arginine or proline [12] but very low in nutritionally important amino acids lysine, tryptophan and methionine [13].”

“Very low in nutritionally important amino acids” interests me. Amino acids are proteins. When you take away the protein, you’re left with little else but carbohydrates. This fact combined with the fact that gliadins have been shown to provoke the body to release anti-gliadin antibodies, which also have been shown to have the ability to attach themselves to Purkinje cells in the cerebellum, make this food suspect, at the least.

When an anti-gliadin antibody attaches itself to a cell in the cerebellum, the brain renders that cell useless and discards it. Although many parts of your brain can grow new cells to replace discarded cells, this area of the brain can’t. That means whenever an anti-gliadin antibody attaches itself to a purkinje cell, that part of the brain never comes back. Yes, that does mean brain damage for those who release these anti-gliadin antibodies.

The question this brings up is how many of us release these antibodies? Judging from the amount of Alzheimer’s disease invading the civilized world, I would say a majority of people display this form of intolerance….a rather large majority.  The next question this congers is, am I one of them? Are you one of them? I found out that I am. Have you yet?

42,657 dadeaths worldwide from cardiovascular disease

Heart disease kills more people every year than any other single cause. Over 42,000 people die from this disease and every day and the only reason it exists is the high amount of sugar we put into our bodies. It brings about the glycation ECC is responsible for and it’s this glycation that is responsible 42,000 deaths from cardiovascular disease every day.

But that’s not all it is responsible for. We have to look at Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. We have to consider cancer, and we have to worry about the amount of high blood pressure and high cholesterol ECC is responsible for. All of these disorders are money producing the diseases that this industry generates, simply for the sake of profit. It’s this profit that is killing everyone

13,698 daily deaths globally from Alzheimer disease

13.698 die each day, worldwide, due to Alzheimer disease alone. That amounts to over 500 deaths daily in the US alone, which means that at least 20 people in this country will die this hour alone, due to Alzheimer disease. Nothing contributes to Alzheimer disease as much as bread consumption. It’s the starchy carbs that break down to glucose, and it’s the glucose that glycates the cholesterol and protein that builds up the plaque and inflammation in your blood that leads to Alzheimer disease, cancer, arthritis, Atherosclerosis as well as most all other CVDs, as well as hypertension and high cholesterol.

11,232 deaths daily from cancer worldwide

11,232 people die every day globally due to some form of cancer and with all the evidence available that wheat contributes to the spread of multiple forms of cancer, why hasn’t the FDA made any statements about the dangers this food presents to the human body. Evidence shows these devastating effects going back to the bones of earliest cavemen that have been discovered.

I recently watched a Nova program on a 5,000 year old iceman mummy that had been frozen in an ice flow until he was discovered in 1991. They found remnants of einkorn wheat in his upper digestive tract suggesting his last meal was bread made from the flour of einkorn wheat. His bones also showed “disease of a modern lifestyle”, as they like to call it. What is this disease of a modern lifestyle? Arthritis. This is evidence of the glycation that occurred in this man from eating the carb loaded bread made from einkorn wheat. Even as difficult as it was to digest einkorn wheat at that time, due to its fibrous nature, it still did the same damage then, that it does today to everyone who continues to eat this food.

Copied from NOVA on PBS concerning a 5,000 year old frozen mummy ;

“Oeggl reconstructed the Iceman’s last meal from his microscopic analysis of a tiny sample removed from the mummy’s transverse colon, the part of the intestine just beyond the stomach. When the Iceman was discovered in 1991, x-rays and CAT-scans of the corpse revealed that his internal organs had shrunken so drastically in the 5,300 years in the glacier that Dr. Dieter Zur Nedden, the radiologist who examined the images, could barely distinguish them. Instead of filling the chest cavity with their billowy white form, the lungs looked like wisps of clouds.

But at the top of the colon, Zur Nedden made out a slight bulge, which the radiologist suspected was a clump of half-processed food. The progress of the food indicated that the Iceman had last eaten about eight hours before he died, possibly of hypothermia, on the Hauslabjoch pass, which cuts over the main Alpine ridge dividing Austria from Italy at 10,500 feet above sea level.

Not until several years after the discovery did the Innsbruck scientists finally cut a hole into the mummy, insert an endoscope, and snip out about .004 ounces from the colon. Dr. Werner Platzer, the University of Innsbruck anatomist then in charge of research on the corpse, gave .0016 ounces milligrams of the material to Oeggl, who had already been studying the rich botanical finds from the site.

Pollen provided a snapshot of the environment the Iceman was exposed to in the hours before his death

Oeggl’s sample was barely the size of his little fingernail. Under the microscope, he quickly identified the flake-like, semi-digested material that made up the bulk of the sample as einkorn, the most important wheat of the Neolithic, the period of prehistory in which people lived in semi-permanent settlements and survived by agriculture and keeping animals. The discovery of einkorn, which does not occur naturally in Europe, in the Iceman’s intestinal tract suggested that he had contact with an agricultural community. The dominance of bran in the sample led Oeggl to believe that the wheat had been finely ground into meal and made into bread, rather than eaten as a porridge, where the grains would have been eaten whole and found in larger pieces in the colon. But the bread would have been little like modern breads. In order to get bread to rise when yeast is added, the wheat grains must contain a high level of gluten, which lends the dough a durable elasticity and therefore holds the pockets of air. Einkorn has low levels of gluten, so the bread made with it was probably hard, somewhat like a cracker, and rather tough on the teeth.

Using an electron microscope Oeggl also spotted tiny particles of charcoal attached to the bran, probably remnants of the baking process on a hot rock, or next to a fire. In addition to the einkorn, the cells of at least one other plant, possibly some herb, were present in the sample, and Oeggl concluded that they, too, had been part of his meal. He also found a tiny muscle fiber and a burned bit of bone, evidence that the Iceman might also have eaten a meat. What kind of meat Oeggl cannot yet say, nor can he determine how much of the meal the sample represented.

 

Not everything passing through the Iceman’s gut had been swallowed intentionally, or was even desirable. Oeggl also found the eggs of the human whipworm. Many people alive today who do not live in areas with flush toilets also carry the worm, which can cause unpleasant symptoms like stomach ache and diarrhea, or even lead to malnutrition. The scientists have no way of knowing whether the Iceman had any such complaints.

Scientists may never know what prompted the Iceman to leave the relatively hospitable valley with no water or food to speak of

The sample also contained many different varieties of pollen, whose strange and beautiful forms Oeggl saw under the electron microscope. Though some peoples are known to eat pollen, Oeggl believed that the quantity in his colon was too small to represent a meal. Instead, the pollen accidentally ended up in the man’s stomach because they either had landed in food or water he ingested, or were inhaled and became trapped in saliva which he then swallowed. Scientists had long wondered where the Iceman was coming from and where he was headed, but until the discovery of the pollen inside the corpse, no scientist had any convincing documentation for his last day. But the pollen provided a snapshot of the environment the Iceman was exposed to in the hours before his death.

The majority of the pollen came from the hop hornbeam tree, which grows in a warm environment. As soon as Oeggl recognized it under his microscope lens, he not only knew which side of the mountain the Iceman had been on shortly before his death, but also the season in which he died. The hop hornbeam tree blooms between March and June, and because the sperm inside the pollen grain, which normally decays after a short exposure to air or water, was still intact, Oeggl believed it had to have been absorbed relatively soon after its release from the tree. The nearest stands of that tree could have grown to the south of the Hauslabjoch, at least five or six hours away by foot. The high valleys to the north are just too cold to sustain it.

The pollen of this particular tree was, therefore, one key to understanding the Iceman’s last hours. It meant that the Iceman was almost certainly in the valley within half a day of his death. Previously scientists had speculated that the Iceman had died in the late summer, when he was surprised by an early storm while trying to cross the pass.

Oeggl readily acknowledges that scientists may never know what prompted the Iceman to leave the relatively hospitable valley with no water or food to speak of (a single sloe berry was found with his remains) and try to cross the mountain at a time of year when several feet of snow easily could have obscured the topography of the steep and rocky Alpine ridge. But his own interest in the Iceman’s demise is not yet exhausted. He expects that his meticulous analysis of the botanical and archaeological material recovered from the bottom of the shallow in which the man died will soon reveal more details about the circumstances of the Iceman’s death.

This feature originally appeared on the site for the NOVA program Ice Mummies.”

Although not shown in this excerpt, the iceman did show signs of modern day disease in his bones. it was evident mostly around his joints in the form of arthritis. This arthritis is directly due to his diet of einkorn wheat. As it does now, in glycating all cholesterol it comes in contact with causing arthritis, it did so then. It just did it slower, due to the indigestibility of the einkorn wheat, but it occurred never-the-less.

The damage it did at that time was much less than what it does now, due to the lack of fiber it has in today’s strains of wheat, mostly the bread wheat made of Triticum aestivum, and spelt, durum, and emmer, as well. Even though arthritis seldom kills its victim, the damage it does, doesn’t go away, ever. It’s stuck to you like paint on a wall and you can’t scrape it off. Most of today’s wheat has more gluten protein than its ever had in its history, making it gluier and stickier, which make it that much more dangerous , as this is what builds up the plaque in your system and you already know what damage plaque does.

Perhaps the biggest question this brings up is, with all of this information available for this many years, why hasn’t the FDA warned us that this food has these capabilities to do this kind of damage to the human body. Should the public be able to make an informed decision as to whether or not to continue to eat this food? Or should the FDA continue to ignore the evidence and fail to even let the public know what this food does? The question I want to ask, was there outside influence in their decision to not expose this information?

Someone is trying to hide this information. They’re want to leave it up to an uneducated public to automatically know what these studies have shown. In whose best interest would it be to keep this information hidden? Whose business would hurt the most if bread and corn and wheat products all of a sudden became taboo?  The grain industry?  Monsanto? The more I look into this, the more it spells out cover-up and because this is how the FDA treats this, it instills a lot of fear in me as to how healthy the rest of our food supply is.

The FDA has to know of the damage these grains do to the body when ingested, so why do they allow these industries continue to peddle their wares as if they’re healthy?

The Iowa Corn Fed Beef Ruse

Food, Inc. is a 2008 American documentary film directed by filmmakerRobert Kenner.[4] The Academy Award-nominated film examines corporate farming in the United States, concluding that agribusiness produces food that is unhealthy, in a way that is environmentally harmful and abusive of both animals and employees. The film is narrated by Michael Pollan and Eric Schlosser.[5][6]

The film received positive responses and was nominated for several awards, including the Academy Award and the Independent Spirit Awardsin 2009, both for Best Documentary Feature.

The film’s first segment examines the industrial production of meat (chicken, beef, and pork), calling it inhumane and economically and environmentally unsustainable. The second segment looks at the industrial production of grains and vegetables (primarily corn and soy beans), again labeling this economically and environmentally unsustainable. The film’s third and final segment is about the economic and legal power, such as food labeling regulations, of the major food companies, the profits of which are based on supplying cheap but contaminated food, the heavy use of petroleum-based chemicals (largely pesticides and fertilizers), and the promotion of unhealthy food consumption habits by the American public.[4][7] It shows companies like Wal-Mart transitioning towards organic foods as that industry is booming in the recent health movement.

Monsanto, the USDA and the FDA

Food, Inc is an eye opening documentary that deals with the agricultural industry’s influence in the USDA and the FDA, concentrating on the meat packing industry’s influence. In 2008 the Chief of Staff for the USDA was a former chief lobbyist for the beef industry. The head of the FDA was a former executive vice president for the national food processors Association. A majority of the staff at both the FDA and the USDA came from Monsanto or its subsidiaries, posing clear conflicts of interests when it comes to protecting consumers. These industries of Monsanto, the USDA and the FDA are responsible for more death and disease than all violence, which includes war and crime, as well as automobile accidents, all other addictions, including heroin, emphetimines and alcohol.

These industries and agencies are directly responsible for over 43,000,000 deaths each and every year.  That total continues to climb and it will continue until everyone decides that it’s time for a cure.

Decisions have been made in the past that clearly benefited industry while presenting clear dangers to humans. By not only allowing contaminated the food with worthless nutrition values or food contaminated by bacteria to sneak into our food supply, but by polluting our rivers and lakes in the process as well, with contaminated ground water from runoff from chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides.

This is just a taste of how unsustainable this is and it all starts with the grain industry, and our insatiable appetites for high sugar food, which is all forced upon up by this industry, the corn producers, wheat growers, and the crop seed companies owned by Monsanto, Novartis, Syngenta, Bayer et al.. Because there food require treatment with medications that this industry controls, they have full control over what happens inside your body, when you bend to their will and buy their products.

The grain industry in Iowa promoted the Iowa corn fed beef, to sell more corn, their largest industry. This had multiple, unforeseen consequences that not only damaged our food supply, but it polluted our resources more than what could have ever been foreseen. Because of our propensity to feed our addiction to sugar, the products that this industry has devised to get us to eat more of their junk food, are putting everyone who is suckered into this cycle, in the hospital with serious disorders. These disorders range from arthritis to cancer to HBP to CVDs and much more.

This is clearly a case where this self policing doesn’t work. It’s killing Americans right now because it doesn’tt. Evidence can be seen in the number of heart disease deaths, cancer deaths, Alzheimer’s deaths, not to mention all the pain, discomfort, and drug abuse caused by the pain. Although this is nice for the profits Monsanto, Syngenta and Bayer who also make drugs that treat the diseases there foods cause, it’s leading our country down a path of destruction that we’ll never recover from if we keep eating the food they advertise. They are playing on the addiction that they’ve inflicted upon the American people as well as the world to pad their profits and boost the influence.

This industry makes sure that sugar gets into baby food, to make sure that every baby who eats it becomes addicted to it, making them lifetime users of their poison. This unwilling addiction to sugar has brought this industry to a level of evil that’s never been seen in any industry. This industry is so intent on keeping us addicted to its lure, simply to increase your profits, that they are now responsible for over 65,753 deaths, worldwide daily. Yes I said 65,753 deaths daily. If this doesn’t bother you, then you have no conscience. Yes this is something to be appalled about and appalled I am and you should be too. This is simply more proof that it’s time for a cure.

50,000 food safety inspections in 1972 to just over nine thousand of them in 2008, the FDA is failing us big time. This is directly related to departmental cutbacks reducing the number of agents available to do the inspections. This is how conservative politicians think this industry and all other industries should police themselves. It would be nice if corporate America but was concerned about more than just their profits, but unfortunately the bottom line is what wins here and the bottom line is greed.

If the FDA can allow a food this dangerous through its monitoring, I’m afraid to even think about what else has snuck through?  The beef industry is already displayed their contempt for regulation through the mass production of beef that their industry is gone last 50 years

Couldn’t this dispute, at least, be closed that wheat can kill? What I would rather ask, was there outside influence in their decision to not issue any warnings? It was recently revealed that the sugar industry took steps to cover up the reports of damage that their food offered, so why wouldn’t it make sense that this closely  related industry, the grain industry, would take those same steps to cover up the same information about what their foods provided?

Was this another case of the industry policing itself and its watchdog, as well? Does this make a solid argument for self policing for corporate entities instead of government regulations? Our health is at stake here and we’ve allowed the FDA to escape judgment. That in my estimation is borderline criminal. 2893 deaths nationally, each day from CVDs, cancer, and Alzheimer disease combined. All three of these disorders are directly due to ECC, excessive carbohydrate consumption, which can be controlled. That’s enough people to wipe out 4 towns, the same size I grew up in. That’s unconscionable and we let it happen. Is that a shame on us for allowing it to happen?

We have direct control of these disorders. We don’t have to let this continue, but we do, simply to feed our addiction. We have a societal addiction to glucose, because it’s not just sugar, it’s what breaks down to glucose, and that includes not only sugar but all carbohydrates that break down to their most basic molecule, glucose. It’s our addiction to this glucose that clouds our judgment, masks our emotions, and controls our desires by gumming up the neurons in our brains every time we eat this food. This is exactly makes it addictive and hands total control over to the glucose, every time we eat it.

Yes, we do have full control over this, and we can stop it, but we have to stop the celebration of our addiction, to stop the addiction itself. To do that we need to instill taxes on the damage it’s doing when you eat this food. It’s time to hit abusers in the pocket book where it hurts the most. This has been successful with cigarettes, why can’t we make it just as successful with glucose? Why can’t we add a glucose tax to sugary drinks and bread and pasta products? These are the products that do the most damage, outside of alcohol which already has its own tax. Why shouldn’t these products have a tax also? When people start to see the real expense in their pocketbooks, they can then equate that expense to the real expense of the devastating effects this food has, that leads to cancer, heart disease, diabetes and dementia. This may be the only manner in which this addiction can be curbed.

Carbs, The Newly Discovered Death Sentence

The Newly Discovered Death Sentence of Starches & Carbohydrates

Baguette With Cereals Stock PhotoI know you’ve been told that you need your carbs, that they’re healthy for you and that they must make up a major part of your diet. How long have they been at the bottom of our food pyramid, telling us,
they should make up the largest portion of our meals? How long have we been heeding this messagePopcorn Stock Photo? I’ve been doing it all my life. Haven’t you?

But what if what you’ve been told was wrong?

What if we don’t need them in the quantities we’ve been told to eat them? gallery-thumbnailsCan you eat too many of them? Who doesn’t? It’s easy to do. That’s due to their addictive nature. We’ll get deeper into that, later.

What if you don’t need carbohydrates at all?
Can you live without them?
Can you live without them and still be healthy?

The question I would rather ask, if you can be healthier without them, wouldn’t you want to be?

danger-overeating-grim-reaper-touches-obese-man-eating-big-burger-vector-illustration-41031546==========health-care-diabetes-info-text-23318754

ABSOLUTELY!

I can tell you right now, you can actually live healthier without them. I can tell you that you can live much easier without them. I can tell you that I live with less pain without them and  you too can live with less pain without them. I can tell you that you’ll have fewer headaches without them, I don’t have headaches anymore. I can tell you that you that you won’t have intestinal problems anymore and i can tell you that you can save your brain and make it smarter, without them. Does this mean that you were lied to in the past, when you were told that they had to be the the largest portion of your diet? to eat them in excess? Examine the evidence, analyze and assess the information, then you be the judge.

You Do Not Need Carbohydrates. 

At least, you don’t need them in the amounts that people everywhere are eating them. By everywhere, I mean everywhere. No place can be found where carbs are not a major part of the diet. To narrow down the problem with carbs, this post and entire site, in general, deals entirely with the high starchy carbs you find in all cereal grains, primarily wheat, barley, and rye because of the gluten that comes with it. But that’s only part of it, which we’ll talk about later in greater detail, because when you ingest gluten, you also eat gliadin. This is the part of wheat that can cause brain damage. That’s something else that we’ll talk about later, in greater detail when we look at how carbs have the capacity to shrink your brain.

But we should start with why you should limit your carbohydrate intake to as little as possible. For starters,  to ensure yourself better health, lower weight and most importantly, less illness and disease throughout your life. Secondly, to reduce your your pain levels by reducing inflammation. Thirdly,  to reduce headaches of any nature. and fourthly, to get better sleep. The full gamut of benefits is really much greater and is covered on the benefits posts of a Life Without Carbs and My Life Without Carbs .

Because your body can’t burn carbohydrates (sugars), it has to turn them into fat, so they can used for fuel. Your body burns fat, not carbs. It actually likes fat so much, it would much rather have it spoon fed to it rather than make its own. The problem with using carbs to supply your fat, is that the fat it turns into, is not a good fat. Because carbs need insulin to be turned into fat, the insulin instructs that fat to go to storage, so all of it gets stored, instead of being used, and this is where the problem begins. It’s the consumption of this starchy food that leads to the massive amounts of weight gain that everyone who eats it, experiences. But then, most of you already know this. It’s just impossible to quit eating it, because of its addictive nature.

Fat Woman Stock Photo
A Simple Decision Can Change Your Health Forever
diet-lady-with-red-apple-100175663
Stop Eating Bread
Time for a disclaimer;

Not all people are subject to this weight gain from cereal grains, only about 90% of us are. That means, about 10% of the population have no intolerances to wheat, gluten or any of the components that come with it. That also means that for 90% of us, we do have an intolerance to it. That means, for 90% of us, we express an allergic reaction to it. The problem with that is, the allergic reaction we experience is weight gain, and this ‘expansion‘ happens, whether it’s wanted or not. Anyone of us who has any kind of an intolerance to wheat, gluten or any other components of this grain will express this ‘expansion’, when we eat it.

Whether you want to accept it or not, carbs are dangerous.

I know you probably don’t want to accept this, but bear with me, it’s necessary for you to know what you’re putting in your body and what’s it’s doing to you. Even the smallest amount causes your body distress. This is why we shouldn’t be eating this food to begin with, remember, (bread = carbs = disease = death);

For the short list, Carbs are responsible for;
  1. Primary Cause of type 2 diabetes 
  2. Primary Cause of Celiac Disease 
  3. Primary Cause of headaches
  4. Primary Cause of Peripheral Neuropathy
  5. Primary Cause of dementia and brain damage (type 3 diabetes)
  6. Primary Cause of heart disease
  7. Contribute to a multitude of gastrointestinal disorders
  8. Are the major contributor to more than half of all cancers
  9. Are the primary cause of LDL particles (“bad” cholesterol)
  10. Primary Cause of Epileptic Seizures
  11. Primary Contributor to Arthritis 
  12. Addictive Nature Making Them as 
  13. Deadly as Heroin, Cocaine, Tobacco and Alcohol.
  14. Primary Thief of Emotional Control
  15. Primary Cause of Of Tooth Decay
  16. Primary Cause of cause of aging
This can be validated by reading Wheat Belly and Grain Brain. Both of these publications will fully explain what these carbs do to you as well as how they do it. (Which is also covered in the rest of the posts on this site) Let’s take a closer look, right now, at the above manifestations that can and do occur from ingesting this food.
  • Type 2 diabetes is caused primarily by obesity and carbs play a
    Diabetic Lancet Device In Hand Stock Photo
    Is Diabetes Your Goal?

    major part in obesity. Carbs cause diabetes because of their need for insulin to be turned into fat so the body can use it. This is the beginning of a downhill spiral that forces the body to make adjustments that it would never have to do, if it were on a diet of protein and fats instead of carbohydrates. Because carbs have to be broken down to their most basic sugar, glucose to be used as a fuel, the glucose flows through your blood stream before it can be metabolized on a cellular level, to be used for that fuel. Glucose needs insulin, to be turned into fat to be digested, to use for energy. Glucose cannot enter the cell without insulin to turn it into fat. The problem is, most of the glucose, after it gets turned into fat, it gets stored as fat in any one of the multitude of fat cells on your body. This takes place in the visceral fat (fat around the internal organs) first and foremost, where it’s the most dangerous. The more carbs you eat, the more insulin your body needs to metabolize those carbs and with a body full of sugar (carbs), you need a lot of insulin to turn all those sugars into fat. After processing a diet full of high carbohydrate food over your lifetime, your body starts to have problems, manufacturing enough insulin, so you can continue to digest the carbs you continue to eat. Because your insulin production can’t keep up with your carb intake, the sugar doesn’t get turned into fat and stays in your blood stream as sugar. It begins to build up in your blood system and you become diabetic. Hence the name insulin dependent diabetes or type two diabetes. Remove the carbs, remove the excess blood glucose. If you remove the glucose from the equation, you remove the diabetes. If you take away the carbs, you take away the obesity and excess glucose. Can it really be that simple? Duh!

  • They cause headaches Dr Perlmutter, in his book, Grain Brain, takes 12 pages to explain how headaches are caused by carbohydrates, wheat and gluten in particular. As Dr Perlmutter is a board certified neurologist, and a nutritionist, I trust him. Wouldn’t you? Shouldn’t you?
  • Peripheral Neuropathy  Peripheral neuropathy (PN) is damage to or disease affecting nerves, which may impair sensation, movement, gland or organ function, or other aspects of health, depending on the type of nerve affected. Wikipedia says, It is important to recognize that glucose levels in the blood may spike to nerve-damaging levels after eating, even though fasting blood sugar levels and average blood glucose levels may still remain below normal levels (currently they typically are considered below 100 mg/dL for fasting blood plasma and 6.0% for HGBA1c, the test commonly used to measure average blood glucose levels over an extended period). Studies have shown that many of the cases of peripheral small fiber neuropathy with typical symptoms of tingling, pain, and loss of sensation in the feet and hands are due to glucose intolerance before a diagnosis of diabetes or pre-diabetes. Such damage often is reversible, particularly in the early stages, with changes in diet, exercise, and weight loss.”  According to Dr Davis, “A common cause of peripheral neuropathy is diabetes. High blood sugars occurring repeatedly over several years damage the nerves in the legs, causing reduced sensation (thus allowing a diabetic to step on a thumbtack without knowing it), diminished control over blood pressure and heart rate, and sluggish emptying of the stomach (diabetic gastroparesis), among other manifestations of a nervous system gone haywire.” He goes on to say, “Of 35 gluten-sensitive patients with peripheral neuropathy who were tested positive for the antigliadin antibody, the twenty-five participants on a wheat- and gluten-free diet improved over one year, while the ten control participants who did not remove wheat and gluten deteriorated.” and ” Formal studies of nerve conduction gluten-consuming group were also performed, demonstrating improved nerve conduction in the wheat- and gluten-free group, and deterioration in the wheat- and gluten-consuming group.”
  • Celiac disease Celiac disease is caused by a reaction to gliadin, a prolamin (gluten protein) found in wheat, and similar proteins found in the crops of the tribe Triticeae (which includes other common grains such as barley and rye).[3]  Gluten—which is Latin for “glue”—is a protein composite that acts as an adhesive material, binding flour together to make bread products, including crackers, baked goods, pasta and pizza dough. It’s this dough that likes to gum things up. Remember the last time you pigged out on pizza? Remember the indigestion? You think, that came from the sauce? Think again.
  • Dementia and Brain Damage   Wheat is associated with dementia and brain dysfunction, triggering an immune stock-photo-44379182-alzheimer-s-word-cloudresponse that infiltrates memory and mind. Dr. William Davis explains it best in his best seller, Wheat Belly, “In one particularly disturbing Mayo Clinic study of thirteen patients with the recent diagnosis of celiac disease, dementia was also diagnosed. Of those thirteen, frontal lobe biopsy (yes, brain biopsy) or postmortem examination of the brain failed to identify any other pathology beyond that associated with wheat gluten exposure. Prior to death or biopsy, the most common symptoms were memory loss, the inability to perform simple arithmetic, confusion, and change in personality. Of the thirteen, nine died due to progressive impairment of brain function.” Yes, you read that right: fatal dementia from wheat ingestion. Dr Perlmutter explains it in more detail in Grain Brain. If you want to join all the other seniors who are all losing their minds to Alzheimer’s disease or dementia of any sort, all you have to do is to continue to eat your bread, pasta, crackers, pancakes, donuts, tortillas and other wheat products and you’ll be right there with everyone else. When was the last 36717144-a-depress-senior-person-with-wood-backgroundtime you misplaced your keys or forgot something? But look on the bright side of it, if you want to keep eating your donuts, you can, as long as you don’t mind that you won’t get to bathe yourself after a while, because you’ll soon have it done for you. I talk more about why this happens.
  • Heart disease (cardiovascular disease) has too many risk factors to list here, because there are many kinds of cardiovascular disease, but one of the biggest of concern, is the excess sugar in the blood (diabetes), as well obesity (excess weight the body need to supply blood to), as well as the high blood pressure and the  high Heart With Stethoscope And Money Stock Photoamount of plaque in the blood due to the glycation of cholesterol thanks to the extra sugar in the blood.  It is estimated that 90% of Heart disease is preventable.[3]  All the causes listed here are caused by eating wheat. Life Insurance agents have to ask 4 times the standard premium to submit an application for a policy on anyone who had both diabetes and high blood pressure, because of the high underwriting risk. If they want a policy, they have to pay 4 times the standard premium because of their condition. And the condition is preventable. What’s keeping you from declaring your independence?
  • Gastrointestinal  disorders by gumming up your digestive system with the gluten that comes with all wheat, especially the high gluten bread and pizza dough. All this glue sticks to the walls of your intestines blocking the digestion of other foods as well as itself. Everyone I know who loves to consume their daily pastries, pastas, biscuits, rolls and crackers, already know about the cramps that build up in their stomachs, due to the amount of undigested food that can’t get through the glue to get digested. This gluten, that’s in wheat, barley, spelt, rye and almost every other variant of wheat, is the substance that causes all the damage to your digestive tract. This glue plays a major role in acid indigestion, acid reflux, heartburn, constipation, nausea, and even general stomach upset.  With 10 different disorders of the digestive tract, gluten plays a gumming role in each one of them. You know the gas and bloating you get, sometimes after a meal? Guess what? Yeah, the major cause of that can be tracked to starchy carbs. And it’s not even included in the above list. I can’t help but wonder why people continue to eat this pseudo food. I keep finding OTC medicine, that I’ve been purchasing over the years, just to combat, excess gas and bloating, acid indigestion, acid reflux, nausea, constipation, diarrhea, worse yet ulcers. All of these manifestations could be curbed with the reduction of  wheat and grains in our diets. That gurgling you just heard from your stomach, was that your stomach telling you to get your act together, and stop the carb intake?
  • Cancer gets its assist from the excess sugar that’s continuously circulating in your blood. It keep your ph levels in an acidic range which is an invitation to illness and disease. Acidosis is not something you want to have to deal with, with all the problems that it can produce. “Healthy human-arterial blood pH varies between 7.35 and 7.45. Changes in the pH of arterial blood (and therefore the extracellular fluid) outside this range result in irreversible cell damage.[1]Cancer loves it when your blood ph levels go into acidosis from the amount of sugar, carbs dump into your blood. This is what leaves your body open for attack, from a multitude of illnesses and diseases, cancer only being one of them. A more complicated explanation of how carbs cause cancer is on the post about the Diseases Caused By Plaque. Again, if cancer gets an assist from carbs, doesn’t it make sense that if you took away the carbs, you’d, at the least, hamper the disease’s, progression, if not stop it altogether. Can it be that simple? Can you give me a reason not try it and find out?
  • Epilepsy Illness Means Poor Health And Afflictions Epileptic seizures A peculiar syndrome of temporal lobe seizures unresponsive to seizure medications and triggered by
    calcium deposition in a part of the temporal lobe called the hippocampus (responsible for forming new memories) has been associated with both celiac disease and gluten sensitivity (positive antigliadin antibodies and HLA markers without intestinal disease).
  • Old Man With Walking Stick Showing Aged 3d Character Stock PhotoArthritis  is a disease of inflammation, which is aggravated by wheat more than anything else, because of the amount of sugars it dumps into the blood stream. Few other sources of sugar are higher than bread and wheat products. Not even table sugar itself. Arthritis is caused by inflammation. Inflammation is influenced by the amount of glucose in your blood, which in influenced by the amount of carbs you eat. Again, can it be that simple? Remove the carbs and you can ease, if not eliminate, it’s influence on Arthritis.
  • Addiction According to Dr Davis, “There is no doubt: For some people, wheat is addictive.” It has to do with the effect it has on our neurotransmitters and neuropeptides Phrase "addicted To Sugar" Made Of Red Sugary Candies Stock Photo, primarily Serotonin and Endorphins. “Endorphins (“endogenous morphine”) are endogenous opioid neuropeptides.” They’re the feel good neuropeptides . This is the same neuropeptide that’s activated by alcohol, tobacco, heroin, cocaine, marijuana and all other substances of an addictive nature, that give you the ‘morphine‘ feeling. When was the last time, you had to have something to eat? What was it, you hungered for? How long was it before you had eaten the previous time? How long can you go without eating? I often go 18 hours a day eating enough for 1 snack, because of my keto diet. Can you?
  • Emotional Distress and Disorder takes place every time you ingest this food, in any form it’s ingested, this is directly due to the to the fluctuations in your blood glucose, caused by the consumption of wheat and grain foods. Blood sugars go up, moods rise. blood sugars go down, moods depress. It’s that simple. The point I want to bring up, is it’s the rise and fall of your blood sugars that have the biggest impact on your emotional status and hence your emotional health. This in itself leads to behavior that, many times, should never occur in the first place. And it would never occur in the first place, if it weren’t for the abundance of this food in our diet. Behavior like violence, propagated by anger and antagonism. Both of these emotions are influenced as much, if not more than anything else, by the foods we eat. I submit that these fluctuations in emotional levels, are due to the changes in blood glucose, in all who eat this food, and all have been influenced by it. If you remove the wheat and grains, you remove the influence. If you remove the influence, you can easier retain your senses. It’s that simple. Behavior driven by fear, is quite possibly the biggest danger our society faces, and this food source is a major cause in driving this behavior, because of of it’s palatable nature. Sugar tastes good. People love to ear it. Mass consumption of it alters the emotional status of everyone who eats it, when their blood sugars fluctuate. It’s these fluctuations that cause a large majority of the abhorrent behavior that pervades society everywhere. It’s these fluctuations combined with the influence of mass media that are driving most of the terrorism in the world today. This theft of your emotional control, is what makes you a slave to corporate influence and subject to their desires, not yourdesires. How long do you want to keep your mental faculties?
  • They Rob You Of Your Teeth Ask any archaeologist, The appearance of rotten teeth marked the beginning of the agricultural age in our ancient history. It moved us from being hunter-gatherers, to farmers. Even though this transition was one of the first moves into civilization, It also served to introduce our bodies to the ravages of carbohydrate nutrition. Fortunately, for our ancestors sake, it wasn’t as dangerous then, as it is, now. It hadn’t been genetically modified.  The wheat that was grown then was unmodified einkorn. It didn’t rob us of our senses, then, because it didn’t fluctuate blood sugars to the extent, that all wheat and grain products it does today. Whatever was eaten had 100 times the fiber in it to slow down the absorption of sugars into the system, fluctuating the blood glucose, in the massive ways they do today. Hence, they didn’t cause the diseases, then, that it causes today. I submit, that it this sudden fluctuation in sugars, that is causing 88% of all illnesses and diseases, that we have to deal with in our modern society. That, in itself, makes us victims of our own advancement, going back to the start of civilization. But, that’s only looking at the past, at the reason why we’re ingesting this food that ruins our teeth. Now, for why it does that. Most of you already know why. It can be summed up in one word, sugar. Sugar rots teeth. Not meat, not cheese, not eggs, not fat, nothing that we consume rots teeth like carbohydrates do. The gluten that we love so much, makes it stick to our teeth, and this is where it begins to do its damage. The sugars work there way into the enamel of your teeth and the decay begins. You brush it away, you floss it away, and you do the best you very can, to keep you teeth as clean as possible. And when you make it to your 75 birthday, you pat yourself on the back, for still having all of your teeth. Or, do you? Have there been times when you couldn’t brush and floss? Do you brush every time you  take a sip of a sweet drink, or a drink of alcohol? All the sugar contained in those liquids, swirls around your mouth for hours and hours, working on decaying your teeth. Remove the sugar, remove the decay. It’s that simple.
  • Carbs  are the root cause of aging due to the AGEs that they cause. This factor is at the root of so many disorders and diseases, that it deserves a blog of it’s own. Read it here

With all of these ailments, illnesses, diseases, disorders, afflictions, and discomfort being caused by these carbs,cropped-time-cure-clock-prevent-disease-sickness-illness-medical-r-words-face-to-illustrate-fundraising-research-to-find-52768147.jpg

The questions I keep asking myself,

Who in their right mind would ever agree to submit themselves to this torture, by eating them?

Those who don’t know that they do!

Most of us know that sugar is bad for us, but what too many don’t want to fully recognize, is that carbs are sugar. With bread being the most popular carb we eat, every time we eat bread, we know that we’re eating carbs, but we don’t want to equate those carbs with sugar, while in all actuality they are. If Sugar Kills, Carbs Kill.

We know that Sugar Kills, but we don’t want to listen to that song because of our addiction to it.

All of the manifestations listed above have been documented in several publications, but they’ve seldom been presented for review and examination, to the medical community. Not until Dr’s Davis’ and Perlmutter’s books, Wheat Belly and  Grain Brain, came forth to warn us about the atrocities this supposedly nutritious food has been doing to us, did we even know we were eating something that is so poisonous (at least to the 90% of us, who are allergic to it).

This, in my estimation, is the biggest problem. Most people are allergic to it. I estimate that more than 90% of the population have some sort of intolerance to wheat, gluten or the gliadin that’s in the wheat. That says, that more than 90% of the people are allergic to bread, pasta, crackers, cereals like Wheaties, Wheat Germ, or Special K (to name just a few), any breaded chicken, shrimp, veal, all breaded fried appetizers, all pastries, all nutrition bars, all cereal bars, anything that has any percentage of wheat or wheat substance in it. The list is too long, even for the length of this post. The question this begs, is why is this food still advertised as being healthy?

Banner-improper-nutrition-health-care-concept-diseases-caused-unhealthy-nutrition-diet-

If 90% of the population, (as I speculate) are allergic to wheat, that explains the claim that I made at the beginning of this post,

You Do Not Need Carbohydrates.

If you’re one of the 90% who are allergic to them, you’d be much better off without them. With as many problems as this food brings with it, it makes absolutely no sense to continue eating it except to feed your addiction. So this brings us to our next problem, getting off of our addiction to them.

The question is then, how do we stop eating them? How do we get this food that’s been such an important part of our diet since time immemorial, out of our diet? For that, you’ll have to continue on to Carbs, how to cut back.”

If anybody feels that any of these conclusions are nothing more than opinion, my challenge to you is, prove me wrong. I invite you to research any and all statements, facts, data of any sort, or links, that I’ve provided in these posts, to invalidate any thing. I’ll even go to the extent to challenge anyone to prove me wrong, in any of my statements. It will generate a good civil discussion, and that’s something I can look forward to, anytime.

My sincere wish, is that everyone who reads these pages verifies and validates what they read. Only then will they know that the information contained within this site is 100% valid. Maybe then, all who read this, will change their behavior and in turn, change the behavior of the whole world.

My challenge to you, is to give a low carb diet a try, for 2 months. If you don’t see any benefit after just 2 months, of abstinence, go back to your high carb diet. But please, prepare yourself to suffer the consequences. You must have given it an honest try, and not cheated at all, for this to work. Any deviation, will not let your body go into ketosis and that’s what’s important.  You have to look at it like your life depends on it, because, it does.

If You Like Bread, You’re As Well As Dead,

Unless Your Change Your Eating Habits

Don’t Fall For Their Ruse