Get ready for a New Year’s challenge that will change your life forever. How many times have you promised yourself to finally lose that unwanted weight? How many times have you failed? This is nothing more than an exercise in self-destruction. This annual ritual results in lowering your self-esteem, not your weight.
You can feel good about yourself again. You can achieve a physical makeover that makes you look 10, even 20 years younger without Botox, filler injections, surgery, or without any unwanted health consequences. You can actually enjoy shopping for clothing. You can eliminate the need for a multitude of prescription drugs. You simply need a plan. Not just any plan, you need a plan that is backed up by facts and results.
The Wheat Belly 10-Day Grain Detox is unlike all other detox programs. It does not involve cleansing your body with various juices or a magical concoction of supplements purported to remove body “toxins,” nor is it a timetable of daily enemas that complicate your meeting schedule. It is a detoxification process from the toxic effects of wheat and grains, a detoxification in the truest sense of the term. It is not just a matter of not eating wheat and grains or of eating “gluten-free” (as critics often perceive it).
Once the toxic effects of wheat and grains have been removed, additional steps are necessary to undo the entire range of ill effects accumulated from their consumption.
This 10-Day Detox distills all the wisdom of the original Wheat Belly books and the lessons learned by the millions of people who have adopted this approach— incorporating the most insightful, cutting-edge, and effective strategies, and sharing them with you so that you can begin your path to weight and health success in a short 10 days.
This challenge brings with it a community of people who understand what you have gone through and are here to support you as you become the healthy person you desire to be. It all begins with committing to the 10-Day Challenge. Just 10 days! Don’t you owe it to yourself?
Related
I have been following the plan for 2 years now with great success. I have lost weight, gotten off medications and feel better.
What I notice is that much information on the blog and website has to do with starting the program. I would love to see more information about the long term needs.
For instance, is there a point when you can stop certain supplements…or add in other ones?
Now that I do more fasting…and cant eat as much…I am wondering if I need to add a multi vitamin or b vitamins like my family doctor suggests.
Barbara wrote: «What I notice is that much information on the blog and website has to do with starting the program.»
Only to some extent — yesterday, for example, the speculative article on Lactobacillus reuteri appeared here.
For many people, of course, no on-going support is needed. Follow this diet and lifestyle, wave goodbye to optional ailments, get great health, and just check in from time to time for new insights. I’m not aware of any specific attention that must be given to steady-state on the program.
For some, however, once the common provocations of modern food-like substances are swept away, and the consensus sickcare minefield is navigated on things like thyroid, individual concerns do remain. The ideal place to explore such issues is probably the [subscription] Undoctored Inner Circle site.
re: «For instance, is there a point when you can stop certain supplements…or add in other ones?»
Here’s my take on that from last year: Supplement Central on UIC.
re: «I am wondering if I need to add a multi vitamin or b vitamins like my family doctor suggests.»
The vast majority of multi-vitamins are worth avoiding entirely, due primarily to calcium, possibly adverse forms of B vitamins, and being unbalanced and uneconomic for everything else. What exact forms of B9 and B12 has your GP advised you to use?
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
My GP is agreeable to no grains and low carb but suggested adding a B complex. Not sure why. But I often wonder if I get enough nutrients from food. Considering IF and not being able to eat as much as I used to.
barbara neimeister wrote: «My GP is agreeable to no grains and low carb but suggested adding a B complex.»
From a program perspective, supplementing B vitamins is optional (except for vegetarians, where it may be essential).
B vitamins are in any event secondary to the program core supplements: vitamin D, magnesium, fish oil, iodine, prebiotic fiber, and periodic probiotics. If those are overlooked, B benefits are apt to be trivial.
And I asked about what forms/products were suggested to you, because the fake folic acid and cheap cyanocobalamin forms found in typical B complexes and multi-vitamins are suboptimal, if not actually adverse, for some 40% of the population. Taking a random B complex is fine if you’ve had your MTHFR status thoroughly evaluated, but I won’t be surprised you haven’t.
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
“80% of modern sickcare expense is for utterly optional ailments”
I like that term “utterly optional ailments.” I think some ailments might become permanent or more stubborn as the years pass, especially in future generations. The USDA food pyramid needs a revision because it would surely be from a source the public trusts. I think more people would change if dietary advice came from a perceived authority on the matter (the USDA).
DLM wrote: « think some ailments might become permanent or more stubborn as the years pass, especially in future generations.»
It’s the getting them that is truly optional. The getting rid of them is subject to how reversible any complications are.
The poster child for this, of course, is the continuum spanning metabolic syndrome, through (and beyond) Type II diabetes. T2D is no more a “disease” than ALD (alcoholic liver disease). Both, trivially avoidable, are largely predictable biologic responses to chronic metabolic over-exposures. The label “disease”, however, does come in handy for those who pretend to not know what causes T2D, but stand ready to “treat” it anyway, and bill for that.
re: «The USDA food pyramid needs a revision because it would surely be from a source the public trusts.»
It’s not the US Department of Lobbyists pyramid scheme anymore. Its been MyPlateOfMetabolicSyndrome for some time now. Anyone who waits for it to get corrected will be maimed by it before that happens. I tend to agree with Tom Naughton on the objective here, which is to get people to stop paying attention to the USDA. With all the official diets, ADA(any), AHA, AMA, FDA, HHS, USDA, etc., politics, commercial interests, and out-of-control egos are likely to make it impossible for them to ever reach sane conclusions on human nutrition.
What’s changed, in consensus nutrition, since I asked over 7 years ago: So who wants to deliver this message to you, and when?
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
I agree with DLM, today is my 4th year anniversary on W.B. And I am so thankful for finding this plan. I’ve kept the weight off and feel great. I too found it to be the easiest plan to follow. Even allowing some wine now and then Now ,are coconut vinegar and coconut aminos o.k I have a been reading Dr. Bruce Fifes Coconut Miracle Book among others and like the recipes,which some call for aminos and coconut vinegar. I would like to try both if i am able to find them, and if they are alright on the W.B. plan. Thank you, Patti
Patti wrote: «Now ,are coconut vinegar and coconut aminos o.k»
Most of the products are suspiciously reticent about displaying their Nutrition Facts panels and Ingredients list on the web, but what I’ve been able to see suggests:
Coconut vinegar
seems to be fine, but check the NF panel. Those I’ve seen say zero net carbs, but one nutrition site claimed a GI (glycemic index) of 35 (which is not exactly low, and we want it to be zero).
Coconut aminos
look like they might be as much as 25% net carbs, so mind the portion size. And be wary of brands puffing about “low sodium”, as they clearly have no real clue about human nutrition.
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
If Dr. Davis reads this, I just wanted to say the most sincere thank you for your diet/lifestyle and health research. I dropped wheat and grains because of suspected celiac disease a few years ago, found my health and life changed drastically (for the better), but added in all the WB supplements after discovering more of your information and have felt amazing mentally and physically ever since. I’ve hardly craved junk food or alcohol since and was able to finally lose weight cutting down to almost six pack abs. I think this is some of the easiest, almost immediate, and most rewarding self improvement anybody can implement. Anybody willing to take that first step will surely never regret it.
Also, thanks Bob Niland for all your thorough, helpful and interesting answers. I hope you both have an excellent year ahead.
DLM wrote: «Also, thanks Bob Niland for all your thorough, helpful and interesting answers. I hope you both have an excellent year ahead.»
You’re welcome, and thanks for your participation.
re: «I think this is some of the easiest, almost immediate, and most rewarding self improvement anybody can implement.»
Yep. We’re basically reverting to the standard diet of 20000 BCE, or so, with some adjustments for convenience, food safety, and compensation for various distortions in modern foods. Perhaps the biggest challenge for people are the realizations:
• over 98% of what passes for “food” is not suitable for routine consumption
• 80% of modern sickcare expense is for utterly optional ailments
• most of official and common alternative dietary advice is completely mistaken
• Standard of Care is often Standard of Catastrophe
• we need to become our own final authorities, for some time to come
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
I live in Australia and I have not seen your wheat free products on our shelves here. Are they available in Australia do you know? If so can you please tell me where I could purchase them.
I have been trying to cut right back on wheat but do like some baked items and haven’t been able to find appropriate things to use instead of flour.
I love your emails and they have helped me. Thank you.
Jill
Jill Fisscher wrote: «I live in Australia and I have not seen your wheat free products on our shelves here.»
Wheat Free Market itself does not appear to have a presence outside of the US, nor ship anywhere but there. You’ll need to ask WFMF about any plans directly, perhaps via their Contact Page. As far as I know, Dr. Davis is just a product/content consultant to them, and does not direct business strategy.
WFMF does have an affiliate in Canada (The Low Carb Grocery), who do export, but in the case of export to Australia, the shipping charges, import duties/taxes, and import controls on foodstuffs might throw up insurmountable roadblocks.
If you haven’t already, use a search engine to find regional discussions about this issue. I was quickly able to find some tips using the phrase “australia low carb sources”.
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
In reading on the http://www.VitaminDcouncil.org site for years, one theme has been that tests on vitamin D are usually too low in quantity, so no results show up. Here is a recent study from Finland. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5541280/ It talks about the quantity needed for each age and how the The Statistical Error in the Estimation of the Recommended Dietary Allowance of Vitamin D gave false information.
Siena wrote: «Here is a recent study from Finland.»
Thanks for the link to that 2017 survey paper. Lest anyone get alarmed about it suggesting a radically new target for vitamin D, note that the Units of Measure for 25-hydroxy titers are nmol/L (75-100), and not the ng/mL more commonly discussed on the blog and in Dr. Davis’ books.
75-100 nmol/L is still too low on WB/Undoctored advice, as that’s just 28-40 ng/mL. This program suggests a target range of 60-70 ng/mL (150-175 nmol/L).
The Finland connection is interesting, because vitamin D from sun exposure is likely a real problem there. It might well take the IU doses described in the paper to get those age brackets into the 28-40 ng/mL range.
In any event, program advice is not based on IU dosing, but on 25-OH titer testing, twice annually until homeostasis is achieved and seasonal adjustment is determined, unless, of course, one is a 23-year-old cruise ship lifeguard, in which case no supplements might be needed at all.☼
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
I appreciate your newsletter but I’m shocked that you think it’s ok to monitize it with all these spam my ads!
It will definitely cause me to be very severe as I decide whether this is worth my time and the space in my inbox. I think you’ll see a lot less subscribers stay with you.
I’ve never seen anything like it and I receive dozens of email for respected authorities— like you. Or how I used to think of your work.
Offer your own product like your book on amazon but this approach demeaning.
Best wishes to you!
Robin wrote: «I appreciate your newsletter but I’m shocked that you think it’s ok to monitize it with all these spam my ads!»
Are you seeing 3rd party ads in the emails, or just on the WB Blog?
In any event, as regards the blog ads, see this remark earlier this month for a tip on how to avoid them.
If you are a long time reader of the blog, have you noticed a change in content recently? Due to the script management plug-in I use, I never see them. So if the WordPress template in use here recently changed, I wouldn’t have noticed at the time.
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
Very frequently, in the last couple of weeks, I’ve gotten a spam of free $1000 visa or Walmart ; I believe it only hits iPhone users. Other folks have been complaining about this. They open up when I go to a wheatbellyblog.com link. I don’t know how to make it stop. I’ve been marking it as spam/suspicious.
Tina wrote: «…I’ve gotten a spam of free $1000 visa or Walmart…»
I’m not clear on how this is presenting itself. Is this a browser pop-up when you visit a blog page, or are you getting spam emails at the address you enter when commenting?
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)
Article on Medscape this morning. What does this mean for us in the context of the WB/Undoctored program? Bone health is a pet topic of mine. We knew this about calcium but I’m surprised the vitamin D didn’t help. I don’t know what kind of doses and levels they were looking at. The article concludes: “However, among men and women healthy enough to still live in the community, the “findings do not support the routine use of these supplements,” the authors stress.”
——————-
Supplements Do Not Prevent Fractures in Healthy Older Adults
A meta-analysis of multiple randomized trials does not support the use of either calcium or vitamin D supplements or their combination to reduce fracture risk of any kind in healthy older adults, Chinese investigators reaffirm.
“The increased social and economic burdens for osteoporosis-related fractures worldwide make the prevention of such injuries a major public health goal,” Jia-Guo Zhao, MD, Tianjin Hospital, China and colleagues write. “[But] results of this meta-analysis showed that calcium, calcium plus vitamin D, and vitamin D supplementation alone were not significantly associated with a lower incidence of hip, nonvertebral, vertebral, or total fractures in community-dwelling older adults,” they observe.
“[And] these results were generally consistent regardless of the calcium or vitamin D dose, sex, fracture history, dietary calcium intake, and baseline serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations,” the authors conclude.
The study was published in the December 26 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Kali wrote: «Article on Medscape this morning.»
Noticed it. Saw “meta” in the Abstract, and that it’s on JAMA (that’s 2 strikes), so was hoping to not need to follow-up on it, but decided I wouldn’t be surprised if someone brought it up.
Now that I’ve taken a peek, I see that the paper is pay-walled, so the questions I raise below cannot be answered without paying the tribute (and perhaps not even then if the work was sufficiently incompetent, as most metas are). Being pay-walled is strike 3. It’s also consistent with an objective of creating a lot of supplement fright headlines, with no ability for the general public to look at the meta and see if there’s any “there” there.
From the top, the paper is a meta; a paper about papers. So the very first question would be how the cites were selected and screened. Medical guild publications are notorious for finding excuses to exclude substantive trials that contradict their consensus claptrap (see the fat & heart disease dust up earlier this year).
The next question is what range of vitamin D supplementation was used, and how recorded (recall reports or titers). Unenlightened trials commonly use consensus dosing/titers for D, which are severely subclinical (this gambit is popular in fish oil trials too). Odds are the populations were at D titers of 50%, if not less, of Vitamin D Council and WB/Undoctored recommendations.
The next problem is that we already know that calcium supplementation doesn’t work for bone health, and is a flat out mistake for all-cause mortality. If I wanted to design an RCT to “prove” that D doesn’t work for bone health, I’d definitely include Ca supps. Ca supps are discouraged when following WB/Undoctored. Get your Ca from food, and make sure it gets absorbed, which leads to my next question.
What diets were the subject populations on? Here, we can guess: standard diets, which means loaded with grains that impair mineral uptake (if not actively leech bones), and deficient in minerals (esp. magnesium), and deficient in K vitamins.
So, shocking revelation, or fake news? Without seeing the full text of this double-secret loo paper, it’s hard to say, but I’m not willing to bet $30 to find out.
________
Blog Associate (click my user name for details)