Wheat Belly...

I heard it too plus read a lot about it. Wheat is not healthy it's also not mend to be to eat by human beings. This besides of the fact how it's prepared and what they added to it. I started changing our diets (including the kids) so the most 1 "wheat" meal a day instead of 2-3. I can't say yet if it will work but I hope so. Since we have enough allergies, bad health problems already. I don't know if we are able to skip it all but it's worth trying it.

I think it's terrible how so much of our food has become modified and has been scientifically "enhanced", when in reality it is becoming worse for us. For example, things like pesticides and growth enhancers are added and it ends up producing an unnaturally grown and less healthy version of the original fruit, vegetable or crop.

Since you have used the term "Wheat Belly" you are clearly referring to this page (or something very similar): http://www.wheatbellyblog.com/2012/02/wheat-is-not-genetically-modified/ Please read the article carefully and in full! Dr Davis makes it quite clear that wheat as sold today is NOT "genetically modified" in the sense that the term is usually used and that he never said that it was. All the same, wheat is not a truly 'natural' product. It has been bred and cross-bred many times over many thousands of years and the grain that we know today is the result of human intervention and selection which probably could never have happened in the wild. Where I disagree with Dr Davis, however, is when he says that hybridization is WORSE than genetic modification. He claims that "hybridization, backcrossing, and mutation-inducing techniques are difficult to control, unpredictable, and generate plenty of unexpected results." Yes, of course they produce some 'unpredictable' results - that is the nature (and excitement) of hybridisation! The farmers who have done it for thousands of years, however, have carefully selected the plants which exhibit the traits which are worthwhile and have bred them, throwing away the ones which don't meet the requirements. Suggesting that the techniques are 'difficult to control' is pure NONSENSE! He goes on to say: "Imagine we were to apply similar techniques of hybridization and mutagenesis to mammals – we’d have all manner of bizarre creatures and genetic freaks on our hands." Well, the fact is that EXACTLY the same techniques have been applied to dogs, cattle, sheep, pigs and almost all other domestic animals. If you compare them with their wild relatives, we DO have 'all manner of bizarre creatures and genetic freaks'. In fact, it is the very nature of such 'genetic freakiness' which makes them more useful to us! Domestic cattle have been bred to produce more tender meat and less fat than their wild ancestors and cows produce FAR more milk than is needed for the calves they produce. All of that is because of human intervention. It is NOT the genetic (or any other) modification of wheat which is the culprit. It is OUR OWN individual ignorance about what makes a good diet which causes obesity. The carbohydrate and protein which we get from wheat is, on the whole, a GOOD thing in moderation - though some people are intolerant of some of the proteins and need to avoid wheat glutens. Likewise (and for similar racially genetic reasons), some people are intolerant of some dairy products and have to avoid cow's milk. That is not a problem caused by the food (or the way that it has been modified), it is a problem caused by OUR OWN genetics and the fact that we are encouraged by manufacturers and the media to forget about what constitutes a proper and balanced diet! People whose natural diet historically relies on rice, for example, should NOT be encouraged to eat wheat bread and potatoes if they are genetically inclined to be intolerant to those foods.