On the evils of wheat

Dogman wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote:

On the order of 30-40% of the population benefits from reduced total
carb intake and reduced glycemic load.

The percentage of the population that could benefit from reduced total
carb intake and reduced glycemic load is ~ the same percentage of the
population that is overweight, pre-diabetic, and/or already diabetic.

Exactly. Much larger than the percentage of population who have
symptoms specific to any one food.

The size of the effect of intolerances to the modern varieties of wheat
in specific is simple to calculate.

The best way to do it (actually, the only way to do it) is to stop
eating grains and see what happens.

n=1.

Thus creditting the wrong thing just like I wrote. People who benefit
from lower carb in general are going to benefit from replacing wheat
with cauliflower, but it's not because it was wheat. They'd get equal
benefit from replacing potatoes with cauliflower. People with Crones,
Celiac, IBS benefit from removing wheat but that's because they benefit
from removing any grain. People intolerant to spelt and kamut benefit
from removing wheat but it's not because of the differences in modern
wheat grains. And then there are the ones who actually are intolerant
of modern wheat but who don't get symptoms from spelt or kamut - These
are the ones who Dr Davis benefitted correctly.

I've encountered people who have problems with modern wheat but not with
spelt or kamut. They exist. Dr Davis is not wrong in the benefits of
his plan to them, nor is he wrong in his explanation of why his plan
works to them. They are a small segment of those who benefit from low
carbing.