3 ms·

As a longtime celiac sufferer, it would be in my best interest and that of my descendants for all of those varieties to be eradicated, like smallpox. There’s n

As a longtime celiac sufferer, it would be in my best interest and that of my descendants for all of those varieties to be eradicated, like smallpox. There’s nothing especially beneficial about wheat as a food, and it has drawbacks, such as how it is the only food I can think of with its own autoimmune disease.

madengr 8y ago
The article says wheat has 5x the human genome. I assume that means it’s very high in protein. Isn’t that what most of the world needs, as opposed to mostly carbohydrates?
- code_duck 8y ago
  High in protein compared to what? Is wheat better than millet, sorghum, quinoa, teff, oats, corn, and rice, or is it just a European tradition to base cuisine on wheat? I’m not an agricultural or genetic expert and I have no idea what relation genome complexity has to proteins or how that makes it useful to humans. Overall wheat is not very high in protein... it’s a crop grown for carbohydrates. If you were trying to fulfill your daily protein needs from wheat, you’d fall quite short. I suppose it complements more adequate sources. The protein it does have - gluten - isn’t especially digestible compared to alternatives like corn or rice, though it does have a texture that people find pleasant or useful in baking. Crops like lentils and soy are what you grow if you want to grow protein.
  - 3x 8y ago
    Wheat has a decent protein-to-carbohydrate ratio and you can make seitan from it, which is a great alternative to tofu / tempeh and other legume-based protein sources.
    - code_duck 8y ago
      Sure, seitan (aka wheat gluten) is a protein source. How many other grains have a decent protein to carbohydrate ratio though, and are more easily digestible, and don’t cause crippling autoimmune disease or digestive dysfunction in 1-5% of people? You can get concentrated protein from any grain with similar nutritional benefits. Personally, my sensitivity to gluten has just about ruined my life - right now, my life is on hold and I am staying in a hotel in Rochester while obtaining treatment from the Mayo Clinic’s celiac specialists. Not sure that anyone can say that about quinoa or millet.
- tejtm 8y ago
  no, it means nothing of that sort, it just means the DNA is five times longer, not that there are five time as many genes encoding five times as many proteins. It is more like there is more DNA padding around the genes as a protection from virus which tend to jump limited distances along a genome. sorry for leading with a negative, I know it can come across more strongly than I intend.
skookumchuck 8y ago
I can't say I support your desire to eradicate wheat. I love bread, and without bread probably half the human population would starve. Most of the rest would likely die in the resulting upheaval. There was a scifi story about such a scenario, I think it was entitled "No Blade of Grass" by John Christopher.
- code_duck 8y ago
  No, wheat is not crucial in a way that people would starve if it were not available. There are dozens of other foods that could be grown which would provide equivalent nutritional benefit. It is not a unique or particularly advantageous source of any nutrition. It does not have any unique advantageous growing properties. Additionally, while many people are not familiar with cereal grains other than the close wheat family, there is really nothing that different about their flavor or how they taste in cooking. The only useful, unique thing about wheat is that the protein provides a texture in baked goods and sauces that people find pleasant. When forced to explore alternative grains for a couple of years, and having eaten my mothers alternative grain cooking before that, I learned that the gluten-free foods often actually taste better. Wheat is necessary and flavorful like Windows is user friendly and required for your computer to function. If you put my comment in context, I am not intending to advocate any sort of eradication program for wheat. I’m responding with mild hyperbole to the notion that it is particularly critical to preserve wheat. The main idea that I am promoting here is that there’s nothing special about wheat, other than that it is particularly harmful to some people.
zhte415 8y ago
I like bread. I like wheat noodles. As a child I was allergic to all dairy products with serious eczema from head to toe, even a drop of dairy would initiate it, entire body covered in scabs, arms in wet bandage inner-wrapping, dry outer bangage should I get exposed to even a little milk product. Yet I do not want all dairy products to be banned, they bring valuable nutrition to diverse groups of people, I was just unlucky, but very lucky to be born in a country with a health service that cares. Wheat is a wonderful food, extremely nutritious, that has been the cornerstone of the development of multiple civilisations. Why eradicate it? Just avoid it.
- code_duck 8y ago
  Wheat is not wonderfully nutritious. It provides nothing special and is even somewhat problematic. If the global food industry was capable of keeping wheat out of their food, that would be fantastic. Unlike dairy, almost all dry foods are contaminated with gluten unless you go to lengths to obtain food that is not.
  - dcbadacd 8y ago
    I'd like to hear about a food that isn't in some way problematic, can you list any?
    - code_duck 8y ago
      The problems I am referring to are celiac and non-celiac gluten sensitivity. There are at least a dozen other grains that provide the benefits of wheat without those disadvantages, and that is to what I am referring. Rice, corn, sorghum, buckwheat, millet, teff, quinoa, lentils, and and so on.
      - dcbadacd 8y ago
        So the "even somewhat problematic" part of wheat is problematic to only 1% of the entire population and that's an argument to kill off all wheat, yeah, no, try again.

madengr 8y ago

The article says wheat has 5x the human genome. I assume that means it’s very high in protein. Isn’t that what most of the world needs, as opposed to mostly carbohydrates?

code_duck 8y ago
High in protein compared to what? Is wheat better than millet, sorghum, quinoa, teff, oats, corn, and rice, or is it just a European tradition to base cuisine on wheat? I’m not an agricultural or genetic expert and I have no idea what relation genome complexity has to proteins or how that makes it useful to humans. Overall wheat is not very high in protein... it’s a crop grown for carbohydrates. If you were trying to fulfill your daily protein needs from wheat, you’d fall quite short. I suppose it complements more adequate sources. The protein it does have - gluten - isn’t especially digestible compared to alternatives like corn or rice, though it does have a texture that people find pleasant or useful in baking. Crops like lentils and soy are what you grow if you want to grow protein.
- 3x 8y ago
  Wheat has a decent protein-to-carbohydrate ratio and you can make seitan from it, which is a great alternative to tofu / tempeh and other legume-based protein sources.
  - code_duck 8y ago
    Sure, seitan (aka wheat gluten) is a protein source. How many other grains have a decent protein to carbohydrate ratio though, and are more easily digestible, and don’t cause crippling autoimmune disease or digestive dysfunction in 1-5% of people? You can get concentrated protein from any grain with similar nutritional benefits. Personally, my sensitivity to gluten has just about ruined my life - right now, my life is on hold and I am staying in a hotel in Rochester while obtaining treatment from the Mayo Clinic’s celiac specialists. Not sure that anyone can say that about quinoa or millet.
tejtm 8y ago
no, it means nothing of that sort, it just means the DNA is five times longer, not that there are five time as many genes encoding five times as many proteins. It is more like there is more DNA padding around the genes as a protection from virus which tend to jump limited distances along a genome. sorry for leading with a negative, I know it can come across more strongly than I intend.

skookumchuck 8y ago

I can't say I support your desire to eradicate wheat. I love bread, and without bread probably half the human population would starve. Most of the rest would likely die in the resulting upheaval. There was a scifi story about such a scenario, I think it was entitled "No Blade of Grass" by John Christopher.

code_duck 8y ago
No, wheat is not crucial in a way that people would starve if it were not available. There are dozens of other foods that could be grown which would provide equivalent nutritional benefit. It is not a unique or particularly advantageous source of any nutrition. It does not have any unique advantageous growing properties. Additionally, while many people are not familiar with cereal grains other than the close wheat family, there is really nothing that different about their flavor or how they taste in cooking. The only useful, unique thing about wheat is that the protein provides a texture in baked goods and sauces that people find pleasant. When forced to explore alternative grains for a couple of years, and having eaten my mothers alternative grain cooking before that, I learned that the gluten-free foods often actually taste better. Wheat is necessary and flavorful like Windows is user friendly and required for your computer to function. If you put my comment in context, I am not intending to advocate any sort of eradication program for wheat. I’m responding with mild hyperbole to the notion that it is particularly critical to preserve wheat. The main idea that I am promoting here is that there’s nothing special about wheat, other than that it is particularly harmful to some people.

zhte415 8y ago

I like bread. I like wheat noodles. As a child I was allergic to all dairy products with serious eczema from head to toe, even a drop of dairy would initiate it, entire body covered in scabs, arms in wet bandage inner-wrapping, dry outer bangage should I get exposed to even a little milk product. Yet I do not want all dairy products to be banned, they bring valuable nutrition to diverse groups of people, I was just unlucky, but very lucky to be born in a country with a health service that cares. Wheat is a wonderful food, extremely nutritious, that has been the cornerstone of the development of multiple civilisations. Why eradicate it? Just avoid it.

code_duck 8y ago
Wheat is not wonderfully nutritious. It provides nothing special and is even somewhat problematic. If the global food industry was capable of keeping wheat out of their food, that would be fantastic. Unlike dairy, almost all dry foods are contaminated with gluten unless you go to lengths to obtain food that is not.
- dcbadacd 8y ago
  I'd like to hear about a food that isn't in some way problematic, can you list any?
  - code_duck 8y ago
    The problems I am referring to are celiac and non-celiac gluten sensitivity. There are at least a dozen other grains that provide the benefits of wheat without those disadvantages, and that is to what I am referring. Rice, corn, sorghum, buckwheat, millet, teff, quinoa, lentils, and and so on.
    - dcbadacd 8y ago
      So the "even somewhat problematic" part of wheat is problematic to only 1% of the entire population and that's an argument to kill off all wheat, yeah, no, try again.