>>like some of those American Indian tribes that tried and failed to build corn-based civilisations in pre-Columbian times. Umm taking into account the Aztec,

>>like some of those American Indian tribes that tried and failed to build corn-based civilisations in pre-Columbian times. Umm taking into account the Aztec, Maya, Inca and all the aboriginal nations that preceded and co-existed with them I would like to disagree with the failure part. It is as possible to build a civilization from corn as it was from rice and wheat. Oh also, this whole "grains are bad for you because of our caveman roots" thing has to be the least provable piece of speculation passing around the Internet these days. It is backed by few facts and much smugness. I like to speculate too though. I think the problem with corn is the petroleum refining style approach that is taken with it. If you read up about it corn is treated as almost like a chemical feedstock. The resulting "products" are a public health disaster hidden from scrutiny by the money of Archer Daniels Midland etc and politicians from the Corn Belt. The problem with wheat is the post WWII intensive breeding programs designed to maximize yield and gluten content. Gluten makes a easier feedstock for bakers and food product manufacturers. It also counts towards protein measurements and that directly relates to price. Many governments like Saudi Arabia that buy wheat for their entire nation look for higher protein levels and bumping gluten is a nice shortcut. I believe these market driven wheat modifications have produced unexamined changes and proteins that negatively affect the health of a significant percentage of the population. I believe in the coming years we will see a movement promoting the revival of "heritage" strains of wheat like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Fife_wheat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Fife_wheat.