[Nora52]

I prefer Wheat Belly Diet by a long way!! :-) Confirmed by the huge list of above.. :-) They are similar but WB feels a much easier place to be! I really like it. No limits on coffee for starters LOL

[kaplods]

If you prefer a simplified paleo diet that's fine, but it is a paleo diet, regardless. If you're going to criticise paleo diets, you should know whether or not your criticisms are valid of all or even most paleo diets and they're not.

Personally I don't find the ten to fifteen foods I listed such a huge list, especially since I eat most of them in small amounts that fit into most paleo guidelines.

Most paleo diets do not limit coffee, but a few do - mostly those who aren't judging paleo by its effects on the body but by the actual foods paleo people ate. That's not particularly helpful, because truly paleo foods aren't available or palatable to modern folks (Insects make up a HUGE part of most paleo diets, and most Americans would rather not get most of their protein from insects).

The paleo diets based on blood sugar control have a more lenient view of low-carb, low-calorie, non-inflammatory modern foods, and they also limit or avoid "paleo-available" foods that were high in carb (but also exceedingly rare) such as honey and maple syrup.

Wheat Belly is virtually identical to all the other paleo diets that focus primarily on blood sugar and inflammation controled.

In addition, most paleo diets do not require a 100% paleo-available diet. Instead they advocate your diet contain 80 to 90% of foods as paleo as posible, and that modern non-paleo foods be chosen judiciously. Of the non-paleo foods you choose to eat, you choose mostly lower-calorie, lower-carb options (because the main goal is blood sugar control and non-inflammatory foods).

You can choose to follow or create a simple paleo diet like Wheat Belly or even one simpler. Or you can understand the reasons paleo diets work, and while that's more complicated in the short-term, it's also much easier in the long-run, because then you can judge every food, including non-paleo foods according to their likely impact on blood sugar and inflammation.

This is why I personally do include caffeinated non-calorie beverages, including tea (not coffee so much as I've never been a coffee fan). It's also why I include some artificial sweeteners, because they're not known to be inflammatory in small quantities and because they do not affect my blood sugar (some people report different effects, so for diabetics and others with blood sugar issues they might want to consider blood sugar monitoring if they suspect blood sugar effects). And it's why I include fermented dairy. I've learned to recognize an inflammatory response - and I do have a negative reaction to fresh dairy, but not to aged/cultured dairy (which I'm assuming is due to a mild lactose-intolerance).


Wheat Belly is a great paleo diet, but it isn't significantly different from other blood-sugar regulating paleo diets (which are most of them). If it's simpler format works well for you, that's great - but you're going to be eating pretty much identically to most other paleo dieters. And that's actually the beauty of all the paleo diets. 90% of the diet is going to be very similar from one plan to another, and the differences are going to be significant only for a few people who are sensitive to those foods.

In the short-run, I think the simplest plans have an advantage. You don't have to understand why it works, you just have to know that it does.

However, their limitations lie in the fact that you can't apply the knowledge to foods that you don't know how to classify. When you understand WHY paleo diets work, you don't need a list of foods you can and can't have, because you can judge each food by its similarity to other foods. You can have a bit of honey or sweet potato or even real sugar as long as you know it can't make up a regular or significant part of the diet.

If you don't understand the blood sugar and inflammation aspects of foods, then you need a list of allowed and forbidden foods. Unfortunately most foods don't really fall well into such black and white "eat all you want" or a "never eat" categories.

[Nora52]

Wheat Belly is not Paleo. Sorry.

[kaplods]

Originally Posted by Nora52

Wheat Belly is not Paleo. Sorry.

Uh, yeah it is. In fact, Dr. Davis himself refers to his diet recommendations as Paleo in his interview with Robb Wolf in The Paleo Solution – Episode 95). Not just once, but several times. And in fact, he said at least once "your listeners probably already know this," or something to that effect.

You can read and hear it yourself on this website.

http://robbwolf.com/2011/08/30/the-p...on-episode-95/


On page 2, Dr. Davis refers to his experiments with a "Paleo-type diet."

And on page 18, Robb Wolf praises Dr. Davis for his paleo-foucs and for Dr. Davis describing a paleo eating style, without actually using the word "paleo" in order to draw a more mainstream crowd and one that would be put off by the word paleo.

Dr. Davis doesn't say "Woa now, don't misunderstand and think I'm advocating a paleo diet and just calling it something else." If he didn't see his diet as paleo, wouldn't you think he would have corrected Wolf? Also when Dr. Davis describes his daughter following his wheat-free recommendations he talks about his tennis pro daughter's experience with a "paleo diet" or a "paleo-type diet" clearly meaning the type of diet he himself is recommending.


Never does Dr. Davis stress how (or even whether) his diet is any DIFFERENT than paleo - but rather he clearly presents his ideas as not just compatible with, but identical to paleo.

You would think that if Dr. Davis was opposed to the idea that his diet is a paleo diet, he would have never used the words paleo himself to describe the diets he was researching and recommending (but he DOES describe the diet as paleo - several times). But Dr. Davis never does that. Not only does he use the paleo label to describe his findings and recommendations - he also doesn't dispute. argue with, or correct Wolf when he refers to them as paleo. Surely if Dr. Davis didn't consider his recommendations paleo he would have done so.

As I listened to the interview and read the transcript, I did not hear Dr. Davis or Robb Wolf disagree on any points. If Dr. Davis did not consider his diet a paleo diet, he wouldn't have used the word himself without clarification. Surely if he felt there were important differences between his diet and the Paleo diets, he would have argued them (or at least mentioned them) in this interview.

[kaplods]

Here's another paleo site in which Wheat Belly is described, and the commentors are clearly agreeing that the book's arguments are nothing new to the paleo community. The description of what Dr. Davis recommends eating is virtually identical to what I've gleaned from reading a dozen or so paleo books. If you read all the paleo diets, you're left with pretty much the same list, with only a few exceptions overall. Dr. Davis is a bit more lenient on some foods, but these are also all foods that some paleo diets allow. None of his "forbidden foods" are foods that all paleo diets accept (and even those that do allow those foods, the recommendation is to eat them very, very sparingly - or to experiment to see if those foods cause you any problems).

Sure if you read only one or even four or five paleo books, you can walk away thinking there's a "huge difference" between Wheat Belly and paleo - but when even Dr. Davis himself describes the diets he has studied and recommends as "Paleo" or "Paleo-style" I would argue that says it all. If he can describe the diet as Paleo-style, I think it's fair for me to.



http://paleohacks.com/questions/7055...#axzz2GVqVul4J

[Desiderata]

Getting caught up in diet dogma has never been helpful to me. In the past, I've excluded even considering other plans because they weren't MY plan -- to my detriment, as I was overlooking something useful for me. (I used to eschew Atkins and was dismissive of the whole low carb thing. Yet now that I am paleo/primal and wheat-free, I have a renewed appreciation for Atkins and have borrowed certain elements to great reward.)

My advice would be not to get too hung up on labels. When there's so much overlap, you can only benefit by being open and listening to what your own body tells you as you experiment with different eating choices. I'm glad you've found something helpful in the Wheat Belly book! I've never read it, but eliminating wheat has been very helpful for me. Paleo has been as well - but again, I've found it most helpful when I take inspiration from it instead of following it dogmatically, and instead use my body as the final arbiter for how well I tolerate things. (Wheat's out, but caffeine and dairy are in, I'm happy to say!)

Good luck to you!

[beachbella85]

...also, i don't think we have to get caught up in labels...if you've found something that is successful for you...even if you modify it a bit to make yourself happy then HOORAY! and we are all supportive of any safe modes of success...

Tell me more about Wheat Belly! I've been dabbling in wheat free for since July. I went hardcore for a couple of months but got off track, but I'd really like to get back to that place because I miss it. I didn't consider going completely on their diet plan though...maybe I'll do a bit more research into it. I just cut the wheat out and felt the wonders ...even if it is a drag since I can't have publix sandwiches...but I don't really miss the rest of the stuff...every now and then I would 'treat' myself to something but then I'd buy it and take one bite and decide I didn't like that crap anymore. Going wheat free was the most liberating experience of my life and for the first time, I had self control over my diet and how and what I chose to eat....mmm, think I'm going to get back to that place ....

[beachbella85]

O and I'd be down for a Wheat Belly thread as well...I'll probably just lurk for a few weeks but I'm really a huge advocate for going wheat free, even if only temporarily just to break the addictive chains of sugar+wheat combination...

[kaplods]

Originally Posted by Desiderata

Getting caught up in diet dogma has never been helpful to me. In the past, I've excluded even considering other plans because they weren't MY plan -- to my detriment, as I was overlooking something useful for me. (I used to eschew Atkins and was dismissive of the whole low carb thing. Yet now that I am paleo/primal and wheat-free, I have a renewed appreciation for Atkins and have borrowed certain elements to great reward.)

My advice would be not to get too hung up on labels. When there's so much overlap, you can only benefit by being open and listening to what your own body tells you as you experiment with different eating choices. I'm glad you've found something helpful in the Wheat Belly book! I've never read it, but eliminating wheat has been very helpful for me. Paleo has been as well - but again, I've found it most helpful when I take inspiration from it instead of following it dogmatically, and instead use my body as the final arbiter for how well I tolerate things. (Wheat's out, but caffeine and dairy are in, I'm happy to say!)

Good luck to you!

This is what I've been trying to say. It isn't about the label, it's about the way of eating, and paleo and wheat belly are so similar that it makes sense to come together in the same thread, because there may not be enough of us to support individual threads.

Dieting in our culture is very much like religion - more divisionary than inclusive - even when the beliefs and religious services are nearly identical, to the point that a casual observer wouldn't catch the differences.

I lived in a town where even the Catholic churces were so divided that there was true animosity between the polish, italian, and slovac churches. The parishes wouldn't cooperate or accept help from one of the other churches, even if it was offered. One church school oferred to share it's computer lab with a poorer school, and the school board refused. Why? Because the school with the computer lab had school uniforms and allowed the girls to wear slacks to school (the smaller school had no uniforms, but an incredibly complicated dress code including past-the-knee dresses for girls).

I've seen the same thing in dieting over and over. People living and eating almost identically, but refusing to be a support for the other, because of one tiny difference in philosophy - even if it doesn't apply to them.

What? You won't consider my plan because it includes coffee, but you don't drink coffee?

Doesn't matter, the plan just isn't the same, because there's a single difference.

The pseudo-religious dogma is incredibly frustrating, and it kept me fat for decades. Oh, it wasn't the only reason, but it was a very big contributor - because if a plan didn't work for me, even for a tiny reason I could easily adapt to, instead I ditched the plan and went looking for something else.

I finally learned the lesson when I started South Beach maybe ten years or so ago. I loved sweet corn, watermelon, and fresh pineapple, and I thought the diet was insane for considering them foods to avoid or eat rarely. I never had a problem with any of those. In fact, every summer I lost weight on my "sweet corn and watermelon diet." I would eat as much sweet corn and watermelon I wanted, along with some protein (maybe from a rotisserie chicken or something easy). It was only a few days, but I wasn't willing to give up those foods.

I almost ditched South Beach entirely, and then I realized I only eat sweet corn and watermelon in late July and August for a few weeks. And pineapple I eat 3 per year at most. I was going to ditch something because I quibbled over something such a small part of my diet.

The thing is, I couldn't admit to eating sweet corn, watermelon, or pineapple when talking to folks on South Beach (either here or IRL), because they'd say "if you're eating that, you're no on South Beach." Even though these weren't foods that Dr. Agatson banned in his book, they were just labeled "limited," or "eat rarely." In fact, Dr. Agatson never outright banns anything. The food people translate as "forbiden" he uses the term "eat rarely" (or something to the effect, it's been a while since I read the book).

It frustrates me when I see people eating almost identically, who focus on the differences instead of the similarities, because there are zillions of diets out there (and zillions more if you count all the inventions and adaptations people make on their own). And yet, everyone seems to want a thread with people following the exact, same, not-just-nearly-identical, but exactly-identical-not-just-in-practice-but-in-every-minute-detail.

It means that someone following Wheat Belly as written, but puts a tsp of honey in their tea is considered "cheating" or "not really following the diet."

I know I'm ranting a bit here, but I just see all the lost potential in people not coming together because of a few minor differences, when they have 95% of their plan in common. Refusing to see the common threads means everyone has less support available than they could.

Wheat Belly is new, and a there aren't a lot of followers yet. An individual thread is great, but you may have little or no company until it gains momentum. Even then, many people knowing it's history, may be responding in the paleo threads, because they were following paleo first and have read Wheat Belly but don't see differences distinct enough to "convert" and have simply integrated Wheat Belly's information into what they already have.

I understand the desire to say "Wheat Belly isn't paleo, it's something new entirely," because people like following new and unique plans (so if they're not unique, they find some minor element to prove a difference).

I think it's pretty clear from the transcript I referenced, that Dr. Davis considers his diet paleo. Now, that doesn't mean anyone has to use the label. Wolf praises Dr. Davis for not using the label, so that it will appeal to the mainstream - who have already rejected or will reject the term. And that's kind of sad. He's essentially thanking Dr. Davis for disguising paleo so it's palatable to the masses. Wouldn't it be great if it didn't have to be disguiesed?

The label is meaningless (which was really my point). However, if Dr. Davis himself embraces paleo, it seems a bit strange to exclude the folks Dr. Davis himself includes.

I know the paleo thread would embrace anyone following Wheat Belly. No one who understands paleo will say, "that's not paleo." And I think a Wheat Belly thread should do the same. Embrace any paleo folk who stop by - because odds are you're eating pretty much the same, for pretty much the same reason.

I tend to rant a bit on this subject, because I see far too many people excluding each other and refusing support from people who are "a little different" even when the difference is 1% of the total. None of us are on 100% the same plan. Everyone will be interpreting their plan and eating just a little bit differently. We can focus on the differences or we can focus on the similarities.

I think the way that offers the most support is focusing on the similarities - so I'm going to point out the similarities when I see them (sometimes to the point of being a bit of a nuisance). I'm sorry for the nuisance to anyone, but I feel it's so important I can't keep silent when I see people creating divisions that don't need to exist. I'm not saying they don't have a right to create that division if they want it, but I also think the similarities are far more important than the differences. After all, how much are the differences really going to come up? Are we really going to spend that much time discussing whether or not we had a teaspoon of honey once a week or whether dairy is something a person should or shouldn't eat?

For the most part, the paleo threads don't get into those arguments. No one is sent away or criticised because they choose to include/exclude a bit of dairy or honey.

None of these plans is about perfection, it's about eating less man-made food and more food that our ancient ancestors would recognize as food - and eliminating the foods that our great grandparents might not recognize.

I just think that an inclusionary thread would be more supportive, than focusing on minute differences.

[Dali234]

Been away for a while. I read Wheat Belly recently, and have been reading paleo blogs for a year or so. I am not "hard-core" paleo, because I eat dairy, but I am trying to be pretty much low carb, high protein, vegetables and dairy, and in almost every case, eating foods the way they are made eg: whole milk, grass fed beef, etc. No additives, no fake sweeteners, etc.
Don't know where this fits, but would love to have some company in the coming months.

[Nora52]

Dali, Wheat Belly may suit you... I don't know.. YMMV. It does encourage fake sweeteners though - but you can use Stevia.. The reasons for sweeteners is explained by the WB book. The aim is to keep the Blood Sugar level and an after meal reading below 100.. So honey in tea for eg - would spike that reading. And may also affect the heart lipid profile for up to 10 days. And Wheat Belly also discourages some vegetables that also spike Blood Sugar. WB is for health not just weight loss. We can stay on track cos we feel so well. WB is growing so fast. But it is new... so there will be false stories and misconceptions. I really like it. Hubbie too. It just feels like regular food without the wheat :-)

[Sparkygrrl]

I've been following WB for about five months and love it. I have lost weight but more importantly got rid of most of my headaches. Just wondering how the cookbook is? I tried a few of the recipes at the back of his original book and wasn't overly thrilled. I don't bother with buying GF bread and if I really want something I will make a one minute muffin with flaxseed. I too wish there was a WB thread on here and was quite surprised to find out there wasn't.

[froggydawgy]

Wheat Belly Thread started here
3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community > Diet Central > Carb Counters
Wheat Belly-January Wheat Belly-January

[Nora52]

That is great... I have only been seriously on WB since Sept although was tending to eat less carbs before that. I must mention the GF bread though - that is really bad for us. We have to stay off commercial GF replacement type foods that have riceflour, tapioca flour, potato flour etc. I did try one MIM but like you - wasn't that impressed and have been happy to just potter along without much baking. I am waiting for the CookBook. Pizza is high on the list !

I had some sugar over Christmas and have been battling the sugar ever since... It takes ages to clear the system ! I lost my knee pain which was great news for me.. Glad your headaches are much better.

Originally Posted by Sparkygrrl

I've been following WB for about five months and love it. I have lost weight but more importantly got rid of most of my headaches. Just wondering how the cookbook is? I tried a few of the recipes at the back of his original book and wasn't overly thrilled. I don't bother with buying GF bread and if I really want something I will make a one minute muffin with flaxseed. I too wish there was a WB thread on here and was quite surprised to find out there wasn't.