Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
10/5/11 5:08 P

The relationship between gluten, schizophrenia, and celiac disease is still unclear, as you will see in these recent studies. If a person is tesing postive with some of these antibodies and/or positive for celiac of course gluten-free diet is explored.

Remember too that the original post was about whole grains (of which there are many)---not just gluten.

Dietitian Becky

SWEETDARLA SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (935)
Posts: 200
10/5/11 4:56 P

Becky, there is interest in the connection between schizophrenia and gluten sensitivity. A PubMed search produces 72 results.

And here's a case study of a schizophrenic woman who overcome her mental illness by eating a grain-free, ketogenic diet. It's pretty fascinating.

JENG829 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (14,729)
Posts: 791
10/5/11 4:48 P

This is why I provided the link to Cereal Grains: Humanity’s Double-Edged Sword by Loren Cordain.

Here is a direct quote, with references, regarding gluten's effect on schizophrenia:

It has been more than 30 years since Dohan first formulated the hypothesis that opioid peptides found in the enzymatic digests of cereal grain gluten are a potentiating factor evoking schizophrenia in susceptible genotypes [327, 328]. In a meta-analysis of the more than 50 articles regarding the role of cereal grains in the etiology of schizophrenia published between 1966 and 1990, Lorenz [329] concluded: ‘In populations eating little or no wheat, rye
and barley, the prevalence of schizophrenia is quite low and about the same regardless of type of acculturating influence.’ In support of this conclusion are multiple clinical studies [330–332] which have shown that schizophrenic symptoms improved on gluten-free diets and worsened upon reintroduction.

327 Dohan FC: Wheat consumption and hospital admissions for schizophrenia during World War II. Am J Clin Nutr 1966;18:7–10.
328 Dohan FC: Genetic hypothesis of idiopathic schizophrenia: Its exorphin connection. Schizophr Bull 1988;14:489–494.
329 Lorenz K: Cereals and schizophrenia. Adv Cereal Sci Technol 1990;10:435–469.
330 Dohan FC, Grasberger JC, Lowell FM, Johnston HT, Arbegast AW: Relapsed schizophrenics: More rapid improvement on a milk and cereal free diet. Br J Psychiatry 1969;115:595–596.
331 Dohan FC, Grasberger JC: Relapsed schizophrenics: Early discharge from the hospital after cerealfree, milk free diet. Am J Psychiatry 1973;130:685–688.
332 Singh MM, Kay SR: Wheat gluten as a pathogenic factor in schizophrenia. Science 1976;191: 401–402.

I'm confused if this has been disproven or if there is some additional info that is missing. From the quote above, and the next paragraph in the paper, a correlation between gluten and one mental illness seems clear. Is this information not accepted by those treating patients? I'm very curious about it...

Other mental illnesses may not have the same correlation, although from my own experience I develop noticeable anxiety and depression when I eat wheat products. Again, everyone is different. But, for me, avoiding wheat is more effective than any anti-depression or anti-anxiety drug that I've taken.

10/5/11 4:15 P

Previously, I provided a link to a site ( which provides peer-reviewed scientific research.

So I used this site to search for mental illness and diet, nutrition, whole grains, etc....since this was one of the "health claims" made in the Westin Price article. Here is a link to an abstract of one study--with valid nutrition recommendations for those with mental illness. Whole grains are not a routine food to avoid for those with mental illness or the develpment of mental illness---in fact whole grains are encouraged as part of a healthy diet:

I encourage our SP members to use the site when wanting to investigate other health claims.

Hope this helps with the quest to uncover valid, peer-reviewed scientific research.

Dietitian Becky

GDBEAR65 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 574
10/5/11 3:02 P

DANNIELLEMARIE, I appreciate your comments but I don't feel it was rude of me to question the validity of Becky's initial post. I consider these "off the cuff" statements to be rather condescending. Maybe it has to do with the fact that many people choose not to research these issues for themselves that Becky felt she could just make this statement without having to support her claim. I am not one of those people. If am wrong then so be it, but I expect people to prove to me where I am mistaken. Is there anything wrong with that. As for the comment about coming down from your high horse, I wrote that in response to SCOTTGARAN's post wherein he stated that because people are acknowledged experts in their field I should not question their statements.

I would still like to know more about the questionable science on which the Weston A Price Foundation is relying to support the article I linked. Also the co-authors are well-educated people, so in effect Becky is saying don't listen to those experts, listen to me because I am expert. I am a reasonable person, prove me wrong. I don't mind admitting when I am wrong. Balance is also about perspective, I was just offering another perspective in the hopes others will learn from it. And I believe in moderation. Regardless of what others may think there is nothing fanatical in what I have written. And I am not against people consuming grains but I do believe it is one of the foods that should be restricted in people's quest to reduce their weight.

10/5/11 2:24 P


While I find eating grain-free works very, very well for me I can absolutely see how it's not appealing or practical for everyone. Sites like this work very hard to meet people where they're at, which is valid and deserving of respect.

I have to say your treatment of Becky is beyond rude. As for her HFCS stance, it's pretty much the opposite of being on a high horse to say, "I once thought this but I've learned more and want to publicly change my stance". I have nothing but respect for her (and I agree with her former stance on HFCS as I have concerns about how it's processed by the liver and its impact on triglyceride levels and fat storage). Though I'm more liberal in my personal use of artificial sweeteners....we all have our vices lol. She does a phenomenal job here and really does listen and consider the opinions of others in a way I truly appreciate.

In fact, I've personally been involved in several heavy conversations here regarding grain-free eating in which she's also participated. The impression of her stance I'm left with is that she doesn't have an issue with grain-free eating as long as produce consumption is high (which for me it is) and nutrient-goals are met.

I think the real issue is that your average American is not only not interested in giving up grains but they're also not willing to eat as much produce as is needed with such a way of eating. There are all sorts of websites devoted to the way you and I eat but this is not one of them...this site works very hard to reach a much larger audience and help them improve their lives to whatever degree each person desires. That is a big job and SparkPeople is great at it.

Not to mention the whole "everyone is different" thing. A way of eating that may seem absolutely optimal for me does not work well for everyone. Some people feel they function better with more carbs, including grain. If someone tells me that, I believe them. They'd know! It's quite a narrow view to assume everyone else on this planet would be best served by doing what works well for you.

Edited by: DANNIELLEMARIE at: 10/5/2011 (14:25)
10/5/11 2:01 P

Since Sparkpeople is a site primarily geared for adults who are trying to lose weight, we do receive many questions on the safety and use of all artificial sweeteners on the market. Therefore, I do have an article on this site where I reviewed the literature on this topic, safety guidelines, intake amounts, etc. For our members who wish to include artificial sweeteners in their diet, these safety guidelines can be applied to their daily food intake and use of sweeteners.

Here is the link to the article:

SP Registered Dietitian Becky

SWEETDARLA SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (935)
Posts: 200
10/5/11 10:26 A

GDBear, I didn't know about the sucralose in our drinking supply. Sucralose should have been tested for this before being approved. Nice going, FDA and EPA. There are so many toxins floating around that they can't completely rid our tap water of. It's such a shame what we've allowed to happen.

For anyone who's interested, here's the PubMed abstract:

Artificial Sweetener Sucralose in U.S. Drinking Water Systems

GDBEAR65 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 574
10/5/11 10:18 A

"But let's leave extreme positions to the Taliban." LOL - couldn't agree more!

FITCHALLENGER SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (10,690)
Posts: 349
10/5/11 10:14 A

It is interesting to read this. I like inquisitive minds, like GDBear's, since those minds are the source of debate that leads to higher understanding. I tend to be inquisitive myself and I know sometimes I appear to be a pain in the a......

But let's leave extreme positions to the Taliban. I think the debate should not be about "I know the truth, you're wrong"... I've done high carb diets that have worked great; I've done high protein diets that have worked great. Both to some extent. There is evidence of truth on both sides.

I think the knowledge about nutrition is still very basic when compared to the theme's complexity; It is therefore still too early to take fixed positions when it comes to nutrition.

And that's only my point of view.

GDBEAR65 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 574
10/5/11 7:47 A

thank you I will take a look at the link provided. I like the article you wrote about HFCS, but it is not really news to me. Added sugar is added sugar. I would like to point out that Sucralose and Aspartame are of questionable merit. Sucralose does not breakdown at all - it is excreted unchanged and even water treatment plants cannot break it down. It is now pervasive in the water supply of many regions. The safety of aspartame has never been proven. FDA approval was rammed through by the puppet who was the head of it in the early 70's. I think Xylitol is more appropriate as a calorie reduced sweetener - yes it is 60% of the calories of sugar, but it is also naturally occurring. May I have your thoughts on this?

Edited by: GDBEAR65 at: 10/5/2011 (07:48)
10/5/11 7:37 A

To the original poster of this thread:
I do respect your right and choice to select foods as you so desire. My comments where not about you or your opinion or your food choices. I am sorry if you felt this way. My comment was only about the Westin Price Foundation. There are numerous studies showing that whole grains (in the appropriate portions) as part of a primarily plant based diet can help with the prevention of such diseases as certain cancers, heart disease, hypertention, diabetes, and excessive weight gain.

To make a conclusionstatement that whole grains are connected to mental illness is scientifically irresponsible. And this is just one example of the problems with the Westin Price article. Once again it is in no way my feeling about you or your food selection choices.

Regarding my HFCS article....I initally based my concern with HFCS on population studies. Once controlled studies were conducted on HFCS, the results where not showing HFCS to be more damaging than sugar---both need to be consumed in small amounts in a healthy diet. As we continue to research this topic and evidenced is obtained, consumption recommendations may also change. Research is slow, and it is often a waiting game.

If you are looking for sites where you can obtain scientific research, a good place to begin is at:

SP Registered Dietitian

GDBEAR65 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 574
10/5/11 7:12 A

So Becky wrote this article
wherein she admits being wrong. And I am not supposed to question her advice? Please come down off your high horse.

GDBEAR65 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 574
10/5/11 6:38 A

SCOTTGARAN - I'm sure glad you're not my professor - "because I said so" does not cut it for me. Sounds dictatorial. And I didn't know a professor's class is an autocracy. Oh I forgot, you have a piece of paper that gives you that right. Nevermind... yes sir, you are absolutely correct, oh exalted one.

Edited by: GDBEAR65 at: 10/5/2011 (06:40)
GDBEAR65 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 574
10/5/11 3:19 A

Will you admit that science does not have all the answers? I have asked for proof of the claims made by Becky and rec'd an insult. Perhaps if Becky had bothered to give some proof I would not be so quick to criticize, But then people here like to judge the book by it's cover, so I have done likewise. And regarding said research, why is it only now that science is starting analyze and become familiar with the micronutrients found in fresh fruits and vegetables? I have apply critical thinking to nutritional information presented to me and I correlate that with some applied logic and have found much of the information wanting. And just because someone has studied a subject it does not mean they know all there is to know about it. Furthermore I am not the one who has caused discension here. Antagonistic attitudes have seen to that. And there is nothing wrong with challenging current perceptions and advice. That is how new discoveries are made.

What's the big deal with the homepage?

Edited by: GDBEAR65 at: 10/5/2011 (03:35)
JENG829 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (14,729)
Posts: 791
10/5/11 1:42 A

I tend to disagree with the current guidelines on grains, despite my respect for RDs such as Becky. And although the information presented in the Weston A Price article below is simplified and not very well cited, i have trouble calling it a "myth". I'd love if Becky or another RD could explain to me why those things are totally false. I will concede that many points are unproven, but I have not seen evidence to disprove them either...

Again, I will post a link to this excellent paper about grains (although I have little faith that anyone will read it). Very well researched (references cited) and there is a lot of detail about anti-nutrients in grains as well as correlation between celiac disease and schizophrenia as well as other mental or physical conditions.

His conclusion in this paper is that most people can handle some grains as part of a healthy diet, but when grain consumption makes up a large part of the diet, often deficiencies or other issues can be seen. When I look at what a lot of Americans eat, it is cereal or bagel for breakfast, lowfat sandwich for lunch, pasta for dinner (or pizza or hamburger on bun, etc). If his assertions are true, that could explain a lot of disease & obesity we see around us.

I'd really love it if people stopped taking sides & just debated the topic... but find that very few others are able to accept that something like lowering grain consumption can help some people - I've seen it improve health, not just in me, but in others. It's not for everyone, and that's ok. But it is a valid way of eating with health benefits for many people, so can we not bash it and call it a fad/myth?

REDSHOES2011 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (66,181)
Posts: 7,159
10/5/11 12:25 A

I agree with Anarie on this one and back Dietitian Becky up fully.. Sparkspeople is a middle of the road site and why are we arguing with someone whom doesn't put up a home page?

Edited by: REDSHOES2011 at: 10/5/2011 (00:26)
LOVE4KITTIES Posts: 4,690
10/5/11 12:24 A

GDBEAR65, the way that you are acting is not what Spark People is all about.

Becky is not a "Dietitian." She is a Registered Dietitian. There's nothing to put quotes around. She has many years of education, training and practical experience and knows what works. She also knows how to identify, read and correctly interpret scientific literature, a skill which it seems that you are unfortunately lacking.

This thread of yours, just like the one where you criticized Spark People and said that the advice given here was bad, is not going over well.

Edited by: LOVE4KITTIES at: 10/5/2011 (00:28)
SCOTTGARAN Posts: 2,014
10/4/11 11:46 P

I laugh as generally I try to stay out of confrontations on this site, but saw your posts in another thread and had to comment. I am sure you are intelligent, but what I feel you probably lack are those lessons we learned on the playground in 6th grade. To take what is given and discard what you don't like. I have been training people for over 16 years and have numerous certifications including teaching at the University level. I do not post the reason backing up my posts every time I write. I simply post, and if people want the info, great. If not, no big deal either. Hope this clears up what I earlier posted.


GDBEAR65 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 574
10/4/11 11:39 P

It's an honest question, if you can't answer it why should I believe what you've written? Cite a source for your information that refutes what was written in that article and I will read whatever study or whatever else you can produce. Please don't take me as being a troll. I am very literate and perhaps more intelligent than many on this board. At least I think for myself. Yes I am being critical of a "Dietician", because she has not offered anything to back up her statement other than her word. And I'm sorry but there's just way too much misinformation out there and not just on the internet for me to take her at face value.

Edited by: GDBEAR65 at: 10/4/2011 (23:42)
SCOTTGARAN Posts: 2,014
10/4/11 9:30 P

Wow GD, you just don't believe it if you don't say it yourself. Funny. I have to admit I disagree with DB on some issues like supplements but have to say she is a dietician that went to many years of school and practices what she does! Geez!!! I mean you have to give credit where credit is due!!!


ANARIE Posts: 13,179
10/4/11 9:24 P

I call troll.

GDBEAR65 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 574
10/4/11 8:44 P

and your source would be?

Edited by: GDBEAR65 at: 10/4/2011 (20:45)
10/4/11 8:13 P

The Westin Price foundation is not known to use reliable, peer-reviewed, evidence based research.
This quote from the article is just one example of the nutrition myths:
"Other antinutrients in whole grains include enzyme inhibitors which can inhibit digestion and put stress on the pancreas; irritating tannins; complex sugars which the body cannot break down; and gluten and related hard-to-digest proteins which may cause allergies, digestive disorders and even mental illness."

SP Registered Dietitian Becky

GDBEAR65 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 574
10/4/11 1:20 P

This well researched article provides insight on the consumption of grains

I would also like to invite you to visit this site - which has a lot of good information on the most commonly available foods.

Page: 1 of (1)  

Other Diet and Nutrition Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
Looking for opinions on Korean food 1/1/2017 6:13:34 AM
Having Your Cake and Eating It, Too! 6/9/2016 11:48:38 AM
IBS and IBD 7/6/2016 9:19:21 PM
Fast food 1/12/2017 6:40:09 AM
Belly Fat 1/6/2017 1:01:13 AM