I was told I had a gluten allergy (insert sad music)

In that moment, I saw my life flash before my eyes. No more pizza? No more sandwiches? No more bread? Was life even worth living? 😄 

Bread was a key ingredient in all my favorite foods…until I was told it wasn’t helping but instead hurting me. It was all because of a parasite but it was still something I have had to deal with for nearly 16 years.

Recently in some of my allergy testing, I was told the allergy no longer showed up. That is a different story and one I’m preparing to test out soon.

I remember reading how Mark Cuban encouraged the Dallas Mavericks during their championship season to not eat gluten.

For many, not eating gluten is a fad, a trend, a diet, a ‘healthy’ choice or a necessity.

Is bread really the enemy? Is gluten the enemy? Why does it seem allergies are on the rise across the board? What if there is something else going on but gluten and bread have been pegged as the bad guy?

Even the latest food pyramid seems to show carbs and grains as not as healthy as was once thought.

They went from being the hero (old food pyramid) to being the villain (new food pyramid).

But what if there’s more to the story? My friend James did a deep dive and he shares his thoughts below:

My friend James wrote the below article and I asked him if I could share it here. It’s lengthy, it’s in depth, but it’s got me chewing on all the possibilities that he touches on. I’d love to hear your thoughts.

I’d do almost anything to have a real pizza again 😁 

What If It’s Not the Gluten?

An Investigation Into Why Millions May Be Avoiding Bread for the Wrong Reasons

By James Gurtner Jr

In the summer of 2005, the summer before I started high school, I spent my days cutting dough and bagging bread at my family’s bakery in Kennesaw, Georgia. Staff of Life Foods was a full commercial operation—we were baking over 400 loaves per day of whole grain bread made the way my grandfather had made it in Brazil, and the way my father had learned from him: freshly ground flour, simple ingredients, no additives.

The bread was light and airy—proof that whole grain bread didn’t have to be the dense brick people expected. But because we were doing everything the healthiest way possible, our loaves would only last about three days on the shelf unless frozen. We approached Whole Foods, thinking they’d be the perfect partner for what we were making. They turned us down. Our bread would compete with their own bakery products.

We didn’t know it then, but we were swimming against a cultural tsunami. Within six years, William Davis would publish Wheat Belly, calling wheat a “perfect, chronic poison” and “the single largest contributor to the nationwide obesity epidemic.” The book sold over 2 million copies. Two years later, David Perlmutter’s Grain Brain would claim carbohydrates are “destroying your brain.” That sold another 1.5 million. The gluten-free market exploded from under $1 billion in 2006 to nearly $12 billion by 2015—a 1,100% increase in less than a decade.

The world wasn’t just “not ready” for our bread. It was being actively taught to fear it.

We ran out of money and sold the bakery to Sue Becker of Bread Beckers—whose work you’ll read about later in this article. Twenty years later, the science has finally caught up to what my grandfather knew instinctively: the problem isn’t bread. The problem is what industrial processing has done to it—and what bestselling books have done to our relationship with it.

The conventional wisdom that 6-10% of Americans are “gluten sensitive” may be dramatically wrong. When self-reported gluten-sensitive individuals undergo double-blind, placebo-controlled testing, only 16% actually react to gluten—while 40% respond equally to placebo (Molina-Infante et al., Nutrients, 2015). The real culprits may be hiding in plain sight: industrial processing methods, chemical additives, pesticide residues, and the elimination of traditional fermentation that once made wheat digestible for millennia.

This investigation examines mounting scientific evidence suggesting that what millions experience as “gluten sensitivity” may actually be a reaction to how modern flour is processed, not to gluten itself. For the estimated 30-40 million Americans avoiding wheat, this distinction could be life-changing—the difference between permanent dietary restriction and potentially healing their relationship with bread.

The Bestsellers That Taught America to Fear Bread

Before examining the science, it’s worth understanding how we got here. The anti-grain movement didn’t emerge from peer-reviewed research. It emerged from bookstores.

William Davis, a Milwaukee cardiologist, published Wheat Belly on August 30, 2011. His central argument: modern wheat is a “Frankenwheat”—a “mutant product of genetic tinkering” fundamentally different from wheat consumed before 1960. He claimed wheat is “as addictive as many drugs” due to opioid-like compounds called exorphins. The book became a #1 New York Times bestseller. Kellogg’s—the world’s largest cereal maker—experienced its biggest sales drop since the 1970s.

Neurologist David Perlmutter followed in September 2013 with Grain Brain, claiming carbohydrates are “destroying your brain” and linking even “healthy” whole grains to dementia, ADHD, anxiety, and depression. It hit #1 on the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and USA Today bestseller lists simultaneously.

The Paleo diet provided the evolutionary framework: humans supposedly haven’t adapted to grains because agriculture began only 10,000 years ago. Google named Paleo the #1 most-searched diet in both 2013 and 2014, with an estimated 3 million Americans following its grain-free principles.

The cultural impact was measurable. Bread sales fell 11.3% between 2008 and 2013. Gallup tracking showed Americans actively trying to avoid carbohydrates rose from 20% to 27%. By 2015, 82% of people eating gluten-free had NOT been diagnosed with celiac disease—most believed these foods were simply “healthier” (Mintel, 2015).

But here’s what the bestseller lists didn’t tell you: the scientific community systematically refuted these claims. A 2013 peer-reviewed study in the Journal of Cereal Science concluded: “Statements made in the book of Davis, as well as in related interviews, cannot be substantiated based on published scientific studies.” Wheat geneticist Dr. Ravi Chabbar at the University of Saskatchewan studied 37 wheat varieties grown since the 1800s and found wheat is “different because we can grow more of it... but it’s not different in terms of the nutrition that it delivers.”

Nicola McKeown at Tufts University’s Friedman School found those consuming at least three servings of whole grains daily had 10% lower belly fat than those eating none—the opposite of Davis’s “wheat belly” claim.

The books won the cultural battle. The science told a different story.

The 2026 Dietary Guidelines: When Policy Follows Ideology

As if the confusion around grains weren’t already damaging enough, the federal government just made things worse. In January 2026, the USDA released new Dietary Guidelines that dramatically demote grains from the foundation of the food pyramid to its narrow tip—cutting recommended servings nearly in half while eliminating any guidance on refined grains whatsoever.

The previous 2020-2025 guidelines recommended 6 ounce-equivalents of total grains daily for a 2,000-calorie diet, with at least half from whole grains. The new guidelines recommend just 2-4 servings of whole grains daily, with no serving recommendation for refined grains. Instead, refined grains are characterized as “highly processed, refined carbohydrates” that should be “significantly reduced.”

This might seem like vindication for the anti-grain movement. But here’s what’s alarming: the administration rejected 30 of 56 recommendations from its own scientific advisory committee to reach these conclusions (Center for Science in the Public Interest, 2026). A STAT News investigation found that eight of nine authors of the new “Scientific Foundation” document had financial ties to the beef and dairy industries.

Dr. Deirdre Tobias, a Harvard nutrition professor who served on the 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, stated: “The reviews themselves, as well as their overall presentation and integration, deviate significantly from the rigorous process that the HHS developed for the DGAs to ensure the evidence base and its committees’ conclusions were replicable, unbiased, transparent, and free from non-scientific influences.”

The problem isn’t distinguishing between processed and whole grains—that distinction matters enormously, as this article will demonstrate. The problem is that the new guidelines throw the baby out with the bathwater, reducing recommendations for whole grains that decades of research show reduce mortality, heart disease, cancer, and diabetes. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine has filed a formal petition to withdraw the guidelines over documented industry influence.

The irony is profound: as federal policy moves to discourage grain consumption based on industry pressure, the scientific evidence for properly prepared whole grains has never been stronger. What we need isn’t less grain—it’s better grain, prepared the way humans ate it for thousands of years before industrial processing changed everything.

A Prophet of Bran Bread Warned Us 188 Years Ago

On the streets of Boston in 1837, a mob of butchers and commercial bakers marched on the hotel where Presbyterian minister Sylvester Graham was lecturing about bread. The “Grahamites” inside reportedly dispersed the angry men by dropping bags of lime from the roof. Graham’s crime? Publishing a treatise arguing that refined white flour was making Americans sick.

“It is, probably, speaking within bounds, to say that nine tenths of the adults in civic life are more or less afflicted with obstructions and disturbances in the stomach and bowels,” Graham wrote in his Treatise on Bread and Bread-Making (1837). “And I cannot but feel confident that the use of superfine flour bread is among the important causes.”

Graham documented that bakers were adulterating bread with “alum, sulphate of zinc, sub-carbonate of magnesia, sulphate of copper”—even “chalk, pipe clay and plaster of Paris.” Ralph Waldo Emerson mockingly called him “the prophet of bran bread.” The baking industry called him a nuisance.

Nearly two centuries later, Graham’s concerns appear prophetic. The U.S. still permits flour additives—including potassium bromate, azodicarbonamide, and chlorine bleaching—that are banned throughout Europe, Canada, and much of the developed world.

The 1870s Transformation That Changed Everything

The timeline of modern digestive complaints aligns remarkably with industrial flour processing. In 1878, the Washburn “A” Mill in Minneapolis installed the first commercially significant roller mill in America—a technology that could “grind enough flour to make 12 million loaves of bread in a day.” By the early 1900s, stone mills had virtually disappeared from commercial production.

What changed wasn’t just scale. Roller milling enabled efficient separation of three components that stone mills had always kept together: the bran (14% of kernel, containing fiber, B vitamins, minerals), the germ (2.5% of kernel, containing vitamin E, oils, antioxidants), and the endosperm (83% of kernel, primarily starch and protein).

A 2024 UC San Francisco study tracking nutrients from raw wheat through milling to finished bread found refined flour lost up to 72% of major minerals and 64% of trace minerals compared to whole wheat (Mayer et al., Journal of the American Society for Nutrition). This isn’t enrichment math—it’s basic subtraction.

The consequences appeared within decades. “With the advent of industrialized roller milling and mass refining of grains in about 1880, worldwide epidemics of pellagra and beriberi began,” noted the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (Mozaffarian et al., 2011). These deficiency diseases arose because B vitamins had been stripped from the popular white flour. By 1940, the situation was severe enough that the U.S. government mandated “enrichment”—adding synthetic vitamins back to flour to replace what processing had removed.

Sue Becker’s 30-Year Experiment in Fresh-Ground Flour

In 1991, Sue Becker came across a publication about the history of white flour and American health decline. She bought a grain mill that week and started making bread for her family—then consisting of six children. What happened next changed her life.

“Almost immediately, and without any other dietary changes, little health complaints that she and her children had learned to live with started clearing up,” her company Bread Beckers reports. “Fatigue, constipation, sugar cravings, chronic congestion, even warts: all gone in a few weeks.”

By 1992, Becker had founded Bread Beckers in Woodstock, Georgia, with a radical message: “I do not think I am supposed to make bread for the world. I think I am supposed to teach the world to make bread for themselves.” It was Sue who eventually purchased our equipment when my family’s bakery ran out of capital—a passing of the torch that kept the mission alive even as our commercial venture ended.

Over 30 years, Becker—who holds a Food Science degree from the University of Georgia—has collected thousands of testimonials. Her company’s website documents cases of IBS resolution, eczema clearing, migraines stopping, and cholesterol improving. Most striking: “Many people with known wheat/gluten sensitivities (not genetic celiac) have shared with us that real bread made only from freshly milled whole grains... is easily digested with no adverse reactions.”

Becker’s central claim involves oxidation: “Once milled, as much as 45% of nutrients are oxidized in the first day alone. In 3 days, just 72 hours later, 90% of nutrients are lost, all to oxidation alone.” This is exactly what we experienced at Staff of Life Foods—our bread only lasted three days precisely because we weren’t using the preservatives and stabilizers that give commercial bread its unnatural shelf life.

Scientific literature confirms rapid oxidation of wheat germ oils. A Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry study (Srivastava et al., 2007) found significant rancid odor and flavor in untreated wheat germ after three weeks. A PLOS One study (Xu et al., 2021) showed wheat germ stability limited to “a few days” without stabilization treatment. The principle—that freshly ground flour differs biochemically from aged commercial flour—has scientific grounding.

The Landmark Study That Turned Gluten Sensitivity on Its Head

In 2018, a research team from Oslo and Monash University published findings in Gastroenterology that should have made international headlines. They took 59 people with self-reported non-celiac gluten sensitivity and gave them three different challenges: gluten (5.7g), fructans (2.1g), or placebo—each for seven days in a double-blind crossover design (Skodje et al., 2018).

The results contradicted everything the participants believed about their own bodies.

Fructans caused significantly more symptoms than gluten. Overall gastrointestinal scores: Fructan 38.6, Gluten 33.1, Placebo 34.3. Among individual participants, 24 had their worst symptoms on fructan, 22 on placebo, and only 13 on gluten.

“Fructan, rather than gluten, induces symptoms in patients with self-reported non-celiac gluten sensitivity,” the researchers concluded.

Fructans are FODMAPs—fermentable carbohydrates that occur naturally in wheat. They’re poorly absorbed in the small intestine and fermented by gut bacteria, causing gas, bloating, and distress. Crucially, fructans are dramatically reduced by sourdough fermentation—up to 90% reduction with proper proofing—while gluten is not meaningfully reduced by standard bread-making.

A 2015 meta-analysis of 10 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (1,312 patients) found that only 38 of 231 NCGS patients—just 16%—showed gluten-specific symptoms. Meanwhile, 40% demonstrated a nocebo response, reacting equally to placebo (Molina-Infante et al., Nutrients).

What Modern Flour Actually Contains

The additives in today’s commercial flour would make Sylvester Graham’s head spin. While Graham warned about alum and chalk, modern flour can contain:

Bleaching agents: Chlorine gas, chlorine dioxide, and benzoyl peroxide whiten flour and modify its baking properties. A 2017 ScienceDirect study first reported that chlorine bleaching creates alloxan—a compound used in laboratories to induce diabetes in mice by destroying pancreatic beta cells (Wang et al., Food Chemistry). These bleaching agents are banned in the EU but permitted in the United States.

Potassium bromate: This dough conditioner, used commercially since 1923, is classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” Japanese research found it induced kidney tumors, thyroid tumors, and mesotheliomas in rats (Kurokawa et al., Cancer Research, 1990). It’s banned in the EU (1990), Canada (1994), China (2005), and India (2016)—but remains legal throughout most of the United States except California, which banned it in 2023.

Azodicarbonamide (ADA): This whitening agent—also used in yoga mats and foam insulation—breaks down during baking into semicarbazide (linked to cancers in mice) and urethane (classified as “reasonably anticipated carcinogen” by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). The World Health Organization linked workplace exposure to “respiratory issues, allergies and asthma.” After a 2014 controversy dubbed “yoga mat bread,” major chains including Subway, Wendy’s, and McDonald’s voluntarily removed ADA.

Glyphosate residues: Perhaps most concerning for gut health, pre-harvest application of glyphosate (the herbicide in Roundup) to wheat—a practice called “desiccation” that began in Scotland in the 1980s—has become widespread. In Canada, 90-95% of wheat acres in Manitoba are sprayed pre-harvest with glyphosate.

Canadian Food Inspection Agency testing (2015-2017) found glyphosate in 95% of wheat bran samples, 91% of crackers, 87% of cream of wheat, 82% of cookies, 79% of pasta, and 77% of flour. A 2020 critical review noted that glyphosate inhibits the shikimate pathway found in bacteria—and that pathogenic bacteria are more resistant to glyphosate than beneficial gut bacteria. “Glyphosate residues on food could cause dysbiosis since pathogenic/bad bacteria are more resistant to glyphosate compared to commensal/good gut bacteria” (Motta et al., PNAS).

The Sardinian Centenarians Who Never Stopped Eating Bread

While Americans debate whether bread is poison, women in Sardinia’s mountainous Blue Zone have been making fresh bread and pasta daily for generations—and living to extraordinary ages. The island boasts the world’s highest concentration of male centenarians, and their diet tells a story that contradicts everything the anti-grain movement claims.

Whole grains comprise 47% of the traditional Sardinian diet, compared to just 6.5% of the American diet (Pes et al., European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2013). Dan Buettner, the National Geographic explorer who identified the world’s Blue Zones, documented the Melis family of Perdasdefogu—nine siblings with a collective age of 861 years, the longest-lived family in recorded history. The oldest reached 109.

“Every day of their life, they had the exact same lunch,” Buettner reported. “A sourdough bread, a three-bean minestrone... and then they had a small glass, I’m talking two or three ounce glass, of wine.”

The bread of Sardinia is pane carasau, also called “carta di musica” (sheet music bread) because traditional sheets were thin enough to read music through before baking. Archaeological evidence dates this bread to before 1000 BCE—remains were found in excavations of Nuraghi, the ancient stone towers dotting the island.

Traditional pane carasau requires durum wheat semolina, water, salt, and a sourdough starter called “frammentu” or “madrighe.” Research published in the Journal of Ethnic Foods found that lactic acid bacteria in Sardinian sourdough starters produce “special sets of peptides and γ-aminobutyric acid with antihypertensive effects” (Mancini et al., 2021). Buettner noted that “in Sardinia, a sourdough bread, leavened with lactobacillus, actually lowers insulin response to a meal.”

These aren’t people who avoided bread to achieve longevity. They built their longevity around it.

When Avoiding Bread Becomes the Disease

For the estimated 72% of Americans on gluten-free diets who have neither celiac disease nor diagnosed gluten sensitivity, the decision to eliminate grains may be causing more harm than the bread they fear.

The nutritional price runs deep. Systematic reviews have documented that gluten-free dieters commonly develop deficiencies in fiber, iron, zinc, magnesium, folate, B vitamins, calcium, and vitamin D (Vici et al., Clinical Nutrition, 2016). Iron deficiency persists in 14-41% of adults on gluten-free diets even when they’re carefully following the protocol.

The gut microbiome damage may be even more consequential. Research published in Genome Medicine tracking 21 healthy volunteers on a four-week gluten-free diet found decreased populations of beneficial butyrate-producing bacteria and four species of Bifidobacterium (De Palma et al., 2009). These bacteria aren’t optional passengers—they produce short-chain fatty acids that suppress colonic inflammation, protect DNA from damage, maintain intestinal barrier integrity, and may even lower colorectal cancer risk.

The Harvard Study That Should Have Changed Everything

A landmark study published in the British Medical Journal in 2017 by researchers at Columbia University and Harvard Medical School should have ended the debate about gluten-free diets for healthy people. It didn’t.

The study, led by Dr. Benjamin Lebwohl of Columbia’s Celiac Disease Center, followed 110,017 participants— 64,714 women in the Nurses’ Health Study and 45,303 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study—for 26 years, encompassing 2,273,931 person-years of data. During that time, 6,529 participants developed coronary heart disease.

The findings were unequivocal: participants in the lowest fifth of gluten intake had a coronary heart disease incidence rate of 352 per 100,000 person-years, while those in the highest fifth had a rate of only 277 per 100,000 person-years. Those eating the most gluten had lower heart disease rates.

“Long term dietary intake of gluten was not associated with risk of coronary heart disease,” the researchers concluded. “However, the avoidance of gluten may result in reduced consumption of beneficial whole grains, which may affect cardiovascular risk. The promotion of gluten-free diets among people without celiac disease should not be encouraged.”

Citation: Lebwohl B, Cao Y, Zong G, et al. “Long term gluten consumption in adults without celiac disease and risk of coronary heart disease: prospective cohort study.” BMJ. 2017;357:j1892. doi:10.1136/bmj.j1892

Whole Grains Don’t Just Avoid Harm—They Actively Protect

The evidence for whole grain benefits doesn’t rest on a handful of studies. A BMJ meta-analysis incorporating 45 studies found that consuming 90 grams of whole grains daily (about three servings) reduced all-cause mortality by 17%, cardiovascular mortality by 22%, cancer mortality by 15%, and diabetes mortality by a striking 48% (Aune et al., BMJ, 2016). The dose-response relationship was nearly linear, with benefits continuing up to seven servings daily.

For type 2 diabetes prevention specifically, the numbers are remarkable. Three Harvard cohort studies tracking 194,784 participants documented 18,629 diabetes cases over 4.6 million person-years. Those with the highest whole grain consumption had 29% lower diabetes risk (Hu et al., PLOS Medicine, 2020). Meanwhile, the American Heart Association found that people with lower gluten intake were actually 13% more likely to develop type 2 diabetes over a 30-year period—the opposite of what grain-free advocates claim.

Blue Zone populations—the world’s longest-lived communities—offer living proof of these findings. From Sardinia’s whole-grain sourdough bread to Ikaria’s barley and Nicoya’s corn tortillas, whole grains form dietary staples in all five regions. These populations don’t fear bread; they’ve built their longevity around it.

What Ideal Wheat Processing Looks Like Today

If the problem isn’t wheat itself but what we’ve done to it, the solution becomes clear: return to traditional methods. Here’s what the science and centuries of practice suggest:

Step 1: Start with organic ancient wheat varieties.

A landmark 2018 study from the Leibniz Institute analyzing 40 wheat varieties found that einkorn showed no detectable alpha-amylase/trypsin inhibitors (ATIs) in five of eight samples tested—the inflammatory proteins now linked to non-celiac wheat sensitivity (Zevallos et al., Gastroenterology). By contrast, spelt—often marketed as a gentler alternative—contained more ATIs than modern common wheat.

The reason lies in einkorn’s unique genetics. As a diploid grain with only 14 chromosomes (versus modern wheat’s 42), einkorn lacks the D genome that contains the highly immunotoxic 33-mer gliadin peptide. While einkorn actually contains more total gluten protein (15-18%) than modern wheat (10-12%), that gluten has a fundamentally different structure—one that appears far easier for the human digestive system to handle.

Best ancient wheat varieties for sensitive digestion (ranked by research): Einkorn (lowest ATIs, best tolerance evidence), Kamut/Khorasan (clinical trials showed IBS symptom reduction), Emmer (only one celiac epitope detected), and Spelt (use with caution—high ATI content). Sources include Grand Teton Ancient Grains, Bluebird Grain Farms, and Barton Springs Mill.

Step 2: Grind with a home stone mill.

Fresh-milled flour contains the entire wheat berry—bran, germ, and endosperm—along with oils that begin oxidizing within 72 hours of milling. Commercial flour, milled months before reaching store shelves, has lost most of these volatile nutrients.

The Mockmill 200 ($349-399) leads the market with German-engineered corundum-ceramic stones that grind cool enough to preserve nutrients (flour temperature around 108°F), producing 200 grams of fine flour per minute with a 12-year warranty. For premium aesthetics, the Mockmill Lino 200 ($739) wraps the same performance in wood and natural acrylic stone housing.

The KoMo Fidibus Classic ($499-579), hand-built in Austria, operates more quietly (88 decibels versus Mockmill’s 96) with solid beechwood housing. For budget-conscious bakers, the Mockmill KitchenAid Attachment ($242) brings stone milling to existing stand mixers.

Step 3: Ferment with a sourdough starter—but get the timing and temperature right.

This is where the science gets precise. The optimal fermentation “sweet spot” is 12-24 hours at 75-82°F (24-28°C) with a final dough pH of 4.0-4.5.

The two primary organic acids in sourdough—lactic and acetic—create fundamentally different effects. Lactic acid produces a mild, yogurt-like sourness; acetic acid delivers the sharp, vinegar-like tang. The ideal ratio between these acids falls between 3:1 and 5:1 (lactic to acetic), with ratios of 80% lactic to 20% acetic producing optimal flavor and digestibility (Gänzle et al., Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2009).

Temperature is the master control. At warmer temperatures (86-99°F), bacteria produce more lactic acid and ethanol, creating milder bread. At cooler temperatures (60-72°F), the same bacteria shift toward producing more acetic acid, creating tangier bread. The sweet spot of 75-82°F balances both acids while allowing yeast and bacteria to work in productive harmony.

Fermentation timing guide for FODMAP reduction: 6-8 hours yields 50-60% fructan reduction (moderate benefit). 12 hours yields 69-75% reduction (minimum effective threshold). 16-24 hours yields 70-90% reduction (optimal range). Beyond 24 hours, you get diminishing returns—and risk over-fermentation (Struyf et al., Journal of Cereal Science, 2017).

What about harmful fermentation byproducts? The concerns are mostly overblown. Biogenic amines (including histamine) remain remarkably low in properly fermented sourdough—typically below 10 mg/kg, far below the 2,500 mg/kg found in aged cheese. Alcohol evaporates during baking, leaving less than 2% in finished bread.

The one legitimate concern for IBS sufferers: mannitol production. This sugar alcohol (classified as a FODMAP) can increase by up to 550% during fermentation. The tradeoff is real: the same bacteria that reduce fructans also produce mannitol. For most people this isn’t an issue, but those with severe IBS may benefit from sourdoughs made with specific homofermentative bacterial strains (like L. plantarum) that don’t produce mannitol.

Step 4: Bake and enjoy—within the first few days.

Use your freshly milled flour within 2-3 days for maximum nutritional benefit. Bake your sourdough after the full fermentation period to an internal temperature of 200-205°F, and consume within a few days of baking. Store any extra flour in the freezer to slow oxidation.

This approach addresses multiple mechanisms simultaneously: ancient wheat’s near-absence of inflammatory ATIs, fresh-milling’s preservation of nutrients, and long fermentation’s dramatic reduction of fructans and phytic acid. It’s the same basic approach Sardinian women have practiced for millennia—and what my grandfather knew in Brazil, what my father knew in Georgia, and what we tried to share with the world at Staff of Life Foods before the market was ready to listen.

Read the Final Section of James’ article here

I’ve got some homework to do and yes on my list is trying to make some fresh Einkorn bread made like they did in the ancient world. Stay tuned…

-Jared

(References down below)

P.S. - My wife has a beautiful newsletter where she shares her perspectives on tending the land, recipes, women’s health and more.

I’d love to hear goals for 2026. 👋

I write this newsletter each week because I feel my best when my body, mind and soul are all healthy. I want the same for you. If you feel like you’ve seen something valuable here, please do me a favor and forward this newsletter to a friend or let me know what you think by replying to this email or texting me - (310) 879-8441

P.S. - This newsletter does not provide medical advice. The content, such as graphics, images, text, and all other materials, is provided for reference and educational purposes only. The content is not meant to be complete or exhaustive or to be applicable to any specific individual's medical condition.

Selected References

Aune D, Keum N, Giovannucci E, et al. Whole grain consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and all cause and cause specific mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. BMJ. 2016;353:i2716.

De Palma G, Nadal I, Collado MC, Sanz Y. Effects of a gluten-free diet on gut microbiota and immune function in healthy adult human subjects. Br J Nutr. 2009;102(8):1154-1160.

Gänzle MG, Loponen J, Gobbetti M. Proteolysis in sourdough fermentations: mechanisms and potential for improved bread quality. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2008;19(10):513-521.

Lebwohl B, Cao Y, Zong G, et al. Long term gluten consumption in adults without celiac disease and risk of coronary heart disease: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2017;357:j1892.

Molina-Infante J, Santolaria S, Sanders DS, Fernández-Bañares F. Systematic review: noncoeliac gluten sensitivity. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2015;41(9):807-820.

Pes GM, Tolu F, Dore MP, et al. Male longevity in Sardinia, a review of historical sources supporting a causal link with dietary factors. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2015;69(4):411-418.

Skodje GI, Sarna VK, Minelle IH, et al. Fructan, rather than gluten, induces symptoms in patients with self-reported non-celiac gluten sensitivity. Gastroenterology. 2018;154(3):529-539.

Struyf N, Van der Maelen E, Hemdane S, et al. Bread dough and baker’s yeast: An uplifting synergy. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2017;16(5):850-867.

Vici G, Belli L, Biondi M, Polzonetti V. Gluten free diet and nutrient deficiencies: A review. Clin Nutr. 2016;35(6):1236-1241.

Zevallos VF, Raker V, Tenber S, et al. Nutritional wheat amylase-trypsin inhibitors promote intestinal inflammation via activation of myeloid cells. Gastroenterology. 2017;152(5):1100-1113.

Here are a few other links to things that have changed my life:

Whoop - Track your HRV and REM Sleep

Function Health - Optimize Your Health via 160+ BioMarkers

Here are a few topics I think you’ll love if you haven’t checked them out before:

How to Breathe for Better Health

How to Supercharge Your Sleep

The Power of the Sauna