Musings on "Food as a Foreign Substance"

[Polly]

Hi All!

I have been thinking about the comment of Mary Beth's - that food is a foreign substance to the body. I had never thought about it like this. But it makes lots of sense.

The digestive tract is a long narrow tube open at both ends whose job is to extract nutrients out of the food we eat and to keep any harmful substances from entering the body, or if they do enter, to "neutralize" them so they can't cause harm.

There is a huge army of immune cells in the gut whose job is to kills micro-organisms if they enter through the mucosa. (This army used to be much busier, before we had a relatively safe food/water supply). In fact, in MC we see evidence of this army - those lymphocytes in our path reports that are a hallmark of MC are immune cells (white blood cells) that are found in any chronic infection/inflammation (and in particular viral infections, interestingly).

Also, there are hundreds of enzyme systems for extracting nutrients from food as well as other parts of the army, like the liver that detoxifies poisons. Not to mention the "good" bacteria that becomes disrupted in MC.

Anyway, I am thinking that our existing GI system whose job is to manage intruders (foreign bodies) probably developed, in part, because of and in response to the specific food that humans ate. It is undoubtedly designed (genetically) to handle those foods that human were most likely to eat over the eons. Can you imagine its confusion and the wear and tear on it when trying to handle today's diet? Chemicals, dyes, preservatives, processed foods made with dozens of ingredients, great excesses of fat, sugar, salt, not enough fruits and veggies, etc. I am feeling sorry for the GI system. LOL! No wonder we have so much disease in modern culture.

Have a fun weekend,

Polly

[Rosie]

Polly, your comments got me reflecting on all the suffering must have accompanied the transition from a hunter-gatherer society to an agriculture-based society. Initially a huge percentage of young children must have suffered from gluten intolerance and died because they couldn't digest the most prevalent food. But infant/child mortality was so high back then the connection went unnoticed. Now a much smaller percentage suffers from gluten intolerance because so many of those who were so sensitive just died and didn't contribute to the gene pool, thus selecting for those who could handle wheat in their diet. A similar story could be told for lactose intolerance and the introduction of dairy products. It's really sad to contemplate how cruelly nature's selection sometimes appears to work..........

I also got to wondering if gluten intolerance is much more common in the native American population, both in North and South America. The domesticated grains of corn and quinona are gluten-free, so you wouldn't expect that there was any selection for gluten tolerance in those populations, at least until the Europeans settled. Has this come up before? It seems like just about everything has at some point!

[Lucy]

Hi there,

I'm really not sure that those of us with the main genes for gluten sensitivity are any more prone to develop it than the same genes in those whose genetic lines were discontinued by an early death in some with the inability to reproduce, obviously. Of course there are probably other genes involved that haven't been discovered as yet that could've resulted in some extremely sensitive infants' deaths at a higher rate than now due to some lost gene combination that used to exist (an additional gene, in other words), but I kind of doubt it.

One thing that some of the writers on the history of celiac disease don't take into consideration, while we're discussing this, is that the Irish didn't experience more problems with celiac disease due to being the last place in Europe to introduce wheat. It would be impossible for the wheat eaters of other parts of Europe to have evolved into being tolerant of wheat in a few hundred years. It just doesn't happen that quickly. Actually, the human genome is essentially the same as it was 10,000 years ago.

I believe that native Americans are of the same LARGE branch of humanity as other Indoeuropeans, like Europeans, Indians, and Persians (Iran). I think that full blooded native Americans are just as likely to have the major genes for celiac disease. All they did is migrate to the Americas a little faster than the rest of us! Ha!

By the way, human migrations are fascinating to read about. Alot more is known now from genetic studies (still a little controversy among scientists, I'm sure). Linguistics is another way these sorts of things were studied before we had all the genetic tests that could be done. Sure would be interesting to be able to have an actual natural history of our disease, wouldn't it?

One of these days they are going to have our ancient ancestors all figured out. We are going to have to have huge reunions and lots of gf BBQ to feed 'em all! I just attended a "reunion" with some of my distant, distant cousins. Neither branch of our family knew the other existed until just a few years ago, but the two families drive back and forth from each of our respective states to "crash" each other's reunions.

After the one for my more distant "family" there was an exhibit at the museum in this small town which the big city has surrounded in which contributions had been made by various family members from their ancestors. The history of the town itself is fascinating!

I've only known these folks a few years, but they make me feel like I'm really one of them, and they say the same about my family line which is the one in the other state, by the way. Turns out these distant kin just lived up the road from me all this time. I guess blood really is thicker than water, after all! Ha!
The main geneologist for our line has contacted some other lines, maybe just as large as the first two, yet they don't seem as interested in all the history that's been discovered. It's a shame as at least one she talked to on the phone was around 80 years old, and soon, all that history that they know will be lost forever.

As a part of the reunion Saturday, an announcement was made about a genetic test that the males had to participate in. Thus far, everyone's father turned out to be their father, so that's a good thing!! Ha! Unfortunately, I missed the announcement, but I think that the people who do these tests can actually trace the origins of the families way back. I need to talk to the husband of our geneologist to see what else he found out from that organization.

Yours, Luce

[ant]

This may be a digression but I remember reading a fascinating Pulitzer Prize Winning book a couple of years ago called "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond, professor of geography and physiology at UCLA. If a remember correctly, his thesis is that, amongst other attributes, the European/Asian race(s) had agriculture as an advantage in dominating the world. This advantage was mainly due to geography (fertile land and temperate climates) and the resulting ability to cultivate cereals (wheat etc.) and cattle (including for diary). Not sure where that leaves us MCers? But, for sure, study of human gene history, migration and Darwinian success provides many clues.

I love the idea of a reunion of all who have the genes that lead/might lead to what we have. An "MCers" clan gathering with GF, DF, SF etc. BBQ food and all..... Of course, we have the clan gathering (but not the BBQ) on this board everyday.....

Just thinking out loud here....

Best ant

[Lucy]

Yep, and just look at where the so-called "Cradle of Civilization" was.

The ability to form towns due to agriculture was certainly due to the more temperate latitudes. Basically, however, I believe that in the beginning of that "settling down" process, grains were mainly stored in case of famine, so I call wheat "famine food." In other words, I don't really need it unless I'm starving! I don't think it took long, however, for it to become a staple and large percentage of the diet.

Actually, there are alot of people who go every year to major celiac convention type things, and begin to know people face to face. I met some of them at Dr. Fine's thing back in Spring of '06, I believe it was. He provided ALL the food, and it was free of ALL our allergins! It was delicious, and nutritious, even Kosher for those who needed that. He actually supervised in the kitchen himself. I would love to live in a boarding house where that would be all that was served! I think I'd be soooo healthy!

By the way, Dr. Fine started the community garden in Dallas. I'm not sure where he got the produce but it was certainly fresh and delicious. Only thing was that at each break we were all starving, but he had all sorts of healthy snacks, like fruits and nuts out in the hall of the hotel during each of them. I guess that's the way one is supposed to eat, but the convenience just isn't there on the other days of our lives, unfortunately, thus, the boarding house dream. Ha!

Back to the national meetings that are attended by people like us, it would be mainly the gluten free foods that would be served at all but Dr. Fine's, but the people in attendance often have the same issues as we do -- multiple sensitivities. I think that some of these people have attended so many of these things, that they've made some pretty long term friends through the years. I've not attended either a CSA national meeting nor an GIG meeting, but I sent my sister and brother-in-law to one that was also in Dallas a few years ago. After a while, those people would've heard all the nationally recognized speakers on a variety of topics as they very the ones that speak as well as the topics. I believe that some of them actually discuss the leaky gut phenomenon.

Guess that's one way that you could feel connected to the larger leaky gut family -- by attending one of those. Also, Dr. Fine has summer family camps out in New Mexico in the mountains where you can get meals free of all most of our sensitivities. They do offer some dairy products, etc., for the people who can have them and want them, but the regular meals I don't think have any dairy at all in them. Hey, wouldn't it be neat if some of us ladies went together as a "family" (only without the kids!) and attended that camp together? I wouldn't be able to make it anytime soon, but I wonder what Dr. Fine would think of that idea? They have it at a YMCA camp, and it's very reasonably priced from what I've heard. Maybe some on the board ought to check that out as a possible "reunion" site for some summer???

Yours, Luce

[tex]

Luce,

Emigration and associated genetics are interesting topics, but there seems to be some differences of opinion on a lot of the dates. Evidently, archaeology still holds a lot of unanswered questions, (or more correctly, a lot of questionable "answers" ). It seems that a lot of the information is subject to change, based on the latest research data. I'm not disagreeing with you, because I believe that you are basically correct. The data, however, seem to change with each subsequent "study", suggesting that it's the scientists who are changing, (along with their methods), more than the data.

For example, you mentioned that "the Irish didn't experience more problems with celiac disease due to being the last place in Europe to introduce wheat". According to the "experts", the country with the highest prevalence of celiac disease is Ireland, (at least that seems to be the current consensus - I have a hunch that status could change, because every time any celiac study is completed, the researchers conclude that celiac disease is 10, or 20, or 30 times more prevalent, than previously thought.) I doubt that the disease is changing that rapidly - it's probably changing, all right, but I suspect that the investigational methods are changing the statistics even more dramatically, as attitudes continue to change. For all we know, tomorrow, the hotbed of celiac disease may be this country, depending on the whims of the researchers.

There's some disagreement about when the first native Americans set foot on this continent, also. Some folks claim that they got here thousands of years before the "discovery" and development of agriculture. Agriculture was developed approximately 8,000 to 10,000 years ago. The first emigrants onto this continent, crossed a land bridge from Asia to Alaska, somewhere between 15,000 and 33,000 years ago, according to archaeological evidence. That would imply that they had never tasted wheat, when they came here. However, there is some evidence that the first wild crosses, (hybrids), that created the ancestors of modern wheat, and corn, (maize), may have occurred 18,000 to 20,000 years ago, and possibly earlier. So it wouldn't have been impossible for some tribes to have been exposed to it that far back in time, though they couldn't have eaten much of it, because those early, wild hybrids produced only a minuscule amount of seed, (grain). That's where the agricultural revolution came in, thousands of years later, when selective breeding, and additional crosses, increased the grain production to a "useful" level. It certainly didn't happen overnight, and progress probably came in "spurts".

http://www.psc.edu/science/Merri/merri.html

However, new DNA technology is drastically altering earlier estimates of arrival times, (usually shortening them). For example, from this study:

http://www.thegeneticgenealogist.com/20 ... americans/

National Geographic suggests that such information indicates that the first Americans set foot here only 15,000 years ago.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... ation.html

I have a hunch that during the next decade or two, we'll learn a heck of a lot about our ancestors, and their genetics. Maybe we'll eventually learn whether or not they tasted wheat, before they got here.

Wayne

[hazel]

Speaking of geography, though not history, look how a baby's digestive system adapts to its environment. How different is the diet of a young Mexican or Vietnamese compared to a Swede or Scot. I guess it depends on its immune system also, in areas with untreated water, etc.