Visit the Microscopic Colitis Foundation Website
I found the following quote in the responses to a blog written by Dr. Briffa. The blog discussed why most research based on epidemiological evidence is pretty much unreliable, (and unfortunately, this is the sort of thing that most doctors seem to base their nutritional and dietary advice on).
The reason why doctors base much of their advice on this type of information, is because most research in the area of nutrition and diet falls into the category of epidemiological studies - precious little research is based on intervention studies. This issue, of course, is certainly worthy of it's own topic, but the comment quoted below, which appeared in the responses to that blog, really captured my interest, especially the part that I have emphasized in red:Here is the blog:Xenia says:
Yes, we should not conclude from this study that whole grain does not benefit heart health. We should conclude it from the fact that we should not eat grain, any grain, ever, at all, in the first place, because just like soy, it is not suitable to be called a food or to be a food, at least not for humans. It has been shown over and over again, both in studies and in real life that it is detrimental to our health in too many ways to even begin to list.
Whole grain is not better – and is sometimes worse. True, we should avoid refined grains (and other refined stuff) at any cost. Bot nobody seems to ever think about the fact that, if the grain remains whole and that very same grain is not organic (and 99% of grain is NOT), then all the pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, toxic fertilizers etc. which would have otherwise been removed with the husks where they accumulate, remain in the flour when the grains are milled. So with shole grain that is not organic, you are ingesting 10 or 20 times as many toxic chemicals as you would otherwise.
Then, there is gluten. I will not even go into that.
And lastly, there is the fact that our digestive tract lining is very thin and easily damaged. It consists just of one layer of cells – so that the digested food can be more easily absorbed from the intestines into the tiny blood vessels surrounding it. You should never, ever eat roughage. Never. We are not meant to eat insoluble fiber that we cannot digest because it scars and damages the sensitive lining. This may cause bleeding, deteriorate absorbtion of nutrients and offer breeding ground to bad bacteria that find shelter in the scars – where they are not meant to be. It also increases inflammation, if repeated every day. But worst of all, it gradually creates spacing between the single-layer cells of the lining, leading to leakages of non-digested food particles into the tissues surrounging the intestine which is the best way if you want to invite allergies into your life, not to mention fatigue, pain, inexplicable headaches, insomnia and last but not least, autoimmune disorders.
So stay away from whole grains and any other insoluble fiber. The way to get your fiber is with vegetables (and it is on purpose that I am not mentioning fruit here – today’s fruit is very far away from what Nature intended it to be …). People find it difficult to give up their bread and pasta so they found a way to justify it. But this does not make whole grain healthy. The reason epidemiological studies may sometimes find seeming health benefits in subjects eating whole grains is that such people who make the effort to eat whole grains instead of the refined ones also eat other stuff percieved as healthy and are generally more mindful of their diet and their lifestyle.
The best rule (but of course not the only one) to judge what is healthy and what is not is to ask yourself if this food could be eaten raw. It does not mean that you have to eat it raw but if it could be ingested raw in case you wanted to, then it is a good start. For example, fish can be eaten as sushi, olive oil does not have to be cooked since you can use it on a salad, vegetables can be eaten raw, meat can be eated as carpaccio or steak tartare … There are other considerations, like how we prepare it, how it has been grown/raised etc. but the “raw rule” is a good start.
3 October 2010 @ 9:08 am
Xenia says:
Sorry, there is a typo at the end of the second paragraph above. “Shole” grain should of course be whole grain.
3 October 2010 @ 9:13 am
http://www.drbriffa.com/2010/09/29/why- ... -evidence/
Of course, for a number of years, we've been aware that fiber is contraindicated for anyone with MC, and that it's abrasiveness is probably the reason why it can be so irritating to the mucosa, but I don't believe we've ever delved into the mechanisms of why this actually happens. I find the above quote to be a very perceptive view of the process, because the enterocytes that comprise the surface of the intestinal mucosa, are indeed physically constrained as a single layer of cells, and the tight junctions, of course, lie between the respective adjacent cells.
The recognition of the fact that only a single layer of cells lies between the contents of the lumen, and the bloodstream, is very illuminating. I think that we were all aware of that fact, but we never really thought of it that way. When you view it as a single layer of cells, then the fragility of this "thin line of defense", becomes pretty obvious. It's no wonder that fiber is a no-no for inflamed intestines.
Incidentally, I'm glad to see that I'm not the only person in the world who believes that insoluble fiber should never be eaten by humans. I have had that belief for many years, (probably due to growing up on a farm, and raising livestock for so many years). Cattle can digest insoluble fiber, because they have 4 stomachs, and one of them is specially designed, just for that process, but humans don't have that capability.
Interestingly, the bran layers of cereal grains, (the husks), are mostly comprised of insoluble fiber. I have often wondered why so many "experts" recommend that we should eat something that not only are we incapable of digesting, but it very likely inflicts microscopic damage to the enterocytes in our intestinal mucosa, as it passes through our GI tract. Why punish such a vital organ, unnecessarily? When we eat whole grains, (whether finely ground, or whatever), our intestines almost surely view all the irritating fiber fraction that rubs against their fragile surfaces, in same the way that we would view ground up razor blades, and assorted trash. IOW, it's dangerous to be around, and it doesn't contain any nutritional benefits that can be extracted. So why is it there?
At least, that's the way I see it. Needless to say, I would be interested in seeing contrary opinions, or other thoughts on this topic.
Tex
