<\/p>\n
by Sue Becker<\/strong><\/p>\n Click to hear Sue’s interview with Vickilynn Haycraft<\/a> or with Hope Egan Wheat Belly<\/em> by William Davis, MD, a New York Times best selling book, is a \u201cprovocative look at how eliminating wheat \u2013 even so called healthy whole grain wheat \u2013 from our diets is the key to permanent weight loss and can offer relief from a broad spectrum of health and digestive issues\u201d.\u00a0 Dr. Davis considers wheat to be the \u201cworld\u2019s most destructive dietary ingredient and claims that with the elimination of this \u201cperfect chronic poison\u201d most health issues can be resolved or reversed.\u00a0 I have read the book and researched many of the claims extensively.\u00a0 In this review, many of these claims will be discussed.\u00a0 Dr. Davis\u2019 position will be stated first then my findings on the claim will be presented in detail.<\/p>\n I have been teaching others about the benefits of healthy eating, particularly freshly milled whole grains, including wheat, since 1992, through my business The Bread Beckers, Inc.\u00a0 I have a degree in Food Science and am a Certified Nutrition Counselor.\u00a0 I have continued my independent studies of physiology, biochemistry and anatomy for more than 30 years.\u00a0 I am currently enrolled in the Naturopathy program at Trinity School of Natural Health.<\/p>\n I am, however, first and foremost, unashamedly a Bible-believing Christian.\u00a0 Unfortunately, Wheat Belly<\/em>, as well as most of the public information in the healthy eating category, comes from a \u201chunter-gatherer\u201d, evolutionary viewpoint.\u00a0 Dr. Davis states that \u201cafter Homo sapiens<\/em> and our immediate predecessors spent millions of years<\/strong> (emphasis mine) eating from the limited menu of hunting and gathering, wheat entered the human diet, a practice that developed only during the past ten thousand years.\u201d This \u201chunter-gatherer\u201d philosophy is based on the idea that man has evolved over millions of years and did not start farming until much later in the evolutionary chain.\u00a0 While I do not deny that there are people groups that are more agricultural than others, the Bible tells us that farming and agricultural living have been around since the beginning of time.\u00a0 As a Christian, I embrace the world view that creation and the human race, as we know it, began as recorded in the book of Genesis.\u00a0 The Bible tells us, \u201cIn the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens \u2013 When no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not yet caused it to rain upon the earth and there was no man to till the ground\u201d (Genesis 1:4-5).\u00a0 Adam and Eve were created by God and placed in a garden<\/strong> and instructed to tend it.\u00a0 The first mention of bread is in the punishment put on Adam because of disobedience: \u201cBy the sweat of his face would he eat bread\u201d (Genesis 3:19).\u00a0 From this Biblical account of man, we can see that Adam and Eve were indeed farmers.\u00a0 Their first son, Cain, was \u201ca tiller of the ground\u201d.\u00a0 The first biblical mention of bread made from flour is as early as the time of Abraham and Sarah.\u00a0 My final authority on all things will be the Bible.\u00a0 From the Bible, I can see that the \u201chunter-gatherer\u201d basis for eating is unscriptural.<\/p>\n God created and gave us food to perfectly nourish our bodies.\u00a0 He knows how our bodies work and what nutrients are needed for good health.\u00a0 He made food to give us those nutrients.\u00a0 When we alter God\u2019s design and plan, we discredit His wisdom and we will suffer the consequences.<\/p>\n I have great concerns when diets eliminate entire food groups, especially ones that God has declared as good for food. Page after page of the Wheat Belly<\/em> book is filled with arguments against wheat.\u00a0 Much of the substantiating evidence against wheat is based on the detrimental affect wheat has on people with celiac disease.\u00a0 One would certainly expect detrimental health responses to wheat for a celiac person.\u00a0 Celiac disease is caused by an inability to digest a particular protein component of gluten, known as gliadin.\u00a0 Gluten is the naturally<\/strong> occurring protein of most grains, particularly wheat.\u00a0 If you can not properly digest a food, then it is toxic to you.\u00a0 It is not surprising then that people with celiac disease will have health issues if they do not eliminate gluten from their diets and will certainly feel remarkably better when they do.\u00a0 The diet recommended in Wheat Belly<\/em> is basically a high protein, low carbohydrate diet, with the elimination of ALL grains, not just wheat.<\/p>\n We need to be cautious about the elimination of entire food groups, especially when the recommendations are based on how that food group affects a particularly small representation of people.\u00a0 For example, Phenylketenuria is a rare disease in which a person is born lacking the enzyme to digest the amino acid, phenylalanine.\u00a0 Phenylalanine is a naturally occurring amino acid found in most protein rich foods such as meats, eggs and milk.\u00a0 Babies are tested for this disease at birth (PKU), and if found to have it are placed on a very low protein diet.\u00a0 Those people who do not adhere to the diet suffer many serious health issues including mental retardation.\u00a0 The high protein diet recommended by Dr. Davis would be debilitating for someone with phenylyketonuria, causing many health issues, just as gluten does for a celiac.\u00a0 Yet, Dr. Davis does not think meat is a poison, but it certainly is to a phenylketonuria patient.\u00a0 If we based our opinions on how meat affects someone with phenylketonuria, we would conclude that meat, eggs, and milk are very dangerous foods, because they contain phenylalanine.\u00a0 Phenylketonuria is indeed less common than celiac disease, but celiac disease affects less than 1% of Americans.<\/p>\n In the remainder of this study, you will find only a few<\/strong> of my own findings when I began to research some of the \u201cfacts\u201d presented in the Wheat Belly<\/em> book.\u00a0 Dr. Davis\u2019 viewpoints will be presented first, in bold type<\/strong>, and are either direct quotes or implications from statements made in the book.\u00a0 My analysis will follow.<\/p>\n \u2022\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Dr. Davis mingles the terms \u201cgenetic modification\u201d, \u201chybridization\u201d, and \u201chuman modification\u201d throughout his discussion of modern wheat.<\/strong><\/p>\n The use of these terms interchangeably throughout the same discussion, sentence or paragraph is confusing and misleading to the reader.\u00a0 Though never stated directly, it is certainly implied that the modern dwarf wheat is the result of genetic modification.\u00a0 Dr. Davis also uses examples of other truly genetically modified foods, such as soybeans, as examples for his arguments against wheat.\u00a0 This is deception at its best, causing the reader to draw wrong conclusions.<\/p>\n Despite the implication in the book, the modern dwarf wheat is NOT a result of genetic modification but of traditional plant breeding techniques.\u00a0 The modern dwarf wheat was developed by cross breeding thousands of strains of wheat to produce a seed with higher crop yield and finally crossing the variety with Japanese dwarf wheat.\u00a0 This produced a shorter plant that would not bend under the heavier heads of grain.\u00a0 The cross breeding was done wheat-to-wheat, unlike genetic modification that crosses genes from other species with wheat.\u00a0 Wheat has NOT been approved for genetic modification in the US.\u00a0 There is NO genetically modified commercially grown wheat in the US.<\/p>\n For the record, I am totally against the use of genetic modification in our food. I want to encourage readers everywhere to be informed.\u00a0 Dig deeper than the popular publications, as the information cited can often be traced back to only one source.\u00a0 Do not be deceived.\u00a0 Look for facts.\u00a0 Seek wisdom from God and His word.\u00a0 Fear is a tool of the enemy, not of God.<\/p>\n For clarification, let me just state again that wheat has NOT been approved for genetic modification in the US.\u00a0 There is no GMO wheat grown commercially in the US.<\/p>\n Finally, organic by definition cannot be genetically modified, so when in doubt, buy organic.<\/p>\n \u2022\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Dr. Davis claims that \u201cwheat has been modified by humans to such a degree that modern strains are unable to survive in the wild without human support\u2026\u201d. (page 22)<\/strong><\/p>\n Again, the use of the term \u201cmodified\u201d can be misleading.\u00a0 Though the statement does not say it, most concerned readers might interpret that statement to mean genetically modified.<\/p>\n To obtain higher yields, the dwarf wheat may indeed require heavier nitrogen fertilization, but without the fertilization, the crop will most definitely survive and yield an adequate crop.\u00a0 In fact, the dwarf wheat was developed to direct its energy to produce \u201cfruit\u201d instead of a large plant and to grow in areas with less desirable soil and growing conditions.\u00a0 Dr. Davis actually contradicts himself a few pages later by stating that \u201cshort stalks reach maturity more quickly, which means a shorter growing season with less fertilizer required to generate the otherwise useless stalk.\u201d<\/p>\n To say that modern wheat can not survive in the wild is nothing short of ridiculous.\u00a0 We are not talking about a wild animal that has been domesticated and lost its natural survival instincts.\u00a0 We are talking about a plant that needs water, soil, and sunshine.\u00a0 The Bible tells us to \u201cconsider the lilies of the field and learn thoroughly how they grow, they neither toil nor spin.\u201d Matthew 6:28<\/p>\n \u2022\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Dr. Davis implies that the modern dwarf wheat is some kind of reproducing machine gone bad, coining such terms as \u201csynthetic wheat\u201d and claims that 5% of the proteins in the modern wheat is unique to the variety meaning that they are found in neither parent.<\/strong><\/p>\n Let me just say emphatically, this is genetically impossible.\u00a0 Plants can only express proteins they have the genetic code to produce.\u00a0 Certain conditions can affect the expression of these proteins but the plant cannot produce a protein when the code for that protein is not there.\u00a0 To put it simply, in human terms, you can not have a blue eyed child if there is no gene for blue eyes.\u00a0 You may never have a blue eyed child even if the gene is there, but you absolutely can not have one if there is no gene or code for it.\u00a0 I do not mean to oversimplify here, but genetics is genetics.<\/p>\n \u2022\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Dr. Davis discusses how even freshly milled modern wheat caused adverse affects for him, comparing his reactions to freshly milled einkorn with freshly milled organic hard red wheat in the section \u201cA Good Grain Gone Bad?\u201d. (page 26-27)<\/strong><\/p>\n The reactions Dr. Davis mentions having to red wheat are very typical of some one that has a wheat sensitivity.\u00a0 Dr. Davis states that he indeed has a wheat sensitivity.\u00a0 It is a fact that people with wheat sensitivity can often better tolerate the ancient grains such as Kamut\u00ae khorasan wheat, einkorn, spelt, and emmer.\u00a0 But for the rest of the 90% of Americans who do not have a wheat sensitivity there should be no adverse reactions.\u00a0 Dr. Davis also admits that his isolated reaction hardly constitutes a clinical trial.\u00a0 I completely agree.\u00a0 His personal experience is completely contrary to what we have seen in thousands of customers, of more than 20 years, who start milling predominately wheat.<\/p>\n \u2022\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Dr. Davis makes continuous references to \u201chealthy whole grains\u201d claiming they are no healthier than the white flour counter parts.\u00a0 He claims that his patients feel better and lose weight when they give up their \u201chealthy whole grain\u201d waffles and bagels for breakfast and replace them with a 3 egg omelet.<\/strong><\/p>\n There is no such thing as \u201chealthy whole grain\u201d processed bread products in the regular grocery store.\u00a0 Between 1870 and 1890, all commercial grain milling methods in the US were replaced by automated rolling mills.\u00a0 These rolling mills separate the bran and germ portions from the endosperm, or the white flour portion.\u00a0 White flour is basically protein and starch.\u00a0 Most all of the vitamins, minerals, fatty acids, and fiber are located in the bran and germ.\u00a0 The removal of the bran and germ leaves the white flour virtually devoid of nutrients except of course for the protein and starch.<\/p>\n By 1910, the new white flour had taken over the market, making white flour and white bread food for the masses.\u00a0 Shortly thereafter, three vitamin deficiency diseases became epidemic.\u00a0 Enriching the flour was necessary to replace the nutrients that were lost in the milling process.\u00a0 For the more than thirty nutrients lost with the removal of the bran and germ, only four were returned \u2013 three synthetically produced B vitamins and iron.\u00a0 A fifth nutrient, folic acid, was later added to enriched flour because of the rising incident of birth defects.\u00a0 Chlorine derived bleaching agents are also used making the flour whiter, as well as conditioners such as potassium bromate, that are certainly unwelcome additions.<\/p>\n Most people do not realize that ALL commercially milled flour in the US today is made on these huge roller mills.\u00a0 Commercially milled whole wheat flour is not at all the same as what you get if you milled the flour yourself.\u00a0 Even flour labeled whole grain is not what one may think.<\/p>\n \u201cDuring the milling process, steel rollers crush the grain, and the white flour released from the endosperm is separated by sifters into different grades according to fineness.\u00a0 The protein portion of white flour is roughly 75% gluten.\u00a0 The bran and germ, which make up about 28% of the wheat kernel, are totally removed in commercially milled flour.\u00a0 Components may be recombined later to form a variety of flours to be sold for varying uses.\u201d (Nutritional Characteristics of Organic Freshly Milled Stone-Ground, Sourdough and Conventional Breads by Campbell, Hauser, and Hill, Ecological Agricultural Projects (EAP publication 35)<\/p>\n Whole Wheat Flour<\/strong> is produced commercially by recombining ground bran with the white flour.\u00a0 The wheat germ and oil is left out, as it would cause the flour to go rancid quickly.\u00a0 No legal specifications are required for this labeling.\u00a0 Most people think \u201cwhole wheat\u201d means \u201cwhole grain\u201d.<\/p>\n Whole Grain<\/strong> is actually a legal term with specific content requirements for labeling.\u00a0 To \u201cmake\u201d whole grain flour, the white flour must be recombined with the bran and germ according to legal specifications for flour to fiber ratio.\u00a0 Gluten, the protein portion of white flour, can be completely extracted from the white flour.\u00a0 Even though white flour is predominately gluten and starch, the extracted gluten, however, is not considered \u201cflour\u201d by legal standards.\u00a0 Gluten can therefore be added in abundance to flour products, even those labeled \u201cwhole grain\u201d<\/strong>.\u00a0 The addition of extra gluten greatly alters the fiber to flour ratio of the \u201cwhole grain\u201d product.\u00a0 This is an unnatural amount of gluten in these \u201chealthy whole grain\u201d products, the consumption of which will not give the desired health benefits, if any at all.\u00a0 This isolated gluten is also found in many non bread products such as soy sauce and taco seasoning.<\/p>\n It is important to mention here that gluten, as it naturally occurs in grains, is not a \u201cbad guy\u201d any more than cholesterol is a bad guy as it appears naturally in eggs and fats.\u00a0 In fact, gluten, as it occurs naturally in most grains, contributes several valuable amino acids to our diets.\u00a0 Amino acids are the building blocks of all protein.\u00a0 Protein foods are important as they supply the body with the necessary amino acids for strength and good health.\u00a0 Glutamine is just one such amino acid.\u00a0 It is known to promote gut health and brain function.\u00a0 The richest food source of glutamine is wheat gluten.\u00a0 Wheat is considered a good protein source for adults as it supplies significant amounts of all essential amino acids, except lysine.\u00a0 The addition of legumes, meat, or milk will supply the needed lysine, making wheat a complete protein source even for growing children.<\/p>\n So, there is simply no comparison between a breakfast of store bought waffles or bagels, which are not healthy no matter what they are labeled, and a breakfast of a three egg omelet and cheese.\u00a0 Of course you feel more sustained on the omelet, but a breakfast of freshly milled whole grain waffles will stabilize your blood sugar and satisfy your hunger for hours, giving you lots of energy.\u00a0 People have different body chemistry.\u00a0 Some people do better on more carbohydrates while others do better on more protein, but always the carbohydrates must be real \u2013 real fruits, real vegetables, and real whole grains.<\/p>\n The invention of the steel roller mills in the late 1800s revolutionized the American diet.\u00a0 Some statistics show that a real decline in America\u2019s health began around 1910.\u00a0 Over one hundred years of eating basically protein and starch, isolated from the rest of the many valuable nutrients found in wheat and all other grains, has contributed to many of the health issues we now see in this country. There is something simplistically wrong with this statement.\u00a0 If the Center for Disease Control only began tracking in 1985, how is it possible to know when the \u201cexplosion\u201d in obesity started?\u00a0 What was happening before 1985?\u00a0 Statistics I have read report the decline in America\u2019s health beginning as early as 1920, with a drastic drop from 1978 to 1980.\u00a0 In 1978, America\u2019s health was ranked 79 out of 100 countries studied.\u00a0 In 1980, the US had dropped to 95 out of 100.\u00a0 This was just in two short years and all prior to 1985.<\/p>\n Could this rapid decline have started in the 1970s when the high protein\/low carbohydrate diets were first introduced by Dr. Robert Atkins?\u00a0\u00a0 Diets such as the Paleo Diet and the Wheat Belly diet are nothing more than the high protein\/low carb diet by a different name.<\/p>\n The REAL truth, according to the USDA Economic Research Service, is that wheat consumption has actually DECLINED in the past 100 years, while meat and sugar consumption have drastically increased.<\/p>\n In 1829, wheat consumption averaged about 225 lbs\/person\/year.\u00a0 It dropped steadily to 180 lbs\/person in 1925, bottoming out in 1972 to an all time low of 110 lbs\/person\/year.\u00a0 There was a slight increase up until 1997, but only up to 147 lbs\/person\/year.\u00a0 According to the USDA Economic Research Service, \u201cthe\u00a0 10 year growth ended in 1997 with the adoption of the low carbohydrate diets\u201d, leading again to a decline in wheat consumption, rapid at first, reaching a low in 2005.\u00a0 In 2011, the estimated consumption of wheat is only 132.5 lbs\/person\/year.\u00a0 That is nearly 100 lbs\/person\/year less than what it was 100 years ago.<\/p>\n A striking change in wheat flour use occurred in the past century.\u00a0 At the turn of the 20th century, home baking accounted for 90 percent of total flour consumption, with commercial bakeries accounting for 10 percent.\u00a0 By 1945, the bakery portion rose to 60 percent as home baking dropped with the entry of women into the workforce.\u00a0 By 1990, less than 10 percent of flour was consumed in the home.\u00a0 As one can see, these facts do not coincide with the statements presented in the Wheat Belly<\/em> book, since wheat consumption has actually decreased while the obesity rate and waistlines have increased.<\/p>\n Also interesting is the fact that by 1980, the dwarf wheat was accepted worldwide to prevent food shortages and hunger in other countries.\u00a0 If wheat is the problem, then why have China, Mexico, and many Third World countries, which all use the dwarf wheat variety, not seen the rise in obesity and decline in health like America?<\/p>\n In the more than two decades I have been teaching others the health benefits of freshly milled whole grains, including wheat, I have seen countless lives improved by weight loss.\u00a0 Dr. Davis\u2019 claims about wheat, weight gain, and particularly fat accumulation around the middle contradict many other studies conducted over the years.\u00a0 One such study, the Framingham Heart Study found that those who ate at least 3 servings of whole grains everyday had the least fat accumulation around the middle.\u00a0 Another 12 year study, conducted among women, to investigate the relationship between the intake of dietary fiber, whole grains, and weight gain over time, found that those who consumed the most<\/strong> whole grains weighed less than those who consumed less whole grains.\u00a0 Those with a high whole grain intake had a 49% lower risk of major weight gain over time.<\/p>\n \u2022\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Dr. Davis makes the claim that wheat is a major contributor to weight gain and that the single elimination of wheat alone will promote weight loss.\u00a0 \u201cIf glucose-insulin-fat provocation from wheat consumption is a major phenomenon underlying weight gain, then elimination of wheat from the diet should reverse the phenomenon.\u00a0 And this is exactly what happens.\u201d (Page36)<\/strong><\/p>\n Dr. Davis states that \u201ca Mayo Clinic\/University study of 215 obese celiac patients showed 27.5 pounds of weight loss in the first six months of a wheat free diet.\u201d\u00a0 (Murray JA, Watson T, Clearman B, Mitros F.\u00a0 Effect of gluten-free diet on gastrointestinal symptoms in celiac disease<\/em>. Am J Clin Nutri 2004 April)<\/strong><\/p>\n First of all, what does this statement even mean?\u00a0 Does he mean 27.5 pounds per person, total for the group, or is it an average?<\/p>\n I found this study and read it for myself.\u00a0 It was not 215 obese<\/strong> celiac patients but simply 215 celiac patients.\u00a0 Of them, only 23% had Body Mass Index (BMI) >25 and only 11% of these had BMI >30.\u00a0 A BMI of >30 is considered obese.\u00a0 If you do the math, that puts the obese number in this study at 5-6 patients, not all 215!\u00a0 Half of the patients had a BMI <20.\u00a0 That means half of the 215 were normal or below normal weight.\u00a0 The conclusion of the study then states that the same proportion of males and females gained or lost weight after the institution of a gluten free diet (males \u2013 31% gained, 41% lost, females \u2013 36% gained and 35% lost).\u00a0 Ninety one patients gained<\/strong> (emphasis mine) weight between the time of diagnosis and 6 months after starting a gluten free diet.\u00a0 In the same period, 25 patients lost an average of 27.5 lbs.\u00a0 There is the 27.5 lbs Dr. Davis mentions, but it is an average among only 25 patients.\u00a0 According to the conclusions of the study, \u201cthis weight loss was most pronounced in the patients who were obese at diagnosis.\u00a0 However, 12 patients who had normal or low weight at diagnosis actually lost weight despite a gluten-free diet.\u00a0 This was largely due to excessive food restriction rather than persistent disease.\u201d<\/p>\n These results are significantly different than the statements made by Dr. Davis in the text above.\u00a0 I am not sure why the facts are misrepresented, but they certainly are.\u00a0 As you can see for yourself, these facts do not make a great case for gluten free and weight loss.<\/p>\n In more than 20 years of hearing the testimonies of others, we have seen many people experience great weight loss if needed when they began to eat freshly milled whole grains, including wheat.\u00a0 They also saw improvements in their overall health, skin and hair.<\/p>\n \u2022\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Dr. Davis makes claims about the affects of wheat on blood sugar and weight loss using the glycemic index as evidence:\u00a0 \u201cAn interesting fact:\u00a0 Whole wheat bread (glycemic index 72) increases blood sugar as much as or more than table sugar, or sucrose (glycemic index 59). (Glucose increases blood sugar to 100, hence a glycemic index of 100.\u00a0 The extent to which a particular food increases blood sugar relative to glucose determines that food\u2019s glycemic index.)\u00a0 So when I was devising a strategy to help my overweight, diabetes-prone patients reduce blood sugar most efficiently, it made sense to me that the quickest and simplest way to get results would be to eliminate the foods that caused their blood sugar to rise most profoundly: in other words, not sugar, but wheat.\u201d (page 8-9)<\/strong><\/p>\n The glycemic index was devised to classify carbohydrate food according to their potential to raise your blood sugar level.\u00a0 Let me first reiterate the fact that commercially milled whole wheat flour does NOT contain the entire components of the wheat kernel.\u00a0 The wheat bran is partially removed and the wheat germ and oil are completely removed.\u00a0 With the bran and germ\u2019s removal a valuable portion of fiber is lost.\u00a0 Fiber has been proven to slow the absorption of sugars released from carbohydrate digestion.\u00a0 But let\u2019s look at the glycemic index charts for ourselves:<\/p>\n
\n<\/a>Click here to request a free CD, “The Truth About Wheat”<\/a><\/p>\n
\n\u201cBut the Holy Spirit declares that in the latter times some will turn away from the faith, giving attention to deluding and seducing spirits and doctrines that demons teach\u2026who teach people to abstain from certain kinds of foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and have an increasingly clear knowledge of the truth.\u201d I Timothy 4:1,3 (AMP version)<\/p>\n
\nIt is important for us all to realize that the US is the largest exporter of wheat in the world.\u00a0 Mexico and Japan are our largest importers.\u00a0 There is widespread global resistance to genetically modified grains.\u00a0 Other countries won\u2019t import genetically modified wheat.\u00a0 Wheat farmers in this country have resisted the development of genetically modified wheat and, in 2005, a trial project was dropped and government approval was never requested.\u00a0 The last trials were supposedly done in 2001, however, I have been told that trials are being done in ND and HI.\u00a0 The recent finding of genetically modified wheat in Oregon actually has wheat growers outraged.\u00a0 They do not want their crops contaminated anymore than we do.<\/p>\n
\n
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Dr. Davis makes a bold correlation between the rise of obesity and the increase in consumption of wheat:\u00a0 \u201cThe sad truth is that the proliferation of wheat products in the American diet parallels the expansion or our waist.\u00a0 Advice to cut fat and cholesterol intake and replace the calories with whole grains that was issued by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute through its National Cholesterol Education Program in 1985 coincides precisely with the start of a sharp upward climb in body weight for men and women.\u00a0 Ironically, 1985 also marks the year when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began tracking body weight statistics, tidily documenting the explosion in obesity and diabetes that began that very year.\u201d (Page 6)<\/strong><\/p>\n