There is no religion involved, unless you have a religious fervor about wanting to degrade something that can only help folks. It has no downside at all.
-- What could you lose by trying it? You don't have to buy anything or go to meetings or post bumper stickers, etc. All you have to do is not eat wheat/grains/sugars for a while and see what happens. Some changes happen within a few days; others don't show up for weeks. Some take several months. But the changes always happen, and the only religious overtones are generated by the detractors seemingly infuriated by the easy success of something so simple.
-- "Commit their health" ?? If you were making some sort of big gamble where if you guess wrong you die, I could see this being a "commitment of health." It is not.
----- The only commitment is to not eat the bad stuff for a while and see how much better things get. You get to eat meat, fish, fowl, veggies, fruit, nuts, cheese, eggs, dairy, and so forth. Okay,... there IS a commitment,.. you have to eat a lot of tasty food.
----- If you are that one person that turns out to be the one not helped in some way, then no harm, no foul. Just fuggeddabaddit. You didn't lose. You just didn't react like everyone else and you go back to the way you were.
I am a skeptical person. I don't change my mind about something unless there is some solid evidence. I hate changing my mind because it makes me feel like I was wrong, and I have an ego problem with that.
-- When I read the Doc's statement about two slices of whole wheat bread causing a more harmful blood sugar spike than a Snickers bar, that got my attention. What kind of idiotic statement is that? So I started researching. After a few days I became concerned because there were lots of conflicting accounts, and no solid proof.
-- So, I bought the book and read it. It was not an interesting read,.. too factual, no plot. The last 1/8" of it, though, was references. I know how to do scholarly research, so I spent a few evenings plodding through the references to make sure he didn't make any of them up, and to verify he did not "adjust" the findings to suit his plan. I got about half way through the references and stopped. He at least had the integrity to quote the findings accurately.
-- Just reading and validating the book was not enough to overcome my disbelief. This had to just be some sort of a fad,.. a scam. So,.. I tried it myself.
----- I was pretty healthy already, so this would be a good test.
----- After several days, I realized something huge had happened. Since my teen years (50 years ago) I have had pounding headaches two or three times a week. They were gone! No more headaches. There is no way for me to convey with a computer what a life event that is. Trust me, just from the absence of headaches alone, I am a new person. Over the next few weeks, several other things happened, some of which makes it a lot more fun riding FJRs. I won't detail all of them here. Just go to this link.
https://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh253/Gyrobob_theOriginal/Healthy%20Stuff/Wheatfreeresults02d.jpg
This is a typical statement, and not all of it is untrue. "This book is essentially a re-packaged nouveau Atkins, with the wheat-free gimmick riding on the back of the growing gluten-free trend."
-- There actually are similarities with Atkins. Atkins had a lot of things right,.. mainly the harm from high carbs. The similarity ends there, though, because Atkins didn't care much about the harm from wheat. He made some noises about it a few times, but didn't do anything about it. Those who had success with Atkins, often had trouble sticking with it because of the wheat. Wheat is addictive (it actually contains opiates) and appetite stimulants, so the Atkins folks who had success initially fell off the wagon later because they kept getting hungry. Dr Davis understands how if you stop with the wheat, and the cravings go away, you don't need willpower anymore.
-- Wheat-free gimmick, eh? Hardly. This is the basis of the whole thing. Wheat is harmful. Get rid of the wheat/grains/sugars and the changes are pretty impressive and easily sustainable.
-- "Riding on the back of the gluten-free trend." Hardly. The gluten-free fad is the very antithesis of what the Doc has his patients doing. Look at the ingredient list of a packaged food with a gluten-free label. It's always loaded with grains, sugars, and JYCP. Lots of carbs. Often they are "fortified." If it was so healthy, why does it need fortification? The trick is to eat food with no list of ingredients. Single ingredient food. Meat, fish, fowl, veggies, fruit, nuts, cheese, eggs, dairy, etc.
Glad to see the discussion continues, but when the flatworlders bring up points that show a lack of understanding, I must provide discussion. When Columbus went to the Pope in the early 1500's, imagine this discussion.
"Your Holiness, thank you for letting me see you about my next voyage to the New World."
"Yes, whatever. Now, Chris, don't be bothering me with that New World crap again. Everyone knows the world is flat and you'll fall off if you go too far. Other sailors have fallen off. The Cardinal in charge of holy geography tells me the world is flat. God knows the world is flat,.. he made it that way!!!"
"But your Holiness, I have been to the new world three times already. I never fell off,.. that is because you just keep sailing and sailing around the world. The world IS round."
"I told you not to say that."
"But Sir,.."
"Shut up. Go away. I'm not funding anything so obviously wrong. On your way out tell the Cardinal I need some more bread."
