fermentation (was: Smoking & Health)

[Guest guest]

>-----Original Message-----

>From:

>[mailto: ]On Behalf Of

>> I would gather

>> >they did what they did to speed up the process.

>>

>> No, they selected those specific bacteria because they are the ones that

>> actually break down the gliadin peptides.

>

>Yes but they concentrated these bacteria, unlike your typical

>sourdough ferment.

Right, and that further makes my point that it would be unwise to

extrapolate from a study that

a) used 30% wheat

carefully selected (what I think were exogenous) micro-organisms that are

known to break down gliadin

c) concentrated those non indigenous micro-organisms

to say that long ferments get rid of gluten *per se*. IOW, this study cannot

be extrapolated in any way to any other ferment since the micro-organisms

were selected and concentrated by the human researchers and were apparently

not endogenous to the flour itself.

>

>> I will read the study

>> >more closely to see if they reference this although they seem to think

>> >their idea is novel.

>>

>> I said that, and I might've not used correct verbiage. I do

>think they think

>> their study is novel in modern times, which it is, but I do believe they

>> mentioned that this was a traditional way of break making.

>

>They used the exact word " novel " in the summary of the results.

Hey, then my memory is better than we sometimes give it credit!

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

“The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

[Guest guest]

On 7/31/05, Suze Fisher <s.fisher22@...> wrote:

> >> No, they selected those specific bacteria because they are the ones that

> >> actually break down the gliadin peptides.

> >

> >Yes but they concentrated these bacteria, unlike your typical

> >sourdough ferment.

>

> Right, and that further makes my point that it would be unwise to

> extrapolate from a study that

I'm not extrapolating, other than to state the obvious, that

*something* is ocurring for the following reasons:

1. lack of symptomology for someone who is symptomatic and then the

symptoms immediately go away when they eat a long ferment bread - I

only stated the obvious, *something* is happening here.

2. that *something* is occurring because of Price's two week ferment.

There clearly is a reason for them doing that. I specifically said,

contrary to what you imply below, that *something* is happening, even

if all the gluten is not disabled. I was only stating the obvious,

that *something* is happening here.

3. The study clearly shows what can occurr in a controlled

environment, i.e. that gliadin can be disabled. That is only stating

the obvious.

And I also clearly said that I fully support the idea that people be

100% sure of their food not being gluten contaminated, but that I

didn't support the idea that complete abstinence was therefore the end

of the story, and that this was somehow incapable of being handled

within the Price paradigm. I think that too is only obvious given you

have a gluten grain eating group amongst Price's primitives, even if

its low-gluten, which most grains have historically been anyway.

So whatever you think about extrapolating, you are not addressing it to me.

> a) used 30% wheat

> carefully selected (what I think were exogenous) micro-organisms that are

> known to break down gliadin

> c) concentrated those non indigenous micro-organisms

>

> to say that long ferments get rid of gluten *per se*. IOW, this study cannot

> be extrapolated in any way to any other ferment since the micro-organisms

> were selected and concentrated by the human researchers and were apparently

> not endogenous to the flour itself.

The microorganisms are a part of the *starter* which is then added to

the dough, that is how sourdoughing normally works, except you can do

a " wild " ferment but that is not what most people do and wouldn't have

suited the researcher's objective, which was to find a " normal " bread

that celiacs could tolerate.

When they isolated those particular strains, they were isolating

strains that normally appear in a sourdough starter, not introducing

something external to the process. I don't know why the researchers

used only 30% wheat (although I can take an educated guess) but a

sourdough starter will break down all the gluten even at 100% wheat,

given enough time. Ask any baker. Which leads me to believe they had

speed and the end product in mind when they did this.

Anyway, I already know where you stand on this, and I already know you

think I might mislead some naive folk who don't understand the

symptomology of their own body to wantonly partake of a gluten grain

that might not be adequately prepared, even after two weeks, based on

the flimsy evidence of one study and the unknown of Price's

observations.

So I see no reason to go back and forth with you on this topic here.

[Guest guest]

On 7/31/05, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote:

> I don't know why the researchers

> used only 30% wheat (although I can take an educated guess) but a

> sourdough starter will break down all the gluten even at 100% wheat,

> given enough time. Ask any baker.

Just because the baking properties of gluten are disabled do not mean

that the immunogenic properties of gluten are disabled, so I don't

think that a baker's testimony would be of any value.

Chris

[Guest guest]

>

> > I don't know why the researchers

> > used only 30% wheat (although I can take an educated guess) but a

> > sourdough starter will break down all the gluten even at 100%

wheat,

> > given enough time. Ask any baker.

>

> Just because the baking properties of gluten are disabled do not mean

> that the immunogenic properties of gluten are disabled, so I don't

> think that a baker's testimony would be of any value.

>

> Chris

As a former baker, all rye breads that have a soft crumb and are not

those heavy " bricks " of rye, do contain at least 30% wheat/white

flour, sometimes more.

As a GI person who gets gut as well as brain symptoms from

even " homeopathic " sized gluten contamination, I have lost all desire

for bread and am having some trouble with why it is so important for

there to be " bread that a celiac can tolerate " . It is not like bread

is the only way to get carbs. Or the only way to get meat and veggies

to your mouth. Or the only way to celebrate Transubsantiation or a

Birthday.

If there were no wheat or gluten grains, we would all live just fine.

What sacred cow am I bashing? Yeah, it would be easier to live in

this current society if I could eat what every one else eats or even

just was commonly available - but even if I wanted to go to all this

trouble for a tolerable bread, it would not be available at my local

cafe anymore than GF bread or brownies is now (which is to say NOT,

but if there are enough of us asking for them, then perhaps.)

Or do you think that ALL breads (etc.) would be baked in this

particular way? I just don't see the market doing that!!

We who have the DQ genes and are in fact gluten intolerant are just

not going to fit in. We will always be different from those without

them. Perhaps someday it will be possible to eat out as casually as a

vegan does (Does a vegan eat out casually?).

I'm sorry, I've mislaid what this conversation is about.

Can gluten be broken down in some fashion (old or new) to its

componant amino acids? Yes - Stanford scientists have a recombinant

peptide that will do so both in vitro and in vivo. Perhaps long

fermenting will do so for bread, not in the lab, but in the kitchen.

Please just remind me of why I would want that...

Connie (who knows that she is currently suffering from the bitchiness

(and gut issues and hoping that there will NOT be a migraine tomorrow)

caused by some gluten somewhere in the last 3 days, but is frustrated

with not knowing exactly when and where it entered her mouth.)

[Guest guest]

On 7/31/05, Connie Hampton <connie@...> wrote:

> Can gluten be broken down in some fashion (old or new) to its

> componant amino acids? Yes - Stanford scientists have a recombinant

> peptide that will do so both in vitro and in vivo. Perhaps long

> fermenting will do so for bread, not in the lab, but in the kitchen.

Ahhh the wonders of gmail. Rather than trying to remember or sort

through the volumes of posts to find this message I just punched in

Stanford + peptide and your message came right up.

Do you have any info that I could chase down concerning your statement above?

TIA,