Are Grains Really Dangerous to Our Health?

By Brane Žilavec, May 2015

Summary of the investigation of the main anti-grain claims

In this report we have looked at the basic claims and arguments of the members of the gluten-free movement. In the process of investigation we have found on the basis of good arguments that:

The first thing which becomes evident is: If the quality of the grains were taken into account by the anti-grain health experts, then they would have to say – instead of "There are no good grains!" [1] – "There are not good pseudo-grains!" Then we could agree with them and thank them for providing scientific evidence for the negative health impacts of modern food production on humans. For all scientific and medical facts which are presented by them are pointing to the cumulative effects of the decades of consumption of pseudo-grains on human beings. These unnatural grains in combination with all other bad quality foods are the real culprit behind the modern health crisis.

There are plenty of people who vigorously object to any suggestion that this might be the case – mainly those who are gaining profits from the existing system of food production, including many doctors. There are even more people who simply ignore the issue of food quality and are continuing to eat junk food because it is cheap. That is, until they become ill; then they are willing to pay as much as they can afford for medications and therapies. For such people it would be very beneficial if they were listening to the indisputable message of the anti-grain health experts – that is something very wrong with modern food – more seriously as before. An extremely important thing the anti-grain health experts manage to expose without doubt is the extent to which highly processed and denaturalised grains have become dangerous to human health.

However, with the omission of the crucial issue of any nutritional question – the issue of the quality of what we eat – their conclusions and messages conveyed to the public are really deceiving and sometimes even absurd. For example they say (italics mine):

One just wonders how they can utter such things and at the same time still consider themselves to be unbiased scientists in the search for truth. For scientists should not believe; they should not say things which simply cannot be checked; and they should take into account all existing evidence and not flatly deny its existence; there is more than enough scientific evidence about the high nutritional value of whole grains and about the positive health impacts of consuming them. [7] Such attitude can be even dangerous when is used for the promotion of general dietary recommendations. There is no good argument given as to why modern people should revert back to the diet of hunter-gatherers and exclude grains completely from our diets. But it makes perfect sense to exclude from our diet pseudo-grains and other forms of junk food!

The next thing which becomes evident is: With the help of the distinction of the quality of the two groups of grains we can properly modify the arguments of the anti-grain proponents that we have not yet genetically adapted to the consumption of grains. It is not – as they claim – that we have not genetically adapted to the consumption of grains since prehistoric times when grains were first introduced into human nutrition. When we take into account the issue of quality the more than obvious conclusion is: We have not adapted to the consumption of pseudo-grains which came on the plates of modern humanity in abundance only after the Second World War. Or, more precisely, we have not evolutionarily adapted to the consumption of junk food – as is demonstrated by the pandemic of modern health problems. Our bodies are evidently still craving for real natural food!

The last thing which becomes evident is: Modern nutritional science based on the materialistic view which is only able to count the endless list of substances and their chemical structures, and on the reductionist approach which separates a small number of metabolic pathways from the staggering number of metabolic interactions in the human organism, is incapable of properly grasping the key characteristic of any food – that is, the quality of food. This is also true in the case of the grains, the staple food of humanity in the past and in the present. The stark message of the anti-grain movement which should be taken extremely seriously is: If we continue in this way we are going to destroy one of the main sources of food provision – the real grains which have been nourishing us for millennia. But it took just about 170 years to replace them more or less with pseudo-grains! Here we have a call to awaken to this burning issue of nutrition.

However, if we are serious about the intention to overcome the present dietary and health crisis, we cannot use the same way of thinking which has created it; instead we need a new, truly holistic understanding of the nature of the human being and the role of nutrition. There are many attempts and steps in this direction. On this website are presented the outlines of a spiritual scientific approach which provides fruitful insights into numerous burning questions in relation to human health, disease and nutrition, including into the questions related to the consumption of grains.


  1. Statement of Dr Perlmutter in a radio interview with him (source not found).
  2. James Braly, MD, Ron Hoggan, MA, Dangerous Grains, Why Gluten Cereal Grains May Be Hazardous to Your Health, Avery, New York, 2002
  3. As above
  4. Dr David Perlmutter, Grain Brain, The Surprising Truth About Wheat, Carbs and Sugar – Your Brain's Silent Killers, Yellow Kite Books, London, 2014
  5. Sayer Ji, The Dark Side of the Wheat, A Critical Appraisal of the Role of Wheat in Human Disease, pdf report available for free if you register at
  6. Dr Mercola's Nutrition Plan,
  7. If you are not aware of them, you can read the chapter Evidence of the Health Impacts in the report Is Refined Food Really Organic? Though this evidence is not intended to be all-embracing, it nevertheless gives a broader review of the topic of whole versus refined grains in the period since the 1930s and it includes a variety of scientists and doctors with various backgrounds.