Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):


0
happyslob

Is Kamut Gluten-free?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):


Kamut is an ancient form of wheat. While its probably lower in gluten than modern wheat, it still has gluten in it. The same goes for spelt. Sorry.


2/05 GERD

3/07 Multinodular goiter (suspicious for follicular neoplasm as of 11/07)

5/07 Iron, vit D, and B vit deficiencies (all of them), but particularly B1, B5, B12 and folate

6/07 Elevated mercury, subclinical hypothyroid, adrenal fatigue, CFS

9/07 Endo/Colonoscopy - neg biopsy (only took 2 samples), diverticulosis, benign polyps

10/07 PCOS (cysts in breasts, ovaries and cervix)

10/07 Major reaction to wheat challenge. Minor reactions to corn, dairy, barley, and refined sugar

2/08 Candida (per Doctor's Data)

3/08 Lyme disease (clinical dx), began tx

3/08 Intradermal allergy testing - high for wheat, beef, pork, tuna, and corn - moderate for almonds, chicken, coffee, eggs, garlic, gluten, green peas, milk, rice, soy, sugar, tomatoes, green peppers, celery, sesame, garbanzo, mushroom, cabbage, strawberries, and spinach.

4/08 Began tx for babs and bart

4/08 Slightly elevated titres for EBV and HHV-6. IgG1 deficiency.

"What doesn't kill us makes us stronger... and stranger."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

No unfortunately its not. Triticale, spelt, kamut, durum, semolina, bulgur and then of course wheat, oats (unless gluten free), barley and rye.

sorry :(

Hi, I'm new to gluten-free, about two weeks now.

NB There is a question at the end.

I'm not Celiac, but my interest was sparked by radio mentions of Dr. William Davis' book: "Wheat Belly".

I have been mildly diabetic (managed, not quite well enough) by diet & exercise.

Recently found to have a cataract developing.

On first going wheat-free I was afraid to eat almost anything, but with coaching from a Celiac friend I'm finding safe foods. I recently bought Kamut Krisp, but it's not clear to me whether this has "bad" gluten, so I asked the company. Their response added some info, but it's still not clear.

NB My blood sugar has dropped in the past week from ~8s or 9s to to 6.7 this morning. Not sure if this is due to eating less or avoiding wheat, but it is encouraging.

My understanding from "Wheat Belly" is that the bad effects of modern wheat (cross-bred, irradiated etc) happened only within the last 60 years. Kamut is apparently a "trade name" designed to protect a particular kind of "ancient grain" from genetic etc. manipulation, i.e. if you mess with it, you cannot call it "Kamut".

So my question is:

Is the gluten in Kamut (& other Ancient Grains) subject to the same problems as the gluten in "modern" wheat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

Kamut is a trademark for Khorasan wheat grown under specific conditions.

Khorasan wheat (Triticum turanicum) is still wheat, and contains the gluten protein that celiacs must avoid.

There have been changes in recent decades to how wheat is grown, but they did not introduce gluten into wheat--it has always been there.

Spelt is another form of wheat sometimes erroneously thought to be gluten-free.

People with celiac disease must avoid all forms of wheat.


Peter

Diagnosis by biopsy of practically non-existent villi; gluten-free since July 2000. I was retested five years later and the biopsy was normal. You can beat this disease!

Type 1 (autoimmune) diabetes diagnosed in March 1986

Markham, Ontario (borders on Toronto)

Celiac.com - Celiac Disease Board Moderator since 2007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

NB My blood sugar has dropped in the past week from ~8s or 9s to to 6.7 this morning. Not sure if this is due to eating less or avoiding wheat, but it is encouraging.

My niece is a diabetic coeliac. Eating or not eating wheat causes NO effect on diabetes ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

Kamut is a trademark for Khorasan wheat grown under specific conditions.

Khorasan wheat (Triticum turanicum) is still wheat, and contains the gluten protein that celiacs must avoid.

There have been changes in recent decades to how wheat is grown, but they did not introduce gluten into wheat--it has always been there.

Spelt is another form of wheat sometimes erroneously thought to be gluten-free.

People with celiac disease must avoid all forms of wheat.

Thank you for that response, but I'm still not clear.

Perhaps because 'everyone' (except Dr Davis) works on the assumption that the question is "gluten or not-gluten", whereas my understanding of Dr. Davis point is that "modern gluten" is genetically different, and some people's metabolism cannot handle it, so the question should be "bad gluten (modern) or good gluten (ancient)".

He says that since about 1950 the genetic manipulation of wheat by cross-breeding (a years-old practice) and irradiation, a modern technology, which has drastically changed the number of chromosomes and hence the genetics of wheat. Apparently one aim of the irradiation etc was to increase yield by creating 'dwarf' wheat - about 18 inches tall rather than 3 feet, to resist hail damage.

I am not Celiac AFAIK, and don't have a wheat belly, but am trying 'wheat-free' to see if it helps with diabetes, cataracts etc and other ills from Dr. Davis' book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

My niece is a diabetic coeliac. Eating or not eating wheat causes NO effect on diabetes ...

Dr. Davis says that eating 'healthy all-grain' bread sends blood sugar level up faster and higher than eating candies. I'm thinking of doing some tests (on myself) about that. NB I'm not Celiac and only 'somewhat' diabetic, so reckon I can test that safely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

Thank you for that response, but I'm still not clear.

Perhaps because 'everyone' (except Dr Davis) works on the assumption that the question is "gluten or not-gluten", whereas my understanding of Dr. Davis point is that "modern gluten" is genetically different, and some people's metabolism cannot handle it, so the question should be "bad gluten (modern) or good gluten (ancient)".

He says that since about 1950 the genetic manipulation of wheat by cross-breeding (a years-old practice) and irradiation, a modern technology, which has drastically changed the number of chromosomes and hence the genetics of wheat. Apparently one aim of the irradiation etc was to increase yield by creating 'dwarf' wheat - about 18 inches tall rather than 3 feet, to resist hail damage.

I am not Celiac AFAIK, and don't have a wheat belly, but am trying 'wheat-free' to see if it helps with diabetes, cataracts etc and other ills from Dr. Davis' book.

For most of us on here, any gluten is bad. This is a Celiac website. This type of wheat may not have as much gluten as modern wheat, but for people with Celiac - wheat is wheat.

You are just trying to eat gluten light so maybe that product would be right for you.


 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

I have not looked into any genetic differences between modern vs. ancient forms of wheat, so I couldn't speak knowledgeably about that. However, there does seem to be some evidence that even in ancient times, celiac disease existed, so whatever differences exists, ancient wheat doesn't seem to have been any better for a celiac's body.

As an example, last year, the remains of an ancient roman woman were found which showed signs of the roman having suffered from celiac disease.

http://glutenfreeville.com/research/ancient-roman-gluten-death-seen#respond


T.H.

Gluten free since August 10, 2009.
21 years with undiagnosed Celiac Disease

23 years with undiagnosed sulfite sensitivity

25 years with undiagnosed mast cell activation disorder (MCAD) 

 

Daughter: celiac and MCAD positive

Son: gluten intolerant
Father, brother: celiac positive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

Speaking as a scientist: modern wheat has been bred with multiple copies of the chromosomes (DNA, genes) that exist in old forms of wheat. It's possible that the older forms of wheat produce less of the gluten protein than do the modern varieties because of having fewer copies of the gluten genes. What I have not seen discussed is whether the amino acid sequences of the modern gluten proteins are different from the ancient ones, because that could make a difference in how your body reacts to them if the difference is great enough. Without having more information, it's hard to determine from the info in this thread what the difference between modern and ancient gluten is. The safest thing to do is to avoid any kind of wheat.

And as for wheat raising blood sugar, yes that's entirely possible because wheat flour is high in starch, and starches (carbohydrates) are broken down into simple sugars. It's not just what you think of as sugars that raise blood sugar, it's starches as well, so a bag of chips or bowl of rice or slice of bread will indeed contribute to blood sugar levels. Giving up wheat and replacing it with rice flour, cornstarch and tapioca like most commercial gluten-free replacements probably will still fill your diet with simple carbohydrates that can raise your blood sugar. But avoiding not just wheat, but its replacement starches as well, can make your diet easier on your body. Fruits, veggies, meat, eggs, nuts - all low carb (well, maybe not the fruit) and better for you than a slice of bread.

By the way, Dr. Davis has a website that talks more about this - I think you can look up "Track Your Plaque" to find out more.


Lee

I never liked bread anyway.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

I have not looked into any genetic differences between modern vs. ancient forms of wheat, so I couldn't speak knowledgeably about that. However, there does seem to be some evidence that even in ancient times, celiac disease existed, so whatever differences exists, ancient wheat doesn't seem to have been any better for a celiac's body.

As an example, last year, the remains of an ancient roman woman were found which showed signs of the roman having suffered from celiac disease.

http://glutenfreeville.com/research/ancient-roman-gluten-death-seen#respond

Very interesting - this is the kind of info I've been looking for.

But surprising - in most(?) cases, when something that negatively affects significant numbers of people, the susceptible people get bred out of existence by evolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

More interesting facts, thank you.

Speaking as a scientist: modern wheat has been bred with multiple copies of the chromosomes (DNA, genes) that exist in old forms of wheat. It's possible that the older forms of wheat produce less of the gluten protein than do the modern varieties because of having fewer copies of the gluten genes. What I have not seen discussed is whether the amino acid sequences of the modern gluten proteins are different from the ancient ones, because that could make a difference in how your body reacts to them if the difference is great enough. Without having more information, it's hard to determine from the info in this thread what the difference between modern and ancient gluten is. The safest thing to do is to avoid any kind of wheat.

And as for wheat raising blood sugar, yes that's entirely possible because wheat flour is high in starch, and starches (carbohydrates) are broken down into simple sugars. It's not just what you think of as sugars that raise blood sugar, it's starches as well, so a bag of chips or bowl of rice or slice of bread will indeed contribute to blood sugar levels. Giving up wheat and replacing it with rice flour, cornstarch and tapioca like most commercial gluten-free replacements probably will still fill your diet with simple carbohydrates that can raise your blood sugar. But avoiding not just wheat, but its replacement starches as well, can make your diet easier on your body. Fruits, veggies, meat, eggs, nuts - all low carb (well, maybe not the fruit) and better for you than a slice of bread.

By the way, Dr. Davis has a website that talks more about this - I think you can look up "Track Your Plaque" to find out more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

Evolution will only breed you out of existence if your mutation is something severe enough to prevent you passing on your genes. Gluten-sensitive people still are able to have plenty of kids, for the most part, even if their bloating and gas make them occasionally unattractive :lol: .


Lee

I never liked bread anyway.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

Evolution will only breed you out of existence if your mutation is something severe enough to prevent you passing on your genes. Gluten-sensitive people still are able to have plenty of kids, for the most part, even if their bloating and gas make them occasionally unattractive :lol: .

Plus some of us don't develop real serious symptoms until adulthood. Since celiac often requires a trigger event for women that trigger can be childbirth. By then of course the associated genes have been passed.


Courage does not always roar, sometimes courage is the quiet voice at the end of the day saying

"I will try again tommorrow" (Mary Anne Radmacher)

Diagnosed by Allergist with elimination diet and diagnosis confirmed by GI in 2002

Misdiagnoses for 15 years were IBS-D, ataxia, migraines, anxiety, depression, fibromyalgia, parathesias, arthritis, livedo reticularis, hairloss, premature menopause, osteoporosis, kidney damage, diverticulosis, prediabetes and ulcers, dermatitis herpeformis

All bold resoved or went into remission in time with proper diagnosis of Celiac November 2002

 Gene Test Aug 2007

HLA-DQB1 Molecular analysis, Allele 1 0303

HLA-DQB1 Molecular analysis, Allele 2 0303

Serologic equivalent: HLA-DQ 3,3 (Subtype 9,9)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

Speaking as a scientist: modern wheat has been bred with multiple copies of the chromosomes (DNA, genes) that exist in old forms of wheat. It's possible that the older forms of wheat produce less of the gluten protein than do the modern varieties because of having fewer copies of the gluten genes. What I have not seen discussed is whether the amino acid sequences of the modern gluten proteins are different from the ancient ones, because that could make a difference in how your body reacts to them if the difference is great enough. Without having more information, it's hard to determine from the info in this thread what the difference between modern and ancient gluten is. The safest thing to do is to avoid any kind of wheat.

If you toss the toxic gliadin fragments into BLAST, all sorts of wheat relatives and grasses come up. Aegilops tauschii, an ancestor of modern wheat, comes up with particularly long matches and even has the toxic 33-mer peptide. I don't know who this Dr. Davis person is, but clearly he has not bothered to do his homework.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

If you toss the toxic gliadin fragments into BLAST, all sorts of wheat relatives and grasses come up. Aegilops tauschii, an ancestor of modern wheat, comes up with particularly long matches and even has the toxic 33-mer peptide. I don't know who this Dr. Davis person is, but clearly he has not bothered to do his homework.

Thanks for doing the work! I should have known that someone here would know what the sequence was and how to BLAST it. Maybe the older wheats had low enough amounts of the proteins to not be a problem, but our guts aren't adapted to what's in the modern wheat for sure.


Lee

I never liked bread anyway.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

Kamut grain is still a wheat grain containing gluten. Other wheat grain has been hybridized so it now contains more gluten than before. I am not celiac but need a gluten free diet due to auto immune disease. To get the health benefit of gluten free you must be 100% gluten free, one grain can trigger immune response reaction. NO one can digest gluten, but if you have an intact healthy digestive system you wont have a problem with it, it will go out as it came in (undigested), but if you have gaps in the gut wall (leaky gut) undigested gluten will pass into the blood stream and cause an allergic response ie: unwanted symptoms, like...headache, migraine, body aches & pains, sinus, fatigue, and many more. so dont eat kamut grain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join eNewsletter

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0


Join eNewsletter