Bread, in one form or another is almost a universal staple. From countries across the world there are almost two hundred recognised basic types. Most by far are based on wheat. Versions include buns,
sticks, wraps, flat breads, crepes, waffles and biscuit types and sandwiches, in one form or another, have crept into the lunch cuisine everywhere.
It would thus seem to be almost a staple if not actually one and thus worthwhile examining.
The use of wheat means they contain gluten.
Many are leavened with yeasts and most are made from flour and thus they contain the remnants of yeast cultures. Common salt it often added, as is sugar, flour improvers, and oil. All of these can be condemned in some way or other. During baking, in the necessary high temperatures, a marvellous crust evolves, great to look at and even better for its crunch taste but this layer of caramelised dough really isn't really good for you. It has become a source of acrylamides which are shown to be involved in production of cancer. The carbohydrate in bread and most of its substance, is refined, constipating and mostly it has a high glycemic index, thus not satisfying hunger over a long time and causing unwelcome insulin highs and instability.
All in all, most breads are not really good for you - but all is not lost. It's marvelous versatility is too good to abandon - what one needs is bread that is good for you ie no acrylamides, no gluten, low if any sodium. no yeast and high in fibre and roughage.
Decades ago bread was different. What was left of a loaf or so of bread bought before the weekend was like a rock ( and almost as heavy as one ) by Monday. Now such, if it was thrown at your head would just bounce off, where then it would have knocked you out.
Why is this? I'm pretty sure its due to the fact that over the last five decades or so bakers have realised the 'wonders' of gluten rich wheat flour. Gluten, the protein that makes bread dough sticky so that it traps the carbon dioxide produced by the fermentation of yeast, and which is set when the dough is baked, holds water. And how it holds water! so that much often most of the weight of the present average loaf is just that - the makers rarely specify how much but it worked wonders for their pockets as you can imagine and the bread stays softer, seeming thus to be less stale, have a longer shelf life again enabling them to reduce 'spoilage', again allowing them to make more money.
Gluten isn't good for a whole swathe of the population - its one of those proteins that knocks about the immune system in our gut. Spelt was the common source of flour in breads at the beginning of the last century and this being low in gluten and used with older slower methods of dough making provided a healthier bread.
Ordinary bread is for many people quite an unknown quantity not necessarily causing overt symptoms. In an obesity advisory capacity of mine years ago I found, as it seems has happened for many others doing this work, that a gluten free regime for a month or so followed then by re-exposure caused acute bloating, pain, and general unwellness. In reality many people don't know what feeling well is till they stop wheat but this does not mean they are coeliacs.
Overt gluten reaction presenting as the problem of coeliac disease is well known.
Allowing for all these problems with gluten why does it's use persist?
Allowing for all these problems with gluten why does it's use persist?
