On Mon, 21 Sep 1998 07:04:49 -0400, Don Wiss <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Amadeus Schmidt wrote:
>
>>- 1 cup of quinoa or buckwheat or rice or millet or spelt or rye
>
>>and avoiding wheat.
>
>No you're not. Spelt is wheat. Spelt is extremely close to normal bread
>wheat (closer than durum wheat, used for pasta, is to normal bread wheat).
>
>Don.
Yes you're rhight, Don. Spelt is a kind of wheat.
I do eat it though (but not very often) because of this reasons:

1.Most spelt you get is a "modern" spelt, modified in the last years
  to be closer to normal wheat and accept nitrogen  fertilizer.
  But I have access to real old spelt grains (red-grain
s) that a farmer
  near me uses as his own seed grain since 20-30 years.
  Other "wheats" which I do avoid are: heavily genetic modified,
  Are treated with chemicals before and after harvest.
  Are severely vitamin-depleted by storage and processing (grinding white).

2.Eating *only* spelt cured that one farmer from blood cancer.
  (lectins have antibody properties and this is - like in misteltoe -
   believed to have some cancer curing properties)

3.Spelt is known to be less allergic-prone than other wheat.

4.I can make some nice neolithic stone age foods from grinded
  spelt with apples and salt only.

5. Hildegard von Bingen(a middle-ages saint who wrote much about nutrition)
   recommends it strongly.
   She is interesting, she doesn't know any american-originating
   foods.

6.Romans used it as the one main staple beside Emmer.

Well, and as I told you: I'm
 not quite shure how much this kind of
grain eating is really paleolithic/mesolithic/neolithic.
And I'm not perfect in any way.

Anyway,  some main considerations in an attempt to find to a real
anchestral nutrition are fulfilled with it very well.
- they are totally unmodified and fresh plants
- they are rich in fiber
- they are very rich in vitamins

And after all I do assume that some developement in humanity is possible.
I don't have any problems with it so I still include it
- from time to time.

Amadeus