Normal life cannot continue to function unless its physical vehicle is supplied with a correct proportion of starches, sugars, and fats necessary to create heat and energy, protein and minerals with which to build tissue, and the various other essentials so frequently ignored by writers dealing with the problem of diet.

Wheat seems to have been given special consideration by Nature in that the whole grain contains practically all the elements required by the human constitution, even to a greater proportion of cellulose or roughage. In its heart, wheat contains albumen which supplies and repairs the wasted parts of the body; then there is a natural and balanced starch which creates heat and energy; nuclein, the germ of life, the most active life principle known; phosphorus, a concentrated food for the marvelous nervous system and the brain of man; the organic mineral elements, equalizers, eliminators, and neutralizers; and lastly, the roughage or cellulose essential to the peristaltic activity of the bowels. All balanced foods, besides supplying the foregoing elements, must maintain a reacting balance in the system. That is, the digestive juices of the stomach must always remain acid while other portions of the system are alkaline, thus maintaining an equilibrium through action and reaction.

The organic mineral elements from whole wheat are acid in their nature, and if no other food were combined with wheat, the blood would soon lose its alkalinity and acidosis with its attendant evils would result. Therefore, it is necessary that in addition vegetables and fruits be supplied to balance the cereal food, as otherwise digestive disturbances are inevitable and these throw the entire system out of balance. In passing, it should be said that a diet of whole-wheat preparations would not affect all people alike. Those who perform hard manual labor might exist on it for a considerable period of time before manifesting any disturbance, as their organs of elimination are very active, especially the pores of the skin due to much perspiration. But the sedentary worker, whose entire body, with the exception of the brain, is more or less inactive, and who seldom perspires freely, if put on a whole-wheat diet would very quickly manifest symptoms of acidosis.

Apologists for white flour, working in favor of certain established interests, generally make their experiments with whole-wheat products uncombined with vegetables and fruits, and base their findings on the result. This is altogether in error, and not in harmony with accepted or established laws, because not a single dietitian worthy of the title would claim for a moment that man should or could live on whole-grain products alone, though dietitians do claim that basically whole-wheat is a complete food and prescribe it in combination with vegetables and fruits.

We have stated that the burning of cereals in the stomach is productive of acid mineral salts. This is true, but this acid salt is entirely a normal production and just what Nature intends it should be. If the test be made with whole-grain-flour bread, it will be found that there is practically no increase in acidity after mastication. On the contrary, if bread made of roller-mill denatured flour is thoroughly chewed, there will be a noticeable increase of acidity during mastication. This acid which is generated while the bread is being masticated is known as nascent lactic acid. It is destructive to health and organic equilibrium. This test in itself should be sufficient to condemn white flour products, for right here is found the almost universal cause of decayed teeth in American children.

The most perfect camouflage is practiced by those who do not wish the human family to return to the use of natural, whole-grain flours - their reasoning appears to be so logical and conclusive that all but the most thorough investigators are readily hoodwinked and made to believe that white flour is the only real bread-food for man. Professor Harry Snyder stated in an article which appeared some time ago in the Northwestern Miller:

"White flour is more completely digested and has a higher food value than whole-wheat flour. This conclusion is based upon a large amount of experimental work done both in this and other countries. At one time it was supposed, because whole-wheat flour contains more protein than white flour, that it must therefore have a higher food value, but numerous experiments show that much of the protein in whole wheat is indigestible and unavailable for use in the human body."

Those who are not fully versed in food science - and the great mass of the people have not studied the subject and are not equipped for such study - at once believe what they read and conclude that this presentation of the subject is scientific, logical, safe, final. To some extent Professor Snyder's statement is true, but it presents only one side of the subject.

His first statement is a masterly mixture of truth and error. It is true that white flour is more easily and more completely digested than whole-wheat flour, but man cannot "live by bread alone." that is to say, not more than one-sixth of his entire diet should be composed of starch. His second statement, that white flour has a higher food value than whole-wheat, totally ignores the existence and work in the system of the many other elements that compose the wholewheat, elements without which man cannot continue to exist. Practically all of Snyder's other statements are thus subtly right and wrong.

If protein were the whole or even the main consideration, then white flour might be considered an ideal food, but the protein content actually is a minor consideration. Why? Because we can readily obtain sufficient protein from many other articles of food and in splendid and natural combination, as for example, from cottage cheese, milk, sea foods, etc., and these are rich in other elements and easily digested, elements for which the physical structures of the American people are starving. White bread could therefore readily be discarded as a food.

For the reason that white-flour preparations do contain more protein - or, to be more precise, because more of the protein in white flour is digested than in the whole-wheat bread - is in not sense any indication that the former has the greater food value. The true, complete, balanced diet is not based either on protein or calories but on various other even more important elements - the organic mineral elements, the nuclein, the vitamins, and the roughage. These elements are not found in protein, taken by itself, but in combination with it before the natural combination of elements in the grain has been artificially broken.

It is well to repeat: we can obtain protein of a kind that can be readily digested and assimilated, from many other foods, and there is no need for us to accept a denatured product such as bread made of white flour. Granting even that whole-wheat bread is not so readily digested as white-flour bread, possibly no other complete food is; but if we obtain the three essentials from it, then it is a highly desirable food even of not a particle of the protein were digested or assimilated.

The people of the nation suffer from all manner of diseases because their diet is far too rich in protein which burns into acids; moreover, due to this over-consumption of unbalanced protein, they lack the ingestion of the other three essential principles of a balanced diet. Give them the whole-of-the-wheat products simply because of the presence in them of these elements, supply the protein food in some other form, and health will be restored. If whole-wheat products were prescribed and consumed for this one purpose alone, it would have its advantages over the concentrated proteins.

Another master stroke in the subtle arguments in favor of denatured flour by this writer, is as follows:

"The proteins of flour and of bran are separate and distinct bodies. The flour bread protein has bread-making qualities which the bran protein does not.(1) Then too the bran has a low degree of digestibility. Because of the dense nature of the bran tissue, it fails to be properly digested by humans, but animals with stronger powers of digestion are capable of digesting and utilizing it advantageously."
-----------------------------------------------------
(1) These writers should explain how it was possible for the peoples of the world to make nourishing bread during the thousands of years before the rolling-mill denaturing method was discovered. Egyptians largely depended upon grain breads and had no method of separating the various constituents of the grain. Indians made whole-grain breads. There is no known record of complaint that whole flours could not be made into bread or that such bread was unsatisfactory as a food.
-----------------------------------------------------

This writer, convincing as he is to those who are uninformed, fails to take into consideration the fact that true and qualified dietitians do not claim that bran is digested(2) by the human stomach and agree that it is a question whether the animal stomach digests it.
-----------------------------------------------------
(2) No claim is made that brans are digested. Absorption of the organic mineral elements by the assimilative organs takes place without the complete digestion of these substances. Potato peels and many vegetables are not completely digested: Would these writers suggest the proscription of these vegetables for that reason?
-----------------------------------------------------

What they (true and qualified dietitians) do claim is this:

1. That when one element of a food is separated from another, as the protein from the bran and nuclein, violence is done, and a natural food, created balanced by Nature, is thereby destructive.

2. When the white-flour-making element has been separated from the other elements of the grain, Nature has been prostituted, her work unbalanced, and the "refined product," torn from its originally accompanying elements and taken out of its natural combination, produces, as already stated, a nascent lactic acid(3) both in mouth and stomach, and this acid, taken up by the system, is destructive to health.
-----------------------------------------------------
(3) This lactic acid is not to be confused with the lactic acid which results from the souring of milk or the fermentation of sauerkraut. These latter are natural products which, during digestion, are changed into alkaline elements. -----------------------------------------------------

3. We admit that the protein and starch of white-flour products are easier of digestion than the other and more important elements, but his is not at all in their favor. This combination of protein and starch, being separated from its native elements by the denaturing process, makes an unbalanced food. Which gives a vicious reaction and fails to nourish as natural and whole foods do.

4. The bran is not recommended because it is digested, but because it is rich in the organic mineral elements which the organs of assimilation DO extract or absorb despite its incomplete digestion- elements which are positively essential in maintaining the equilibrium of the tissues and in rebuilding tissue.

5. The vitamins and nuclein also are eliminated from white flour, consequently the most active principle of the food is denied to those who eat white-flour products, and the residue of starch and protein is utilized because the system is given nothing better to use.

6. The bran, not being wholly digested, acts as an eliminator, scouring the mucous membrane of intestines and bowels, and thus helps to produce natural peristaltic action.

A question that logically arises in the minds of many readers, is: If the bran is not digested, how can its mineral elements be assimilated? When a pharmacist macerates crude drugs, he does not expect them to be "digested," but uses a menstruum or solvent that will extract the active principles of the drug. When this is done, the residue or dregs is discarded. The digestive and assimilative organs employ the same method with whole-grain breads and other foods that furnish cellulose. These crude elements are first "torn apart" as thoroughly as possible, the digestive juices act as a menstruum, and the assimilative organs as the percolator.

Still further to show that the experienced dietitian does not expect bran or cellulose to be digested: in cases of pronounced constipation, he prescribes bran, knowing that it cannot be digested but must pass through the digestive and eliminative organism in a more or less whole state and thus cleanse and eliminate the poisons and toxins from the bowels.

"Light" or "fluffy" breads cannot as easily be made when all of the bran remains in the flour, nevertheless, every really good cook knows perfectly well that a bread sufficiently light and most appetizing to taste can be made of whole-wheat flour, and the difference in substance and color, is more than compensated for by the virtues in the food itself. Moreover, if kept for a few days, it does not turn into an evil-smelling, sour product of the mills but remains fragrant and delightfully tasting, a nourishing staff of life. There are thousands of good women in country and town who will bear us out in this statement - they are not asleep, they have been reading, thinking, asking questions, demanding a whole-wheat product, and gradually teaching their families and neighbors its value.

While not so great an amount of protein is digested when we eat whole-wheat bread, what we do digest is a vitalized product and a much less amount of it is required. Why? The protein present is in combination with its native elements - the organic mineral, vitamins, and nuclein - and is therefore an active protein.

That these ACTIVE agents are essential in the elimination of weaknesses and diseases, is readily indicated by the fact that many eminent physicians of all schools now make use of nuclein as a base for their medicines, for the reason that this ACTIVE agent gives greater potency and therefore causes their medical agents to bring about quicker results, while at the same time it helps to sustain the vital forces of the body during the critical period when it is trying to throw off the disease. This is exactly what the vitamins and nucleins in whole grain breads and other foods do when combined with their protein.

If but fifty per cent less of the protein of whole-grain-flour breads is digested than of white breads, the nourishment obtained from this fifty per cent would still be greater than that received from the protein in white bread. Why? Because the whole-grain protein is active, natural, balanced, easily assimilated, being vitalized by and in harmony with its own active agents, the vitamins and nuclein, not to mention the equalizing agents, i.e., the organic mineral elements.

In speaking of the experiments made with bread prepared from various flours, our apologist states:

"Squads of men were fed on the breads made from these different flours, and the actual digestibility of each kind of bread was determined. Thus a squad of three or more men was fed a ration in which white bread was an essential part. After the digestibility of this was determined, the same men were fed the same ration except that whole-wheat bread milled from the same wheat, was substituted for the white bread. Then in the same way the tests were repeated, using the graham bread.

We quote further from Professor Snyder:

"In general, the digestibility of the ration, whether simply bread and milk with a little butter and sugar or a more varied diet, was decreased when the change was made from white bread to entire-wheat bread and still further decreased when either was replaced by graham bread, the remainder of the diet being, of course, the same in all three cases. The differences are sufficient to indicate that, even though the graham flour contains the most, and the white flour the least total protein of the three, the body would obtain protein and energy from a pound of whole wheat then a pound of graham flour and still more from a pound of white flour than from either of the others."

The reasoning, on the surface, is logical and not easily contradicted but the conclusion is actually based on false premises.

As to the digestibility of white flours (and to this category may be admitted all denatured products): We admit this to be true. But - we know from experience that when we feed bread made from white flour to chickens or dogs, rats or mice, while the food is easily and quickly digested and for a time the animals appear to become much stronger more vital, manifest greater activity, and seem to be better in every way, this improvement is only superficial. The action of the white bread may be compared to the action of intoxicants upon a tired man. They stimulate him for a time and he will seem like a new man, but gradually this stimulation which is a form of cell intoxication, wears off, and he finds himself in worse state than before: he is far more "tired" and to this tiredness is added the mischief of the toxins which have resulted from "burning" up this sugar in the form of alcohol. This is precisely what happens when animals are fed wholly or chiefly on denatured-flour products: they stimulate for a time by calling into activity all the vital forces, but when these are used up, there comes a break, a gradually enervating action which, if continued, can result in tuberculosis and similar ailments. We make no denial of the statement that unpolished rice, whole-grain breads, vegetables, and other non-denatured food substances fail to give the amount of energy, pro-rata, that white flour, polished rice and other denatured foods give. But this energy is artificially stimulated and when the effect has subsided there is left in the system a residue of toxins and nascent lactic acids which are positively inimical to health.

The basic foods, when taken in their natural state, without the abstraction of any of their integral elements, require longer time and more energy to digest. But health, strength and normality do NOT depend on how rapidly or slowly a food is digested but on the normality of the digestive process, or whether the resultant elements which can be used for building purposes are as free as possible from noxious acids and toxins.

White flour yields energy in part through excessive stimulation, the creation of acids, gases, and a form of alcohol which cannot be used by any normal function of the body and for which we must pay in one way or another if the process is continued for any length of time.

Another claim frequently made for white flour is voiced in the following statement:

"According to the chemical analysis of graham, entire wheat and standard patent flours milled from the same lot of hard Scotch fife spring wheat, the graham flour contained the highest and the patent flour the lowest percentage of the total protein. But according to the results of digestion experiments with these flours, the proportion of digestible or available protein and available energy in the patent flour, was larger than in either the entire wheat of graham flour.

The lower digestibility of the protein of the latter is due to the fact that in both these flours a considerable portion of this constituent is contained in the coarser particles (bran) and so resists action of the digestive juices and escapes digestion."

If the food value found in wheat depended entirely or even in greater part on the protein content, then these conclusions would be correct. But neither on the protein nor on the energy yielded by the converted protein, not yet on the ease with which it digested, does the food value depend, but on the combination of protein, vitamins, organic mineral elements, and nuclein in the original food substance created by Nature; this combination, besides yielding these various important elements, also prevents the formation of noxious acids and gases which form when denatured white or milled flour is largely consumed as food.

The greater portion of bran ingested in whole-wheat bread is not digested but it is macerated in the digestive juices. Now a mascerated mass of any substance need not be "digested" in order that its virtues or active principles be extracted, but the menstruum employed, if of the right kind, will extract it. So with the assimilation of the real constructive particles in bran. The digestive juices act as the menstruum and absorb, or "draw out" these qualities even though the bran is not actually digested.

The most misleading, though seemingly entirely logical, line of reasoning is contained in the following paragraph:

"These investigations of Woods at the University of Maine and Snyder at the University of Minnesota, show that 100 lbs. of white flour, because of its higher digestibility, furnishes the human body with the same amount of nutriment in the form of digestive protein and available energy as would be supplied by 106 lbs. of whole wheat flour. As to the question of minerals and the special constituents commonly called vitamins, they are abundantly supplied in a reasonable combination of foods. A dietary is made up of a combination of foods. No single food, not even milk, makes a perfect adult diet."

The average man who consumes a great deal of bread, eats less than two pounds a day. If it requires but six per cent more of the whole-wheat bread to furnish the same amount of protein yielded by the white bread, then he would consume about two ounces more of the whole-wheat bread and would ingest, in addition to the balanced protein, the highly important organic mineral elements, the bread. Besides this, his system would not be forced to contend with the nascent lactic acid created by the consumption of white bread, which acid is constantly manufactured by his constant activity, and which must be eliminated by the food he consumes, and to the amount of which no man can afford to add by foolish or ignorant selection of food. But the statement analyzed is not the most important statement in the paragraph quoted, though it shows how little more of the whole-wheat bread is required in order to supply the additional elements a man receives from whole-grain bread. The really illogical conclusion of the writer is found in his statement that the organic mineral elements, vitamins, nuclein, etc., may be secured from other substances. As a fact, these investigators must be keenly aware that the diet of the average person is composed mostly of white breads, white potatoes, denatured cereal products, meats, and fats, refined sugars, and other equally denatured foods, not one of which contains any appreciable amount of these elements and that, aside from the bread consumed, the diet is therefore greatly deficient.

What is the practical result of such reasoning and such conclusions reached by our educators and constantly broadcast to the trusting uninformed?

There are, according to official records, more than 5,000,000 boys and girls in the United States suffering from malnutrition. Malnutrition is almost always the result of misfeeding, of supplying the stomach with foods which satisfy the desire, require energy to digest, and which fail to supply the proper nourishment - the elements constantly demanded by the system for its work of building and rebuilding. Of these deficient foods, white bread and other denatured cereal products from the greater proportion, and to this diet are added tea and coffee in place of cereal drinks and the much-needed milk, sweet cakes and cookies instead of vegetables, desserts concocted of various denatured substances, in place of fruit. The official statement reads as follows:

"Some 5,000,000 of our children today are anemic, then, more or less listless, nervous, underweight, backward in their studies, underdeveloped physically, pale and perhaps constipated, because they are not getting enough food of the sort that Nature needs to build full-blooded, active, forward-going young human animals.

Starchy foods, such as are made from the denatured, roller-mill white flour, polished rice, polished barley, refined sugars and syrups, are the prime cause of constipation and allied ailments. Until such time as pseudo-investigators and apologists are forced to give place to real food scientists, and, through the teachings of the latter, the people are again led to make use of the foods as provided by Nature, this fearful condition will not only continue but gradually will become worse.

The official statement continues:

"Insufficient or unsuitable food and drink, such as tea and coffee instead of milk, is generally conceded to be the chief cause of under-nutrition. The first requirement of a growing child is food. If the food supply is insufficient, the body itself is burned up to provide the energy (this happens after a food intoxication such as follows a concentrated protein diet which lacks other essential elements) and loss of weight results. It is essential therefore, that the diet of the growing child should be, first of all, generous in amount."

It is safe to claim that more than four-fifths of the appalling number of victims who suffer from malnutrition so suffer not because of an insufficient amount of food but entirely because of a lack of the right material. What may we expect when the day of the average school boy and girl is started with fried white potatoes, white bread, cookies, tea or coffee? The energy in calories is admittedly more than sufficiently high, the protein is abundant, but the actual building and maintaining material is almost wholly lacking and to this lack is added a stimulant. Despite this fact, bulletins are issued praising denatured products as foods for starving America.

If these children were encouraged to eat a breakfast composed of whole-wheat bread and butter, a glass or two of milk, and in case of low vitality, the yolk of an egg, we should shortly be blessed with a race of normal creatures instead of under-nourished weaklings who are the pity of God and the disgrace of a self-styled civilized and enlightened people.

"An insufficient and inadequate breakfast of bread and coffee, whether or not the midday meal is adequate, virtually always means too little food in total, even though a hearty supply may be eaten. Indulgence in sweets and highly seasoned foods, habitual eating between meals, late hours, unventilated sleeping rooms, and lack of exercise, all help to create a "finicky" appetite and thus in the taking of too little food. Whenever the amount of food eaten habitually falls below the actual need, no matter for what reason, malnutrition is the unfailing consequence."

Generally speaking these statements are true though the statement that an insufficient breakfast, if the amount of food at other meals is sufficient, will be the cause of Malnutrition, is not based on facts. Experience has shown that the contrary is true and that the no-breakfast plan has been the means of restoring thousands to health who formerly had been almost constantly ailing, provided the diet at the other two meals was sufficiently varied and correctly combined.

"A diet inadequate in the right kind of food has equally disastrous results. To be well-nourished, a child must have every day some body-building material, or protein, to help form his muscles, his blood, his heart, his longs, his brain, and all other parts of the body. Without it his muscles cannot develop normally nor his organs be in the best condition. Certain proteins of animal origin - those of milk, eggs, and meat - are more valuable for growth than are those of cereals, beans, peas, and vegetables. A liberal amount of the child's 'building material' therefore should be furnished by foods of animal origin. Failure to supply these in sufficient amounts may result in under-nourishment."

The greater part of this statement also may be considered sound, though it is not necessary, in fact is not best to give meat to children because of the toxins and ureas present in it and because of the stimulating effects. The suggestion that vegetables are not essential is illogical in the light of our present knowledge concerning nutrition and, if followed, may induce malnutrition, because neither children above the age of two, nor adults, can be free from malnutrition if the greens are eliminated from the diet. They are essential, because they, together with fruits, supply the organic salts, without which the blood may become acid and a state of acidosis develop; digestion and assimilation will be interfered with, and malnutrition result. So true is this that in some of the large hospitals under more enlightened management, the first two weeks of treatment for malnutrition may prescribe a diet almost wholly of either tomato or orange juice.

"Another specific need of the child's body is for minerals. He must have plenty of lime to build sound bones and teeth, iron to make red blood, and other minerals for just as definite purposes. Without suitable amounts of lime and phosphorus, his bones will usually be spongy and his teeth defective, while lack of iron causes anemia. In this condition, the blood has not enough normal red corpuscles to carry sufficient oxygen to the tissues to burn up the food, and loss of weight follows. Since milk is about the only logical source of lime(4) and since vegetables, fruits, whole cereals and egg yolks, in addition to milk, supply most of the other minerals, it is readily seen that many cases of malnutrition are caused by too little of one or other of these foods."
-----------------------------------------------------
(4) Chemists of high repute maintain that lactic acid from any source, even synthetic, is metabolized to alkaline carbonates in the blood. The Natura School refutes this and believes that the synthetic lactic acid, the lactic acid which results from fatigue, and the lactic which results from denatured starches are all identical and that none of these can be metabolized. It further denies that lactic acids from whatever source are identical in as far as the welfare of man is concerned, though from the chemical standpoint this may be true. For this reason lactic acid from sour milk, sauerkraut, and other natural food sources is called natural, and that acid which is chemically made, of forms as the result of fatigue or the use of denatured foods, is termed nascent. Experiments made without bias should prove, or disprove, this contention.
-----------------------------------------------------

In general these statements are correct but the author of them is wholly in error when he says that "milk is about the only logical source of lime," as we shall show in another chapter. It is true that milk is exceptionally rich in vital calcium, but there are many vegetables which contain an abundance of this element in a form easily assimilated. Moreover, due to the newer knowledge of nutrition, we know now that lime by itself will cause such ailments as arthritis, hardening of the bones beyond normal, and various other serious ailments. Besides the lime, sodium is indispensable because it prevents lime and magnesium deposits from forming and keeps the lime in normal distribution, able to perform its proper functions. Sodium is principally found in the vegetables well known to most of us.

"Van Leersum and Mink, in Holland, studied the relative digestibility of white and whole-wheat breads, and found the whole-wheat bread less nutritive and economical than the white bread when it represents the staple food of the populace. The larger the amount of whole-wheat consumed, the lower its digestibility. The loss in digestibility was not alone due to the 'excretion of the bran but was largely due to the increased peristalsis, and secretion of intestinal juices occasioned by the brown bread.'"

The thought of these investigators seems to be directed principally toward the digestibility of the food - they pay but little attention to its actual building value. A food, such as polished rice, may be quickly digested yet furnish very little real nourishment, help congest the system and consume energy to eliminate, thus proving all in all, to be a liability and not an asset to the body.

No experienced dietitian is so ignorant as to claim that any large amount of whole-wheat bread should be consumed at one meal. If the bread is used as a basic food, then it should furnish no more than one-third of the entire amount of food consumed at the meal. One-half of the total food should be of vegetable origin and the remainder of other required elements predominating in hydrocarbons and carbohydrates. If the ratio is fully two-thirds of vegetable origin to one-third of whole-wheat bread, as it should be, to be a balanced ration, then there is no need to fear for the digestion of the bread or that it will cause irritation of the bowels or that most of its nutritive value will not be assimilated. Even when an abundance of fresh vegetables is combined with the diet, the whole-wheat bread is more desirable than the white, and when the menu is lacking in fresh vegetables, the whole-grain products are absolutely essential if health and strength are to be maintained.

An old adage says, "From the experience of others learn wisdom." Being fully aware of just what they may expect who are daring enough to take sides with Mother Nature as against adulterators, denaturizers and their apologists, not to mention pseudo-scientists who, for reasons best known to themselves, are in favor of denatured flour and other unbalanced food products, we are prepared for unfairness in their consideration of our position. We are acquainted with one man whom we believe to be absolutely honest, even though he is in favor of denatured flours, who, instead of applying himself to a closer study of Nature's laws and the principles governing dietary science or food application, defends his position by the use of the oldest, most unfair, of all weapons - sarcasm. We are wholly cognizant of the fact that the masses, as well as the superficial and uninformed reader, will remember a sarcastic comment long after statements based on facts are forgotten. For this reason we would answer criticism before it is born.

The apologists, sincere or hired, in their comments on the results of feeding dogs, rats, chickens, with denatured products, admit frequently that whole-wheat foods are best for them but point out in this connection that men are not animals. The argument is all very well in playing on the biased feelings of the people who, though disease-ridden, weak, nervous, possibly senile, nevertheless resent the imputation that they are even physically in a class with dogs and chickens. Despite this unfairness and failure to give honest consideration to the conclusions arrived at by the genuine experience of those who have the real welfare of humanity at heart, the undisputed fact is that, while the majority of people consider themselves of too great importance in the economy of Nature and, if you will, the plans of God, the human body is not in the slightest manner different from that of the animal body save possibly that the former requires to be supplied with the greater amount of nerve and brain food. The flesh of man and the flesh of animals, the blood of man and the blood of animals, are identical in practically every respect, and differ only in degree - all the sarcasm of all the masters in its use, does not change the facts by one iota.

One of our correspondents knowingly wrote us: "These apologists know that the surest way to retard the sale of whole-wheat flour for human consumption is to associate it in the public mind with the food for dogs of chickens." We heartily agree with our friend but truth is truth and will not remain forever hidden. Through experience and close observation covering twenty-seven years, we can state without reservation, that the many people who yearly come to Beverly Hall, one having become familiar with our whole-grain biscuits, muffins, and bread, always thereafter demand whole-wheat products. It has been proved, not only in this case but in countless others, that when once the human palate has been introduced to real bread, a gloriously perfect product of Nature, it unhesitatingly turns away from the denatured article. Sarcasm and ridicule may prove to be potent weapons when dealing with the illiterate and superficial, but cold, hard facts are necessary to convince the investigator and those people who are really and honestly seeking health. When these are once thoroughly convinced, the defeat of those who uphold and produce denatured foods of little value, can no longer be delayed. The fact that certain apologists have referred to Dr. Harvey W. Wiley as "poor old Doc. Wiley," in no way detracts from his honor and integrity as a man, nor from the soundness of his scientific conclusions as to the desirability of whole-grain products as food. The calling of names, the use of sarcasm, invectives, and ridicule does not answer a single sound accusation made against denatured products. Even in a real debate among school children, these would be ruled out, as worthless non-arguments, and to any thinker, they merely indicate that the users of such weapons by their very use admit that there is no logical answer to their statements relative to the value of denatured foods.

We have had no few correspondents, who, having made use of whole-wheat or graham flour, found them not edible, or if so, that they did not bring about the desired results. There have been many brands of co-called whole-wheat and graham flours on the market, many of which are not what they claimed to be. And breads advertised as made from nothing but the entire wheat flour, are all too frequently, in the same false class. Therefore: Do not condemn whole-wheat foods until you are certain that you have had a genuine article. Then, after you have used these you will find no place for dissatisfaction.

-----------------------------------------------------
Editor's Note: To be at its best, whole wheat four must be ground at a low heat (stone ground) and then used within two weeks to prevent the oils from going rancid. Some health food stores have facilities for grinding in this fashion, or, if one of these is not available, home stone mills are now obtainable. If you cannot find them, write us and we'll tell you where.
|Top|