[Editor’s Note: This post continues from Part 1, “Why You Can Eat Bread in Europe but Not in the U.S.” If you haven’t read that yet, start there to get the full background on how wheat has changed.]
If you’ve ever wondered why you can eat bread in Europe but feel bloated or sluggish after a slice in the U.S., you’re not alone. For years, gluten has taken the blame, but the real story is far more complex.
Fat loss isn’t just about calories. It’s about digestion, inflammation, blood sugar regulation, and your body’s ability to recover. And when it comes to modern wheat, every step of the supply chain, from seed to slice, can affect those outcomes.
This post breaks down what has changed in wheat and bread over the last 70 years and why those changes matter if you’re trying to improve body composition, energy, and long-term health.
Celiac Disease and Modern Wheat: What the Science Actually Shows
Let’s start with a common myth: modern wheat is not inherently more dangerous for people with celiac disease than older varieties.
While diagnoses have increased dramatically over the past few decades, research shows that total gluten content in modern wheat is comparable or even slightly lower than in heritage strains (1). What matters more is the presence of specific immunogenic peptides, like the infamous 33-mer gliadin fragment, wich is the primary trigger in celiac disease (2, 3).
A comparative analysis of modern and ancient wheat cultivars found no consistent trend of increased immune activation in newer wheat types (1). Some modern wheats contain slightly more of one problematic epitope and less of another, but there is no clear upward trend in immunogenicity.
💡 Key takeaway: For people with celiac disease, all wheat is problematic. While some modern varieties may contain more of the 33-mer peptide, the overall evidence does not show modern wheat as consistently more toxic than older strains.
What Are D-Genome Gliadins?
Wheat contains several types of gluten proteins, including gliadins, which play a major role in digestion and immune response. Wheat’s genetic makeup includes three genomes: A, B, and D.
- Modern bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) contains all three genomes: A, B, and D
- Ancient wheats like einkorn and emmer do not contain the D-genome
The D-genome gliadins are a group of gluten proteins unique to modern wheat. Some of these proteins have been identified as more immunogenic, meaning they are more likely to activate immune responses in sensitive individuals, including those with non-celiac gluten sensitivity or autoimmune risk (2).
💡 Why it matters: Even though ancient grains aren’t necessarily lower in total gluten, the absence of D-genome gliadins may explain why some people report fewer symptoms after eating einkorn or spelt.
Decline in Mineral Density: More Yield, Fewer Nutrients
One area where modern wheat does fall short is mineral content.
This decline is largely explained by what’s known as the “dilution effect.” As modern wheat varieties have been bred for higher yield, particularly more starch per grain, the concentration of micronutrients has decreased (4). In addition, semi-dwarf wheat has shorter root systems, which may limit the plant’s ability to pull minerals from deeper layers of soil.
To address this, researchers have launched biofortification efforts to breed new varieties that maintain high yields while restoring mineral density (5). This is especially important in countries where people rely heavily on wheat for daily nutrition.
💡 Key takeaway: Higher yields led to more calories but fewer minerals per bite. Biofortification is working to reverse that trend.
Ancient Grains: A Return to Nutrient Diversity
Ancient wheats like einkorn, emmer, spelt, and khorasan have surged in popularity as alternatives to modern wheat. These traditional strains have undergone minimal hybridization and retain a different nutritional and biochemical profile.
Micronutrients
Ancient wheats often contain higher levels of iron, zinc, selenium, and magnesium, especially when consumed as whole grains (6). These minerals are critical for energy production, hormone function, and metabolic flexibility.
Phytochemicals and Antioxidants
These grains also contain more polyphenols and flavonoids, especially in the bran and germ (7). These compounds may help reduce oxidative stress and inflammation, which are two hidden drivers of fat loss resistance.
Gluten Structure
As covered earlier, while ancient grains aren’t gluten-free, they lack the D-genome gliadins that appear to be more immunogenic (2). Some also contain lower levels of amylase-trypsin inhibitors (ATIs), a protein group that may trigger immune responses in sensitive individuals (11).
💡 Key takeaway: Ancient grains may be better tolerated not because they’re lower in gluten, but because they’re structurally different and more nutrient dense.
Modern Bread-Making: A Recipe for Digestive Distress?
It’s not just the wheat that changed. The way we bake bread has shifted dramatically over the last century—and it may be a bigger factor in wheat intolerance than genetics.
Chorleywood Bread Process (CBP)
In the mid-20th century, industrial bakeries adopted the Chorleywood Bread Process, which uses chemical additives and high-speed mixing to reduce fermentation time.
While this made bread cheaper and faster to produce, it also:
- Reduced natural gluten breakdown (9)
- Preserved more FODMAPs, which can cause bloating and gas in IBS or sensitive individuals (8)
- Altered the structure of starch and fiber, changing how bread affects blood sugar and satiety (9)
In contrast, traditional sourdough methods involve long fermentation that partially degrades gluten and reduces FODMAPs (10). These are fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols. They are known to trigger bloating, gas, and discomfort in people with IBS and non-celiac wheat sensitivity.
Modern white bread made with CBP contains more intact gluten and FODMAPs (9). This may explain why some people feel better eating traditionally fermented European bread, even if they are not celiac.
In the United States, commercial white flour is often treated with chemical agents such as benzoyl peroxide for bleaching or potassium bromate for dough conditioning. Bleaching alters the flour’s natural color and may degrade certain micronutrients. Bromate, which is banned in many countries but still permitted in the U.S., has been linked in animal studies to potential carcinogenic effects (13).
💡 Key takeaway: If you feel bloated after eating American bread but not European bread, it may not be the gluten—it could be the short fermentation time, chemical additives, and processing methods.
WGA: The Anti-Nutrient That Isn’t the Villain
Wheat germ agglutinin (WGA) is a lectin found in the germ layer of wheat kernels. It’s often labeled an “anti-nutrient” due to its ability to resist digestion and bind to gut cell membranes.
But here’s what matters:
- WGA is virtually absent in white flour, which removes the germ
- Levels in whole wheat are extremely low, about 0.01g/kg
- WGA is heat-sensitive, and baking significantly reduces its biological activity (12)
Studies comparing modern and heritage wheats show no increase in WGA levels from breeding. Unless you’re eating raw wheat germ, the risk is minimal.
💡 Key takeaway: WGA isn’t a major factor in wheat sensitivity for most people. And it’s not specific to modern wheat.
Glyphosate and Preservatives: Additives You Didn’t Ask For
The most overlooked factor in modern wheat intolerance may not be in the grain—it may be in the farming and preservation process.
Glyphosate as a Desiccant
In the U.S., wheat crops are often sprayed with glyphosate before harvest to speed drying. This practice is not approved in Europe (13).
- The IARC, a branch of the WHO, classifies glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen” at high exposures (14)
- Even at low levels, residual glyphosate may impact gut bacteria and inflammation, though human research is still ongoing (15)
Bread Preservatives
Many U.S. breads contain calcium propionate, a preservative that prevents mold but has been linked to:
- Behavioral changes in children (16)
- Gut irritation in sensitive individuals (17)
While not conclusively harmful, these additives are less commonly used in European baking, where flour tends to be less processed and more tightly regulated.
💡 Key takeaway: Many modern wheat complaints are less about gluten and more about chemical exposure, gut microbiome disruption, and lack of ingredient transparency.
✏︎ The Bottom Line
Wheat itself hasn’t radically changed since the 1950s, but everything surrounding it has. From soil health to grain selection to flour treatment and baking methods, each layer affects how your body digests and responds to wheat-based foods.
Modern wheat isn’t more gluten-rich or inherently harmful. But it is:
- Lower in minerals
- More heavily processed
- Baked with shorter fermentation
- Exposed to more chemicals and preservatives
If you’ve struggled with wheat-based products, experiment with:
- Long-fermented sourdough
- Organic or heritage grains
- Unbleached, non-bromated flour
- Wheat diversity: spelt, einkorn, emmer, rye
At PlateauBreaker, we encourage you to pay attention to how your body responds. When it comes to digestion, inflammation, and fat loss, how we grow it, process it, and preserve it all matters.
Bread isn’t the enemy. But how we grow it, process it, and preserve it is what matters.
Bibliography
(1) Dieterich, Walburga et al. “Proteins from Modern and Ancient Wheat Cultivars: Impact on Immune Cells of Healthy Individuals and Patients with NCGS.” Nutrients vol. 14,20 4257. 12 Oct. 2022, doi:10.3390/nu14204257. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9611902/
(2) van Herpen, Teun W J M et al. “Alpha-gliadin genes from the A, B, and D genomes of wheat contain different sets of celiac disease epitopes.” BMC genomics vol. 7 1. 10 Jan. 2006, doi:10.1186/1471-2164-7-1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16403227/
(3) Molberg, O et al. “Tissue transglutaminase selectively modifies gliadin peptides that are recognized by gut-derived T cells in celiac disease.” Nature medicinevol. 4,6 (1998): 713-7. doi:10.1038/nm0698-713. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9623982/
(4) Fan, Ming-Sheng et al. “Evidence of decreasing mineral density in wheat grain over the last 160 years.” Journal of trace elements in medicine and biology : organ of the Society for Minerals and Trace Elements (GMS) vol. 22,4 (2008): 315-24. doi:10.1016/j.jtemb.2008.07.002. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19013359/
(5) Wani, Shabir Hussain et al. “Improving Zinc and Iron Biofortification in Wheat through Genomics Approaches.” Molecular biology reports vol. 49,8 (2022): 8007-8023. doi:10.1007/s11033-022-07326-z. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9165711/
(6) Dragičević, Vesna et al. “Screening of Nutritionally Important Components in Standard and Ancient Cereals.” Foods (Basel, Switzerland) vol. 13,24 4116. 19 Dec. 2024, doi:10.3390/foods13244116. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39767058/
(7) Golea, Camelia Maria et al. “Physicochemical Characteristics and Microstructure of Ancient and Common Wheat Grains Cultivated in Romania.” Plants (Basel, Switzerland) vol. 12,11 2138. 29 May. 2023, doi:10.3390/plants12112138. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10255643/
(8) Bertin, Luisa et al. “The Role of the FODMAP Diet in IBS.” Nutrients vol. 16,3 370. 26 Jan. 2024, doi:10.3390/nu16030370. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38337655/
(9) Smith, Frances et al. “Digestibility of gluten proteins is reduced by baking and enhanced by starch digestion.” Molecular nutrition & food research vol. 59,10 (2015): 2034-43. doi:10.1002/mnfr.201500262. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26202208/
(10) Menezes, Leidiane A A et al. “Effects of Sourdough on FODMAPs in Bread and Potential Outcomes on Irritable Bowel Syndrome Patients and Healthy Subjects.” Frontiers in microbiology vol. 9 1972. 21 Aug. 2018, doi:10.3389/fmicb.2018.01972. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30186276/
(11) Zevallos, V. F., et al. (2017). Nutritional Wheat Amylase-Trypsin Inhibitors Promote Intestinal Inflammation via Activation of Myeloid Cells. Gastroenterology, 152(5), 1100–1113.e12. https://www.gastrojournal.org/article/S0016-5085(16)35503-2/fulltext
(12) Pusztai, A, and G Grant. “Assessment of lectin inactivation by heat and digestion.” Methods in molecular medicine vol. 9 (1998): 505-14. doi:10.1385/0-89603-396-1:505. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21374488/
(13).Malalgoda, Maneka et al. “Preharvest Glyphosate Application during Wheat Cultivation: Effects on Wheat Starch Physicochemical Properties.” Journal of agricultural and food chemistry vol. 68,2 (2020): 503-511. doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.9b06456. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31869217/
(14) Guyton, Kathryn Z et al. “Carcinogenicity of tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate.” The Lancet. Oncology vol. 16,5 (2015): 490-1. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70134-8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25801782/
(15) Lehman, Peter C et al. “Low-dose glyphosate exposure alters gut microbiota composition and modulates gut homeostasis.” Environmental toxicology and pharmacology vol. 100 (2023): 104149. doi:10.1016/j.etap.2023.104149. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37196884/
(16) Dengate, S, and A Ruben. “Controlled trial of cumulative behavioural effects of a common bread preservative.” Journal of paediatrics and child healthvol. 38,4 (2002): 373-6. doi:10.1046/j.1440-1754.2002.00009.x.” Clinical Pediatrics, 1993. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12173999/
(17) Pongsavee, Malinee. “Effects of 3300 del A-1061 Ter BRCA1 frameshift mutation and calcium propionate on oxidative stress and breast carcinogenesis.” International journal of molecular epidemiology and genetics vol. 10,3 47-52. 15 Jun. 2019. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6627784/
