It’s been awhile since we bashed Natural News for its continuing lack of the most basic research skills. Case in point: I was discussing wheat with a friend, who helpfully forwarded me a link about why wheat is so bad. It kinda sorta reads like science, or at least journalism. But it isn’t. Take this doozy (please!):

“So how did the “staff of life” become a weed of disease?

For starters, wheat is not the same today. It has been hybrid (sic) over time to resist fungus, grow more quickly, and be more pliable for industrial bread baking. 50 years or so ago, wheat contained only five percent gluten. Today, it is 50 percent gluten.”

HUH? First, I’m shocked that no one bothered to question that factoid. I read ALL the comments, one from an RN, several from people who seemed to be fairly articulate. Did NO ONE bother to Google this? Then it occurred to me that this crowd may not even know what gluten IS. Definition? Two words. Wheat protein.

So I walked over to the pantry and picked up a bag of flour (I’m apparently unaffected by the demon wheat). Nutrition Facts: protein is 13%. Then I checked it with Wikipedia: wheat protein 10-15%.

Let’s be clear about this. 50% protein in a plant would be amazing! Every hunger and poverty relief agency in the world would LOVE to have a plant with that level of protein (moringa comes close). It would be the biggest “superfood” in the world overnight. But alas, it is just not true. Unfortunately, most of what NN publishes cannot be taken as fact. And who needs a “news” source that you need to constantly check?

Really? Not one reader questioned that? Really?