Same here, but it must be sourdough.

The longer the fermentation the less nutrients you have because yeast and bacteria are eating them during the process.

@@AuxHex the yeast eats the sugar and starches, making the nutrients more available. I'd love to see the actual research on this.

Same! I've been trying to gather more information besides other's and my experiences but there doesn't seem to be a comprehensive study I can find. But fermented, from starter, bread seems to be a game changer for my family. And better than conventional gluten free products.

From older research I know they have concluded that both yeast and sour dough fermentation of the flour increases bioavailability of some nutirents, mostly some vitamins and iron if I remember correctly. I don't think any proteins where lost when it came to nutrition, just broken down, much the same with some of the lectins like gluten. It all made the grains easier to digest. I don't really know if there have been wide tests done on the end product (the bread itself). I think the dough needed to ferment for 6 - 12 hours before they noticed any change in the gluten content. For practical purpose, that is over night fermentation. Fermentation time and perhaps even the specific sourdoug culture are probably major factors in this. Another factor is the term "modern wheat", it is not one type of grain at all. The gluten content and quality in some wheat varieties have resulted in the use of the word "super gluten". The vitamin and micronutrient levels are likely related to cultivation methods and soil types. Use of herbicides and pesticides, which in the long run depleats soils and maked the grain dependant on mineral fertlizers to a higher degree. The (relatively) modern wheat varieties might not turn out as inferior as the most intens or "modern" cultivation methods as a whole.

The cost is because lower yield extra expense on harvesting, processing. But if this kind of wheat/bread would became prominent in diets, displacing white bread , the economies of scale and investing in more efficient processing and harvesting could bring down the cost significantly.

with the added benefits of healthier people and metanoias supposed (and most likely correct) scaling scenario, i think it would at least equal the cost and thatd be better, anyways. i think the transitional costs would be a small price to pay for healthier food longer term

davidhunternyc Go to the slide at 9:23 minutes. I believe this chart is comparing to modern wheat. Look at The Analyzed Values Bread column for 1K (Einkorn) that is how much more nutrients that it contains than modern wheat bread. The minuses are less than modern wheat bread. Einkorn bread is packed with nutrition! Someone please correct me if I’m wrong.

davidhunternyc You can also see the bread nutrient comparison on the slide at 11:45 minute mark. 👍

@@jw6180 Makes this a lot easier thank you.

Einkorn is much more nutrient dense. Also, keep in mind that the modern wheat they're comparing is anything but modern. They haven't stripped the kernels, bleached the flour, and so on to make their trash "shelf-stable." They essentially made modern wheat as ancient as they could for this comparison, and it still falls short.

Natural fermentation adds many nutrients not measured in this video.

No, most people like gluten because it givena much higher quality of bread. Just because some people are gluten intolerant that doesn’t mean all the rest of the people in the world don’t want to have it. Low or gluten free products lack the correct texture and taste.

There has been a rise of intolerance to gluten and this is being studied as it is still not certain that it is gluten alone that is the problem. Most results are showing the intolerance comes form a lack of fermentation of the gluten in the dough, a process which makes it more digestible. Most commercial baking has a much reduced fermentation time. There is also the problem with commercial wheats in some countries where crops are sprayed with chemicals to dry out the plant before harvesting, this can also increase intolerant reactions. What is not commonly known is that gluten is a vital constituent of a healthy diet but it has been demonized in social media due to the issues above. People are getting intolerant reactions (this is different from celiac disease issues), that is not in doubt, but the real answer of why, is still in process.

Andy w 😂😂😂 gluten free orange juice. Just like cholesterol free whole grain printed on the box.

Jute Wood true..Modern wheat is not good at all..It has been genetically modified in fifties..They made it bigger and shorter for better yields ..The result was increase from 5% gluten in ancient grain to 50% in modern one..That's why many people are celiac or gluten sensitive today..People should't mess with nature under the microscope..Old and natural grain is Eincorn. Fermentation process should by longer(few days) and natural,,not with powder as natural bacteria and fungi helps with nutrient breakdown and predigestion..

It's not gluten it's the type modern wheat is said to be too hybridized

i think this study wasnt very expensive to conduct. a similar study can be produced with additional tests got natural fermentation without much cost. it may be much more extensive bc you might want to test different climates, continents, and starters. of course without formal training and leadership your results may be considered invalid, though im not sure how studies are judged nowadays with the advent of the internet and self learning

@@leafster1337 Even a non-academic study will be extremely interesting, even if we don't measure exact regional & climate variation. Seems to me that fermentation and human nutrition has been hand in hand since further than recorded history for preserving and nutritional (flavor in the minds of our ancestors) content.