If there is a simpler and more productive way to grow crops, capitalism will ensure it happens naturally. Farmers don't fertilize and apply pesticides because "that's the way they're trained". The only way to create change at scale is by eliminating risk. Who would risk there entire operation without a guarantee the new method won't backfire and cause severe loss? Farmers apply inputs to hedge risk and create yield just as every business does.

Dress up like a bear and he will come find you.

G. hirsutum Ag said:

---

My plan is to post on X 3-4 times a day until someone sees it. No one pays much attention to agriculture stuff though so I'm trying to not get lost in the shuffle. The posts I've made today showed up on my replies but not on my main posts page. Maybe if I can get some hearts and some view and some reposts by anyone here thats on X could help boost some attention towards me. Ive also got some friends with Washington and Austin connections that I am working as well. This is the start of a journey that I believe will be very rewarding for all of us if we come together.

Lets get rid of preservates and dyes and all the extra crap. Lets rework the food pyramid. Lets work on using fewer and better chemicals and synthetics in our production but give us some leway to fight pests that have wrecked and destoryed nations for generations. We still fight the fungus that caused the Irish Potato Fammine today. I promise, we don't want that to happen again

And for anyone following along, I am not saying I am the best person to talk to him. There are 1,000s infinitely more qualified than myself. It just needs to get on their radar.

This thread is a great example of the issue though. Someone immediately blamed GMOs in wheat which is completely incorrect information. There could be some truth the using glyphosate as a harvest aid but I'm not sure how wide spread that is as a practice and I don't know what the label on harvest delay is. The amount of misinformation out there is truely quite staggaring and this has been a battle that we have fought for ages and I have been fairly vocal about it until it was no longer tolerable to speak the truth on line during covid.

The wheat gets touched multiple times down the line after it leaves the farmers field before it ends up in a pasta bag. There are a lot of variables to consider and if someone bans the wrong chemical based on a poor understanding our grass issues could skyrocket and our yields could really drop.

The bottom line is that it is a tricky subject that involves a lot of moving parts and faces a lot of challenges. The few of us that are left are all pretty dang good farmers, or maybe we are the ones bull headed enough to keep doing what we are doing. The financial numbers sure stink at the moment.

---

Just wanted to say…I'm a big RFK fan, very excited for our future with him in charge of HHS. We HAVE to make serious changes in our food chain and ultimately within the final product we consume. I'm one of those "crunchy" people.

That said, I have a lot of respect for you. You sound very genuine. I've also considered the potential of destroying our food supply, which will have devastating effects, obviously. I truly hope RFK has deep and productive conversation with our farmers and ranchers. I hope your voice is heard.

G. hirsutum Ag said:

---

All wheat is non gmo. There is not commerically avaiable GMO wheat in the US

---

This is the way. Might I suggest the block feature for bots.

Thank you! Farmers can definitely do better and big chemical needs to be held to a much higher standard. It's a big task but I know there is a way forward where we can all find middle ground

Max06 said:

---

Pre-harvest application of glyphosate to expedite ripening & dry down. Can cause chemical changes in the wheat starches itself if applied too early.

Try organic flour, probably won't have an issue.

---

Kamut flour is what a relative with bad food allergies uses.

EskimoJoe said:

---

Jack Boyett said:

---

I farm and grow wheat as well. I used to be on board with the OP.

I recently read a book called Dirt to Soil by Gabe Brown. He is a farmer in ND that no longer uses synthetic fertilizer and uses very little herbicide. He does this by building soil health. His yields are 20% above his county average. As a farmer, it was super interesting. I'm no longer sure that the generally accepted industrial farming methods are the right way.

---

You may know about these guys, if not I believe they are on to something.

https://www.prairiefood.com/

These guys are local to me and are creating an alternative to synthetic fertilizer by building soil health and promoting microbial growth that has been killed by blasting the soil with anhydrous and phosphorus for decades. They use manure from the local feed lot and by products from the local ethanol plant. They have developed a process to rapidly break it down to the nutrient level in what would take years to do if you were to just spread manure. The producers who use it are seeing gains in OM, microbes, and naturally drought resistance that goes along with healthier soil.

---

Who would have thought? There ain't enough manure on the planet to supply every acre of cropland. Hopefully they use some form of no-till/strip till to make it really work.

Folic acid is an issue for a huge percentage of the pollution. Its use needs to be ended as well.

The differences between pasta in the U.S. and pasta in Italy largely stem from variations in wheat types, processing methods, and regulations, which can affect the levels of gluten, wheat germ, and overall digestibility.

Key Differences in U.S. vs. Italian Pasta:

1. Wheat Type:
U.S. Pasta:
Typically made from modern durum wheat varieties bred for higher yields and gluten content. These varieties often have higher gluten levels than traditional Italian wheat.
Wheat is often enriched and refined, stripping it of natural nutrients and fiber.
Italian Pasta:
Often made from traditional durum wheat varieties, such as those grown in Southern Italy. These tend to have a lower gluten content and more balanced protein structures.
Italian pasta is usually not enriched, as the wheat is milled in a way that retains more of its natural nutrients, including some wheat germ.
2. Gluten Quality:
U.S. Gluten:
The gluten in modern U.S. wheat varieties is often harder to digest because of the higher levels and altered protein structure from genetic crossbreeding.
This can sometimes exacerbate gluten sensitivity or bloating in sensitive individuals.
Italian Gluten:
Traditional Italian wheat often has a simpler gluten structure, making it easier to digest for some people. Anecdotally, individuals with mild gluten sensitivity report fewer issues when eating pasta in Italy.
3. Processing and Wheat Germ:
U.S. Pasta:
Typically made from wheat that is more heavily processed, removing the wheat germ and bran during milling. This reduces the pasta's natural nutrients and fiber.
Mass-market pasta is often dried quickly at very high temperatures, which can affect its texture and nutrient profile.
Italian Pasta:
Traditional Italian pasta (e.g., artisanal brands) is often made using milling processes that retain more of the wheat germ, giving it a richer flavor and better nutritional profile.
Many Italian pastas are dried slowly at low temperatures, which preserves nutrients and enhances texture when cooked.
4. Regulations and Ingredients:
U.S. Pasta:
U.S. regulations allow for a wide range of ingredients and processing aids, which can include added preservatives or chemicals.
Enriched pasta is common, with added nutrients like iron and folic acid to replace those lost during processing.
Italian Pasta:
In Italy, the production of pasta di semola di grano duro (pasta made from durum wheat semolina) is highly regulated. It must only contain durum wheat semolina and water, with no additives.
This strict regulation ensures higher-quality pasta with consistent characteristics.
5. Nutritional and Digestive Differences:
U.S. Pasta:
Higher gluten levels and refined processing can make U.S. pasta harder to digest for individuals with mild gluten sensitivity or gut issues.
Refined, enriched pasta often has a higher glycemic index, leading to quicker blood sugar spikes.
Italian Pasta:
Traditional Italian pasta often retains some of its fiber and nutrients, making it more satiating and easier to digest.
The slower drying process and lower gluten levels in traditional varieties may contribute to a more stable blood sugar response.

Why Some People Feel Better Eating Pasta in Italy:

1. Simpler Gluten Structure: Traditional Italian wheat may be easier to digest for individuals with gluten sensitivity (though it's not suitable for those with celiac disease).
2. Less Processing: Retention of natural nutrients and wheat germ in Italian pasta can enhance digestibility and nutritional value.
3. Additives and Preservatives: Italian pasta is typically free of additives that are sometimes present in U.S. pasta.
4. Portion Sizes and Cooking Methods: Italians often cook pasta al dente (firm to the bite), which has a lower glycemic impact compared to overcooked pasta. Portions are also smaller, reducing the overall carbohydrate load.

Choosing Pasta for Better Digestibility:

1. In the U.S.:
Look for imported Italian brands like De Cecco or Barilla (Italy-made), which adhere to Italian regulations.
Opt for whole-grain pasta or artisanal U.S. brands that use traditional processing and minimal additives.
2. In Italy:
Most pasta follows traditional methods, so stick to authentic pasta di semola di grano duro for the best experience.

Would you like recommendations for specific brands or types of pasta that align with these benefits?

Grapes said:

---

Folic acid is an issue for a huge percentage of the pollution. Its use needs to be ended as well.

---

I read an interesting article that it is suspected that a lot of postpartum depression is a result of women not being able to properly process folic acid. Up to 30%. First thing is they get put on prenatal vitamins and it overloads their system with it and they can process it. Best to take methylated B vitamins

I'll give RFK a call

These wheat varieties are what I will be using for bread baking and making pasta ...

Hard Red Winter:



Turkey Red

BadMoonRisin said:

---

I would try renting a bear suit and laying down next to a roadway he frequents, appearing as if you were struck by a car.

---

Good idea, like this bloke...

SunrayAg said:

---

GMO's have harmed exactly 0 humans in the history of planet earth.

That number has always been 0. That number will always be 0.

Anti GMO hysteria on the other hand, has killed many.

Organic agriculture makes 2 acres yield the same as 1, and generally is not as "organic" as you think. Good luck feeding the growing population with lower yields and less farmland.

---

GMO is not the problem people make it out to be in and of itself, except when it is used in ways that increase the amount of chemicals used on the crops, such as roundup resistant corn. Making it so you can spray more herbicide on the plants to kill weeds without killing the plant may enhance the overall yield, but it also leads to higher levels of chemical residuals in the crops.

And blanket statements about organic growing yields are pretty meaningless when there are people out there doing it right that are seeing higher yields than non organic methods. People like to point to somebody who just stopped using any chemicals on a field that has been nuked for years, but didnt change anything else about their growing methods and had a huge drop in yield, and say "see, organic doesn't work". There is more to making organic or at least less synthetic chemical dependent growing work than just cutting back on the use of the chemicals.

Try hand written letter.
Then start calling
Go to his office ...once

This is a connected world creating a lot of chaff. Go old school.

If I buy pasta or most bread in Canada and the US. Folate or Folic Acid is listed on the ingredient statement.

If I buy Italian pasta, flower etc…. It is not.

The reason being, folic acid was added to the list of items used on grain crops in NA and EU. The EU realized it made people feel like **** and banned it shortly after. Canada and the US still spray essentially all grains with it.

Try this for yourself. Look at the ingredients. If pasta and breads makes you feel terrible, sleepy, bloated, foggy brained etc…. Try Italian pasta with no folate/folic acid.

Tough to find bread without it. In Canada you have to buy Italian or Turkish flour to get folate/folic acid free.

I believe the estimate is that about 40% plus Americans struggle to process folate/folic acid thru their system. The side effects being bloat, drowsy, foggy brain etc…. Some believe it's a major contributor to the hi rate of children with concentration issues in school.

In my family becoming conscious of this helped my daughter and I. My wife and 2 boys have no issue either way.

Phatbob said:

---

My wife can't eat pasta made from wheat grown in the USA, but can from anywhere else. If that isn't a sign that something needs to change, I don't know what is.

---

Yep went to Italy this summer and ate pasta like crazy. No stomach upset. We're essentially doing everything wrong when it comes to nutrition.

txags92 said:

---

SunrayAg said:

---

GMO's have harmed exactly 0 humans in the history of planet earth.

That number has always been 0. That number will always be 0.

Anti GMO hysteria on the other hand, has killed many.

Organic agriculture makes 2 acres yield the same as 1, and generally is not as "organic" as you think. Good luck feeding the growing population with lower yields and less farmland.

---

GMO is not the problem people make it out to be in and of itself, except when it is used in ways that increase the amount of chemicals used on the crops, such as roundup resistant corn. Making it so you can spray more herbicide on the plants to kill weeds without killing the plant may enhance the overall yield, but it also leads to higher levels of chemical residuals in the crops.

And blanket statements about organic growing yields are pretty meaningless when there are people out there doing it right that are seeing higher yields than non organic methods. People like to point to somebody who just stopped using any chemicals on a field that has been nuked for years, but didnt change anything else about their growing methods and had a huge drop in yield, and say "see, organic doesn't work". There is more to making organic or at least less synthetic chemical dependent growing work than just cutting back on the use of the chemicals.

---

1: your statement about glyphosate and chemical use increase because of GMO is incorrect. Roundup ready corn enables us to use less chemicals and the chemical safety profile is a lot safer than the herbicides we use in a non roundup system.

2: I have seen zero data to ever suggest that organic yields more than conventional. Please provide some proof for your statement. Also of note, organic doesn't mean didn't have chemicals applied to it. The list of approved pesticides for use in organic food is pretty lengthy and most of those chemicals have a higher use rate and worse safety rating

Quote:

---

I need your help to reach RFK

---

First, get yourself an animal carcas. Preferably large mammal from the Carnivora order. . .

BadMoonRisin said:

---

I would try renting a bear suit and laying down next to a roadway he frequents, appearing as if you were struck by a car.

---

This cracked me up. Thanks for the laugh.

Having said that, I am interested to see what impact RFK can have. The U.S. needs to eat healthier and it ain't gonna happen without an intervention.

EclipseAg said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

I would try renting a bear suit and laying down next to a roadway he frequents, appearing as if you were struck by a car.

---

This cracked me up. Thanks for the laugh.

Having said that, I am interested to see what impact RFK can have. The U.S. needs to eat healthier and it ain't gonna happen without an intervention.

---

I am genuinely curious what intervention people think will be effective.

Removing red dyes and "preservatives" from food isn't going to make Americans healthy again when over 40% of Americans are obese and 10% have severe obesity,

The average American eats less than one serving of fruits and vegetables (that aren't ketchup or potatoes) per day, eats over 2x the recommended amount of sugar, drinks more than 1 alcoholic beverage per day, and spends over 9 hours a day sedentary. I don't have the numbers, but I'd guess most people consume at least 50-100% more calories every day than their body actually needs to maintain a healthy weight. Maybe as much as 200% more if they are eating all or most of their food from restaurants.

Short of banning ultra-processed "junk" foods entirely - which we know isn't going to happen - the problem is much bigger than the targets the people supporting this movement are going after.

Removing dyes and preservatives doesn't make junk food healthier, just like gluten free junk food is still junk food.

Everything we need to eat healthier and be healthier is in the grocery store right now. People just aren't choosing those foods.

All this movement is doing is ignoring the real problem - which is Americans consume too many calories, especially in the form of high calorie, low nutrient, ultra processed foods, and don't engage in enough activity to prevent those calories from being stored as excess fat.

Everytime I hear someone complaining about gluten.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

I would try renting a bear suit and laying down next to a roadway he frequents, appearing as if you were struck by a car.

---

Now this is how you Texags!

TXTransplant said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

It causes her to have mildish stomach cramps. It doesn't happen with things made from wheat grown in Italy or France, but we haven't tried others. I guess the next step in the troubleshooting is to try US non-GMO and see if that has the same results, but understandably she isn't super in on the "lets see what gives me stomach cramps" trials.

---

There is no commercially grown GMO wheat in the US. GMO wheat does exist, but it's not currently grown or sold here. This is a myth that's been wrongly perpetuated.

There are varieties of wheat that have been altered through conventional breeding.

Europe grows different wheat varieties that are significantly lower in gluten than what is grown in the US.

You can buy flours from Europe and make your own pasta. It's actually pretty easy.

---

And fresh homemade pasta is fantastic compared to dry store bought. We do it occasionally. It is easy, but definitely a time commitment vs throwing dry stuff in a pot of boiling water for 10 mins.

How to Make Egg Pasta (an in-depth guide)

Phatbob said:

---

My wife can't eat pasta made from wheat grown in the USA, but can from anywhere else. If that isn't a sign that something needs to change, I don't know what is.

---

The ridiculous over-use of Monsanto's broad-spectrum glysophate based herbicides.

Yall realize that they spray this poison on all of many of our vegatables while in the field. They then have adjusted the dna of the plants to not die under the assault of the glysophate herbicides.

These herbicides might not cause cancer (where the studies have been tailor focused). But there is growing concern that they mess with our gut's microbiome.

Study finds glyphosate-related alterations in gut microbiome

TXTransplant said:

---

Removing red dyes and "preservatives" from food isn't going to make Americans healthy again when over 40% of Americans are obese and 10% have severe obesity,

The average American eats less than one serving of fruits and vegetables (that aren't ketchup or potatoes) per day, eats over 2x the recommended amount of sugar, drinks more than 1 alcoholic beverage per day, and spends over 9 hours a day sedentary. I don't have the numbers, but I'd guess most people consume at least 50-100% more calories every day than their body actually needs to maintain a healthy weight. Maybe as much as 200% more if they are eating all or most of their food from restaurants.

Short of banning ultra-processed "junk" foods entirely - which we know isn't going to happen - the problem is much bigger than the targets the people supporting this movement are going after.

Removing dyes and preservatives doesn't make junk food healthier, just like gluten free junk food is still junk food.

---

Here's the defense that "there are so many issues affecting American's health these days...why should we start with one or more of the problems and try to solve it...it's hopeless!!!!"

Quote:

---

All this movement is doing is ignoring the real problem - which is Americans consume too many calories, especially in the form of high calorie, low nutrient, ultra processed foods, and don't engage in enough activity to prevent those calories from being stored as excess fat.

---

Have you considered that the quality of our food products and the chemical alterations that the food undertakes to make it addictive might be part of the problem with people eating more than they should. The food is lacking the density of nutrients that the same food has in Europe.

txags92 said:

---

GMO is not the problem people make it out to be in and of itself, except when it is used in ways that increase the amount of chemicals used on the crops, such as roundup resistant corn. Making it so you can spray more herbicide on the plants to kill weeds without killing the plant may enhance the overall yield, but it also leads to higher levels of chemical residuals in the crops.

---

This needs to stop.

WestAustinAg said:

---

txags92 said:

---

GMO is not the problem people make it out to be in and of itself, except when it is used in ways that increase the amount of chemicals used on the crops, such as roundup resistant corn. Making it so you can spray more herbicide on the plants to kill weeds without killing the plant may enhance the overall yield, but it also leads to higher levels of chemical residuals in the crops.

---

This needs to stop.

---

I agree. Perpetuating that lie needs to stop.

That's a strange take on my post given that I said almost the exact opposite.

Obesity is probably the single most prevalent health problem in the US. MANY chronic health conditions stem from obesity - diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, hormone disruptions, joint pain, sleep apnea, fatty liver disease, and even some cancers (at a minimum, obesity raises the risk, if not causing it directly).

You solve the obesity problem and a lot of the other health issues are drastically reduced.

It's not hopeless - unless you focus on the wrong "problems".

Prevention is the solution to reducing most chronic health conditions, and a maintaining healthy weight is one of the best "preventative" actions a person can take prevent adverse health issues. .

WestAustinAg said:

---

TXTransplant said:

---

Removing red dyes and "preservatives" from food isn't going to make Americans healthy again when over 40% of Americans are obese and 10% have severe obesity,

The average American eats less than one serving of fruits and vegetables (that aren't ketchup or potatoes) per day, eats over 2x the recommended amount of sugar, drinks more than 1 alcoholic beverage per day, and spends over 9 hours a day sedentary. I don't have the numbers, but I'd guess most people consume at least 50-100% more calories every day than their body actually needs to maintain a healthy weight. Maybe as much as 200% more if they are eating all or most of their food from restaurants.

Short of banning ultra-processed "junk" foods entirely - which we know isn't going to happen - the problem is much bigger than the targets the people supporting this movement are going after.

Removing dyes and preservatives doesn't make junk food healthier, just like gluten free junk food is still junk food.

---

Here's the defense that "there are so many issues affecting American's health these days...why should we start with one or more of the problems and try to solve it...it's hopeless!!!!"

Quote:

---

All this movement is doing is ignoring the real problem - which is Americans consume too many calories, especially in the form of high calorie, low nutrient, ultra processed foods, and don't engage in enough activity to prevent those calories from being stored as excess fat.

---

Have you considered that the quality of our food products and the chemical alterations that the food undertakes to make it addictive might be part of the problem with people eating more than they should. The food is lacking the density of nutrients that the same food has in Europe.

---

Food is not addictive in the same way alcohol or drugs are addictive (ie, your body does not become chemically dependent on it).

With that said, there are a lot of reasons why people overeat processed foods.

1) Taste. Junk foods taste good.
2) Mouth feel (for example, that satisfying "crunch" you get when eating chips or popcorn)
3) Convenience - prepared foods almost always have more calories than the homemade equivalent (restaurant foods having even more excess calories).

We should be eating a protein-rich diet (roughly 30-40% of calorie intake) with fresh fruits and vegetables, the balance of calories coming from fats and carbs, and minimizing consumptions of ultra-processed "junk" foods.

Ultra processed foods are typically devoid of protein. People overeat processed foods because they don't provide the same level of satiety that protein (in combination with the appropriate amount of fat) does. Think about the last time you were satisfied by a serving (the actual serving size on the container) of chips, ice cream, or even nuts (which most people consider "healthy", but overconsumption of even "healthy" foods can still be problematic).

There is no way to make these foods "healthier". The "healthy" choice is to simply eat them in moderation, because over-consumption of them leads to excessive caloric intake (often at the expense of protein, which is a macro-nutrient that our bodies actually need a lot of to maintain healthy muscle mass).

Eating also gives people a dopamine hit - much like doing any activity that gives you pleasure.

The problem is, the more you eat to get a dopamine hit, the more you have to eat to maintain the same level of that dopamine "high". Eventually some people end up overeating so much that it leads to obesity.

I have no idea what "chemical alterations" you are talking about, or what "nutrients" our food is lacking. No one is "chemically altering" food to make it less nutritious.

Whole foods in the US (chicken, beef, fruits, vegetables, etc) are not lacking in nutrients, nor are the nutrients being removed. Foods may have varying or different micro-nutrient profiles depending on where they are sourced, but that doesn't make them unhealthy or less healthy.

Ultra-processed foods are for the most part NOT dense in nutrients because that's NOT the purpose they serve. However, they are calorically dense, which is why overeating them causes so many problems.

People who are trying to maintain a healthy weight cannot and should not rely on most ultra processed foods as a source of any macro or micro nutrient.

I would also argue that obesity is not an addiction problem because because most people level off at some weight (extreme obesity is only about 10% of the population). So people CAN stop eating.

The problem is, they have been eating more calories than their body needs. The excess calories are stored as fat.

Once people have habits around eating, they can be very hard to break. In order to lose weight, you have to eat fewer calories - but people have their morning grande Starbucks habit, their afternoon Snickers habit, their Chik Fil A with fries habit, etc, etc. None of these are excessive amounts of food, they are just really high in calories, and add up to more calories than most people need in one day.

I'm 5'6" and about 140 lbs, 18-ish% body fat, and roughly half my body weight is lean mass (muscle). I workout every day, lift heavy weights 3-4 times a week, do cardio 3-4 times a week, and try to get my 10k steps in every day.

My daily caloric intake to maintain my body weight at that level of activity is only about 1600 calories. If you weigh/measure your food, 1600 calories is not a whole lot. I could blow that entire amount with one meal at a restaurant (and would probably still be hungry).

I would also argue that preventative health care means teaching people (via things like body scans) how many calories their bodies REALLY need to maintain a healthy weight. Because I think most people have absolutely no clue. Then you teach them what that calorie amount REALLY looks like. One of the best investments I made was a food scale. It's very eye opening to see how much (or little) a serving size of various foods really is.

WestAustinAg said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

My wife can't eat pasta made from wheat grown in the USA, but can from anywhere else. If that isn't a sign that something needs to change, I don't know what is.

---

The ridiculous over-use of Monsanto's broad-spectrum glysophate based herbicides.

Yall realize that they spray this poison on all of many of our vegatables while in the field. They then have adjusted the dna of the plants to not die under the assault of the glysophate herbicides.

These herbicides might not cause cancer (where the studies have been tailor focused). But there is growing concern that they mess with our gut's microbiome.

Study finds glyphosate-related alterations in gut microbiome

---

Incorrect. You can apply glyphosate to some sugar beets and some sweet corn, but other than that if you apply glyphosate on any vegatable crop it will kill it. And I'm not sure you fathom how little chemical is actually applied. A full labeled rate of glyphostate is 0.1% of 1oz per square foot. Thats half of one drop from an eye dropper every square foot.

And i disagree a bit here. You can't solve the obesity problem without tackling the chemical recompositioning that the big food companies and agri business partners are engaged in. You have to solve the nutritional density that is being stripped from food which is fine to reap bigger profits than would be there otherwise

And we don't get there if we don't have a government that sees itself as an impartial judge/regulator of the industries with which it has oversight.


Look at the real causes of obesity. It isn't just lazy rich people (or poor people). Our food stocks have been manipulated in the labs.

aglaes said:

---

TXTransplant said:

---

Phatbob said:

---

It causes her to have mildish stomach cramps. It doesn't happen with things made from wheat grown in Italy or France, but we haven't tried others. I guess the next step in the troubleshooting is to try US non-GMO and see if that has the same results, but understandably she isn't super in on the "lets see what gives me stomach cramps" trials.

---

There is no commercially grown GMO wheat in the US. GMO wheat does exist, but it's not currently grown or sold here. This is a myth that's been wrongly perpetuated.

There are varieties of wheat that have been altered through conventional breeding.

Europe grows different wheat varieties that are significantly lower in gluten than what is grown in the US.

You can buy flours from Europe and make your own pasta. It's actually pretty easy.

---

And fresh homemade pasta is fantastic compared to dry store bought. We do it occasionally. It is easy, but definitely a time commitment vs throwing dry stuff in a pot of boiling water for 10 mins.

How to Make Egg Pasta (an in-depth guide)

---

We went to a cooking school in Sicily and learned how to make an egg-free pasta. Just flour (and the key is getting the correct flour) and water. SUPER easy and fast because we just rolled them out on a little wooden tool (vs having to make noodles or fancy shapes).