Originally Posted by Tannhauser
My opinion -seeing as you asked
- is that it is absolute nonsense. Admittedly, this is not based on any research into the diet, but there are huge numbers of these 'If you're X, you shouldn't eat Y' type diets and they never have any kind of credible evidence behind them.
But you may want to ignore this as I also think that the whole wheat/milk intolerance thing is, in the vast majority of cases, completely blown out of all proportion.
If you go back to milk and wheat having had a period off them, you may well feel uncomfortable as you would with any sudden influx of a foodstuff you're not used to.
By analogy, I used to 'feel better' having had my multivits, and would have sworn that they were the cause of that. I now believe that they didn't do me one damn bit of good - my body goes through very complex cycles of feeling good or worse, none of which are remotely connected with vitamin intake.
I'd agree that "always eat" and "never eat" is exaggerated.
Lactose intolerance is somewhat trainable and of course, Lactaid, etc. negates the issue while making milk nutrition accessible.
Wheat/Gluten allergies can range from mild to deadly....most people have some negative reaction but for the vast majority it is innocuous.
In life, rapid changes are rarely advisable...unless you find yourself in a burning building!
I felt similarly about vitamins, but recently went to a specialist, had my blood tested and got a focused vitamin prescription...so far, the most profound affect was from vitamin D3. I can tell almost daily if my skin and healing factor are operating properly...the change in those areas has been drastic and positive.
Many of the other effects (of the correct
vitamins) are not perceptible. They are long-term benefits recognizable only at the cellular level and over many years. That said, a typical, healthy person eating a range of foods should need very minimal supplementation at most and does not need a huge amount of vitamins.