Abram Hoffer MD PhD

Has anyone here heard of this doctor? He is a proponent of orthomolecular treatment for schizophrenia. I have two of his short books. Well, they have to be short because it seems there is not sufficient research on the matter.

I have schizophrenia, and it has ebbed and flowed over the years. Hoffer's theory as to why people contract this disorder is because of poor nutrition and nutritive deficiencies. In his book, Light on Schizophrenia: Revealing Causes and Solutions From an Orthomolecular Perspective, he postulates that dairy and wheat play a role in the pathophysiology and etiology of schizophrenia.

Specifically, the gluten in the wheat and the casein in the dairy. These two protein compounds get broken down, by digestive enzymes in the enteric tract, into gliadorphin and casomorphin. These two molecules then have either two options: get further broken down by DPP4 and yield innocuous amino acids, or enter the brain and alter behavior.

If dipeptidyl aminopeptidase type 4 is present, then theoretically the patient should fare to a greater degree. But if it's not present or deficient due to a xenobiotic present, such as the anti-diabetic medications Tradjenta or Januvia, then the aforementioned proteins can cause havoc in the nervous system and thus contribute to the pathoneurophysiology of schizophrenia/psychosis.

Of course, the above info is just a grain of sand on the beach compared to the potentially full explanation as to why schizophrenia develops. Abram Hoffer's theory is just that. And there are rightfully indicated correlations involved in this complex matter.

Thank you for sharing this, I will look into it further...

My immediate reaction is to look at different cuisines to prove or refute this hypothesis. China has a huge population who grew up eating food virtually devoid of dairy. And then in Indian cuisine there is plenty of cheese (paneer), cultured milk (raita) and milk in chai and desserts. Rice is gluten-free and is the main starch staple in China. In India they eat a lot of naan which has gluten. So if that theory were true, you would expect far fewer cases of schizophrenia in China than in India.

And yet

"For China, the estimated prevalence of schizophrenia in 1990 was 3.91 per 1000 population, so there were an estimated 4.43 million prevalent cases. This prevalence is less than half that estimated for developed countries (8.98/1000), but is similar to that estimated for India (3.36/1000)." Characteristics, experience, and treatment of schizophrenia in China - PMC).

Another reaction: the author attributes a contribution to developing schizophrenia to modern anti-diabetic medications Tradjenta or Januvia. But were these medications even around when the term schizophrenia was first coined?

"The introduction of the term and concept schizophrenia earned its inventor, Swiss psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler, worldwide fame."
"Eugen Bleuler (1857-1939)"
Eugen Bleuler's schizophrenia—a modern perspective
- PMC.

Tradjenta was first FDA approved in 2011
Tradjenta (linagliptin) FDA Approval History - Drugs.com

So that casts doubt on the hypothesis. The disorder is not new and yet modern medications are suspected to cause it?

I remember watching a lecture by Gary Null PhD, who is an expert on longevity. This latter credential is not necessarily an implication to what I am about to say.

Null said that he is allergic to wheat and would get brain fog whenever he ate it in the states. He then said that when he traveled to Italy and ate the wheat there, he did not get any kind of reaction whatsoever. He then inferred that there must be something different about the wheat there than it is in the United States; perhaps the way it is grown or what it is exposed to. So, yes, consuming wheat may or may not be linked to the development of Schizophrenia. I suppose a similar postulate could be made about dairy.

So the data you provided is supportive of this.

Also, as far as pharmaceuticals like Tradjenta and Januvia: just because they are linked to schizophrenia does not mean they are necessarily the definitive causality in schizophrenia etiology.

I appreciate your scientific inquiry and I am not offended for you to refute Hoffer's stochastic conclusions. But I do believe that nutrition can help immensely in the possible convalescence of mental health maladies. However, like I indicated above, just because Hoffer claimed wheat and dairy as contributing to schizophrenia; does not necessarily mean one will contract it from those dietary entities.

I just made whole wheat spaghetti for dinner and the pasta is imported from Italy. We eat pasta imported from Italy all the time. So when you eat in the States, you may eat homegrown wheat, or you may eat imported wheat. It is not always readily apparent what wheat you are eating.

Does the United States import wheat as a raw product and not in the form of pasta?

Here is some info from Wheat in United States | The Observatory of Economic Complexity but I am not clear if this is just wheat as a commodity or including finished products:

United States imports Wheat primarily from:
Canada ($396M),
Poland ($2.14M),
Italy ($1.18M),
Mexico ($329k), and
United Kingdom ($211k).

The fastest growing import markets in Wheat for United States between 2020 and 2021 were Poland ($2.14M), Italy ($733k), and Mexico ($329k).

At any rate, it is clear that there is some Italian wheat in the US, albeit not as nearly as much as Canadian wheat.

Therefore, this claim that somebody got brain fog whenever he ate in the States would imply that occasionally that included eating wheat imported from Italy. Not every time, no, but occasionally. So that someone occasionally reacted with an allergy to Italian wheat consumed in the United States but never to native Italian wheat consumed in Italy? That claim sounds dubious. We do not have such a Chinese wall-like divide between the US and Italian markets.

And then the next claim is that because wheat in the US and Italy differ in whether they cause an allergy (in that particular individual), it may be concluded that wheat may or may not be linked to the development of Schizophrenia. I am not sure I follow the line of reasoning here.

And how is the data I provided supportive of this? My data showed the between India and China, the prevalence of schizophrenia is the same despite widely differing main staples of local cuisine. How does that data support the claim that consuming wheat may or may not be linked to the development of Schizophrenia? I am not clear how any data can be supportive of that claim because the claim is phrased in terms of "may or may not be linked". That claim is always true. So in a sense, yes, my data supports this claim but any data supports this claim because the claim is necessarily true. I am sorry but by now I am totally confused.

I was saying that Hoffer's theory about wheat being linked to schizophrenia may or may not be true. I was pointing out the possibility that, since wheat may or may not cause an allergic reaction depending on how it is grown or what it is exposed to, wheat may or may not be linked to schizophrenia. Because if the wheat is contaminated with pollutants, then it is likely Hoffer's hypothesis is true. Because it is possible that wheat allergy may really be a sensitivity to what the wheat is exposed to (pollutants, contaminants, etc.)

The data you provided pointed to the possibility that wheat and dairy consumption does not contribute to schizophrenia, because of the way it is grown or the fact that it is not exposed to pollutants. The data showed that India had a lower incidence of schizophrenia, even though wheat and dairy are consumed far more in that country.

Sounds like there is a lot of research to be done on food and its connection to schizophrenia before debate is even useful.
If there is a connection though, it would be great, it would present a natural solution. Interesting stuff!

Look, schizophrenia is an old disease. You really did not want to have schizophrenia during Middle Ages. At best, you would have been ordered to undergo exorcism. At worst, you would have been burned at the stake for possessing evil spirits. Compared to the current stigma still surrounding schizophrenia, we live in far better times. Conditions that now would be described as symptoms of schizophrenia were described without using the term schizophrenia. Just because Kraepelin first described it in the late 19th century and the term schizophrenia was coined in the early 20th century does not mean that sxhizophrenia originated at that time. But even we assume, counterfactually, that it did originate at that time, that would have been before the advent of modern pollutants and contaminants.

In antiquity and Middle Ages, quite clearly, modern pollutants and contaminants to which wheat is exposed simply did not exist. Even the wheat grown during those times differed from currently cultivated wheat. Yet, schizophrenia existed. Methods of growing wheat changed, wheat itself changed, but schizophrenia continued to exist. Does this fact now sway you away from believing that schizophrenia is linked to the modern methods of growing wheat?

Further, had this hypothesis been true, wheat-eliminating diets would have been overwhelmingly efficacious for patients with schizophrenia. After all, you remove the causative pathogen and the symptoms should go away, right? And yet, in studies, some small studies are for the benefit of GFD (gluten-free diet) and others show no beneficial effect. Clearly, this is an interesting avenue for research and more research is needed, but there is no overwhelmingly positive data in support of the hypothesis you favor. Since you like intellectual pursuits, here is a long and interesting article for you:

Use of a Gluten-Free Diet in Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review - PMC

Hoffer's theory was just that. Wheat and dairy are possible contributors. So in older times, even though wheat and dairy were not exposed to pollutants and contaminants, it could have been something else.

In common parlance, yes.

Here is a good description of the difference in meaning of the word "theory" between common parlance and science from the American Museum of Natural History:

"In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence. But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts."

Also, I did a search for [Abram Hoffer schizophrenia] in PubMed and there were only 2 hits and both questionable. One was from a publication I have never seen mentioned before. See below:

Schizophrenia and cancer: the adrenochrome balanced morphism.
Foster HD, Hoffer A.
Med Hypotheses. 2004;62(3):415-9. doi: 10.1016/S0306-9877(03)00319-0.
PMID: 14975514
These relationships seem compatible with one or more genetic risk factors for schizophrenia that offer(s) a selective advantage against cancer. There is experimental evidence that appears to support this possibility. ...The evidence suggests that there are balanced morphis …

So I have looked up whether Med Hypotheses is a peer-reviewed publication. It is not.

Lack of publications in rigorous peer-reviewed journals would not have boded well for this theory (using this term in its everyday meaning) had Hoffer published at all this hypothesis and his proposed supporting evidence. But he did not publish anything, even in non-peer-reviewed journals.

He did live to the age of 91, which suggests that he might have known a thing or two about longevity. Of course he also could have been dealt a lucky hand of genes. But at least his long lifespan is not inconsistent with attributing knowledge about how to live long to him.

Thread closed for admin review.

We're going to leave this thread closed, because Hoffer's theories have long since been debunked. Please see his Wikipedia entry for more info:

Abram Hoffer - Wikipedia

If there were easy, simple answers to mental illness (like nutrition or diet being major contributing factors), modern science would've found them by now in scientific, peer-reviewed studies. Since such things have not been found by researchers, I would caution against a person pursuing such treatments as being not evidence-based.

Certainly pursuing good nutrition and exercise are positive things to engage in with any mental illness. But they alone do not cause (or are major contributing causative factors to) mental illness. In the vast majority of people, such activities alone will not be sufficient treatments to help someone with mental illness.