[Paleo1]

I was wondering if anybody knew of charts, tables, etc. listing the gluten levels in specific foods? I am gluten intolerance, but not celiac, and would like to know what foods definitely that I should avoid with the least consequences (if you know what I mean).

[lovegrov]

Paleo1, on Nov 15 2009, 04:20 PM, said:

I was wondering if anybody knew of charts, tables, etc. listing the gluten levels in specific foods? I am gluten intolerance, but not celiac, and would like to know what foods definitely that I should avoid with the least consequences (if you know what I mean).

Doesn't happen in the U.S., or anywhere else I know of. Generally speaking, I believe that wheat has more than rye or barely. Spelt is a low-gluten wheat.

Be aware that gluten intolerance can grow into full-blown celiac.

richard

[tarnalberry]

Never seen or heard of a thing. Trying to make one would be a pretty big pain, since the amount of gluten can vary if ingredients vary at all.

[koolkat222]

Since any amount of gluten triggers a reaction, levels don't really matter, do they?

[psawyer]

koolkat222, on Nov 15 2009, 09:59 PM, said:

Since any amount of gluten triggers a reaction, levels don't really matter, do they?

That is a matter of some difference of opinion among experts. Most believe that there is a level, which will vary from person to person, below which the healing process is faster than the damage process. In our western society, where gluten is everywhere, I do not believe that anyone is truly 100% gluten-free. You are getting some from cross-contamination. Someone eats a donut and then, without washing, presses the start button on the office copier. You use the copier, then touch your lips or eat something, also without washing. Just one example of how gluten is everywhere in our lives.

Having said all that, I do agree that if you can measure the gluten content of a product with available tests as being above their detection limit, you are probably best to avoid it. Current tests can detect as little as 5 parts per million (ppm), but they are rather expensive. More common tests detect 20 ppm. Many products labeled as gluten-free are not tested at all.

[Archie_P]

Paleo1, on 15 November 2009 - 04:20 PM, said:

I was wondering if anybody knew of charts, tables, etc. listing the gluten levels in specific foods? I am gluten intolerance, but not celiac, and would like to know what foods definitely that I should avoid with the least consequences (if you know what I mean).

When you are a celiac, you JUST DONT eat any foods that have gluten in them. Celiac and gluten intollerant people know what grains they have to avoid and religiously avoid products with those gluten grains in them. Because like the other member said, its starts with gluten intollerance and often migrates to full blown celiac disease. The reason being that you may not have the genes that gurantee you to become a celiac, but most modern grains have a much higher density of gluten than the original wild grains had, so our bodies just overload and give in. There are many gluten intollerant people out there, and that is maybe why restaurants dont take celiacs seriously - because they think that everyone is just dabbling to be trendy.

On gluten levels, it is true that the current US gluten free level has dropped down to 20 parts per million (ppm). Europe used to be 200 too and they dropped to 20 before America did. Australian laws suggest the limit should be 5 ppm to be called gluten free, but legislators all over think that this would be too costly for manufacturers, so they settle for a higher limit, for shareholders sake. Actual testing can go as low as 3 ppm, but maybe not in easy accessible cheap kits.

And like the other forum member said, you are going to get plenty of gluten in hidden ingredients and cross contimation anyway, so if you want to starve off celiac disease, perhaps its best to go real gluten free now. Take on the hassle now and avoid the pain later.