Search the Community

Celiac.com 11/18/2023 - Celiac disease is a complex autoimmune condition triggered by the consumption of gluten, a protein found in wheat, barley, and rye. As awareness of this condition grows, so does the need for accurate information. In a recent poll on Celiac.com, participants were asked various questions about celiac disease. This article aims to dissect and discuss the results of this poll, shedding light on the correct answers, common misconceptions, and the importance of accurate information. Worldwide Prevalence of Celiac Disease Poll Question: Worldwide, how many people have celiac disease? Around 0.01% - 0% Around 0.1% - 4% Around 1% - 28% Around 5% - 17% Around 10% - 51% Correct Answer: Around 1% Discussion: The correct answer is approximately 1% of the global population. Celiac disease is more common than many people realize, affecting about 1 in 100 individuals worldwide. Surprisingly, 51% of poll participants believed the prevalence to be around 10%, indicating a significant overestimation. This misconception highlights the importance of spreading accurate information to create a more informed and supportive environment for those with celiac disease. Diagnosis of Celiac Disease Poll Question: How is celiac disease typically diagnosed? Tarot cards - 0% Just by feeling better not eating gluten - 1% Blood antibody tests - 9% Endoscopy where biopsies are taken - 4% Blood antibody tests followed by an endoscopy where biopsies are taken - 86% Correct Answer: Blood antibody tests followed by an endoscopy where biopsies are taken. Discussion: Diagnosing celiac disease involves a combination of blood tests and an endoscopy with biopsies to confirm the presence of villous atrophy. Despite this clear diagnostic process, 86% of participants correctly identified the need for both blood tests and biopsies. In certain cases where tTg-IgA levels are 10x normal it may be possible to make such a diagnosis, possibly leading to 9% who believed that blood tests alone were sufficient, in general a more comprehensive diagnostic approach is typically necessary for an accurate diagnosis. Safety of Eating at Gluten-Free Restaurants Poll Question: Eating in a restaurant that has a gluten-free menu is always safe for someone with celiac disease. TRUE - 4% FALSE - 96% Correct Answer: FALSE Discussion: The vast majority of participants, 96%, correctly identified that eating in a restaurant with a gluten-free menu is not always safe for individuals with celiac disease. Cross-contamination is a significant concern, even in establishments offering gluten-free options. The 4% who chose "TRUE" may underestimate the strict measures needed to prevent cross-contact, emphasizing the need for continuous education on the challenges faced by those with celiac disease. Conclusion This poll provides valuable insights into the prevailing perceptions and misconceptions surrounding celiac disease. As awareness grows, it is crucial to ensure that information is accurate and accessible. Dispelling myths and providing correct information empowers individuals with celiac disease and fosters a more supportive and understanding community. Education is the key to creating a world where those with celiac disease can navigate their dietary needs with confidence and security.

Celiac.com 09/18/2019 - At Celiac.com, we get all kinds of questions about celiac disease. Here are some of the most common questions we see. Is celiac disease a food allergy to wheat, rye or barley? While it's true that people with celiac disease must avoid wheat rye or barley, celiac disease is not a food allergy, it is an auto-immune disease. Find out more about the differences between food allergies and food intolerance. What foods are gluten-free? You can find Celiac.com's extensive list of safe gluten-free foods and ingredients here. What foods contain gluten? You can find Celiac.com's extensive list of unsafe gluten-free foods and ingredients here. What are the main symptoms of celiac disease? Classic symptoms of celiac disease include gastrointestinal symptoms, like upset stomach, abdominal pain, gas, bloating, indigestion, and diarrhea. Many celiacs suffer from many these and other symptoms on a regular basis. However, many others show few or no symptoms. No single set of signs or symptoms is typical for everyone with celiac disease. Signs and symptoms almost always vary from person to person. How common is celiac disease? Celiac disease is one of the most common chronic health disorders in western countries. It is also one of the most under-diagnosed. Recent studies and advances in diagnosis show that at least 3 million Americans, or around 1% of people have it, but less than 1 in 5,000 cases is ever diagnosed. Here are some celiac numbers compared to other diseases. Can people with celiac disease drink alcohol? People with celiac disease can drink alcohol. They still need to avoid consuming wheat, rye and barley directly. Even though the scientific consensus is that distilled beverages contain no gluten, many celiacs choose to consume only alcohol which is labeled 'gluten-free.' Others freely consume alcohol distilled from cereal grains, including whiskey and gin, with no noticeable problems. To find out more, check out our list of gluten-free alcoholic beverages. Do people with celiac disease have a higher risk of other diseases? People with celiac disease do have a higher risk of certain associated diseases, including Addison's disease, peripheral neuropathy, Crohn's Disease, congenital heart disease, epilepsy, and many more. Is celiac disease genetic or hereditary? Celiac disease is heavily influenced by genetics. Having certain genes can increase a person's risk of developing celiac disease. Also, people with first-degree relatives who have celiac disease face a significantly higher risk for developing celiac disease. Can genetic testing help to spot celiac disease? Genetic tests for celiac disease and gluten sensitivity are readily available. Testing can be performed on either blood and mouth swab samples. Tests can be done at home and mailed to the lab for analysis. Does eating gluten in childhood influence celiac disease risk? Researchers have been busily hunting for celiac risk factors in children. A recent study showed that every daily gram increase in gluten intake in 1-year olds increases the risk of developing celiac disease autoimmunity by 5%. Can celiac disease cause mental problems? There is no evidence that celiac disease causes mental problems directly. However, celiac disease is associated with several mental conditions, including schizophrenia. Also, at least one recent study shows evidence of a link between gluten sensitivity and acute mania. Can celiac disease cause skin problems? Celiac disease is associated with at least seven skin conditions.

Celiac.com 12/05/2016 - Symptomatic suspected gluten exposure is common among patients with celiac disease on a gluten-free diet. A gluten-free diet is the only recommended treatment for celiac disease. Although anecdotal evidence suggests that suspected gluten exposure is common among celiac patients following a gluten-free diet, there is not a great deal of hard data to support that view. A team of researchers recently set out to assess the prevalence and characteristics of gluten reactions in people with celiac disease on a gluten-free diet. The research team included JA Silvester, LA Graff, L Rigaux, JR Walker, and DR Duerksen. They are variously affiliated with the St Boniface Hospital in Winnipeg, Canada, the College of Medicine at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada, and with the Celiac Research Program at Harvard Medical School in Boston, MA, USA. Their team prospectively enrolled adults with biopsy proven, newly diagnosed celiac disease. They then conducted a survey related to diet adherence and reactions to gluten, both at study entry and at 6 months. To measure celiac disease symptoms and gluten-free diet adherence, they used T Celiac Symptom Index, Celiac Diet Assessment Tool (CDAT) and Gluten-Free Eating Assessment Tool (gluten-free-EAT). Of the 105 patients enrolled, 91% reported gluten exposure less than once per month, while the average CDAT score was 9 (IQR 8-11), which suggests good dietary adherence. Two out of three patients reported suspected symptomatic reaction to gluten. Most, 63 percent, did not suspect gluten consumption until a reaction occurred. Meanwhile, just under one-third (29 percent) reported that problems happened when ordering in a restaurant. Thirty percent of patients say that gluten was consumed from incidental contact, while 10 percent said it was due to eating a major gluten ingredient. Average time to symptom onset was 1 hour, though onset ranged from 10 minutes to 2 days. Symptoms lasted about 24 hours on average, and ranged from 1 hour to 8 days. Symptoms typically included abdominal pain (80%), diarrhea (52%), fatigue (33%), headache (30%) and irritability (29%). Even with good dietary compliance, most celiac patients following a gluten-free diet suffer from regular adverse reactions to gluten. Eating away from home continues to pose the major risks for accidental gluten exposure. The team recommends that physicians treating celiac disease patients should include regular questions regarding gluten reactions as part of their assessment of gluten-free diet adherence. Source: Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2016 Sep;44(6):612-9. doi: 10.1111/apt.13725. Epub 2016 Jul 22.

Celiac.com 02/25/2011 - In many parts of the world, recommendations by World Health Organization (WHO) regarding child nutrition are regarded as the scientific standard. So, any time a major health organization comes out with recommendations that differ from those made by WHO, there is always much discussion about the science behind both sets of recommendations, and, occasionally, some intellectual and scientific jousting from both sides. That was the case recently, when a magazine called BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal) published new and controversial recommendations regarding breastfeeding. According to an article by Susan Perry on MinnPost.com, those recommendations, the resulting criticism from WHO, and BMJ reviewers' response make some excellent points about issues of conflict of interest in research. The recommendations by BMJ suggest that breast milk should be supplemented with solid foods starting around the age of four months, two months earlier than currently recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the reviewers, waiting to introduce solid foods increases a baby’s risk of developing anemia, food allergies and celiac disease. Those recommendations brought a strong response from WHO, which noted that its own decade-long no-solid-foods-until-six-months recommendation is “based on evidence that the early introduction of solid food to babies increases the risk of infection and disease.” The response from WHO then proceeds to refute each argument made by the BMJ reviewers. A response by Susan Perry to the spat appears on MinnPost.com, and makes some excellent points about issues of conflict of interest in research. Now, this debate between WHO and BMJ is a bigger deal in certain places than in others. The United States never officially adopted the WHO recommendation, as did the U.K. in 2003. Ironically, it seems that more American than British moms are following WHO standards. BMJ reviewers say that less than 1 percent of British mothers exclusively breastfeed their babies for six months. In the United States, that figure is 13 percent, as reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, that's a story for another day. But, a strong rebuttal from WHO is not the only problem facing the authors of the new BMJ review. A more pressing problem for BMJ study is that three of the four authors admit that they took funding within the past three years from companies that manufacture infant formula and baby food. Now, these researchers claim that their findings and recommendations are in no way influenced by their financial relationships with these companies: "My colleagues and I are independent pediatricians and scientists, funded by universities or hospitals, and we received no funding for doing this review other than our normal salaries,” review author, Mary Fewtrell, a child nutritionist at University College London told NatureNews reporter Natasha Gilbert. She adds that “all of us have had links with industry at some point. We are making no comment in our paper about what type of solid foods should be introduced — this could be home-prepared or commercial depending on the mum's choice — the main issue is that the food should be nutritionally adequate and safe." But financial connection between study authors and industry cannot fail to raise legitimate questions about the independence of study findings. Moreover, such a relationship creates a cloud of potential doubt over the nature of the findings. Indeed, the review itself indicates a strong desire within the baby food industry to get British health officials to change their current advice to mothers to breastfeed exclusively until six months if possible. Survey data shows that British mothers are slowly pushing back the age at which they introduce solid foods to their babies. Successive surveys since the 1970s show that nearly all UK infants receive solids by four months. The number in the 2000 survey, for example, was 85%. However, the 2005 figure drops to 51%, with mean age of introduction of solids at 19 weeks, a rise from 15 weeks in 2000. In view of the higher reported rates of exclusive breast feeding to six months elsewhere in the West (more than 30% in Hungary and Portugal, for example), it seems likely that the impact of the UK recommendation will be greater in 2010 than in 2005. It is timely to consider whether such trends could influence health outcomes. Susan Perry notes in her response that the study seems "extremely timely, therefore, for baby food companies to consider whether such trends are going to damage their bottom line — and to financially support, even if not always directly, the research efforts of "friendly" academics." That’s one example of why researchers who accept money from industry should be prepared to have their studies, methodologies, data and recommendations questioned — along with their motives. Source: MinnPost.com