A little overwhelmed. Doctor stated last week after positive biopsy they want to run blood work (done in reverse, vomitting blood). They stated they were 99% sure I was celiac and that the biopsy was not as strong because I had altered my diet the last 3 months excluded gluten (ate some hidden...was being treated for ulcers). Blood work came back negative today. Doctor now states 99% sure I am not celiac because "if I was, the blood work would have shown it". When I questioned this based on my past conversation and what I have read on negative blood tests, she said "be happy...you don't want a celiac diagnosis, it creates a nightmare with insurance."
Definitely sticking with gluten free but would love feedback. Does the diagnosis matter? Should we push for a second opinion? Or, is it true that that the blood work would confirm the diagnosis? I feel like I was just wrapping my head around the "99% sure celiac" and now to be told the opposite is so confusing. I am truly okay if I am not celiac, evident I am definitely gluten intolerant.
Edited by carpermi, 08 May 2013 - 08:03 PM.