Posted 25 June 2009 - 04:24 AM
I know this sounds odd, but after reading, a few different books on Celiac since being diagnosed, I have noticed that there really isn't much difference other than how in depth the author's get. There was nothing new in Elisabeth's book that isn't in any of the other books I have already read, other than her personal experiences. Her information was the vaguest of any of the books I have read so far. Scott brought up many good points in his blog post. Other than personal experiences, it really is hard to be original when writing about a common medical condition that many others have already written about. The format that they all tend to all follow is used as it is the most logical and easy to read. As I haven't read the author who is making the claim's book, I really do not know what her claims are substantiated from. I guess as this goes along maybe we will find out, or it will be dropped. I would think that an author writing about Celiac is wanting to help others. Think about it. If the original authors who wrote the first books and copywritten info had any other motives in mind, I cannot see how even this site would be able to be in existence.
I apologize for being wordy, but cannot seem to simplify my thoughts this morning.