8 replies to this topic

[Britgirl]

This is fascinating and a must watch for all of us.

http://www.glutenfre...-the-confusion/

[ElseB]

It is interesting that he suggests that essentially all grains are bad.
Recent research from Italy indicates that several gluten-free grains are in fact safe. Researchers in Italy noted that several cereals and pseudocereals (such as tef, millet, amaranth and quinoa), have long been thought to be safe for celiacs simply because they are not classified botanically in the same family as wheat,barley or rye. In other words, their safety was assumed, based on their lack of relationship to wheat, not because they had actually been tested to ensure that they were safe. But their research found that the grains were in fact safe, in that they caused no immune reactivity.
Here's a link to the article:
http://onlinelibrary...100132/abstract

Another thing to always keep in mind is that there is a high level of contamination of inherently gluten free grains. So people can react to rice, but its actually because of contamination with wheat. Here's a study about these high levels of contamination:
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/20497786

[mamaw]

It almost makes us feel like we shouldn't eat any thing but meats, fruit & veggies for sure! Yes, that is probably the way we should go....

[psawyer]

I watched the whole thing. What a waste of 40 minutes of my life. Plenty of assertions, no credible evidence for it. He can't tell the difference between an allergy, an intolerance, and an autoimmune self-destruct reaction.

He uses "gluten" in the botanical sense, not in the sense we do when discussing celiac disease.

He is "Dr. Osbourne." Well, yes, technically he is. He is legally allowed to use the title. He probably expects us to believe that he is a Medical Doctor. However, he is a chiropractor.

I might take his advice for a pain in my neck, but not in my gut.

[BabsV]

I watched the whole thing. What a waste of 40 minutes of my life. Plenty of assertions, no credible evidence for it. He can't tell the difference between an allergy, an intolerance, and an autoimmune self-destruct reaction.

He uses "gluten" in the botanical sense, not in the sense we do when discussing celiac disease.

He is "Dr. Osbourne." Well, yes, technically he is. He is legally allowed to use the title. He probably expects us to believe that he is a Medical Doctor. However, he is a chiropractor.

I might take his advice for a pain in my neck, but not in my gut.

Not to mention he's got a website with a special area for 'members' -- you too can be a member if you want to cough up US$69 to join and then another US$12 PER month to stay. At least I think those were the prices when I came across him...He's on facebook and I liked his page early on when I was just learning about being gluten free (was in fact finding mode and pulling info from everywhere!) He seems to post teasers which lead right back to paying money to find out more info for anything substantive. Something about it all makes me leery.

[dilettantesteph]

What bothers me about this video is how science is misrepresented. It seems to be scientific, but it gives incorrect information. Gluten is a term for storage proteins in cereal grains. Gluten sensitivity refers to a sensitivity to the gluten in wheat, barley and rye. When it comes to videos like this it is really too bad that when celiac disease is described, they used the term gluten. If they had used a more specific term this confusion wouldn't happen. Wheat, barley and rye are closely related cereal grains. The other grains are not closely related. The other grains contain gluten with the different types referred to, but they have the same name by convention, not because they are similar to the gluten in wheat, barley or rye. They do not cause problems for celias or gluten sensitives unless they have an additional sensitivity, or unless they are contaminated.

I didn't get past that part of the video, there are likely other inaccuracies.

[sandsurfgirl]

I came across this guy on Facebook yesterday and spent quite a bit of time reading his website. All he does it put out teasers and try to get you to spend a ton of money for the "real" information. The price is outrageous, but it's typical of self published types. They can't get their stuff published by a real publisher because they either can't write or they don't have the credibility or backing on their info so they publish it themselves and use dirty marketing tactics to get people to overpay to offset their huge self publishing costs.


I do think a clean diet is the best way to go and the more fruits and veggies you eat the better. I read that Jack LaLanne ate 5 to 6 pieces of fruit per day, at least 10 different types of vegetables in a salad and he juiced. All those veggies are going to be good for your body no matter what.

I do agree with him that it's not healthy to eat a lot of gluten free substitute foods like cookies and cakes, etc. And it's true that sugar isn't good for you. But people who are going nuts eating that stuff or making it a staple part of their diet would be doing it if they weren't celiac and would have health problems regardless. "Junk food is bad for you" is a given fact whether it's gluten junk food or gluten free junk food.

I don't want to take in his information and be scared to eat a piece of gluten free bread. We have it hard enough as it is.

[psawyer]

I don't want to take in his information and be scared to eat a piece of gluten free bread. We have it hard enough as it is.

Thanks for that. I think he is full of the excrement of a male bovine.

[tennisman]

That website is a joke lol . In the summer I posted a few things on an article about gluten free and weight loss . It was quite hilarious what he posted he never had any good information to back arguments up . I don't listen to any gluten free advice / information unless it's from my doctor , or another celiac .