Jump to content
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Confused Please Help


suecosgrove

Recommended Posts

suecosgrove Newbie

I have had constant nausea since christman. My gastroenterologist did an endoscope and colonoscomy. He said the biopsy in my dude emu showed damage and told me I had celiac disease. He also did a genetic test on me that day. Now three weeks later and much money invested in gluten-free items he calls and says My test is negative. What does this even mean??


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



cavernio Enthusiast

So he called and said your genetic test was negative? Or was he saying he was actually wrong about your duodenum being damaged?

If he had your duodenum test wrong, or accidentally messed up your results with someone else's or something, then you don't have celiac disease.

If he called and said your genetic test was negative, I would still think you have celiac disease.

Most, not all, people with celiac disease apparently have a specific genetic problem that makes them prone to getting it. However, there exist people who do not have that gene/set of genes who still do develop celiac disease. IIRC, the wikipedia article actually says only 90% of people have the standard 'celiac' gene. They also list a couple of other genes that are known to cause celiac disease. I wouldn't be surprised if the lab/doctors didn't bother testing for those less common genes. (I'm actually rather surprised they did genetic tests for you at all, my doctors won't do that for me, even though I've asked about getting it.)

However, there's still the possibility you don't have celiac disease. There's something called tropical sprue which manifests like celiac disease in that it causes your villi in your intestines to disappear/become damaged, but which I don't believe is caused by gluten. The prognosis for that is not good however, they know even less about that than celiac disease.

Do you feel better not eating gluten? If the answer is at all yes, then you should continue being gluten free. Well, you should continue being gluten free regardless.

There's also a possibility that you have a candida problem. Note that intestinal candida is not a diagnosis most doctors think exist. Or they only think it exists in very sick people like AIDS patients.

Talk to the doctor again if you can.

dilettantesteph Collaborator

There are some genes recognized to cause celiac disease in Europe which are not tested for here. A negative genetic test doesn't mean that you don't have the disease. See if your symptoms clear up on the gluten free diet. If you eat more whole foods (produce and meat) it is less expensive and more healthy.

Bubba's Mom Enthusiast

In a lot of the literature they say DQ2 and DQ8 are the Celiac genes. Many dr.s thing they can rule out Celiac if you don't have those. They have found there are other genes that also can mean Celiac.

Since you have the damage in your duodenum, it would be a good idea for you to stay gluten-free.

Soo..did the Dr. say what caused your damage if it's not celiac?

Kansas Rookie

I tested negative to the gene testing, but definitely am gluten intolerant. I agree with the others, if you feel better without gluten, stay on the diet.

mushroom Proficient

If you are biopsy positive, you are celiac. Period. Doesn't matter a hoot about the genes. :)

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Celiac.com:
    Join eNewsletter
    Donate

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):
    Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):





    Celiac.com Sponsors (A17-M):




  • Recent Activity

    1. - Scott Adams replied to HAUS's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      7

      Sainsbury's Free From White Sliced Bread - Now Egg Free - Completely Ruined It

    2. - Scott Adams replied to deanna1ynne's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      13

      Inconclusive results

    3. - deanna1ynne replied to deanna1ynne's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      13

      Inconclusive results

    4. - cristiana replied to HAUS's topic in Gluten-Free Foods, Products, Shopping & Medications
      7

      Sainsbury's Free From White Sliced Bread - Now Egg Free - Completely Ruined It


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      132,437
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    rednecksurfer
    Newest Member
    rednecksurfer
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.5k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • Scott Adams
      In the U.S., most regular wheat breads are required to be enriched with certain B-vitamins and iron, but gluten-free breads are not required to be. Since many gluten-free products are not enriched, we usually encourage people with celiac disease to consider a multivitamin.  In the early 1900s, refined white flour replaced whole grains, and people began developing serious vitamin-deficiency diseases: Beriberi → caused by a lack of thiamin (vitamin B1) Pellagra → caused by a lack of niacin (vitamin B3) Anemia → linked to low iron and lack of folate By the 1930s–40s, these problems were common in the U.S., especially in poorer regions. Public-health officials responded by requiring wheat flour and the breads made from it to be “enriched” with thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, and iron. Folic acid was added later (1998) to prevent neural-tube birth defects. Why gluten-free bread isn’t required to be enriched? The U.S. enrichment standards were written specifically for wheat flour. Gluten-free breads use rice, tapioca, corn, sorghum, etc.—so they fall outside that rule—but they probably should be for the same reason wheat products are.
    • Scott Adams
      Keep in mind that there are drawbacks to a formal diagnosis, for example more expensive life and private health insurance, as well as possibly needing to disclose it on job applications. Normally I am in favor of the formal diagnosis process, but if you've already figured out that you can't tolerate gluten and will likely stay gluten-free anyway, I wanted to at least mention the possible negative sides of having a formal diagnosis. While I understand wanting a formal diagnosis, it sounds like she will likely remain gluten-free either way, even if she should test negative for celiac disease (Approximately 10x more people have non-celiac gluten sensitivity than have celiac disease, but there isn’t yet a test for NCGS. If her symptoms go away on a gluten-free diet, it would likely signal NCGS).        
    • JoJo0611
    • deanna1ynne
      Thank you all so much for your advice and thoughts. We ended up having another scope and more bloodwork last week. All serological markers continue to increase, and the doc who did the scope said there villous atrophy visible on the scope — but we just got the biopsy pathology report back, and all it says is, “Duodenal mucosa with patchy increased intraepithelial lymphocytes, preserved villous architecture, and patchy foveolar metaplasia,” which we are told is still inconclusive…  We will have her go gluten free again anyway, but how soon would you all test again, if at all? How valuable is an official dx in a situation like this?
    • cristiana
      Thanks for this Russ, and good to see that it is fortified. I spend too much time looking for M&S gluten-free Iced Spiced Buns to have ever noticed this! That's interesting, Scott.  Have manufacturers ever said why that should be the case?  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

NOTICE: This site places This site places cookies on your device (Cookie settings). on your device. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.