codetalker

I’m wondering if it might be worthwhile considering this issue from a different perspective.

 

The reality nowadays is that almost everything we consume contains contaminants.  For instance, my tap water is considered safe to drink.  However, the quarterly water purity assessment on the water company’s website indicates that the water has detectable levels of scores of contaminants, albeit at or below a level considered to be safe.  Many types of fish are considered to be safe, although this is true only if you limit how many servings you eat per week.  At the same time, pregnant women are advised not to eat certain otherwise safe fish at all. 

 

In the news a while back, there was the story about diacetyl which is used as a microwave popcorn flavoring.  While supposedly safe for those who eat a normal amount of popcorn, a man who ate much more over an extended period of time apparently developed serious lung problems.  After that became headlines, it was also reported that workers in the popcorn manufacturing plant who were exposed daily to diacetyl apparently also had problems.

 

The point is that someone who is limited to a few foods is going to eat those foods more frequently and therefore will be exposed to a higher than normal amount of whatever contaminant is in that food.

 

Consider someone who can only eat rice.  That in and of itself does not raise any alarms.  However, it has been reported that rice grown in the U.S. has higher than normal levels of arsenic.  Although there are many varieties of rice which come from all over the world, chances are that someone unable to eat a wide variety of foods and eating mainly rice would buy and consume a single variety of rice.  If that rice contained contaminants, that person would be consuming those contaminants on a daily basis and may exceed the safe exposure limit.

 

As you mention in your post, it is hard, if not impossible, to mix up your selection of foods.  My recommendation would be to consume the least contaminated foods possible.  For instance, regardless of where you come down on the organic and the GMO debates, buy and consume only organic foods and stay away as much as possible from GMO’s, at least for the time being.  In the case of organic foods, this will limit your exposure to contaminants such as pesticides.

 

Also, try to source different varieties of the few things you can eat.  If all you can eat is rice, then buy different varieties.  Try to avoid eating a single variety of one type of food day after day.

 

I would be surprised, albeit pleasantly, if there was a completely gluten-free resort. With celiacs making up less than 1% of the population, a completely gluten-free resort would not seem like a viable business model. It would most likely suffer the fate of all the celiac singles sites. It would never attract the critical mass of users to be effective / cost-effective. There just aren't enough of us.

There could also be an issue when a couple or family were traveling together and not all were celiacs. If the resort accomodated gluten-eaters, then by definition they would not be completely gluten-free. There would then be a possible problem with cross-contamination.

Nice thought though.

I am aligned with those that do not feel compelled to be 100% vegetarian or vegan.

For a while now at home, I’ve been vegetarian and, if it wasn’t for my love affair w/ cheese, vegan.

However, I just got back from a week in Belize and was content to simply be gluten-free. I ate fish, meat, eggs, etc. Now that I am back home, I am back to a vegetarian diet with an occasional bit of cheese.

I leave the vegetarian and vegan labels to the purists.

So, when they're "off the record" and speaking to the public on the phone - the product is gluten free. But, when they're committed to their words in writing, well you see how they fudge for self protection.

It might be worth considering that the need to “fudge” and protect themselves with legalese is the result of selling to a litigious society, one in which the opportunity to sue is the next best thing to winning the lottery. Suits are expensive (even if lost) and threaten the viability of the company.

We all are by definition part of the litigious society and regardless of our individual motives we are, if only by association, part of the problem. IMHO, companies, restaurants, etc. are justified in being wary when any of us approach them. They know that if they do not dot every i and cross every t, they may get sued. Worse yet, if they do everything right, they still might get sued and may even have to pay a settlement. Further, due to the growing prevalence of celiac, there is a growing likelihood of wolves among us who would try to leverage a glutening into a suit that might pay off. It is simply the sad state of our society.

I would recommend that we try to take a kinder and gentler approach when dealing with companies, etc. The first step would be to put ourselves in their shoes and see things from their perspective. That might moderate our response to them. Again, IMHO.