Jump to content
  • Sign Up
  • About Me

    Born and raised in Northern California, I am an out going, adventurous individual. I've studied English at Santa Rosa Junior College, and also a bit of business. Throughout my school years English has always been my favorite subject.

  • Related Articles

    Scott Adams
    Preface: The following information was supplied originally in 1991 in the form of a letter to Phyllis Brogden, Chairperson of the Greater Philadelphia Celiac Sprue Support Group, by Donald D. Kasarda, who was a Research Chemist with the US Department of Agriculture at that time. Copies were sent to four other major celiac patient groups in the US. Dr. Kasarda retired from the USDA in 1999, but updated the information in February of 2000. Dr. Kasarda wishes to add the following disclaimer to the information: These are my opinions based on quite a few years of research in the area of proteins as they relate to celiac disease. They do not necessarily represent those of the Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture. If you have any questions or comments regarding the piece, you can address them to Don at: kasarda@pw.usda.gov
    The only plants demonstrated to have proteins that damage the small intestines of people with celiac disease are those from wheat, rye, and barley (and the man-made wheat-rye cross called triticale). Although oats had generally been considered harmful until 1996, several high quality studies published since then indicate that oats are not harmful either in celiac disease or dermatitis herpetiformis. Some physicians choose not to accept these findings or else point out that there is some potential problem of contamination of oats by wheat. The contamination question has not yet been adequately researched, but may be overemphasized. The three harmful species are members of the grass family and are quite closely related to one another according to various schemes of plant classification (taxonomy). However, not all members of the grass family damage the intestines of celiac patients. Rice and corn, for example, are apparently harmless.
    Many other grains have not been subjected to controlled testing or to the same scrutiny as wheat, rye, barley, oats, rice, and corn in relation to celiac disease. In fact, only wheat and oats have been extensively studied in controlled experiments with the most up-to-date methods. If we accept corn and rice as safe, however, and this seems reasonable to me, then members of the grass family that are more closely related to these species (on the basis of taxonomy) than to wheat are likely to be safe. Such grasses include sorghum, millet, teff, ragi, and Jobs tears, which appear to be reasonably closely related to corn. In some cases, there are protein studies in support of this conclusion, although the studies are not sufficiently complete to provide more than guidance. Scientifically controlled feeding studies with celiac patients would provide a better answer. However, such studies are not likely to be carried out in the next few years because of high costs and the difficulty of obtaining patient participation (such studies would likely involve intestinal biopsy). In lieu of feeding studies, further studies of protein (and DNA) would provide the next best way to evaluate my suggestion that millet, sorghum, teff, ragi, and Jobs tears are not likely to be toxic in celiac disease, although even such studies are hampered at present by a lack of knowledge of which sequences in the wheat gluten proteins are harmful. There is evidence that a few sequences are harmful, but not all possibilities have yet been tested.
    The scientific name for bread wheat is Triticum aestivum var. aestivum--the first part of the name defines the genus (Triticum) and the second part, the species (aestivum). Species falling in the genus Triticum are almost certain to be harmful to celiac patients. Grain proteins of these species include the various types characteristic of the gluten proteins found in bread wheats (including the alpha-gliadins) that cause damage to the small intestine in celiac disease. Durum wheats (Triticum turgidum var. durum) used for pasta are also harmful to celiac patients. Some Triticum species of current concern include Triticum aestivum var. spelta (common names include spelt or spelta), Triticum turgidum var. polonicum (common names include Polish wheat, and, recently, Kamut), and Triticum monococcum var. monococcum (common names include einkorn and small spelt). I recommend that celiac patients avoid grain from these species. Also, given their very close relationship to bread and durum wheats, I think it is unlikely that these grains would be safe for those with classical allergic responses to wheat.
    Rye (Secale cereale) and barley (Hordeum vulgare) are toxic in celiac disease even though these two species are less closely related to bread wheat than spelta and Kamut. They belong to different genera, Secale and Hordeum, respectively, and lack alpha-gliadins, which may be an especially toxic fraction.
    There have been anecdotal reports suggesting a lack of toxicity in celiac disease for spelta and Kamut, along with anecdotal reports of the opposite, at least in the case of spelt-celiac patients who have been harmed by eating it. Controlled tests would be necessary to draw a firm conclusion, although they hardly seem necessary insofar as spelt and Kamut should be considered forms of wheat.
    The diagnosis, sometimes self-diagnosis, of celiac disease is occasionally made without benefit of reasonably rigorous medical or clinical tests, especially intestinal biopsy. Individuals who are diagnosed in this way without rigorous testing may not actually have celiac disease. Claims that particular foods cause this latter group no problems in relation to their celiac disease could cause confusion.
    Furthermore, celiac patients who report no problems in the short run with spelt or Kamut might experience relapse later. There is now adequate evidence that when celiac patients on a gluten-free diet (that is, a diet free of any proteins or peptides from wheat, rye, and barley) have wheat reintroduced to their diets, times-to-relapse vary enormously among individuals, ranging from hours to months, or even years. And this is for wheat, presumably the most toxic of all cereal grains to celiac patients.
    Additionally, the relapse may not be accompanied by obvious symptoms, but be recognized only by physicians through observation of characteristic changes in the small intestinal tissues obtained by biopsy. The reasons for the enormous variability of response times are not known. It may be speculated that the variability has something to do with the degree of recovery of the lining of the small intestine on a gluten-free diet, the degree of stress that the patient had been experiencing (including infections), and individual genetic differences.
    As I have indicated, all known grain species that cause problems for celiac patients are members of the grass family. In plant taxonomy, the grass family belongs to the Plant Kingdom Subclass known as monocotyledonous plants (monocots). The only other grouping at the Subclass level is that of dicotyledonous plants (dicots). Some other species about which celiac patients have questions actually are dicots, which places them in very distant relationship to the grass family. Such species include buckwheat, amaranth, quinoa, and rape. The seed of the last plant listed, rape, is not eaten, but an oil is pressed from the seeds that is commonly used in cooking. This oil is being marketed as canola oil. Because of their very distant relationship to the grass family and to wheat, it is highly unlikely that these dicots will contain the same type of protein sequence found in wheat proteins that causes problems for celiac patients. Of course, some quirk of evolution could have given rise in these dicots to proteins with the toxic amino acid sequence found in wheat proteins. But if such concerns were carried to a logical conclusion, celiac patients would have to exclude all plant foods from their diets. For example, buckwheat and rhubarb belong to the same plant family (Polygonaceae). If buckwheat were suspect for celiac patients, should not rhubarb, its close relation, be suspect as well?
    It may be in order to caution celiac patients that they may have undesirable reactions to any of these foods--reactions that are not related to celiac disease. Allergic reactions may occur to almost any protein, including proteins found in rice, but there is a great deal of individual variation in allergic reactions. Also, buckwheat, for example, has been claimed to contain a photosensitizing agent that will cause some people who have just eaten it to develop a skin rash when they are exposed to sunlight. Quinoa and amaranth may have high oxalate contents-approaching those of spinach and these oxalate levels may cause problems for some people. Such reactions should be looked for, but for most people, buckwheat, quinoa, or amaranth eaten in moderation apparently do not cause problems. (Buckwheat is sometimes found in mixture with wheat, which of course would cause a problem for celiac patients.) It seems no more necessary for all people with celiac disease to exclude buckwheat from their diets because some celiac patients react to it than it would be for all celiac patients to exclude milk from their diets because some celiac patients have a problem with milk.
    In conclusion, scientific knowledge of celiac disease, including knowledge of the proteins that cause the problem, and the grains that contain these proteins, is in a continuing state of development. There is much that remains to be done. Nevertheless, steady progress has been made over the years. As far as I know, the following statements are a valid description of the state of our knowledge:
    Spelt or spelta and Kamut are wheats. They have proteins toxic to celiac patients and should be avoided just as bread wheat, durum wheat, rye, barley, and triticale should be avoided. Rice and corn (maize) are not toxic to celiac patients. Certain cereal grains, such as various millets, sorghum, teff, ragi, and Jobs tears are close enough in their genetic relationship to corn to make it likely that these grains are safe for celiac patients to eat. However, significant scientific studies have not been carried out for these latter grains. There is no reason for celiac patients to avoid plant foods that are very distantly related to wheat. These include buckwheat, quinoa, amaranth, and rapeseed oil (canola). Some celiac patients might suffer allergies or other adverse reactions to these grains or foodstuffs made from them, but there is currently no scientific basis for saying that these allergies or adverse reactions have anything to do with celiac disease. A celiac patient may have an allergy to milk, but that does not mean that all celiac patients will have an adverse reaction to milk. Again, however, scientific studies are absent or minimal for these dicots. A list of my publications with pertinence to celiac disease follows. Cross-references to the literature for most of the points discussed above can be found in these publications.
    Kasarda, D. D., and DOvidio, R. 1999. Amino acid sequence of an alpha-gliadin gene from spelt wheat (Spelta) includes sequences active in celiac disease. Cereal Chem. 76:548-551. Kasarda, D. D. 1997. Celiac Disease. In Syllabus of the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology & Nutrition, 4th Annual Postgraduate Course, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, pp. 13-21. Kasarda, D. D. 1997. Gluten and gliadin: precipitating factors in coeliac disease. In Coeliac Disease: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Coeliac Disease (September 5-7, 1996), edited by M. Mäkki, P. Collin, and J. K. Visakorpi, Coeliac Disease Study Group, Institute of Medical Technology, University of Tampere,Tampere, Finland, pp. 195-212. Srinivasan, U., Leonard, N., Jones, E., Kasarda, D. D., Weir, D. G., OFarrelly, C., and Feighery, C. 1996. Absence of oats toxicity in coeliac disease. British Medical Journal 313:1300-1301. Tatham, A. S., Fido, R. J., Moore, C. M., Kasarda, D. D., Kuzmicky, D. D., Keen, J. N., and Shewry, P. R. Characterization of the major prolamins of tef (Eragrostis tef) and finger millet (Eleusine coracana). J. Cereal Sci. 24:65-71. 1996. Kasarda, D. D. 1994. Defining cereals toxicity in coeliac disease. In Gastrointestinal Immunology and Gluten-Sensitive Disease, edited by C. Feighery, and F. OFarrelly, Oak Tree Press, Dublin, pp. 203-220. Shewry, P. R., Tatham, A. S., and Kasarda, D. D. 1992. Cereal proteins and coeliac disease. In Coeliac Disease, edited by M. N. Marsh, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, U. K., pp. 305-348. De Ritis, G., Auricchio, S., Jones, H. W., Lew, E. J.-L., Bernardin, J. E. and Kasarda, D. D. 1988. In vitro (organ culture) studies of the toxicity of specific A-gliadin peptides in celiac disease. Gastroenterology 94:41-49. Kagnoff, M. F., Patterson, Y. J., Kumar, P. J., Kasarda, D. D., Carbone, F. R., Unsworth, D. J. and Austin, R. K. 1987. Evidence for the role of a human intestinal adenovirus in the pathogenesis of celiac disease. Gut 28:995-1001. Levenson, S. D., Austin, R. K., Dietler, M. D., Kasarda, D. D. and Kagnoff, M. F. 1985. Specificity of antigliadin antibody in celiac disease. Gastroenterology 89: 1-5. Kagnoff, M. F., Austin, R. K., Hubert, J. J., Bernardin, J. E. and Kasarda, D. D. 1984. Possible role for a human adenovirus in the pathogenesis of celiac disease. J. Exp. Med. 160: 1544-1557. Grains in Relation to Celiac (Coeliac) Disease by Donald D. Kasarda.
    An annotated copy: http://wheat.pw.usda.gov/topics/

    Heather Curtis
    Celiac.com 10/26/2009 - With the ever-increasing awareness of celiac disease comes an expanding market of gluten-free options.  The days of lengthy supermarket trips spent pouring over labels has given way to the tiny oasis of the “gluten-free” section is many grocery stores. 
    While this section is still limited in many respects, the food production industry as a whole has become aware of the need to cater to the expanding gluten-free community.  Gluten-free snacks, prepackaged meals, and baking supplies are no longer elusive, and the variety is continually expanding.  While rice, potato, and corn flours are common strongholds in a Celiac’s kitchen, there is now a new wave of flavorful flours from Peru making their way into the United States.
    Many Peruvian heritage grains, dating back to pre-Incan times, have been found to be naturally gluten-free and incredibly nutritious.  The first wave of these grains and flours to hit the U.S. market come to us from Zocalo Gourmet.  Marching to shelves are kaniwa, mesquite, purple corn, and sweet potato flours.  Each has a distinct flavor and “personality” that is sure to delight any gluten-free baker and reinvigorate their favorite recipes. 
    Kaniwa is a species of goosefoot, closely related to quinoa.  This tiny grain is packed with protein and has an Earthy taste that lends itself well to breads, pancakes, and muffins.   
    Mesquite is also protein rich and imparts a warm, sweet, slightly smoky taste on foods while enhancing the flavors of cinnamon, chocolate, caramel, and coffee.  Adding mesquite flour to your favorite recipes will transform their flavor and put a completely new spin on your old favorites.
    Purple Corn can be used in any recipe calling for traditional corn meal or flour while providing an antioxidant boost. Although similar in nutrition to yellow corn, purple corn contains substantial amounts of phenolics and anthocyanins, among other phytochemicals, which gives the corn its vibrant color. Its main colorant is cianidin-3-b-glucosa which is a known antioxidant. The high anthocianin content does not degrade with heat exposure.
    Sweet Potato is a velvety flour that holds moisture well, imparts a subtle sweetness on baked goods, and is incredibly versatile. 
    With these flours come more complete flavor and nutritional profiles for the gluten intolerant.  To learn more about these flours and how they can be used check out:
    http://www.zocalogourmet.com/products/floursgrains2.html
    and
    http://zocalogourmet.blogspot.com/ 
     


    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 12/03/2010 - An interesting finding regarding corn from a research team based in Sweden that studied the effects of both gluten and corn on patients with celiac disease.
    The research team included G. Kristjánsson, M. Högman, P. Venge, R. and Hällgren, who are affiliated variously with the Department of Gastroenterology, the Department of Medical Cell Biology, Section of Integrative Physiology, the Laboratory for Inflammation Research, and the Department of Rheumatology at Uppsala University Hospital in Uppsala, Sweden.
    Specifically, the team sought to better understand the facets of nitric oxide (NO) production induced by rectal gluten challenge and the relationship between nitric oxide production and mucosal granulocyte activation.
    The team measured the release of rectal nitric oxide in 13 patients with celiac disease and in 18 control subjects. The team measured levels both before and after rectal wheat gluten challenge.
    To collect the gas, the team used a rectal balloon and a newly developed instrument, which allows simultaneous measurements of concentrations of granulocyte mediators in the rectal mucosa. This new technique is called the “mucosal patch technique”.
    The technique allowed the team to measure myeloperoxidase (MPO), eosinophil cationic protein (ECP), and histamine.
    They found that concentrations of rectal nitric oxide increased in ALL celiac patients after wheat gluten challenge, peaking at 15 hours (average concentrations of 9464 (SEM 2393) parts per billion (ppb), with a range of 250–24982 ppb.
    The maximum MPO and ECP increase occurred five hours after challenge. At the fifteen hour mark, the team observed a correlation between mucosal MPO and nitric oxide production.
    They then compared their results against measurements taken after corn gluten challenge. Six of the celiac patients showed an increase in nitric oxide production 15 hours after rectal corn gluten challenge, though much smaller than after gluten challenge. The control group showed no increases after either challenge.
    The main findings showed that mucosal activation of neutrophils and eosinophils precedes pronounced enhancement of mucosal nitric oxide production after rectal wheat gluten challenge in patients with celiac disease.
    The researchers also found that some patients with celiac disease show signs of an inflammatory reaction after rectal corn gluten challenge, shown by increased nitric oxide production and activation of granulocyte markers.
    The fact that nearly half of the celiac patients in this small sample showed increases in nitric oxide production after a corn challenge is definitely interesting, and calls out for further study.
    Source:

    Gut 2005;54:769-774. doi:10.1136/gut.2004.057174 Update by Elaine E. Thompson, Ph.D. submitted 12/03/2010:
    In this study the researchers discovered that the cornmeal they tested was contaminated with wheat. Please revise this blog entry to reflect the flaw in the study."The manufacturer claimed that their corn product was free from wheat or other cereals. We tested the product at the Swedish National Food Administration (Livsmedelsverket) and it was found to be contaminated with 82 μg/g (ppm), which is less than the usual allowed amount in a gluten free diet (<200 ppm) according to the Codex Alimentarius Standard for gluten free foods, and far less than what has been found to be a safe amount of gluten contamination when correlated with histology in oral challenge studies. It cannot be excluded that the small amounts of gluten present in the corn preparation induced an inflammatory reaction as the mucosal patch technique is very sensitive. "


    Jefferson Adams
    Celiac.com 07/31/2013 - People with celiac disease react to specific proteins in wheat, and a team of scientists from Washington State University are attempting to develop new varieties of wheat that suppress those proteins and are safe for those with celiac disease.
    Currently, they can silence nearly 90 percent of the protein that causes a gluten reaction. They hope their research efforts will lead them to a strain that suppress 100% of the proteins that trigger gluten reactions.
    Since people with celiac disease react to specific proteins in wheat, the simple solution is to eliminate those proteins to develop an allergy-free wheat.
    According to the U.S. National Institutes of Health, wheat is made up of three groups of proteins : gliadins, low molecular weight glutenin subunits and high molecular weight glutenin subunits.
    The majority of people with celiac disease can tolerate the high molecular weight glutenin proteins, so the Washington State scientists attempted to silence the genetic expression of the other proteins in wheat.
    The high molecular weight glutenins are necessary for baking, so the wheat should produce flour suitable for a variety of breads and dough.
    The researchers are using a genetic technique called RNA interference, that has enabled them to silence the expression of more than 80 percent of the wheat genes associated with autoimmune reactions.
    “With our molecular genetic technologies we have wheat plants that silence 85.6 percent of the immunogenic genes,” said Diter von Wettstein, a plant science professor at Washington State. “The chances of getting plants with more than 90 percent silencing is good.”
    Such wheat hybrids might not work for all people with celiac disease, but could they provide benefits for the majority of people with celiac disease?
    What do you think? Would you try it? Share your thoughts below.
    Read More at Producer.com.

  • Popular Contributors

  • Forum Discussions

    Thanks! I didn’t realize that the IGA test could be just a specific portion of your total IGA.  I looked at at my test results and it says  with assessment of total IGA.  My follow up appointment is on Thursday, I can ask my doctor for more information when I see her.
    Rachelle, this is a pretty old thread, so this member may not respond.  Your child should see a doctor.  You could ask for celiac disease testing or have him elvaluted for something like EoE.   https://www.aaaai.org/conditions-and-treatments/related-conditions/eosinophilic-esophagitis https://www.beyondceliac.org/celiac-disease/symptoms/children/
    Yes, the photo link worked.  Again, DH is not diagnosed visually because it resembles so many other rashes.   Is it possible to get an appointment at the celiac center at Texas Children in Houston?  I do not know your insurance, but it might be possible to pay for a visit (cash) but get tests, etc. via your in-network insurance.  It would be worth a call.   https://www.texaschildrens.org/departments/celiac-disease-clinic I  do not understand why they think he is too young to devel
×
×
  • Create New...