My Dilemma

[moonunit]

Okay, I'm pretty sure I know what you guys are going to say, but I will ask anyway. I have a dilemma.

I have tested positive through Enterolab, and my son has always been a bit fussy by nature (he's 15 months old) so I had him tested as well.

His test came back positive, but look at the numbers:

Fecal Antigliadin IGA 15 (normal <10)

Fecal Antitissue Transglutaminase 10 (normal <10)

Quantitative microscopic fecal fat 54 (normal <300)

So it looks like he's absorbing food okay, and although I know, I know, it's "like a pregnancy test, positive is positive," a 10? That's kind of like... I don't know, is that cutoff number solid as a rock, I wonder now, or a teeny bit arbitrary?

I guess now I'm trying to figure out is which is worse:

- Make his quality of live extremely difficult (one of his first words was "cracker" and he adores cheerios) when he seems to be doing okay absorption-wise and I haven't had him see a doctor yet to confirm or direct his care

OR

- Keep feeding him gluten when I can see that at least one number indicates that it might hurt him in the long run to do so

Right now I think we're in a wait-and-see place, figuring that if he is getting damage, it's minimal or will be later down the road. I would like him to be diagnosed by a doctor but the blood work only happens after age 2, right?

I guess I am mostly just looking for some opinions and some support that this is a tough spot to be in!

Thanks...

Oh, and P.S. -- Now I also wonder if I should have my daughter (age 2) tested. I would have to go through Enterolab because her pediatrician refuses to test her (MY doctors say that the + tests don't count, so since I "don't have anything wrong" my daughter has no family history to warrant testing.) This is getting expensive!

[chrissy]

antigliadin numbers can be raised by things other than celiac. in fact, i think alot of people have anti-bodies to things that they don't have any problems with. it doesn't look to me like your son tests positive for celiac. a lot of kids are a bit fussy by nature. i am like you, and would prefer a diagnosis by a doctor. this is just my personal opinion-----but if it were me, i would not put my child on a gluten free diet based on such low numbers and "a bit fussy by nature" being his only symptom. i would probably keep it in mind, and watch for other symptoms, and have blood tests run as my child got older.

[CarlaB]

He is currently not having bad reactions, but it may be causing his discomfort, even if it hasn't caused damage yet. I'd at least try a gluten-free diet to see if it helps. If after a few months it's doing nothing for him, then reconsider.

[Ursa Major]

I agree with Carla here. If he wouldn't have a reaction, it would be lower than 10. He is little, and doesn't have extensive damage yet, so his numbers are still low. Why wait with the gluten-free diet until he gets really sick?

Also, there are gluten-free versions of those foods he likes. He is too little to remember the old, gluteny versions for long.

And yes, I would definitely encourage having your daughter tested as well. Since celiac disease is genetic, that's a good thing to do. And since you have tested positive, there IS a family history to warrant testing!