Jump to content
This site uses cookies. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. More Info... ×

  • 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 Celiac.com!
    eNewsletter
    Donate

To Be Or Not To Be. . .

ptkds

By ptkds
in Coping with Celiac Disease

Recommended Posts

ptkds Community Regular
ptkds
Posted

I was diagnosed w/ celiac through blood work a few months ago. I had decided not to get a biopsy done and I started the gluten-free diet. But now I have realized that may have been a mistake. My dd saw an allergist yesterday and he kept asking if my other dd and I had gotten a biopsy. Then he even questioned if it were really celiac since it wasn't "confirmed" w/ a biopsy.

So my question is, should I start eating gluten again and get the biopsy? I already know that I have celiac because I have a horrible, miserable reaction when I have gluten. But from a medical standpoint it seems like I need to have it confirmed so the dr's will be more accepting of mine and my dd's diagnoses.

What do you guys think?

ptkds

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):


RIMom Newbie
RIMom
Posted

My 4 1/2 year old was just diagnosed in December by blood test. We also got a lot of pressure from family and others saying it wasn't celiac until you did a biopsy. Finally met with the pedi gastro this week, and he said I have to tell you that this is the only true way to confirm it. He also said that having a positive blood test and having a positive response to gluten-free diet (which my daughter has had) is the other way to confirm it. He said we don't have to do the biopsy to have the diagnosis. He said there is no risk in adopting the gluten-free diet other than additional cost of food. Especially if she has responded positively to the dietary change. He said she may want to be biopsied in the future, maybe as a teen, in order to confirm that she has to continue with the diet.

I'm also considering the enterolab test rather than the biopsy. It's so much less invasive with no risk at all.

We also have an extensive extended family history of Celiac so the chances she has it are high anyway (she has three cousins, two aunts and probably her dad who have it.... dad hasn't been tested yet, but does much better when he is gluten free too, although doesn't respond dramatically to gluten in terms of getting sick etc).

I have just stopped telling people that we haven't done the biopsy and just say she has it. Everyone (school, friends parents, extended family) have been supportive, especially when I mention how much better she looks and feels (even though she was never really sick..... just low grade tummy aches often). Her coloring is better, she is happier, and her bowels have changed (are more formed). She has been very accepting of the diet as long as I can make adequate substitutions, which I have worked hard to do for her.

I would be happy to discuss my experience with the gastro more if you want to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gfp Enthusiast
gfp
Posted
I was diagnosed w/ celiac through blood work a few months ago. I had decided not to get a biopsy done and I started the gluten-free diet. But now I have realized that may have been a mistake. My dd saw an allergist yesterday and he kept asking if my other dd and I had gotten a biopsy. Then he even questioned if it were really celiac since it wasn't "confirmed" w/ a biopsy.

So my question is, should I start eating gluten again and get the biopsy? I already know that I have celiac because I have a horrible, miserable reaction when I have gluten. But from a medical standpoint it seems like I need to have it confirmed so the dr's will be more accepting of mine and my dd's diagnoses.

What do you guys think?

ptkds

IMHO the time to have a biopsy is before going gluten-free.... the longer you leave it the less attractive it is.

Then he even questioned if it were really celiac since it wasn't "confirmed" w/ a biopsy.

Find yourself another allergist or take this one the literature and see if you can reason with them.

Start here and print out what is useful... Open Original Shared Link . if the allergist is not willing to make concessions then forget them and find another...

If the allergist hasn't read the articles on pro-s and cons of biopsy you have to ask if they are qualified to be treating you anyway.

You need someone on top of the disease, not someone you need to continually educate.

If your stuck for one then hopefully someone here will have a good well educated one close to you...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jayhawkmom Enthusiast
jayhawkmom
Posted

Is the allergist your doctor also? If not... he has no business asking you about any of your medical history or diagnosis. I do understand that family history must be taken into account. However, what if you were someone who chose a gluten free diet purely from a standpoint of health, rather than disease? Would he argue with you and tell you that a gluten free diet is unhealthy? Someone used this analogy with me yesterday... and it really helped. If I were a vegetarian and raised my children in that manner, I don't have to have a medical reason for it. So, if I chose to raise my children gluten free - with or without a diagnosis of anything, that should be my choice as their parent.

My blood tests were "iffy" - biopsy showed no villi damage. Did I catch it in time? Hopefully. Am I gluten free? You betcha.

I fully admit, I started to question the who issue myself, after being gluten free for a while. Then one day in December I ate some gluteny goodies at a baby shower, and I was sicker than a dog for days afterward. That was all the confirmation I needed.

Good luck with your decision. There are going to be strong opinions for either or. I don't have a strong opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fiddle-Faddle Community Regular
Fiddle-Faddle
Posted
My 4 1/2 year old was just diagnosed in December by blood test. We also got a lot of pressure from family and others saying it wasn't celiac until you did a biopsy. Finally met with the pedi gastro this week, and he said I have to tell you that this is the only true way to confirm it.

I've said this in other threads, so forgive me for being repetitive.

THis is like telling someone with a peanut allergy that the only true way to confirm the peanut allergy is to feed him peanuts until he has has an anaphylactic response. Then, and only then, will it be confirmed?

Come on, this is baloney. A biopsy confirms villi damage, yes--if the affected villi are biopsied. Remember, villi damage is often patchy. A lot depends on the doctor being able to choose an affected area to biopsy, and, if damage is often only visible under the microscope, the odds aren't great. Is villi damage the only problem celiacs face, or even the worst problem? Heck, no.

Take someone who does not have villi damage, but reacts badly to gluten ("gluten intolerant"). Feed him gluten long enough, and eventually, yes, there WILL be villi damage.

Why do doctors insist on their obviously gluten-intolerant patients poisoning themselves in order to CAUSE damage so the doctors can see for themselves? As gentleheart said so eloquently in another thread, whatever happened to "first do no harm?"

AAARRRGGGHHH!!

Okay. Rant over. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carriefaith Enthusiast
Carriefaith
Posted

Going back on gluten may be difficult and unpleasant now that you've start the gluten-free diet... I would suggest getting a gene test done to see if you have a celiac gene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fiddle-Faddle Community Regular
Fiddle-Faddle
Posted
Going back on gluten may be difficult and unpleasant now that you've start the gluten-free diet... I would suggest getting a gene test done to see if you have a celiac gene.

Given the number of people on this board who do NOT have celiac genes, yet still biopsied positive for celiac, I am not convinced that there is much value to the gene test. (Otherwise, I would agree that that would be a logical choice!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):


jayhawkmom Enthusiast
jayhawkmom
Posted
THis is like telling someone with a peanut allergy that the only true way to confirm the peanut allergy is to feed him peanuts until he has has an anaphylactic response. Then, and only then, will it be confirmed?

And, that's an even better analogy, one that I can identify with. I have a child with an anaphylactic peanut allergy. And, if someone suggested I give her a peanut just to "see" what would happen, I would laugh in their face and then tell them to get the h*ll away from me and my family.

Why do we allow doctors to make us feel as if we have NO idea what we are talking about when we say we can't tolerate a certain food, or groups of food?

Let's stop the madness! :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kbtoyssni Contributor
kbtoyssni
Posted

A positive blood test means you have it. And I'm assuming from your reluctance to go back on gluten you've had a positive dietary response, too. You certainly don't need a biopsy to tell you what you already know. By the time a biopsy comes out positive, you've got so much damage to your intestines. I don't know why you'd want to do that to yourself. This doc needs to read some current literature on diagnosing the disease.

Some doctors only see the biopsy as the way to diagnose, but there are many out there who will accept blood tests or dietary response. If you have a doctor who is questioning your celiac, maybe a new doctor is in order. I wouldn't be able to see a doctor that questions me because I know they're going to be doing things by the textbook and be inflexible when it comes to alternate treatments. If there's one thing I've learned from my diagnosis, it's that this disease is anything but textbook!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):


  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      121,088
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748
    Aventine
    Newest Member
    Aventine
    Joined
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      120.3k
    • Total Posts
      1m
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):



  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):


  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • trents
      Recently Diagnosed Celiac- Need advice

      By trents · Posted

      I'll answer your second question first. The single best antibody test for monitoring celiac blood antibody levels is the tTG-IGA and it is very cost effective. For this reason, it is the most popular and often the only test ordered by physicians when checking for celiac disease. There are some people who actually do have celiac disease who will score negatives on this test anyway because of anomalies in their immune system but your wife is not one of them. So for her, the tTG-IGA should be sufficient. It is highly sensitive and highly specific for celiac disease. If your wife gets serious about eating gluten free and stays on a gluten free diet for the duration, she should experience healing in her villous lining, normalization in her antibody numbers and avoid reaching a celiac health crisis tipping point. I am attaching an article that will provide guidance for getting serious about gluten free living. It really is an advantage if all wheat products are taken out of the house and other household members adopt gluten free eating in order to avoid cross contamination and mistakes.  
    • Anmol
      Recently Diagnosed Celiac- Need advice

      By Anmol · Posted

      Thanks this is helpful. Couple of follow -ups- that critical point till it stays silent is age dependent or dependent on continuing to eat gluten. In other words if she is on gluten-free diet can she stay on silent celiac disease forever?    what are the most cost effective yet efficient test to track the inflammation/antibodies and see if gluten-free is working . 
    • trents
      Recently Diagnosed Celiac- Need advice

      By trents · Posted

      Welcome to the community forum, @Anmol! There are a number of blood antibody tests that can be administered when diagnosing celiac disease and it is normal that not all of them will be positive. Three out of four that were run for you were positive. It looks pretty conclusive that you have celiac disease. Many physicians will only run the tTG-IGA test so I applaud your doctor for being so thorough. Note, the Immunoglobulin A is not a test for celiac disease per se but a measure of total IGA antibody levels in your blood. If this number is low it can cause false negatives in the individual IGA-based celiac antibody tests. There are many celiacs who are asymptomatic when consuming gluten, at least until damage to the villous lining of the small bowel progresses to a certain critical point. I was one of them. We call them "silent" celiacs".  Unfortunately, being asymptomatic does not equate to no damage being done to the villous lining of the small bowel. No, the fact that your wife is asymptomatic should not be viewed as a license to not practice strict gluten free eating. She is damaging her health by doing so and the continuing high antibody test scores are proof of that. The antibodies are produced by inflammation in the small bowel lining and over time this inflammation destroys the villous lining. Continuing to disregard this will catch up to her. While it may be true that a little gluten does less harm to the villous lining than a lot, why would you even want to tolerate any harm at all to it? Being a "silent" celiac is both a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing in the sense of being able to endure some cross contamination in social settings without embarrassing repercussions. It's a curse in that it slows down the learning curve of avoiding foods where gluten is not an obvious ingredient, yet still may be doing damage to the villous lining of the small bowel. GliadinX is helpful to many celiacs in avoiding illness from cross contamination when eating out but it is not effective when consuming larger amounts of gluten. It was never intended for that purpose. Eating out is the number one sabotager of gluten free eating. You have no control of how food is prepared and handled in restaurant kitchens.  
    • knitty kitty
      14 year old with Celiac & EOE still suffering...

      By knitty kitty · Posted

      Forgot one... https://www.hormonesmatter.com/eosinophilic-esophagitis-sugar-thiamine-sensitive/
    • trents
      50 YO Male Recently Diagnosed with Celiac Disease

      By trents · Posted

      Welcome to the forum community, @ekelsay! Yes, your tTG-IGA score is strongly positive for celiac disease. There are other antibody tests that can be run when diagnosing celiac disease but the tTG-IGA is the most popular with physicians because it combines good sensitivity with good specificity, and it is a relatively inexpensive test to perform. The onset of celiac disease can happen at any stage of life and the size of the score is not necessarily an indicator of the progress of the disease. It is likely that you you experienced onset well before you became aware of symptoms. It often takes 10 years or more to get a diagnosis of celiac disease after the first appearance of symptoms. In my case, the first indicator was mildly elevated liver enzymes that resulted in a rejection of my blood donation by the Red Cross at age 37. There was no GI discomfort at that point, at least none that I noticed. Over time, other lab values began to get out of norm, including decreased iron levels. My PCP was at a complete loss to explain any of this. I finally scheduled an appointment with a GI doc because the liver enzymes concerned me and he tested me right away for celiac disease. I was positive and within three months of gluten free eating my liver enzymes were back to normal. That took 13 years since the rejection of my blood donation by the Red Cross. And my story is typical. Toward the end of that period I had developed some occasional diarrhea and oily stool but no major GI distress. Many celiacs do not have classic GI symptoms and are "silent" celiacs. There are around 200 symptoms that have been associated with celiac disease and many or most of them do not involve conscious GI distress. Via an autoimmune process, gluten ingestion triggers inflammation in the villous lining of the small bowel which damages it over time and inhibits the ability of this organ to absorb the vitamins and minerals in the food we ingest. So, that explains why those with celiac disease often suffer iron deficiency anemia, osteoporosis and a host of other vitamin and mineral deficiency related medical issues. The villous lining of the small bowel is where essentially all of our nutrition is absorbed. So, yes, anemia is one of the classic symptoms of celiac disease. One very important thing you need to be aware of is that your PCP may refer you to a GI doc for an endoscopy/biopsy of the small bowel lining to confirm the results of the blood antibody testing. So, you must not begin gluten free eating until that is done or at least you know they are going to diagnose you with celiac disease without it. If you start gluten free eating now there will be healing in the villous lining that will begin to take place which may compromise the results of the biopsy.
×
×
  • Create New...