Anyone Do Both Enterolab & York Testing?

[hathor]

I'm not quite sure where forum this post belongs in, but here goes.

I received my Enterolab results a couple weeks ago and they showed an intolerance to everything tested (gluten, milk, egg, soy, and yeast). I can't say I've ever noticed a reaction to soy or yeast. I've been twisting and turning trying to cut out those two.

As I understand, Enterolab's method hasn't been published in a peer reviewed article or validated by others. Is the York testing more accepted? I'm wondering if it would be good to confirm that my saliva and blood results agree with the fecal results I've received.

I also wonder if I have any other sensitivities that I'm unaware of.

Of course, I'm kind of worried. I don't actually WANT anything more to try to avoid

This is the way I cope with things -- I research them to death. Last night I had a dream where I was reading ingredient labels -- that was it. I need a richer fantasy life, I think

[AndreaB]

Hathor,

I had allergy/intolerance done by US Bioteks (through a doctor that I was referred to) and then did enterolab about 3 months later after being very gluten lite for about 2 months.

For my allergy intolerance I scored moderate on whole wheat, spelt and wheat gluten; low on rye and wheat gliadin. Enterolab was a 14.

Allergy intolerance for soy was moderate; enterolab was 15.

Allergy intolerance for dairy was low; enterolab was 7.

[Rachel--24]

York would be testing for IgG antibodies in the blood.

Enterolab tests for Iga antibodies in stool.

I'm not sure which antibodies York is looking for in saliva??

Its two completely different classes of antibodies....two different immune responses. It would be like comparing apples and oranges since they are not really the same type of test.

I wouldnt say that York testing is more "accepted". There is no food intolerance testing that is known to be completely accurate...there can be false negatives as well as false positives with York's intolerance testing.

I would say that these types of tests are for informational purposes only.....as they are not really diagnostic of anything and the tests arent completely reliable. An elimination diet is more valid then food intolerance testing.

I have lost faith in Enterolab and really dont put too much stock into their testing. I have had food intolerance testing in the past....although it wasnt through York. I went through Great Smokies...they tested over 100 foods and the results ended up being of no help to me.

Some people do benefit from the tests and others find that it didnt help....in most cases elimination diet works best.

[Cottage-Soul]

If you want the IGg blood tests, go with a different company than York (now Optimum Health Resource Labs). I ordered one of the 96 food panel blood tests (for $379) back in August and didn't get results until January. I probably wouldn't have them at all except I happened to call once and someone actually answered the phone (they don't reply to emails either). The test was supposedly ready in October, so I can't fathom why it was never mailed. If you do a search for Optimum Health Resources you'll find a thread in which other people had the same experience as I did.

I was told via the results that I am sensitive to Gluten, wheat and dairy and have cut these out of my diet for the past 2 weeks. I've had no improvements as of yet...so I'm not even sure the results are accurate. I'll continue with the eliminations for a couple months and hope for better health. Not very encouraged at this point though.

[hathor]

York would be testing for IgG antibodies in the blood.

Enterolab tests for Iga antibodies in stool.

I'm not sure which antibodies York is looking for in saliva??

Its two completely different classes of antibodies....two different immune responses. It would be like comparing apples and oranges since they are not really the same type of test.

York has several different tests. The saliva one is for IgA antibodies to egg, gluten, milk, and soy. One blood test is for 96 foods and IgG as you say. Then they have another blood test described as follows: "IgA/IgG/IgM Tissue Transglutaminase (tTG) Autoantibody Rapid Test will detect elevated levels of the antibodies associated with Celiac Disease and IgA-mediated gluten intolerance."

I know they are different tests. I thought if different tests from different labs lead to the same bottom line I might be more confident in the results. Or at least I can put my doubting relatives at ease. They think I need to have my blood tested. Frankly, the Enterolab results for gluten, milk, and egg are consistent with my real life experience, i.e., I eliminated them and I feel better. I have them and I feel bad. Presumably the third test should show the same thing as my Enterolab result for tTG.

It is the soy and yeast results I'm not sure of. I've never noticed a reaction to either. An IgA response to soy, albeit in saliva, would theoretically be shown by the first test. But are there different kinds of IgA responses? Obviously I'm still researching things. Yeast had what I would call a borderline response according to Enterolab. The only other testing I can find for it looks at IgG.

So foods you are intolerant to can cause IgA reactions but not IgG?

I wouldnt say that York testing is more "accepted". There is no food intolerance testing that is known to be completely accurate...there can be false negatives as well as false positives with York's intolerance testing.

That I know. The web site lists a number of studies as "validation," but I haven't tried to read up on them yet.

Things would certainly be easier if I could eat soy and yeast. I suppose I could go without for a period of time and then introduce them and see how I feel.

Why do you say Great Smokies' testing was of no use, if you don't mind my asking? Did they find intolerances that you don't notice in real life, fail to find ones you do, or both?

Given what Cottage_Soul said, I'm not inclined to go with York now.