Jump to content

  • 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 Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Testing

mstrain

Recommended Posts

mstrain Rookie
mstrain
Posted

I was diagosed with celiac's three years ago at what seemed to be the onset of the disease. Once diagnosed, is it necessary to have testing repeated? Blood tests, biopsies, other? If the "treatment" is to eat gluten-free, what would the point of repeated teasting be? I am ignorant to "follow-up care" if such a thing is necessary. Please enlighten me!

Thanks!

Michele

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):


ECD Newbie
ECD
Posted

so, my doctor told me that you get diagnosed, and then sometimes they use the tests to confirm the diagnosis because there may be something else going on that might be serious if left untreated. sometimes, a positive dietary response is enough, but that's fairly subjective as there can be a large placebo effect, etc., so they like to have something a bit more concrete than "i'm feeling so much better!" i don't know if that's just mine or if that's the medical standard. i'd rather know for sure, but i think a large part of that is from getting a lot of 'diagnoses' in the past which basically amounted to "i don't really know what you have, so i'm going to say its this," you know? i think at this point (and this is just me - i'm sure lots and lots of people disagree), if all my tests came back negative and the doctor wanted to pursue other legitimate tests, i'd totally do it... while eating gluten-free :) i'm just afraid, without confirmation, that maybe it's wrong again! obviously, i'm a bit too trusting of the medical profession, though, because if they told me tests were negative but still believed it was celiac disease, then i would be okay with that... as long as it resolved my symptoms. is that completely crazy? sorry for rambling at you but it's late and it's been a long day :)

LuvMoosic4life Collaborator
LuvMoosic4life
Posted

You should have repeat testing done to make sure you are healing and that you are not getting gluten in your diet.

happygirl Collaborator
happygirl
Posted

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Gemini Experienced
Gemini
Posted
I was diagosed with celiac's three years ago at what seemed to be the onset of the disease. Once diagnosed, is it necessary to have testing repeated? Blood tests, biopsies, other? If the "treatment" is to eat gluten-free, what would the point of repeated teasting be? I am ignorant to "follow-up care" if such a thing is necessary. Please enlighten me!

Thanks!

Michele

I was diagnosed via blood work only....the endo was not needed. I have had repeat testing to ensure that no gluten is getting in but I only did that to shut the doctor up. I went from being end stage Celiac and extremely ill to resolution of all symptoms and a much needed, 15 pound weight gain. As far as I'm concerned, that, along with my blood work, was proof enough that I was healing.

I think it all depends on how well you feel and whether you are confident enough with food ingredients to know you are not ingesting any gluten. I personally feel that because the endo is so invasive, it should only be done if a person is not responding 100% to the diet or there are other, in your face symptoms of something else.

Amyleigh0007 Enthusiast
Amyleigh0007
Posted

My son's GI wanted to do another biopsy 4 months after his first biopsy. He said it was because he wanted to make sure gluten free was working and there weren't other issues going on (like my son's food allergies). I'm glad we did it because he discovered that Pepcid was not doing anything for my son's reflux and he put him on different meds.

Archived

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

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


  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      132,387
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748
    LizzieE
    Newest Member
    LizzieE
    Joined
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.5k
    • Total Posts
      1m
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):



  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):


  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • Mmoc
      Blood tests low iGA 4 years later digestive issues

      By Mmoc · Posted

      Thank you kindly for your response. I have since gotten the other type of bloods done and am awaiting results. 
    • Aretaeus Cappadocia
      Gluten free nuts

      By Aretaeus Cappadocia · Posted

      I wanted to respond to your post as much for other people who read this later on (I'm not trying to contradict your experience or decisions) > Kirkland Signature Super Extra-Large Peanuts, 2.5 lbs, are labeled "gluten free" in the Calif Costcos I've been in. If they are selling non-gluten-free in your store, I suggest talking to customer service to see if they can get you the gluten-free version (they are tasty) > This past week I bought "Sliced Raw Almonds, Baking Nuts, 5 lbs Item 1495072 Best if used by Jun-10-26 W-261-6-L1A 12:47" at Costco. The package has the standard warning that it was made on machinery that <may> have processed wheat. Based on that alone, I would not eat these. However, I contacted customer service and asked them "are Costco's Sliced Almonds gluten free?" Within a day I got this response:  "This is [xyz] with the Costco Member Service Resolutions Team. I am happy to let you know we got a reply back from our Kirkland Signature team. Here is their response:  This item does not have a risk of cross contamination with gluten, barley or rye." Based on this, I will eat them. Based on experience, I believe they will be fine. Sometimes, for other products, the answer has been "they really do have cross-contamination risk" (eg, Kirkland Signature Dry Roasted Macadamia Nuts, Salted, 1.5 lbs Item 1195303). When they give me that answer I return them for cash. You might reasonably ask, "Why would Costco use that label if they actually are safe?" I can't speak for Costco but I've worked in Corporate America and I've seen this kind of thing first hand and up close. (1) This kind of regulatory label represents risk/cost to the company. What if they are mistaken? In one direction, the cost is loss of maybe 1% of sales (if celiacs don't buy when they would have). In the other direction, the risk is reputational damage and open-ended litigation (bad reviews and celiacs suing them). Expect them to play it safe. (2) There is a team tasked with getting each product out to market quickly and cheaply, and there is also a committee tasked with reviewing the packaging before it is released. If the team chooses the simplest, safest, pre-approved label, this becomes a quick check box. On the other hand, if they choose something else, it has to be carefully scrutinized through a long process. It's more efficient for the team to say there <could> be risk. (3) There is probably some plug and play in production. Some lots of the very same product could be made in a safe facility while others are made in an unsafe facility. Uniform packaging (saying there is risk) for all packages regardless of gluten risk is easier, cheaper, and safer (for Costco). Everything I wrote here is about my Costco experience, but the principles will be true at other vendors, particularly if they have extensive quality control infrastructure. The first hurdle of gluten-free diet is to remove/replace all the labeled gluten ingredients. The second, more difficult hurdle is to remove/replace all the hidden gluten. Each of us have to assess gray zones and make judgement calls knowing there is a penalty for being wrong. One penalty would be getting glutened but the other penalty could be eating an unnecessarily boring or malnourishing diet.
    • trents
      Has anyone had terrible TMJ/ Jaw Pain from undiagnosed Celiac?

      By trents · Posted

      Thanks for the thoughtful reply and links, Wheatwacked. Definitely some food for thought. However, I would point out that your linked articles refer to gliadin in human breast milk, not cow's milk. And although it might seem reasonable to conclude it would work the same way in cows, that is not necessarily the case. Studies seem to indicate otherwise. Studies also indicate the amount of gliadin in human breast milk is miniscule and unlikely to cause reactions:  https://www.glutenfreewatchdog.org/news/gluten-peptides-in-human-breast-milk-implications-for-cows-milk/ I would also point out that Dr. Peter Osborne's doctorate is in chiropractic medicine, though he also has studied and, I believe, holds some sort of certifications in nutritional science. To put it plainly, he is considered by many qualified medical and nutritional professionals to be on the fringe of quackery. But he has a dedicated and rabid following, nonetheless.
    • Scott Adams
      Has anyone had terrible TMJ/ Jaw Pain from undiagnosed Celiac?

      By Scott Adams · Posted

      I'd be very cautious about accepting these claims without robust evidence. The hypothesis requires a chain of biologically unlikely events: Gluten/gliadin survives the cow's rumen and entire digestive system intact. It is then absorbed whole into the cow's bloodstream. It bypasses the cow's immune system and liver. It is then secreted, still intact and immunogenic, into the milk. The cow's digestive system is designed to break down proteins, not transfer them whole into milk. This is not a recognized pathway in veterinary science. The provided backup shifts from cow's milk to human breastmilk, which is a classic bait-and-switch. While the transfer of food proteins in human breastmilk is a valid area of study, it doesn't validate the initial claim about commercial dairy. The use of a Dr. Osborne video is a major red flag. His entire platform is based on the idea that all grains are toxic, a view that far exceeds the established science on Celiac Disease and non-celiac gluten sensitivity. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and a YouTube video from a known ideological source is not that evidence."  
    • Wheatwacked
      Has anyone had terrible TMJ/ Jaw Pain from undiagnosed Celiac?

      By Wheatwacked · Posted

      Some backup to my statement about gluten and milk. Some background.  When my son was born in 1976 he was colicky from the beginning.  When he transitioned to formula it got really bad.  That's when we found the only pediactric gastroenterologist (in a population of 6 million that dealt with Celiac Disease (and he only had 14 patients with celiac disease), who dianosed by biopsy and started him on Nutramegen.  Recovery was quick. The portion of gluten that passes through to breastmilk is called gliadin. It is the component of gluten that causes celiac disease or gluten intolerance. What are the Effects of Gluten in Breastmilk? Gliaden, a component of gluten which is typically responsible for the intestinal reaction of gluten, DOES pass through breast milk.  This is because gliaden (as one of many food proteins) passes through the lining of your small intestine into your blood. Can gluten transmit through breast milk?  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

NOTICE: This site places This site places cookies on your device (Cookie settings). on your device. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.