Horrible Slate Article

[Mskedi]

I think I'm really missing something here. How is "bogeyman" insulting? It's saying it's something people are worried about. I don't think he's say AT ALL that some people are making things up and don't feel better when they're off gluten.

I read "bogeyman" as a loaded term, probably because of my associations with it. When I think of the word, I imagine a kid being afraid of something in his closet that isn't actually there. To me, the use of the term implies that the danger of gluten isn't actually there.

Maybe I'm being hypersensitive.

[FMcGee]

I read "bogeyman" as a loaded term, probably because of my associations with it. When I think of the word, I imagine a kid being afraid of something in his closet that isn't actually there. To me, the use of the term implies that the danger of gluten isn't actually there.

Maybe I'm being hypersensitive.

I guess I've just always interpreted it as "something people are afraid of or worried about." I think what happened with this author - and this is also true of his title and introduction - is that he was looking for the snappy, catchy phrase, and now that it's all being parsed to death, it doesn't hold up. I publish for a living, too, and that can happen more easily than you'd think. It could even be possible that he wrote it differently and his editor had him brush it up a bit. I honestly think this is kind of a problem for Slate as a whole, that they try to be edgy and push envelopes and whatnot, but don't often end up actually doing that, and instead just offend - or bore, or annoy - a whole heap of people, often their intended audience. The writing itself is good, but what's being said is often fair to middling, given what they seem to want to do. I think this article isn't an attack on gluten avoiders, but a symptom of a larger problem within the publication.

[lobita]

I guess I've just always interpreted it as "something people are afraid of or worried about." I think what happened with this author - and this is also true of his title and introduction - is that he was looking for the snappy, catchy phrase, and now that it's all being parsed to death, it doesn't hold up. I publish for a living, too, and that can happen more easily than you'd think. It could even be possible that he wrote it differently and his editor had him brush it up a bit. I honestly think this is kind of a problem for Slate as a whole, that they try to be edgy and push envelopes and whatnot, but don't often end up actually doing that, and instead just offend - or bore, or annoy - a whole heap of people, often their intended audience. The writing itself is good, but what's being said is often fair to middling, given what they seem to want to do. I think this article isn't an attack on gluten avoiders, but a symptom of a larger problem within the publication.

I agree with that. I've seen the pub problem happen as well (yay fellow editors!).

Also, I think the problem is that the article isn't aimed at those of us on the board. I'm assuming that most of us have gone through horrific medical problems and once we found that going gluten-free changed some if not all of those problems, it became panacea for us. But there are others out there, my bf being one of them, who tries going gluten-free because of small problems. My bf suffers from stomach problems from time to time and is "tired" often. When he went on the diet for a month, he said he felt a little better and more energetic, but couldn't really tell the difference.

Now my story: I was so fatigued in college that I would sleep 10 hours and still cry because I couldn't stay awake during my classes. And everyday felt like I was walking around in a haze, and that went on for years. What I had was definitely fatigue, and anyone who'd have experienced what I did couldn't write, like the Slate author did, that going gluten-free has a placebo effect.

But that's the dramatic difference between someone like myself going on the diet and my bf. Sometimes it's hard to remember that not everyone is as sensitive to gluten as I am.

I do like the part where he writes about how not eating gluten can make it harder for you to digest when you do. I never understood why people became more sensitive to gluten after going off of it, but the lack of enzymes makes sense to me because that's why beans upsets a lot of people...b/c they lack the enzymes to digest it.

[Scott Adams]

You might find this response interesting:

https://www.celiac.com/articles/21874/1/Ron...late/Page1.html

Take care,

Scott

[neesee]

It's my understanding that Ron Hoggan's doctorate is in education, not medicine.

[mushroom]

It's my understanding that Ron Hoggan's doctorate is in education, not medicine.

And we all know how informed about gluten the typical medical degree makes one

[Scott Adams]

Uhhh, sorry, what did your comment have to do with Ron's response? I assume that the guy who wrote the article in Slate isn't a doctor either...I also am not a doctor...do we need to be doctors of medicine to respond to Slate's incorrect article?

Take care,

Scott

It's my understanding that Ron Hoggan's doctorate is in education, not medicine.

[TrillumHunter]

"Ironically, the people who may benefit most from the current vogue are those who have been gluten-free all along. The proliferation of gluten-free products has made life for a full-blown celiac easier than it's ever been, and a greater awareness of gluten-related disorders has more celiac patients getting diagnosed than ever before. (There are still thought to be millions of undiagnosed cases in the United States.) Let's hope those gains aren't erased when the conventional wisdom shifts again and we leave this diet craze behind us." The Slate article

"Your ill-informed attack on a gluten free diet is regrettable because it suggests it is a fad diet rather than a therapeutic one." Ron Hoggan

How did you come to this conclusion after reading the last paragraph?

Surely some of you can see it IS becoming a fad for lots of people? The sad thing is lots of those people DO have celiac but they'll never know because Elizabeth Hasselback says to just try it!

[neesee]

Uhhh, sorry, what did your comment have to do with Ron's response? I assume that the guy who wrote the article in Slate isn't a doctor either...I also am not a doctor...do we need to be doctors of medicine to respond to Slate's incorrect article?

Take care,

Scott

You hold Ron Hoggan up to this forum like he is some sort of an authority figure about celiac disease and non celiac gluten sensitivity. He has no more education on the subject than you or I do. He is a retired special education teacher who is making money selling books he's probably not qualified to write.

Besides, Ron didn't put his response here, you did.

[Tim-n-VA]

It's my understanding that Ron Hoggan's doctorate is in education, not medicine.

Thanks. With "Dr." in the byline and starting with references to a medical doctor by name, it was not clear.

[Scott Adams]

Does this mean you read the article?

Scott

Thanks. With "Dr." in the byline and starting with references to a medical doctor by name, it was not clear.

[mushroom]

Surely some of you can see it IS becoming a fad for lots of people? The sad thing is lots of those people DO have celiac but they'll never know because Elizabeth Hasselback says to just try it!

There may be a small percentage of masochists out there who have adopted it as a "fad", but I do not see that as a problem. And while I am no fan of Elizabeth Hasselback, I personally don't find it particularly sad that I don't KNOW for sure that I have celiac disease, and my insurance companies don't either. It is enough for me that members of my family have it and by eliminating gluten I discovered all the other foods my body was objecting to which were masked by the overwhelming gluten response.

[Jestgar]

There may be a small percentage of masochists out there who have adopted it as a "fad",

I just have a hard time seeing anyone in their right mind doing this diet as a fad. At least not to the point that they'd be annoying waiters and such as much as we do. I'm all for people cutting back on gluten, but who is going to buy an $8 loaf of mediocre bread if they don't have to?

I wonder if there is simply an overwhelming number of people who feel bad when they eat gluten, and this is too hard for mainstream media to accept.

I, personally, have never met a single person who does this diet as a "healthy lifestyle choice".

[TrillumHunter]

Oh they aren't masochists, they're sadists. They're the people who make everyone buy them special crackers and then proceed to eat the cheesecake because "it's only a little gluten." You haven't come across any of these folks? That is great because they are screwing us over.

I frankly don't think it's important at all to be officially diagnosed. What I do think is important is not misrepresenting oneself as celiac and proceeding to EAT GLUTEN.

Anything that is touted as causing weight loss is going to become a fad.

"At least not to the point that they'd be annoying waiters and such as much as we do." Have you ever been a server? Some people LIVE for a reason to do this.

[ravenwoodglass]

It's my understanding that Ron Hoggan's doctorate is in education, not medicine.

So what!!!! So to you that means he can't have done any research or have knowledge about celiac or gluten intolerance. I have much more knowledge about celiac than any of the doctors I have seen except perhaps for the allergist who was the primary doctor responsible for my diagnosis. You don't need an MD behind your name to do research and become knowledgeable about something. I suppose I should be thankful for my doctors ignorance, after all they are directly responsible for all the time I have had to research due to the medical issues that were to far advanced to resolve.

[ravenwoodglass]

You might find this response interesting:

https://www.celiac.com/articles/21874/1/Ron...late/Page1.html

Take care,

Scott

Thanks for posting that. I found it to be a good response to an article of questionable value.

[mushroom]

Oh they aren't masochists, they're sadists. They're the people who make everyone buy them special crackers and then proceed to eat the cheesecake because "it's only a little gluten." You haven't come across any of these folks? That is great because they are screwing us over.

You obviously have a bone to pick with someone but it's not any non-gluten eating person I know--they all bring their own crackers. These folks you are talking about are the same kinds of people who sit down and eat a high-glycemic, sugar-laden meal and then go inject themselves with insulin, and I do know at least one of those.

[Tim-n-VA]

Does this mean you read the article?

Scott

Yes.

[TrillumHunter]

You obviously have a bone to pick with someone but it's not any non-gluten eating person I know--they all bring their own crackers. These folks you are talking about are the same kinds of people who sit down and eat a high-glycemic, sugar-laden meal and then go inject themselves with insulin, and I do know at least one of those.

Maybe I do have a bone to pick but it isn't with you personally. I think deciding to go gluten-free because you have a family history and you know it bothers you is pretty damn responsible. Folks with pictures of their battered insides can't always do it.

My bone is with the knee-jerk criticism of any author who dares to question the validity of recommending a gluten-free diet for the general population. The author did not deny celiac disease in any way. He did, as many in medical research still do, question the idea of gluten intolerance. He questioned the appropriateness of the celebrity advice book that touts the weight loss benefits of a gluten-free diet on the jacket of the book. He gets demonized for that?

I don't know anyone who follows the gluten-free diet who demands things of a host but I know a couple of chronic "dieters" who do.

[Mother of Jibril]

I have much more knowledge about celiac than any of the doctors I have seen except perhaps for the allergist who was the primary doctor responsible for my diagnosis. You don't need an MD behind your name to do research and become knowledgeable about something.

Really!! While I trusted my gastroenterologist (who was checking for evidence of mastocytosis in my GI system, not celiac) to perform an endoscopy, I had to explain the results of my genetic test from Enterolab... *0302 is DQ8. He had no idea. Once I explained he thought I was smart to stay on the gluten-free diet. I give him a lot of credit for listening to me.

I've come to realize that nobody knows my body like I do! Even medical doctors. I live in my body 24 hours a day... so when something is bothering me I'm very persistent about doing the necessary research. I've accumulated a LOT of knowledge. The main reason I come here is to share it.

Thank you for everything that YOU have shared, ravenwoodglass

[mushroom]

He did, as many in medical research still do, question the idea of gluten intolerance. He questioned the appropriateness of the celebrity advice book that touts the weight loss benefits of a gluten-free diet on the jacket of the book. He gets demonized for that?

I think you will get a lot of argument here on the concept of gluten intolerance. But I don't think any celiac (at least on this forum) advocates the gluten-free diet as a weight loss measure (the only person I have seen is Elizabeth Hasselback to sell books). That was not the part of the article that we all took exception to. It did have that added benefit for me, but half of the celiacs, it seems, are trying to gain weight.

Since many people who have problems with gluten and also have other autoimmune diseases test negative for celiac, it is pretty hard to say that they are not intolerant to gluten. You can argue that the tests are inaccurate, which we do, but without that diagnosis of celiac what else are you going to call it??

[darlindeb25]

I, personally, have never met a single person who does this diet as a "healthy lifestyle choice".

Me either. I have read about them, in news articles and such, yet have never met anyone who does it.

I know there are many of us here who could write an article, which would be wonderful for the gluten intolerant. This person is not one of us, he is just writing what he has been told. It's difficult to know how we feel unless the person is also walking in our shoes.

It's n ot a bad article, it's just not a good one either...mediocre is the word for it. At least it gets people talking, and if just one person see's the words gluten intolerance, and does research, then finds a reason for why they feel the way they do, then wonderful!

[Tim-n-VA]

I have a sister-in-law who is always trying fad diets. She went thru a gluten-free phase indirectly as part of the blood type diet. She might have also been gluten free when she was selecting food by color but I can't remember the details of that one.

One data point for knowing a person who chose the "lifestyle". I personally like these people because they increase the market demand for gluten-free products and labeling.

[Jestgar]

She might have also been gluten free when she was selecting food by color but I can't remember the details of that one.

:blink: :blink:

[Lisa]

Here is a recent article in Living Without Magazine, by Dr. Stefano Guandalini, MD:

Open Original Shared Link

We have readers who don't have celiac disease but feel much better on the gluten-free diet. They’re gluten sensitive, right?

Years ago, I was skeptical about so-called gluten sensitivity. Today I’m very respectful of individuals who don’t have celiac disease but who report a real benefit from the gluten-free diet. Improvement in health can be coincidental to starting the diet or it can be due to a placebo effect—but certainly not in every case. There’s a lot of research going on in this area, including in our lab at the University of Chicago Celiac Disease Center. The data is preliminary but suffice it to say that research is now revealing that changes do occur in the intestines of gluten-sensitive patients when they ingest gluten. More will be uncovered about this in the future.

Please note reference to the "placebo effect", as referred to in Daniel Engber article.