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 Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Less Inflammation = Fewer Symptoms?


CGally81

Recommended Posts

CGally81 Enthusiast

I've had overt celiac symptoms since February 2009. Discovered I had it at the end of July 2009. Tried to go gluten-free August 2009 (but didn't know all foods that had gluten), went totally gluten-free October 2009, and totally casein-free January 2010.

Anyway, I haven't had any celiac symptoms for months now. There were some mistakes, like when I had barbeque sauce which contained modified food starch and caramel color, and I got a nasty headache (but no other symptoms) that cleared up within minutes of taking L-glutamine. But I haven't had anything that I would identify as a celiac reaction for a long time now. I also used to be hungry all the time since going gluten-free, but that's not really a problem now.

For the record, my symptoms are low blood sugar reaction, severe inability to focus or concentrate, nasty headache, liquid D, and weird "squib" noises in my stomach every few seconds that last for a long time.

Anyway, I'm still trying to make my diet healthy. I removed hydrogenated oils from it, after learning of their health effects, and introduced fish oil. This is a very recent change, as in, less than 2 weeks ago.

I'd read in the past about the link between inflammation and autoimmune disorders, as well as inflammation and celiac disease. Celiac is said to cause inflammation, but do the symptoms go down if there's less of it?

Hydrogenated oils cause inflammation. Fish oil reduces inflammation. Removing the first and adding the second should obviously be a big help. (I did it for many health reasons anyway, but this should be an additional benefit)

So, my question to all of you is, is there a chance that my symptoms will be reduced if I succeed in significantly reducing inflammation? Not that I plan to eat gluten again - even if my celiac is cured, the long-term health effects even on non-celiacs are simply not worth it. But still, do you think that if I continue this healthy diet of fish oil minus hydrogenated oil, and take care of myself, and get my inflammation reduced, that my symptoms will be much lesser should I accidentally come into contact with small amounts of gluten?

Plus, a study did show that the risk of early death was higher for those with inflammation than those without, so I wonder if that, to some extent, may be part of the key to our wellbeing.


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



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



Archived

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

  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Celiac.com:
    Donate

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):
    Celiac.com Sponsor (A17):





    Celiac.com Sponsors (A17-M):




  • Recent Activity

    1. - trents replied to barb simkin's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      8

      celiac, chocolate and alcohol

    2. - barb simkin replied to barb simkin's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      8

      celiac, chocolate and alcohol

    3. - trents replied to barb simkin's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      8

      celiac, chocolate and alcohol

    4. - barb simkin replied to barb simkin's topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      8

      celiac, chocolate and alcohol


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      131,333
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    BeitAryeh
    Newest Member
    BeitAryeh
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.4k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • trents
      So, you had both and endoscopy with biopsy and a colonoscopy. That helps me understand what you were trying to communicate. No, no! It never occurred to me that you were trying to mislead me. It's just that we get a lot of posters on the forum who are misinformed about what celiac disease is and how it is diagnosed so I need some clarification from you which you were so gracious to give.
    • barb simkin
      I had both the genetic genes for celiac.  My gastroenologist advised he also took a biopsy during one of my colonoscopies and endoscopy and advised I had celiac disease, along with stomach ulcers from my esophagus stomach down to my small bowel. I was shown the ulcers on the catscan and endoscopy report.  I also had polyps in 3 places throughout my large bowel. I was on a strict diet for months following.  I am sorry if I didnt define how I was diagnosed with celiac disease.  I am sorry if you think I was misleading you. I also had to pay $150.00 for the genetic testing.
    • trents
      So, I'm a little confused here. I understand you to say that you have not been officially diagnosed with celiac disease. Is this correct?  You have had genetic testing done to check for the potential for developing celiac disease and that was positive. Is this correct? I think you meant to type "gluten sensitivity" but you typed "gluten insensitivity". Just so we are clear about the terminology, there is celiac disease and there is NCGS (Non Celiac Gluten Sensitivity). They are not the same but they have overlapping symptoms. Celiac disease causes damage to the small bowel lining but NCGS does not. NCGS is often referred to in short form as gluten sensitivity. However, people often use the terms celiac disease and gluten sensitivity interchangeably so it can be unclear which disease they are referring to. Genetic testing cannot be used to diagnose celiac disease but it can be used to establish the potential to develop active celiac disease. About 40% of the general population has one or both of  the genes that have been most strongly connected with the potential to develop active celiac disease but only about 1% of the population actually develops active celiac disease. This makes the genetic test useful for ruling out celiac disease but not for diagnosing it. A colonoscopy cannot be used to diagnose celiac disease because it doesn't permit the scope to go up into the small bowel where celiac disease does the damage. They use an endoscopy ("upper GI) for checking the small bowel lining for celiac damage.
    • barb simkin
      I did nor read the chocolate pkg as it was of fered to me and I ate 2 pcs. I do know that only very dark chocolate and and a very few others are gluten free. Most alcohols contain gluten. I have several yrs of not knowing my celiac condition as docs would not do the test. After looking on the internet about my sufferings I insisted on the gene trsting which showed positive for gluten insensitivity and a biopsy on my next colonoscopy that also showed positive which could not help the damage done to my small bowel. So I very rarely have a glass of wine
    • trents
      @barb simkin, are you sure the chocolate products are gluten-free and not "manufactured on equipment that also handles wheat products and tree nuts", i.e., cross-contamination? And what kind of alcoholic beverages are we talking about? Most beers are made from gluten-containing grains. Just checking.
×
×
  • Create New...