Jump to content
  • Sign Up
0
Scott Adams

New Treatment for Celiac Disease? - WebMD

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

6.jpg

MSN Health & Fitness

New Treatment for Celiac Disease?

WebMD

9, 2011 -- Blocking an inflammatory protein called interleukin-15 (IL-15) may help treat the symptoms of celiac disease and prevent the development of ...

Human and mouse studies sharpen focus on cause of celiac disease EurekAlert (press release)

Mouse Study Suggests New Clues to Celiac Disease MSN Health & Fitness

Hughes-Trigg Subway now offers gluten-free options The Daily Campus

Celiac.com

all 8 news articles »

View the full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was just another obnoxious article from the pharmaceutical industry which is funding researchers, to try to get all of the celiacs dependent on those oh- so - expensive biological immune altering DRUGS instead of just letting them eat a gluten free diet in peace, and get symptom relief that way. Since biologic drugs are going to be the way most new drugs are developed, from what I have read, the thought of having another 1% of the population taking these things must have them anticipating good times.

Medications that block IL-15 are being developed for other inflammatory diseases, including RA.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the problem is that in spite of some Oats being certified Gluten Free, some of us react to Oat anyway. Is this really too hard a concept to understand ? Not all gluten free grains work for all gluten free people ?

:o:huh::angry:

But non-Celiacs who have never had a gluten reaction in their lives are saying they're safe! :P

I haven't completely lost faith in the medical community...but I have my moments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, the problem is that in spite of some Oats being certified Gluten Free, some of us react to Oat anyway. Is this really too hard a concept to understand ? Not all gluten free grains work for all gluten free people ?

:o:huh::angry:

While I agree 100% with most of what you say here regarding pharmaceuticals, many, many Celiacs can and do tolerate certified gluten-free oats just fine, including me. I ate a lot of oats pre-diagnosis anyway so was used to the amount of fiber. The reaction that some have may be from the fiber content alone. I think oats should be included in safe foods lists, as long as they are certified, and if you cannot tolerate them, like any other food, you don't eat them. Oats should not be discouraged if tolerated well as they are just too nutritious a food to make the unsafe lists. The protein is not quite the same as wheat gluten so the cause of the reaction may not be for the same reasons.

I do like your passion with regards to Big Pharma. I feel the same way. I have a cousin who is a drug rep and, although I love her dearly, I don't discuss her job....ever. If you knew the money they made and the bonuses they get for amount of drugs sold, it would make you sick. The proof is in the doctors office when they pressure you to take what you don't need. However, as long as America looks for the quick fix, these people are not going to go away.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but we are going to have a problem if the gluten free food industry listens to the Oats proponents and starts sticking Oat flour into everything under the assumption that because some Celiac Association said they were "safe," they must be "safe." This stuff needs to be labeled.

Another thing to watch out for is the Genetically Modified Food plant breeding industry. I know they are experimenting with crossing different types of grains with each other, in hopes of transferring characteristics of one to the other, and I can't get a good answer as to whether or not this is a risk to how the proteins are treated by our bodies. And most of the GMO proponents are scary because they really don't seem to care at all about a subset of the population for whom this could affect, having already successfully foisted GMO alfalfa upon the organic dairy industry now with this latest USDA ruling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but we are going to have a problem if the gluten free food industry listens to the Oats proponents and starts sticking Oat flour into everything under the assumption that because some Celiac Association said they were "safe," they must be "safe." This stuff needs to be labeled.

Another thing to watch out for is the Genetically Modified Food plant breeding industry. I know they are experimenting with crossing different types of grains with each other, in hopes of transferring characteristics of one to the other, and I can't get a good answer as to whether or not this is a risk to how the proteins are treated by our bodies. And most of the GMO proponents are scary because they really don't seem to care at all about a subset of the population for whom this could affect, having already successfully foisted GMO alfalfa upon the organic dairy industry now with this latest USDA ruling.

I have seen cookies which contain certified gluten-free oat flour...which I would eat because they are certified gluten-free. If it doesn't state that, then I don't eat them. I would think that any company marketing directly to the gluten-free population would clearly mark whether the oats were certified or not. I doubt they would stick oat flour in everything, either, as oat flour would not taste good in many products. There are already enough gluten-free flours used successfully in baking so I don't think a company is going to change their recipes over that....it's too expensive to do so. Gluten-free oats/flour are very expensive and I have only seen them used in gluten-free oatmeal cookies.

As far as GMO foods go, I don't buy them and don't approve of the whole thing. It's dangerous to muck with the food supply. Whole Foods and other markets have many non-GMO foods so it's not that dire....yet. Europe is pretty good about not allowing GMO foods so I guess I may retire there, if things get bad here in the States! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whole Foods and Stonyfield Farms (the yogurt guy) have been really, really disappointing on this entire GMO issue. They are just planning to keep selling their stuff no matter what is in it.

The issue of organic dairy says cows whose products are sold as "organic" can't eat GMO feedstuffs, like sugar beet root pulp or alfalfa or corn. But almost the entire seed supply of sugar beets in the US has been started to be grown with GMO sugar beets, and now there is no way to prevent alfalfa from being cross contaminated if they let the GMO alfalfa loose - the same thing has happened with GMO corn.

Here is Gary Hirshberg's (Stonyfield) sorry excuse as to GMO alfalfa http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hirshberg/speaking-with-one-voice-t_b_816447.html where he's complaining that one of the Organic Consumers Association people was being mean to him. Well, he and his friends at Whole Foods have been dumping lots of campaign donations towards the current administration who approved this stuff. And they've adopted a sort of live and let pollinate just don't look too closely stance towards the GMO industry.

In December, to no one's surprise, the USDA took a complete ban of GE alfalfa off the table as an option, leaving only two choices: complete deregulation, or deregulation with some safeguards to protect organic farmers under a principle which they called "co-existence." The choice we were faced with was to walk away and wait for the legal battle in the courts or stay at the table and fight for safeguards and restrictions that would attempt to protect organic farmers and consumer choice, still maintaining the option for legal battle later. A group of us participated in the meetings with the clear caveat that any decision to deregulate GE alfalfa must include restrictions that protect organic farmers and consumers' choice. When faced with the overwhelming reality that GE alfalfa would be released despite our best efforts, we believed fighting for some safeguards to protect organic and organic farmers was essential.

Many have asked why we endorsed the coexistence option rather than an outright ban on GE alfalfa. The answer is we didn't. When it was an option we strongly endorsed an outright ban. However, the option of an outright ban was taken off the table. At that point, we then specifically advocated that any regulatory approval must ensure (a) protection of seed purity -- for organic farmers' use, and as insurance in case something "crops up" that causes a later reconsideration of the use of biotechnology; (B) organic farmers whose crops become contaminated by GE alfalfa must be compensated by the patent holders for their losses due to losing their organic certification and © the USDA must oversee all testing and monitoring of GE crops to ensure compliance as part of its role in protecting all US agriculture. Needless to say, the biotech coalition was firmly opposed to all three caveats, but we remained united and fought hard for them.

No, they didn't "fight hard."

Farmers must be compensated ? What a joke !

They know darn well that when Monsanto counter sues farmers, Monsanto usually prevails in courts because of crooked judges. And this is classic biotech bullying, where the burden of proof must be that "harm was caused," or there is no foul.

These "options" get taken "off the table" when campaign contributors fold. Almost NOBODY in the consumer end likes the idea of GMO food and yet Monsanto and their ilk are still running wild in the USDA's appropriations process for biotechnology research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0

×