Health Risks Of Non-Celiac Gluten Intolerance?

[color-me-confused]

The doc thinks I'm more in the gluten intolerant group than the celiac group, based on the degree of inflammation in my biopsy. Aside from the lack of difference of treatment (gluten-free diet), what's known about health risks of non-celiac gluten intolerance? Not that I am all that interested in eating gluten again, I can't imagine any good would come of that...

[JoshB]

What's your blood work say?

There's still some debate in the medical community over whether gluten intolerance exists. There's not been a whole lot done yet on how it should be defined, whether it's a permanent state or what the risks are, if any, beyond the general symptoms.

[color-me-confused]

I was looking at my blood work last night. The IgG test is on there but it doesn't say if it was the anti-gliadin version or the total IgG test. I'll have to dig into that a little more to see which was done. If it was the anti-gliadin IgG in the normal range than I'd wonder if I have a gluten intolerance, it might be an intolerance to some other part of wheat.

Of course I feel 1000x better on the gluten-free diet, I'm just trying to wrap my head around this.

edit: the sheet says "Immunoglobulins IgG, IgA, IgM serum". all in the normal range and each is called out as IgG, IgA, IgM with no annotations. There is another test labeled "transglutiminase IgA" which was a 7. So it looks like the anti-gliadin IgG wasn't run since that's a separate test at that lab. argh.

[JoshB]

I'm asking because there are all sorts of "inflammation", and if your inflammation didn't resemble celiac inflammation you might be barking up the wrong tree. If it was celiac inflammation, then it seems like you have celiac disease. I don't think you can have it a "little bit". That's like being a "little bit" pregnant.

Anti gliadin IgA antibodies are not specific to celiac disease. The IgA form of ttG antibodies are supposed to be more specific to celiac disease. [Open Original Shared Link I don't think that either one is supposed to be a fool-proof indicator, though ttG-igA is close at higher levels. IgM seems to indicate that your doc was looking for signs of infection, and is --I think-- irrelevant to gluten intolerance. You unfortunately don't seem to have EMA-IgA which can sometimes show something the others don't and is supposed to be a foolproof test (though it's not very sensitive and is often falsely negative).

Still, your ttG seems to indicate at least a little damage, which might be caused by celiac disease. If your GI saw minor inflammation that looks like celiac trouble, then I'd be inclined to think that you got lucky and caught things just as they were starting. That makes you about 30 years-worth luckier than most people.

[color-me-confused]

I'm asking because there are all sorts of "inflammation", and if your inflammation didn't resemble celiac inflammation you might be barking up the wrong tree. If it was celiac inflammation, then it seems like you have celiac disease. I don't think you can have it a "little bit". That's like being a "little bit" pregnant.

I guess in practice either gluten intolerance or pre-clinical celiac is the same...don't eat gluten! thanks for your help. I'm going to do some reading and try not to worry about the difference too much, I think.