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

Gluten Free Debate


come dance with me

Recommended Posts

come dance with me Enthusiast

Open Original Shared Link

 

What's everyone's thoughts?


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



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



kareng Grand Master

That's an interesting article. I'm not familiar with the specifics of your gluten-free labeling laws. From what I have seen from other people in Australia, they may not be either.

I would hate for them to loosen up just because the rest of the world is a bit looser. But....many gluten-free companies are testing to 10 ppm even if the US proposed law is 20.

Kamma Explorer

I like Australia's labelling requirements and cannot understand their reasoning why they would want to bring them in line with Europe and North America.  In my opinion, the goal is to protect and inform people with gluten intolerance, not to create standardization internationally.  Especially when there are many that still react to less than 20 ppm and are initially confused by 'gluten free' labelling as to mean 'no gluten present'.  

 

Australia also has a caveat in their labelling that manufacturers can claim their product is 'low gluten' if it falls under 20 ppm.  

 

An interesting note is that in Europe historically, it was believed that 200 ppm gluten levels were considered safe for celiacs (1981 standards) and thus food containing <200 ppm was labelled gluten free.  It was only decreased in 2009 to <20 ppm.  This was also in conjunction with the industry using a variety of  detectability tests that had different sensitivities of detecting gluten.  For example, one commercial method that was approved by the American Association of Official Analytical Chemists could only detect gluten levels above 160 ppm.  As different tests were developed that had a higher degree of sensitivity in detecting gluten, the acceptable 'gluten free' level was dropped to 20 ppm. based on serological testing that this level was safe for most celiacs.  (However, Fassano's recent study of some celiacs not healing at all on a diet of <20 ppm is throwing a bit of a curve on the <20 ppm being safe for all celiacs).

 

At this point, if they have the ability to detect gluten levels down to under 3 ppm (they do and it's what Australia bases their 'gluten free' labelling on) they should label the products as such.  I wish more countries would standardize to Australia, not the other way around.

 

 

Ref:  Open Original Shared Link

Ref: Open Original Shared Link

Ref  Open Original Shared Link

Oscar Apprentice

Kamma, should we assume that all those "greater than" symbols (>) were actually intended to be "less that" symbols (<)?

Kamma Explorer

:)

Oscar, you're a peach.  Thanks for catching that and will edit.

GFinDC Veteran

Kamma, should we assume that all those "greater than" symbols (>) were actually intended to be "less that" symbols (<)?

Or maybe they are "less than" symbols? :D  I see she already fixed 'em up.

 

Kamma,

 

There's an old saw, if it ain't broke, don't fix it!  It seems to me everyone in Australia would easily understand the current labeling there.  Changing the standard seems unneeded to me.

Kamma Explorer

Here's an article from a newspaper in Sydney.  The push to change the labelling comes from inside the industry.

 

Excerpt:

Australian food manufacturers and suppliers are pushing to increase the amount of gluten allowed in so-called ''gluten-free'' foods on which thousands of people with digestive problems rely.

The Australian Food and Grocery Council is preparing to ask Food Standards Australia New Zealand to relax its current standard, which states there must be no detectable gluten in foods labelled ''gluten-free''.

The lobby group instead wants such foods to be able to contain up to 20 milligrams of gluten per kilogram, which would bring Australia in line with British and European standards.

A confidential survey by AFGC of 98 businesses that either manufacture ''gluten-free'' foods or supply them found nearly 80 per cent think the new standard would cut down manufacturing plant costs, including gluten testing costs, and make it easier to source products from overseas.

Open Original Shared Link

 

 

So it's fuelled by a cost cutting measure.within the industry.


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



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



auzzi Newbie

Coeliac disease is only part of the wider picture.

 

Gluten is an allergen. A product with less that 20ppm will be labelled "gluten-free" up until they have an anaphylaxic fatality. 

 

Besides, they would have to legislate a change in the "Truth in Labelling" laws/regulations. You cannot say it it "gluten-free", if, by it's very definition, it is not ..

 

All lobby groups have their own agendas ...

Archived

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

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

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





    Celiac.com Sponsors (A17-M):




  • Recent Activity

    1. - trents replied to JudyLou's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      1

      Seeking advice on potential gluten challenge

    2. - JudyLou posted a topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      1

      Seeking advice on potential gluten challenge

    3. - marzian commented on Scott Adams's article in Diagnosis, Testing & Treatment
      5

      A Future Beyond the Gluten-Free Diet? Scientists Test a New Cell Therapy for Celiac Disease (+Video)

    4. - Jmartes71 posted a topic in Related Issues & Disorders
      0

      Medications

    5. - Scott Adams replied to GlutenFreeChef's topic in Celiac Disease Pre-Diagnosis, Testing & Symptoms
      11

      Blood Test for Celiac wheat type matters?

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      133,142
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    Mark Conway
    Newest Member
    Mark Conway
    Joined
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.5k
    • Total Posts
      1m
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):
  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • trents
      Welcome to the celiac.com community, @JudyLou! There are a couple of things you might consider to help you in your decision that would not require you to do a gluten challenge. The first, that is if you have not had this test run already, is to request a "total IGA" test to be run. One of the reasons that celiac blood antibody tests can be negative, apart from not having celiac disease, that is, is because of IGA deficiency. If a person is IGA deficient, they will not respond accurately to the celiac disease blood antibody tests (such as the commonly run TTG-IGA). The total IGA test is designed to check for IGA deficiency. The total IGA test is not a celiac antibody test so I wouldn't think that a gluten challenge is necessary. The second is to have genetic testing done to determine if you have the genetic potential to develop celiac disease. About 30-40% of  the general population have the genetic potential but only about 1% actually develop celiac disease. So, genetic testing cannot be used to diagnose celiac disease but it can be used to rule it out. Those who don't have the genetic potential but still have reaction to gluten would not be diagnosed with celiac disease but with NCGS (Non Celiac Gluten Sensitivity).  Another possibility is that you do have celiac disease but are in remission. We do see this but often it doesn't last.
    • JudyLou
      Hi there, I’m debating whether to consider a gluten challenge and I’m hoping someone here can help with that decision (so far, none of the doctors have been helpful). I have a history of breaking out in a horrible, burning/itchy somewhat blistering rash about every 8 years. This started when I was in my early 30’s and at that point it started at the ankles and went about to my knees. Every time I had the rash it would cover more of my body, so my arms and part of my torso were impacted as well, and it was always symmetrical. First I was told it was an allergic reaction to a bug bite. Next I was told it was eczema (after a biopsy of the lesion - not the skin near the lesion) and given a steroid injection (didn’t help). I took myself off of gluten about 3 weeks before seeing an allergist, just to see if it would help (it didn’t in that time period). He thought the rash looked like dermatitis herpetiformis and told me to eat some bread the night before my blood tests, which I did, and the tests came back negative. I’ve since learned from this forum that I needed to be eating gluten daily for at least a month in order to get an accurate test result. I’m grateful to the allergist as he found that 5 mg of doxepin daily will eliminate the rash within about 10 days (previously it lasted for months whether I was eating gluten or not). I have been gluten free for about 25 years as a precaution and recommendation from my doctor, and the pattern of breaking out every 8 years or so remains the same except once I broke out after just one year (was not glutened as far as I know), and now it’s been over 9 years. What’s confusing to me, is that there have been 3 times in the past 2 years when I’ve accidentally eaten gluten, and I haven’t had any reaction at all. Once someone made pancakes (they said they were gluten-free, they were not) and I ate several. I need to decide whether to do a gluten challenge and get another blood test. If I do, are these tests really accurate? I’m also concerned that I could damage my gut in that process if I do have celiac disease. My brother and cousin both had lymphoma so that’s a concern regarding a challenge as well, though there is a lot of cancer in various forms in my family so there may be no gluten connection there. Sorry for the ramble, I’m just doubting the need to remain gluten free if I don’t have any reaction to eating it and haven’t had a positive test (other than testing positive for one of the genes, though it sounds like that’s pretty common). I’d appreciate any thoughts or advice! 
    • Jmartes71
      Hello, just popped in my head to ask this question about medications and celiac? I have always had refurse reaction to meds since I can remember  of what little meds my body is able to tolerate. I was taking gabapentin 300mg for a week,  in past I believe 150? Any ways it amps me up not able to sleep, though very tired.However I did notice it helped with my bloating sibo belly.I hate that my body is that sensitive and medical doesn't seem to take seriously. Im STILL healing with my skin, eye, and now ms or meningioma ( will know in April  which)and dealing with this limbo nightmare. I did write my name, address ect on the reclamation but im not tech savvy and not sure if went through properly. I called my city representative in Stanislaus County and asked if theres a physical paper i can sign for proclamation for celiac and she had no clue about what I was saying, so I just said I'll go back on website. 
    • Scott Adams
      I'm not saying that some celiacs won't need it, but it should be done under a doctor's supervision because it can cause lots of problems in some people.
    • Jmartes71
      I also noticed I get debilitating migraines when I smell gluten, wheat and its not taken seriously when it affects one in every way.Im still begging to properly be heard.I also noticed tolerance level is down the drain with age and life changes. I have been told by incompetent medical that im not celiac or that sensitive. Diagnosed in 1994 by gi biopsy gluten-free ever since along with other lovely food allergies. Prayers
×
×
  • 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.