gfp

I'm dealing with a non-gluten-free household situation right now, eg., foods containing gluten are prepared all around the kitchen, glutened dishes & utensils etc. will get put in the sink/dishwasher with gluten-free ones. I have to rewash items that get washed with the same old dish rag that's been used & reused on glutened items.

No one seems to understand the severity of it all & can't seem to be bothered with it all. My word isn't good enough for them & research is out of the question. I know they just can't be bothered with it all (which I can accept) but I know the general concensus is that I'm overreacting. GRRRR!

To top it all off, my husband & I buy the groceries & I wind up cooking dinner every night!

How do I deal with all of this?

TIA!

Its hard to say without knowing who the others are...

If these are your kids then heck, just put your foot down.

If you are sharing a kitchen for other reasons then its more difficult. The reality is you will always get cross contamination in a non-gluten-free kitchen, its just a matter of time but you can obviously swing luck in your favor.

The main problem from what you say is the others taking the illness seriously but this depends so much on your circumstances it seems hard to come up with a best solution....

Sorry but I think you will find the answer inside yourself.

Firstly I think you might need the help of your family and to do this you need to tell them you have been cheating.

Gluten is addictive as you know and breaking it can be as hard as any drug.

What I would recommend, especailly in summer is to drop the gluten-substitute foods like gluten-free bread and pasta etc. until you are past the hump. You could buy sme nice gluten-free pasta as a interim treat barolla make some decent stuff.... but keep this as your reward.

Each time you eat gluten it is just setting you up for the next fall, you need to get past this.

I would recommend sticking strictly to fresh meat/veg and fruit for a few weeks. Heck your in the garden of the world even if it is wheat dominated. Take this time as a purging of the toxin/drug from your system and then at the end take your treat (gluten-free pasta or pizza etc.) as your reward.

Hi, Jaimek, thanks for posting the info. I totally agree with the breastfeeding thing (though obviously it's not a guarantee)--but I do question his advice on starting gluten no later than 9 months. Other potential allergens like citrus and strawberries are held off until at least a year (and families with history of food allergies are told to wait even longer). Why start gluten at 9 months? Did he have a reason for that? (I'm not jumping down youyr throat, I'm trying to find out why he would start it at 9 months.)

I read the same study, its simply as they said the studied a whole load of kids and when they were introduced gluten in the diet and found a lower incidence at age 5 than those who were introduced it later.

However this is a very preliminary study, it doesn't say why it just shows the stats.

Now it might be (I'm speculating here) that mothers who breastfeed tend to introduce solids earlier and that there is a correlation with when they introduced solids containing gluten and indeed the reason why is due to the IgG being passed in mother's milk. It might equally be something else ...

For instance what if they did 4 groups instead of 2 ... breastfed with mother consuming gluten and non breastfed with mother not and did both of these with the 6-9 month introduction.... ?

What does non-celiac gluten sensitivity mean?

How is it different from celiac?

I am confused and need to know

TIA

Lorraine

You are not the only one confused....

It all hinges on the definition of celaics disease.

Prior ro the 50's celaics was non specific and basically referred to people who were ill when they ate wheat, barley, rye etc.

Then they invented a new endoscope that wnet into the intestine and they saw damaged villi and decided that was the cause.

Today many researchers see many symptoms of people who react in different ways to gluten but depending where you are and who you ask this is either celaic disease or not. Ask a enterologist and they will likely say it is damaged villi, ask a neurologist and they will have a different answer.

I have a page I made about this which summarises my thoughts....but I can't post it directly because it would break board rules ..

Sunday, 12 March 2006

Coeliacs disease was first diagnosed by Galen a Roman physcian to the emperors in 2AD or his contempory Aretaeus of Cappadocia.

Exactly what is it and what is accepted or not as coeliacs disease is rather dependent where you live.

Galen 131-201AD

Image

Many commercial interests seek to control what is and what is not considered coeliacs disease but the most inclusive and simple defintion remains that of Galen. which is an intollerance to eating wheat, barley or rye.

Francis Adams translated the presenved works of Aretaeus and reprinted them for the Sydenham Society in 1856. The original Greek Text of the sections on "The Coeliac Affection" suggests that Aretaeus may possibly have understood a remarkable amount about the coeliac condition or to put it another way we don't know much more now.

From the writings of Dr James S. Steward, Consultant Physician, West Middlesex University Hospital, Isleworth, Middlesex.

"After the 1939-45 war came a fundamental discovery which proved to be the main advance in the treatment of coeliac children and adults alike. This discovery was made and described in detail by a Dutch paediatrician, Professor Dicke, in his doctoral thesis for the University of Utrecht in 1950. He showed how coeliac children benefited dramatically when wheat, rye and oats flour were excluded from the diet. As soon as these were replaced by wheat starch, maize flour, maize starch or rice flour the children's appetite returned and their absorption of fat improved so that the fatty diarrhoea disappeared."

The next step was the isolation of various parts of wheat and identification of one of its two main proteins (gluten) as the culprit.

This is where things start to get confused.

" The original observation which, together with Processor Dicke's discovery, led to our present understanding of the nature of the coeliac condition was made by Dr. J. W. Paulley, a physician in Ipswich, and reported to the British Society of Gastroenology in Birmingham in the same year as Professor Dicke's discovery. Dr. Paulley described an abnormality of the lining of the small intestine found at the operation in an adult coeliac patient. This abnormality consisted of an inflammation, the exact nature of which is still being investigated.

The existence of this inflammatory change was confirmed in several patients by Dr. Paulley and was then found by many doctors in this country, the United States and elsewhere to be the most essential single feature on which the diagnosis of the coeliac condition could be based. Its importance to the patient is that it results in a loss of the microscopic projections or villi which are partly responsible for providing the lining membrane of the small intestine with a large surface area. It is from this mucous membrane lining that the absorption of food into the bloodstream takes place." Fig 1 Healthy ViliImage

From this point on research and diagnosis of coeliac disease focused largely on the intestine and the degradation of the villi which line it. The invention of the gastric biopsy and subsequent modification for the intestine provided a easily measurable metric. The destruction of the villi can be clearly seen in the photomicrographs opposite. However According to netdoctor.co.uk "Half of adults with coeliac disease do not have any symptoms from the bowel." Other common symptoms include depression and damage to the nervous system. Ultimately several other autoimmune diseases are also linked with coeliac disease. The focus on the villi has caused a certain neglect of other areas and most of those who do have recognisable damage to the villi also suffer other symptoms. The common digestive symptoms are summarised below.

Common (classic) disgestive related symptoms

* Anaemia (iron deficiency)

* Bloating and flatulence

* Diarrhoea and/or constipation

* Fatigue, weakness and lethargy

* Nausea and vomiting

* Stomach cramps

* Weight loss

Fig 2 Villi being destroyed Image

However a large percentage of people who react to the protein in wheat, barley and rye also suffer wide ranging autoimmune and neurological problems.

Ataxia is caused by damage to the nervous system. It manifests itself as poor muscle coordination or earlier loss of feeling usually beginning in extremeties.

Depression is also well documented but another difficult to measure property.

A good summary is available here:Open Original Shared Link

In the end the distinction is actually quite simple: The difference between an alergy and an intollerance is defined by the type of anti-bodies produced. An allergy is defined as IgE antobodies being produced by the body. In coeliac disease specific anti gluten IgA and IgG antobodies are produced.

The interested reader is directed to this article on antibody types Open Original Shared Link

Fig 3. Villi completely dissapearedImage

In the end not every biopsy diagnosed coeliac has symptoms they have recognised, many are diagnosed after relatives are diagnosed for instance. Equally many coelaics who suffer neurological or other symptoms do not have the classic damaged villi. Ultimately under a strict Gluten Free diet most coeliacs will repair the damage to the villi but still remain susceptible to further damage by eating gluten.

Last Updated ( Thursday, 27 April 2006 )

Sorry, the photo's and formatting get lost when I cut/paste.

In the end I see no reason for us the sufferers to argue over who is celaic, who is non-celiac gluten sensitivite etc. because we are all in the same boat with our requirements which is to avoid gluten

hope that helps but since the Dr's are confused its only natural we should be!

In an attempt to lighten this up serendipity gave me this

Open Original Shared Link

It seems heart patients can either eat rat poision (warfarin) OR drugs derived from GM modified goats

Obviously the warfarin is vegan and the GM modified goats milk isn't...

The reasons for taking immodium are two fold. Firstly it stops D like any opiate and secondly it binds to the stomachs endorphin receptors.

There is a lot of research showing that gluten and casein can acts as 'exorphins' which is to say they bind to the bodies endorphin receptors exactly like opiates such as immodium, coedine, morphine and heroine. However immodium is designed to just prevent the D and have the other mind numbig effects of the other opiods.

There is further evidence that gluten binds poorly to the endorphin receptors and that this damages them, this prevents the body regualting its mood via endorphins since they cannot be used due to the receptors being damaged.

By temporarily blocking the recptors with a relatively harmless drug the endorphin receptors are protected ...

Whoa guys! His advice comes on the heals of the most recent research on the subject! Go take a look at the studies before second guessing their results. :-) They could be flawed studies, but in these three cases (chance of first degree relative *developing celiac disease*, breastfeeding reducing the risk of developing celiac disease, and introducing wheat after 6 months *and before 9 months*), they're actually fairly good studies. (pubmed has the abstracts on these studies, if you want to look them up.)

Ooops.. exactly what I was going to say....

And the fact someone is breastfed and develops celaic has no relevance whatsover... noone is saying breasfeeding precludes celiac simpy that it reduces the chance of developing it.

Either the test or the sample was flawed. You can not get genes your biological parents do not have.

You can its is natural mutation. You either believe in genes or not, if you do then mutation of genes is an everyday occurence which is scientificaly proven.

However you also make a good point about natural parents.

Research shows that in random samples 1:25 children are not fathered by the presumed father (in biassed samples of people requesting DNA sampling the figure is as high as 1:7). Figures were from the UK and US.

The trigger for the random sampling was actually based on studies and diagnosis of hereditory diseases and the number of mothers who refused to have genetic testing done which both puzzled researchers and skewed the results. This is therefore on of the sources of error in testing.

Perhaps we can 'make everyone happy', by saying that, if you choose to not introduce any solids for the first year, in the case where the mother doesn't have celiac disease (but she or the father is a carrier), she is gluten free until some point between 6 and 9 months, at which point she introduces wheat into her diet, which will get gluten into the breast milk.

Sounds logical but I think the breastfeeding preventing a trigger actualy is based on the IgG being transferred via breastmilk and the IgA being transferred via the umbilical prior to birth although we obviously read the same pubmed article and it did not specifically state this.

I had the same issue "going veggie" seemed like a good change for me and I got into the issue of balancing proteins and carbs, balancing legume consumption (for nitrogen) and finding enough sources of calcium, iron, etc. It certainly is a tightrope act maintaining a healthy diet on vegan sources alone. That being said, I am not a vegan/vegetarian as it was just too much to think about.

I think careful analysis of the vegan diet is mandatory especially for a celiac patient as yes, there are malabsorption issues to begin with. Once you have mapped out a vegan diet (with all the minimum nutritional requirements and with a -sorry for the pun - seasoned nutritionist) you then are ready, set & go to eat vegan.

I don't think the non-vegans (on our thread) are questionning a vegans choice here, but just stating what might not be the obvious to the general public: that the vegan diet can be inadequate (as many non vegan diets are too, but they require less homework because "everything goes.") if you don't do it without doing your homework on types of protein, carbs, etc. Without doing homework, your vegan diet could end up being inadequate for your needs and thereby creating additional health problems. I guess it can be boiled down to "look before you leap."

exactly...

The original issue was why a nutritionist would suggest adding meat to a diet for someone with celiac problems.

I would imagine that the primary reason for this is the nutritionist beleives that they are not getting enough protein to maintain a positive nitrogen balance.

I have been a vegetarian for about 7-8 years, and before my celiac diagnosis, I relied heavily on meat substitutes. I cut out the fake meats after my diagnosis because almost all of them contain gluten as a filler. Since then I have been eating tofu and drinking soy milk about 3 times a week. Last week, I also found out that I am lactose and casien intollerant. Friday I spoke on the phone with a nutritionst and she told me that I need to cut out or limit my tofu and soy milk intake and start eating some meat. This is a nutritionist that I know well, but I wanted another opinion, so I asked a doctor who told me that cutting out those things would not help me. I'm so confused!! That is why I'd like advice from you all. Since my diagnosis, my symptoms have not improved at all, I have not gained any weight, and yesterday I developed a blistery, itchy yet burning rash all over my face (possibly dh, but I'm not sure).

So we have a vegetarian, trying to gain body mass who is lactose and casein intolerant and celaic.

Her nutritionist wants her to limit her intake of soy prodcuts (suggesting a suspicion of intolerance to them IMHO) and start eating some meat.

This largely suggests to me her nutritionist suspects or has tested (nitrogen balance is simple to test on urine) however her Dr. doesn't think cutting out soy will help and she is confused... who wouldn't be!

Now noone here as far as i can see has said a vegetarian or even vegan diet is unhealthy in itself, simply that it is more difficult to get a balanced diet. All the evidence we have (above post) leads me to think her nutritionists suspects or has confirmed she is in a catabolic state and hence not gaining the desired weight.

If the nutritionist suspected to few calories or vitamins the nutritionist would have told her to increase calories or take suppliments... but they do not they simply suggest cuttting soy and adding meat.

Its entirely possible the nutritionist if employed fulltime could formulate a balanced vegan diet without soy but they would need to know everything she ate everyday .. so she has taken the simple and practical option of removing soy and adding meat.

Presuming the OP can eat meat and her later posts show she is then the simple answer to her question is in two parts.

1) Eating meat is the simplest way to achieve a positive nitrogen balance for someone with lactose and casein intolerances.

2) Given the OP is tested positive for celaic, lactose and casein intolerances reducing a known and common intolerant (soy) from the diet is a sensible step.

There are pro-soy and anti-soy lobbies but the obvious thing to do if in doubt is to cut it out! Indeed givent he timeframe for clinical testing on the issues the responsible thing for the nutritionist to do is suggest erring on the side of safety?

I think most vegetarians who have bothered to educate themselves, even just moderately, about the vegetarian diet know that most plant-based sources of protein are 'incomplete'. Granted, there are probably a number of vegetarians out there who do not educate themselves (unlikely on this board, given our population, but I'm sure there are plenty of them out there), so I think education is the key. For those unwilling to take the time/energy to educate themselves... perhaps it's not a good dietary choice.

I agree on both counts, and education is the key. Indeed if you check all my posts I have never said vegetarianism is unhealthy as has been claimed all i have ever said is that without advanced dietry knowledge and very careful planning it has an increased opportunity to provide an unbalanced diet and that without this advanced knowledge and research it tends to rely on spupplimentation from questionable sources like soy.

Based on the work I did looking into going vegetarian, it does indeed look like you can certainly get all the protein you need (even up to the 1g/kg level - a level I've seen as the low-end of the recommendation scale for weight-training), but you have to be smart about it. You can't waste your calories on juice and lots of fruit; you have to be strategic about your eating. (Heh, really, it's a lot like RPG games, and allocating your gear...) Like the gluten-free diet, once you become accustomed to it, it doesn't need to be that hard (you automatically know not to go for white rice, but brown/wild if you can't get a more complete grain like quinoa), but it's a learning curve.

Absolutely and I was a quasi vegetarian for 4-5 years because my girlfriend was vegetarian and it was simpler that way. I had no aversion to meat, I just didn't buy it and being a student my diet was financially controlled to that I made myself. However the protein needed for a positive nitrogen balance varies according to the protein AND absorbtion. WHO figures today show about 0.7g/kg but this is not corrected for those with malabsorbtion issues and this is especially true in legume and grain proteins which are particualrly indigestable to start with, let alone someone wioth malabsorbtion and damaged villi.

However as eKatherine said

Most people in general, regardless of their dietary preferences, have avoided learning about the food they are eating. If I think vegetarians and vegans rarely do this, it isn't saying that I think people who eat meat every do it either. In fact, I think that people in general avoid this information for fear of having to change their diet - a great and fearful unknown.

Indeed, my first post on this thread merely stated

The first thing to realise is there ios no such thing as a healthy diet.

If you reach 18, have 3-4 kids and die you have achieved your sole purpose.

But I was told that is fatalistic and later if I want to live like a chimp that is up to me or if I want to scrub around in the forests looking for food etc. .

The fact remains there is no such thing as the healthy diet, just varying degrees.

As was said by eKatherine there seems to be a barrier to vegetarians actually looking up the figures because they seem to beleive the vegetarian diet is healthy by definition .....

I think half the problem is that vegetarians and vegans are often hassled by their own families .. and further in many cases by families with a very poor diet (SAD) who are obviously unhealthy. Hence they take a defensive postition based on their diet being healthier than their family or whomever is the one criticising their vegetarianism.

Hence:

People, for some reason, hold a prejudice against vegetarians (maybe their lifestyle threatens you in some way) and then they run around finding any evidence they can that it is unhealthy and evil. Why can't people just live their lifestyle the way they want and leave others alone about their choices?

I mean what a completely pointless post!

I happen to have researched soy for my own health, I happen to have researched protein adsorbtion for the same reasons and people come here and ask questions.... so from what she is saying I shouldn't express my views when answering someone else, I should leave them alone?

When people make wild and outrageous claims like chimpanzee's are vegetarian I should just ignore it and not correct it and that vegetanarianism is simply a healthier lifestyle and therefore doesn't need questioning and proof to the contrary be damned?

I fail to see the point of this board if this is the case.

Further to this is the existance of many vegetarian sites dedicated to defending vegetarianism with quasi-science. Heck their are hundreds with myth buster factoids like amino acid ratio's can be balanced yet they all stop short of actually doing the math. As a scientist I findd these sites objectionable because they are pretending to express scientific fact without proof based on the fundamental tenet that "vegetarianism is healthy" and there is no need to check.

edits:

The point is non of these pro-vegan/vegetarian sites contain figures for the constituent parts of different foods yet this information is avaialable in many places such as

Open Original Shared Link

Yet in every place the actual analysis and results are found they find that minimum protein intake is in the region of 0.7g/kg and that vegetarian protein intake is insufficient.

My questionaire stated that yes, I had been tested via bloodwork and those results were negative. However my Enterolab results were positive.

I would hesitate a guess that this will be used in his peer reviewed paper to show the effectiveness of the enterolab testing vs other methods.

The problem with clinical trials is they take so long... so if the entrolab catches and early diagnosis which is IgA and IgG negative then the test becomes validated when this person's celiac disease continues to develop and they are serum positive.

However I know lots of people who have met him at conferences etc. so he isn't exactly hiding but if you want to meet him you will need to make an effort.

Reading above about the dangers of Soy as a plant estrogen, affecting the hormones of women, and also the overuse of wine as a cause of breast cancer.

I am just wondering about all this. Asian cultures eat tons of soy products. The French and some other Europeans drink tons of wine.

There is very little breast cancer in Asia, and certainly no more Breast Cancer in France than here.

Just wondering. Karen

Actually asians eat little soy in thier traditional diets and this is mostly fermented see: Open Original Shared Link

And on breast cancer, I'm not sure of the actual stats on early phase breast cancer but on cancer recovery France has one of the best medical systems in the world. Its expensive, but all cancer medication, ops etc. are free (well courtousy of the tax payers) so cancer survival in France is higher than the US.

I happen to have an American friend here in Paris in remission who has seen both sides of this but this is the difference between a socialised medical system and a private one where the quality of service depends on insurance and what you can pay.

Here is one link I found...

Open Original Shared Link

Happy Birthday! Personally, I say have a great time. Be safe, but as long as you avoid gluten, I can't imagine one night of drinking is going to do you a lot of harm. It isn't the best thing for you, but we still have to have fun even when we are recovering. I still remember my 21st birthday and I don't think it would have been the same if I was sober.

Does anyone know if flavored vodka is gluten-free? I'm specifically wondering about Stoli. I can't find an email address or phone number anywhere for them. I just don't know if the flavoring is gluten-free, since I know the plain vodka is ok.

Many of the vodka mixer drinks are not actually made with vodka but just the fermented mash since they would only add water later anyway.

Since you have indicated you don't need to crunch the numbers, I'll do some number-crunching for you.

How much of the following do you need to eat to get a day's protein intake? I've selected these foods because they are the ones which you gave as examples of foods that will produce an adequate diet. My numbers here are for a 50 kg person.

Rice - 1 pound 9 ounces dry weight, before cooking. Rice is not a high protein food! To eat this much rice would give that 50 kg person 2500 calories, more calories than they need, but with no room left for other foods.

Potatoes - 7 pounds if you eat the skins - 1883 calories. Too bad if you like butter, no calories to spare.

Further this assumaes that the proteins in those are actually complete in terms of the human bodies requirements for amino acids.

According tot he FDA daily protein requirements for an adult are between 0.6 - 0.8 grams of protein for every 2.2 pounds (1 kilogram) of body weight.

Open Original Shared Link

The first thing to notice is that the protein requirements depend on the type of protein and that protein deficiency is a simple thing to test.

Adding the mean of the long-term studies to that of the short-term studies gave an average of 0.605 g/kg/day, which when increased by 25% gave a calculated safe level of intake of 0.76 g/kg/day. This was rounded to the final value proposed of 0.75 g good-quality protein per kilogram per day.

However the crux is that much of the vegetable protein is not usable without adding the right balance... The following are amino acid breakdowns of a few proteins and the average for nitrogen balance in humans in mg/g of nitrogen. (8 essentials + the 2 commonly accepted semi-essentials)

mg/g N	Isoleucine	Leucine	Lysine	Methionine	Cystine	Phenylalanine	Tyrosine	Threonine	Tryptophan	Valine


Kidney beans	180	279	256	57	73	173	210	194	45	225

Cabbage 	242	296	148	36	1	58	1	1	27	76

RICE	285	536	248	141	104	344	295	243	78	403

IDEAL N balance	250	440	340	220	120	380	240	250	65	310

Human milk	252.63	488.42	343.16	105.26	121.05	222.11	243.68	259.47	100	300

The problem is that although some of the pulses etc. have good overall ranges in they are usually deficient in one or more essential amino acids. Although this can be found elsewhere in other foods like cereals these contribute but add another hole when the two proteins are added together.

Some vegatables are completely bizarre in terms of amino acid content of their proteins. Compared with what a human body needs the ratio's of some amino acids can be sky high while others are near zero.

Thus the proteins are mainly not used as proteins but eventually broken down for energy.

The Bombay response sounds like a typical CYA disclaimer to me.

Distilled alcohol is gluten-free regardless of the source. Only if gluten were added after distillation would there be a concern. This is the case with some coolers and all "malt beverages" but should not be a problem with regular spirits.

Cheers!

Technically speaking there is no such thing as distilled alcohol only distilled alcohol, water mix. Pure alcohol can only be obtained by taking this mix and passing it through a drying agent, usually concentrated sulfuric acid.

See

Open Original Shared Link

This can occur while still not letting gluten through the process because aromatic rings (and other compounds which give flavor) are generally rather small molecules. Proteins like gluten are, comparitively speaking, huge. Distillation is a process of separating small molecules from large molecules, and that's why it's gluten-free if you don't add any gluten back into the process.

If someone finds that they still don't tolerant alcohol well, and some people don't - irrespective of gluten-intolerance - then the answer is to avoid it, of course. :-)

Indeed but the mash for spirits is a complex system. Even a pure alcohol/water mixture is azeotropic so you will never get 100% alcohol since the partial pressures of the two end points are both lower than the two together.

The mash is far more complex and contains many other products from the original ingredients AND breakdown products of the yeasts. Each of these adds complexity to the eutectic so at any one point depending on the composition it can shift and include molecules with a higher SLHE because the eutectic is pushed upwards.

Although gluten in large the complex process of fermentation breaks down the proteins into their smaller amino acid chains. The prolamines themselves have a affinity for alcohol which means they will be difficult to seperate and under the forced partial pressure of the mix can go into the distillate.

On a more theoretical level any molecule which can overcome the surface tension and bonding of the solution will escape and become part of the distillate. In other words when you see vapour coming from water at below bp. the water is boiling at a lower temperature, indeed this is common if you think about frost evaporating on a autumn morning. The more external energy you add (heating the solute) the more this happens.

This is not just a theory, any long exposure photo of a river of the sea shows the mist of water vapour coming off it and is a well used photographic technique. In the same way a molecule of gluten or especially the amino acids can escape at any momnet.

To take this to its theoretical conclusion we are talking about paired atoms and EPR.

Conspiracy theories aside, nobody is forcing you to buy anything from them.

I commend them for taking the fries of the gluten-free list. And for having a gluten-free list at all.

Its not a conspiracy theory that McDonalds lie about their ingredients, it is a matter of court record.

All I am expressing is "are they the sort of company you want to trust" and as I said earlier that is an individual matter everyone can decide for themselves.

I find it surprising that poeople have not read of the previous cases (like the one I posted) and I am merely seeking to bring this to peoples attention so they can decide for themselves. Personally I prefer top trust people and organisations until they do something to prove me wrong and in the case of ford and Mcdonalds they have already done this so I would be a fool to trust them...."Fool me once shame on you..." (add the ending of your choice here )

The reason I hesititate to commend them is because they had the fries on a gluten-free list but never asked the manufacturers of the oil. So whereby its good they have taken them off now I question their motivation ... for instance if they got a different supplier who would give them a certificate of gluten-free compliance (for instance to codex standards) and they knew it contained gluten anyway I don't think they have the interest of their customers at heart. My reasoning on this is the multiple court cases that have proven them to be deliberatly covering up ingredients.

They may have changed? Who knows but for me they have shown their colors and they will need to do something more than take gluten-free fires off the list to convince me they are interested in providing their customers with nutritional infomation.

I realize supersize-me is a commerical film and they guy made money from making it but in nearly all the McDo's he went to the nutritional info was unavailable and McDonalds have yet to sue him or issue a correction so considering they are court happy I am happy to accept they say one thing but practice another.

That is an unsupported statement. What researcheres are you talking about? And who blew the top off this conspiracy theory that the soy industry is trying to ruin us all? The same could be said for the beef industry, the dairy industry, the green onion industry. Where does this finger pointing stop?

Open Original Shared Link

In the course of 24 hours you can combine legumes/beans and grains and you have complete proteins that you need for your body to be healthy and happy. And there is such a thing as a healthy diet.

Well you don't unless you can balance them gram for gram of amino acids but I doubt you are going to change your opinion regardless of evidence.

I've looked and looked and haven't found anything that conclusively supports your position that being vegetarian is detrimental to ones health, or that soy is dangerous.

I never said being vegetarian is detrimental to onces health, I said an unbalanced diet is and that vegetarians have a bigger problem balancing the essential amino acids and hence it is harder to have a balanced vegetarian diet. If you can't find information on soy being dangerous then you are either looking in the wrong places or don't want to accept the facts.

I don't think vegetarians need you to inform them. Many of them are already extremely informed on nutrition, more-so than the average person. Just because they do not agree with your OPINION that it is bad doesn't mean they are ignorant on the topic.

When did I suggest vegetanarianism is BAD? So far you have avoided any answers to my questions on amino acid balance and how the body uses proteins, this hardly furthers your case. Can you tell me off the top of your head the dominant amino acid in potato? So although the average vegetarian may be more informed on nutrition than the average guy doesn't mean they understand it completely at a cellular level. In the same way most celaics are better informed than the average person too.

The original question is based on why a nutritionist might suggest adding meat to a diet....

I am surely not alone in the fact that most nutritionist can hardly tell you what products contain gluten, loet alone start explaining body chemistry tot heir average patient hence the addition of meat is the easiest way for them to provide a balanced diet.

Before you contradict me on this please tell me exactly tho the gram how many grams of lysine would be needed from another source if I ate 100g of potatoes? If you don't know this off the top of your head you are not getitng a balanced diet because you can't just say "ill eat some pulses, some root vegatables and everything will balance out"

The cow you know today is a genetically engineered frankenstein that isn't wuite comparable to their ancient ancestors. The same can be said for many foods. That's how agriculte works. They improve the size and quality of the food so they can make more money selling to more and more people. What's left to eat? You cuold possibly forage for food in the forest.

The cow today is still the same species as that of 10,000 or 100,000 years ago. Indeed the cows I eat are not so different, my preferred race being Charolaise.

Yes it does! Genetically modified food is dangerous and not the same as human helping along natural selection to create a better crop yield.

Firstly Soy is the number 1 agricualtural export from the US

Secondly some 86% of it is GM.

Thirdly there is little difference between making a new species by splicing DNA and by cross breeding as is done with roses and was done to produce wheat... one just takes a lot longer than the other.

Tricale is a relatively new species produced first in 1875 by forced pollentation and selective weeding out using wheat and rye, no GM manipulation required... if we reinvented it today Monstanto could just graft the genes into the wheat but the effect is the same.

The additonal danger of GM crops is they splice genes which could never have been introduced by cross pollenation and produce species which could never have survived...

I like the idea of cooking her dinner

Of course you do your a lady.. . now I really wish someone had given me this tip at 19

Unfortunately my idea of romantic when I was 19 left a lot to be desired. I'm sure more and more ladies will tell him the same thing.

firstly this is not your fault .... let me repeat that this is not your fault ..

OK... you have choices. You have a slight catch-22 situation. you obviously love your mom and are an excellent daughter and you are doing what you can.

However.... I personally honestly beleive that having gluten in a kitchen, crumbs on the carpet (that get circulated with a hoover) etc. etc. is just a recipe for disaster. Many people on this board do cope in split kitchens but personally I think its an accident waiting to happen and my girlfried keeps her cookies sealed in ziplock and eat them outside the appartment.

Secondly many of us here get depression linked to very small amounts of gluten. If this is making your mom depressed she is stuck in a vicous circle...

You have to talk to her... like everyone else says but do so in a supportive way. Just as an idea why not be 100% gluten-free in the house. Tell her you are doing this to support her. You don't mention anyone else living at home?

My mother was diagnosed and had problems for 2 years on gluten-free but she was always cheating or taking risks like giving her dog buiscuits. In the end i had to go home and live with her for 2 weeks and put my foot down. This is much easier when you are 38!

I would hope that if your mother is not 100% absolutely gluten-free her depression may be caused by the gluten and once you do this the fog will slowly lift. you could take snacks outside the house, ask her for money for a sandwich because you will eat it outside not in front of her and spread crumbs.

These are just my ideas. listen to everone and make up your own mind, you have shown enough maturity by asking the questions to show you are up to this!

I was just curious about this brand of gin because i drank it all the time before DX. Then I got this email from them. I thought Gin was on the safe list?!

"Thank you for your inquiry. As per your request, please be advised that the alcohol used in processing the gin does derive from grain, corn, wheat, and rye. Therefore, BOMBAY SAPPHIRE and BOMBAY ORIGINAL Gins may contain trace amounts of gluten, because some of these ingredients are outsourced. The exact quantity is unknown. If you still have questions, we suggest you contact your doctor as to whether or not you should consume such beverage products before consumption.

We would also like to take this opportunity to thank you for your valued patronage.

Best Regards,

Consumer Services

The Bombay Spirits Company U.S.A. "

Well lets not knock a company for being honest... personally I prefer a we can't guarantee that platitiudes.

On another thread I just said as much so I stick to tequila, white rum and the like .. avoid anything with coloring or anything derived from grain alcohol.

The question of what is 'safe' and not is a personal question, noone can answer it definitively the important thing is to do as you have done and make an informed choice ... three cheers to Bombay for being upfront.

I will personally buy Bombay products for others when buying a round but not avoid them myself. Hopefully they will get the custom their honesty deserves and we all stay safe.

SuperBeck, when you were still on gluten, you didn't realize that you can't tolerate dairy, because it didn't cause a reaction as bad as the gluten. Now that the gluten has cleared out of your body, your body has realized that it doesn't like dairy either. Which is actually fairly common for celiac disease.

It isn't possible to get a negative reaction to cutting out grains, it just appears that way, because many times people go through actual withdrawal when eliminating grains. They can cause you to be addicted, because they cause a reaction in your brain similar to the effects of morphine.

Well it all depends on what you call a negative reaction, I rather think heroine addicts have a different take:D

However Ursula correct (i'm just being pedantic over this) and the lack of exorphins from gluten can conceivably give someone withdrawal and that is really the correct term as she says. However like most here I think that gluten is not good for anyone and noone is going to have a overall negative reaction, you might have temporary discomfort from withdrawal but its a question of is that negative or positive....

You are definately not bothering us with your questions! I think your girlfriend is very lucky to have found a guy who is willing to do this research and anything he needs to do to take care of her.

Pleae ... don't think you are bothering us .. just like Carla B says... that's why we are all here and its great you are onboard.

My take on alcohol is prettty simple:

1) Distillation is a weird thing and when it concerns hundreds of compounds then its never certain, simply put if distillation produced pure alcohol (which is not possible anyway) it would all taste the same! If you can tell a rum from a vodka or tequilla then there must be more in there than just alcohol and water.

2) Some alcohol is made from grain and others from other sources (tequilla/rum/cognac) so presuming nothing is added afterwards with gluten (like coloring) (sorry do you guys spell it the UK way or US way?) then a clear non-grain alcohol like tequilla or white rum is safer than one from grain... beware cognac's etc. which tend to add caramel color which can be wheat derived.

3) Don't know about Canadian wine or US wine but french wine with an appellation is definitively safe. Only the VDT or VDP are not controlled rigerously.

4)

other than that, if i understand correctly even if it isn't supposed to contain gluten it might always. now that comes to another question i have, should we not take the risk at all and only eat food certified gluten-free either on the package or by the company, or can we just look at the ingredients and see that it isnt supposed to contain anything bad. because like skunkeemom said jsut a small amount can be very hurtful. what do most celiacs do? whats the best for my girlfriend?

Absolutely not, the best thing for your girlfriend is the same as everyone else in the world, fresh unprocessed food. It gets tricky if you want to eat out but the best advice i think I can give anyone is just buy fresh unadulterated ingredients and cook them yourself... most of the gluten-substitute products are actually pretty lousy... lots of them contain other additives as well and celiacs tend to have more delicate digestive systems in that regard than Joe or Jane Doe.Things like soya intolerance are common in celaics etc. so the best thing is to only buy basic stuff and make it yourself.

If you happen to find that daunting ... i have a lot of foolproof recipees you can impress her with (and Im sure the nice folks here will have hundreds) and a nice evening in with you making some food and a bottle of wine might be more romantic than a trip to a bar... OK.. i know you guys are 19 and bars are cool... but I would guess she will appreciate this.

There are many foods that are naturally gluten-free, like meats, veggies, fruit, etc. so they won't be labelled gluten-free. The gluten-free labelling really makes it easier for the other stuff, but I do eat foods I know are safe. It seems very complicated in the beginning, but several months down the line (I'm five months gluten-free) it gets easier because you've already checked out your favorite foods and drinks. I've just checked them out one at a time so I know what I can have when I'm out. Now that I've checked out more, I have more choices.

I don't need to retype this since CarlaB said it so well.

To tell you the truth I kinda thought it was like lactose intolerance... woops. ohmy.gif

Its not that different, its just the tiniest bit will make a celiac ill. However your girlfriend may try and make it seem less important because she doesn't want to freak you out.... the absolute best thing you can do IMHO is to tell her it doesn't and that you are right on board. If she wants to go out for a meal say you are equally at home (pun intended) staying at home and cooking if she is taking a risk.

You know we have so many frustrated people here who's partners can't handle it or accept it and your girlfriend is incredibly lucky to have found you. Her parents are perhaps being over protective but they have thier own experiences of others who would not accept it. We all have friends and relatives that just don't get it and so her parents are probably just erring on the side of caution.

You can help gain their trust by asking them to recommend places to take her that they consider safe.

Please keep asking the questions...

Isn't this horse dead enough without beating it?

If it makes you sick, don't eat it. McDonald's is not required to disclose allergens, since they are a restaurant, not a manufacturer. They don't fall under the umbrella of the labelling law, but they volunteered to disclose that information. The FDA also does not have regulations regarding what is "gluten-free" in the US so most companies use the European codex standard of 30 ppm or less.

I think that is the point.

If McDonalds volunteers the information they should make sure its accurate. They have the option of not providing it if they are unsure so when they choose to make public statements and provide fact sheets they should make sure they are accurate as if they are unsure they have the option of saying so or saying nothing.

The way I see it, if they were required by legislation to provide the information and made a mistake that is one thing but to volunteer false information is a different matter be that knowoingly or by m,aking sure they ave no paperwork that proves they knew the composition of the oil. Equally if this were an isolated incident I would be more sympathetic but McDonalds has a long history of releasing inaccurate statements and the main problem is to prove mea culpa.

McDonald's sent their fries to the U. of Nebraska to be tested, like many other companies do. In a lab setting, the fries are gluten-free.

This is not a indication of diligence it is a act of CYA. They presumably chose to test using the ELISA test because it is less accurate and only semi-quantitative, I can't see a few thousand $ of GC-MS time actually being the reason they opted for the screening test rather than a real quantitive test.

If I can make a corallory

Open Original Shared Link

Open Original Shared Link

Ford clearly knew that people would be killed due to the defect but their action was to see what they might loose in litigation vs a recall. Its a simple mathematical decision on which the cost of human life is determined only by what they might be sued for..

However, why would the consumers be surprised by this.... Ford had already clearly demonstrated its position over the Pinto

Open Original Shared Link

The point I am trying to make is some companies operate like this. McDonalds has been proven in court on many many occaisions to have deliberatly released false information. The link I made above (prior post) links to just one case, but its a recent US case and yet it appears most people are unaware of it.

Just because soy can be an allergen for some people does not make it bad for everyone, just those allergic to it. Some people are allergic to peanuts, does that mean it's bad for everyone?

No you are putrting the cart before the horse.... so many people are allergic to it because it is not a natural food. It is bad for people in many ways

# High levels of phytic acid in soy reduce assimilation of calcium, magnesium, copper, iron and zinc. Phytic acid in soy is not neutralized by ordinary preparation methods such as soaking, sprouting and long, slow cooking. High phytate diets have caused growth problems in children.

# Trypsin inhibitors in soy interfere with protein digestion and may cause pancreatic orders. In test animals soy containing trypsin inhibitors caused stunted growth.

# Soy phytoestrogens disrupt endocrine function and have the potential to cause infertility and to promote breast cancer in adult women.

# Soy phytoestrogens are potent antithyroid agents that cause hypothyroidism and may cause thyroid cancer. In infants, consumption of soy formula has been linked to autoimmune thyroid disease.

# Vitamin B12 analogs in soy are not absorbed and actually increase the body’s requirement for B12.

# Soy foods increase the body’s requirement for vitamin D.

You will die if you eat rat poisoning.

No you won't, not in moderation it just thins the blood, hundreds of thousands of people take it everyday on prescription, especially stroke victims and people who had had coronary bypasses

The first thing to realise is there ios no such thing as a healthy diet.

If you reach 18, have 3-4 kids and die you have achieved your sole purpose.

Anything else is a bonus. Everything you eat can be bad for you and everything you eat can provide nutrition but all it is doing is feeding an engine.

That said, some things are worse for people than others.

Soy is no more bad for you than anything else.

and that everything else contains gluten? Soy is one of the top 12 food allergies in humans and other mammals. It is no more fit for human consumption than bamboo leaves which Panda's manage to survive on or grass which cows manage to survive on.

Everything in moderation.

Sure feel free to much down a packet of rat poision... in moderation of course. Of course a small amount of rat poision can be good for some people ...

You can eat a moderate, well-balanced vegetarian diet just as easily as a omnivore diet.

Obviously not ... an easy diet is .. well easy. Meat and two veg while not the heathiest choice is still a moderate balanced choice. That is not to say you cannot have a balanced vegetarian or vegan diet but it is simply not easy.

Eat as many potatoes as you like and you will always have an amino acid inbalance. Indeed with the exception of soy there is little vegetable protein that is balanced and hence it needs balancing against other proteins ... its all possible its just not easy.

People, for some reason, hold a prejudice against vegetarians (maybe their lifestyle threatens you in some way) and then they run around finding any evidence they can that it is unhealthy and evil. Why can't people just live their lifestyle the way they want and leave others alone about their choices?

Erm, well if someone has problems and asks then is it not the right thing to do to point them in the right direction? Perhaps the problem is vegans and vegetarians who keep insisting that it is a healthy diet.

In the end there is no need for us to be healthy, many people lead fulfilling lives without being healthy and indeed being 'healthy' is simply a term for not dying soon. The healthiest person can walk out and be hit by a bus anytime.

The human body is designed to be omnivorous, it is the basis of its sucess and flexibility. Chimpanzee's are NOT vegetarian.... not by a long way their diet includes eggs, mammals and birds.

So the omnivorous nature of man and his predecessors goes back some 300,000 years at least.

The bottom line is that man is designed to be omnivorous and the human development has developed around that. Our appendix is non-functioning and so we rely on more concentrated foods, in order to get these concentrated foods we evolved higher reasoning capacity and this leaves us more time than herbivores to do other things. Most herbivores spend most of their time just eating very low nutritional value foods. They wake up, have a scratch and then eat all day before sleeping.

Because of mans higher reasoning we have developed ways to use unnatural sources of food. this doesn't make them healthy, it just means we have developed ways of taking usually inedible high nutritional value foods and making them partially edible and partially digestable. Wheat, rice and Soy are the overriding ones but not all. It is hardly surprising that the human body develops intolerances to foods it was never designed to eat.