Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'conflict'.
Found 2 results
My Celiac Disease is causing really stressful family drama. This has been an issue since I was diagnosed, but has gotten worse lately. The problem is with my dad. He and my mom live in the same town as I do and I often eat there. Because I am so sensitive to gluten, my mom has tried to keep their house 100% gluten-free. But my dad keeps bringing in bread and then gets bread crumbs around the kitchen. He tries to be careful, but he slips up and uses the butter to butter the bread and therefore gets the butter contaminated. He has used this butter to fry eggs and many other things. So the butter gets in the dishes, the utensils and the sponges. Despite being on a strict gluten-free diet for nearly 5 years, my antibodies are still slightly elevated at this point. I don't even eat out in restaurants at all because of cross-contamination. I have to cook all my food myself. However, I'll eat at my parent's house sometimes and they will cook for me. I have trusted them to make safe meals for me (and they have read many books about Celiac Disease and are very familiar with cross-contamination). My mom doesn't want any gluten in the house, but my dad keeps bringing in bread. We have tried to talk to him about this problem but every time we bring it up, he gets very defensive and takes it personally. I have told him that I am afraid I can't eat any meals that they prepare because of possible cross-contamination. My mom spent nearly a week cleaning the entire kitchen but he keeps bringing in bread. She is extremely frustrated with him, as am I. It's very perplexing because my dad is a very kind and loving person. But I think he is behaving selfishly when it comes to this. He'd rather bring bread home and eat it and therefore put my health at risk. But he doesn't see it that way. He thinks my mom and I are overreacting. However, he is getting old and forgetful. He can be very absent minded at times and doesn't seem to remember the correct protocols for dealing with cross-contamination. Last year, I was a guest in someone's house and the kitchen was dirty and full of crumbs. I ended up getting exposure even though I prepared my own food and using my own dishes. I was having panic attacks and other symptoms for almost 2 weeks afterward. He saw what I went through. But I think he's in denial when he sets his kitchen up to be a similar risk. This has lead to a lot of tension between him and my mom. I have thought about giving him 2 choices: either he stops bringing in bread and I will eat their meals OR he continues to bring in bread and I will not eat any of their meals. I hate to think that my disease causes so much stress and drama in my family. Fortunately, they are a lot more understanding than a lot of families, but my dad has his pitfalls. This is really stressing me out and I think it's causing unnecessary drama. Any suggestions?
Celiac.com 02/25/2011 - In many parts of the world, recommendations by World Health Organization (WHO) regarding child nutrition are regarded as the scientific standard. So, any time a major health organization comes out with recommendations that differ from those made by WHO, there is always much discussion about the science behind both sets of recommendations, and, occasionally, some intellectual and scientific jousting from both sides. That was the case recently, when a magazine called BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal) published new and controversial recommendations regarding breastfeeding. According to an article by Susan Perry on MinnPost.com, those recommendations, the resulting criticism from WHO, and BMJ reviewers' response make some excellent points about issues of conflict of interest in research. The recommendations by BMJ suggest that breast milk should be supplemented with solid foods starting around the age of four months, two months earlier than currently recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the reviewers, waiting to introduce solid foods increases a baby’s risk of developing anemia, food allergies and celiac disease. Those recommendations brought a strong response from WHO, which noted that its own decade-long no-solid-foods-until-six-months recommendation is “based on evidence that the early introduction of solid food to babies increases the risk of infection and disease.” The response from WHO then proceeds to refute each argument made by the BMJ reviewers. A response by Susan Perry to the spat appears on MinnPost.com, and makes some excellent points about issues of conflict of interest in research. Now, this debate between WHO and BMJ is a bigger deal in certain places than in others. The United States never officially adopted the WHO recommendation, as did the U.K. in 2003. Ironically, it seems that more American than British moms are following WHO standards. BMJ reviewers say that less than 1 percent of British mothers exclusively breastfeed their babies for six months. In the United States, that figure is 13 percent, as reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, that's a story for another day. But, a strong rebuttal from WHO is not the only problem facing the authors of the new BMJ review. A more pressing problem for BMJ study is that three of the four authors admit that they took funding within the past three years from companies that manufacture infant formula and baby food. Now, these researchers claim that their findings and recommendations are in no way influenced by their financial relationships with these companies: "My colleagues and I are independent pediatricians and scientists, funded by universities or hospitals, and we received no funding for doing this review other than our normal salaries,” review author, Mary Fewtrell, a child nutritionist at University College London told NatureNews reporter Natasha Gilbert. She adds that “all of us have had links with industry at some point. We are making no comment in our paper about what type of solid foods should be introduced — this could be home-prepared or commercial depending on the mum's choice — the main issue is that the food should be nutritionally adequate and safe." But financial connection between study authors and industry cannot fail to raise legitimate questions about the independence of study findings. Moreover, such a relationship creates a cloud of potential doubt over the nature of the findings. Indeed, the review itself indicates a strong desire within the baby food industry to get British health officials to change their current advice to mothers to breastfeed exclusively until six months if possible. Survey data shows that British mothers are slowly pushing back the age at which they introduce solid foods to their babies. Successive surveys since the 1970s show that nearly all UK infants receive solids by four months. The number in the 2000 survey, for example, was 85%. However, the 2005 figure drops to 51%, with mean age of introduction of solids at 19 weeks, a rise from 15 weeks in 2000. In view of the higher reported rates of exclusive breast feeding to six months elsewhere in the West (more than 30% in Hungary and Portugal, for example), it seems likely that the impact of the UK recommendation will be greater in 2010 than in 2005. It is timely to consider whether such trends could influence health outcomes. Susan Perry notes in her response that the study seems "extremely timely, therefore, for baby food companies to consider whether such trends are going to damage their bottom line — and to financially support, even if not always directly, the research efforts of "friendly" academics." That’s one example of why researchers who accept money from industry should be prepared to have their studies, methodologies, data and recommendations questioned — along with their motives. Source: MinnPost.com