Skip to content
  • Register
    • We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

    Gluten

    2»

    Replies

    • Posts: 3,643 Member
      I'm spelt intolerant. It took my doctor and I a while to identify it, but it was a fun journey. Never new how much spelt is in random breads and other things.

      I do love me some gluten though.
    • Posts: 70 Member
      thanks for all the replies and help. I will tell my doctor about it and go from there. Thank you all again.
    • Posts: 8,736 Member
      It might be the fiber but definitely talk to your Dr
    • Posts: 1,776 Member
      tamicoil1 wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      You do know that gluten intolerance and celiac disease are not the same thing don't you? You can have an intolerance and not have celiac disease.

      Probably not.
      Analyzing the data, Gibson found that each treatment diet, whether it included gluten or not, prompted subjects to report a worsening of gastrointestinal symptoms to similar degrees. Reported pain, bloating, nausea, and gas all increased over the baseline low-FODMAP diet. Even in the second experiment, when the placebo diet was identical to the baseline diet, subjects reported a worsening of symptoms! The data clearly indicated that a nocebo effect, the same reaction that prompts some people to get sick from wind turbines and wireless internet, was at work here.

      http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/05/gluten_sensitivity_may_not_exist.html

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2364869
    • Posts: 1,144 Member
      FunkyTobias wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      Probably not.
      show previous quotes

      http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/05/gluten_sensitivity_may_not_exist.html

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2364869

      That very small study proves nothing. I don't have Celiac disease, however, I do have a gluten intolerance. I know this by experimenting myself, and having myself tested. There is a difference between Celiac disease and a gluten intolerance. They are not the same thing.
    • Posts: 1,776 Member
      tamicoil1 wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      That very small study proves nothing. I don't have Celiac disease, however, I do have a gluten intolerance. I know this by experimenting myself, and having myself tested. There is a difference between Celiac disease and a gluten intolerance. They are not the same thing.

      37 subjects, double blind, placebo controlled crossover design vs n=1 self diagnosis. Guess which is more reliable?

      And no, you weren't tested for gluten intolerance since no such test exists.
    • Posts: 1,404 Member
      tamicoil1 wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      That very small study proves nothing. I don't have Celiac disease, however, I do have a gluten intolerance. I know this by experimenting myself, and having myself tested. There is a difference between Celiac disease and a gluten intolerance. They are not the same thing.

      Actually, it proves much more than your anectodal evidence. Unless you yourself are a doctor. Although my friend who truly has celiac disease, verified by biopsy of her intestine, thanks people who have "gluten intolerance" for the improved variety of foods in the grocery store that she can eat.
    • Posts: 7,574 Member
      edited March 2016
      I do not have celiacs, but I have an actual allergy to wheat, barley and oat (even oat that is gf). This has been verified by blood work. I have had to be on a ventilator many times because of my allergy (throat closes) and have gone in respiratory arrest in the past because of it.

      There are other issues than just celiacs, but I also question the legitimacy of "gluten intolerance".
    • Posts: 500 Member
      edited March 2016
      janejellyroll wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      Lots of things are claimed by "various sources," many which -- upon analysis -- turn out to be utterly mistaken. In order to evaluate the claims, we'd need to know what information it was based on.

      I'm sorry, I'll retrace every article I've ever read on the subject just so that I can post sources, in order to have some random poster on a forum will believe me haha. Just give me ten minutes.
    • Posts: 25,763 Member
      JoshuaMcAllister wrote: »
      show previous quotes

      I'm sorry, I'll retrace every article I've ever read on the subject just so that I can post sources, in order to have some random poster on a forum will believe me haha. Just give me ten minutes.

      Nobody is forcing you to participate in a conversation. It isn't unreasonable for someone who claims that various sources support something to be able to name a couple of those sources. If you truly have no idea who claims that or where, maybe claiming it publicly isn't the best idea.

      My point is that "various sources" make all sorts of claims. For that to have any meaning, people need to know what those sources are. Is it some random website run by a raw foodist? Is it a site run by medical researchers? These things make a difference even if you would rather they don't.
    This discussion has been closed.

    Welcome!

    It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
    Sign In
    Register

    Quick Links

    Categories