Posted on 05/18/2014 8:43:16 AM PDT by blam
Researchers Who Provided Key Evidence For Gluten Sensitivity Have Now Thoroughly Shown That It Doesn't Exist
Jennifer Welsh
May 15, 2014, 3:37 PM
In one of the best examples of science working, a researcher who provided key evidence of (non-celiac disease) gluten sensitivity recently published follow-up papers that show the opposite.
The first follow-up paper came out last year in the journal Gastroenterology. Here's the backstory that makes us cheer:
The study was a follow up on a 2011 experiment in the lab of Peter Gibson at Monash University. The scientifically sound — but small — study found that gluten-containing diets can cause gastrointestinal distress in people without celiac disease, a well-known autoimmune disorder triggered by gluten.
They called this non-celiac gluten sensitivity.
Gluten is a protein composite found in wheat, barley, and other grains. It gives bread its chewiness and is often used as a meat substitute. If you've ever had "wheat meat," seitan, or mock duck at a Thai restaurant, that's gluten.
Gluten is a big industry: 30% of people want to eat less gluten. Sales of gluten-free products are estimated to hit $15 billion by 2016.
Although experts estimate that only 1% of Americans — about 3 million people — suffer from celiac disease, 18% of adults now buy gluten-free foods.
Since gluten is a protein found in any normal diet, Gibson was unsatisfied with his finding. He wanted to find out why the gluten seemed to be causing this reaction and if there could be something else going on. He therefore went to a scientifically rigorous extreme for his next experiment, a level not usually expected in nutrition studies.
For a follow-up paper, 37 self-identified gluten-sensitive patients were tested. According to Real Clear Science's Newton Blog, here's how the experiment went:
(snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Settled science.
For those, like myself, who avoid the terrible Business Insider website, here is a direct link to the study:
http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/05/gluten_sensitivity_may_not_exist.html
/johnny
Thanks. I am always amazed at the food/diet trends, but this gluten thing is just stunning. Folks are just convinced that removing gluten will solve everything, including global warming (must have something to do with farting).
And now we have the person most responsible for this trend actually being a scientist and studying it further, and finding that his original report was pre-mature, and there is something else going on.
My mom used the get the Readers Digest disease-of-the-month. I look at this as the same psychosis.
Thanks for posting this.
From your link;
” And last, but not least, nine days worth of urine and fecal matter would be collected. “
Uh,,,, kinda like “We have to pass it to see what’s in it.” Maybe Nan would like to be the study’s poop collector? Perfect job for her!
bttt
I call total BS on this.
Celiac is a well-known, serious illness induced by allergy to gluten. And now these aholes are trying to say: well, either you’re 100% allergic to gluten or 0% allergic. You know, sort of like how everyone is either seriously allergic to various types of pollen or not allergic at all, with nothing in between. Oh, wait ....
“Science. It works.”
HONEST science. IT works. Kudos to Gibson.
I had a doctor that was convinced that every malady in the world could be traced either to Lyme's disease or to gluten. Whenever one of my tests came back negative, she'd order a different type of test for the same thing. I was tested for gluten sensitivity 17 times in 3 months, and for Lyme 9 times during that same period. My gluten test results never changed, but one of the Lyme tests eventually came back ambiguous, so she started me on high-powered antibiotics, which had no effect whatsoever so she kept upping the dosage. By the time I finally got fed up and refused to take anymore, I was hallucinating and my liver showed signs of giving out.
I'm a lot more skeptical these days.
This study has decent controls including keeping
the FODMAP contribution isolated. After doing a decent
job on the basic test, the writer proceeds to display
a failure to search the literature for the causal
mechanism behind gluten sensitivity. There is plenty
to find. Try searching for zonulin and gliaden. The blogger
started with a preconceived result and did just enough
to try to give it a little support.
I know, I’m the first to rail against “junk science”! But........I’ve had severe arthritis pain almost disappear for three years now, since I’ve given up Gluten (although I’m not a Nazi about it). I guess it could be placebo effect but three years is a long time. Whatever it is, I’m a little scared to go back full on to gluten.
I’m at the market last week — in produce section — and there is a sign that says “gluten-free” over the display of cut-up cantaloupe and watermelon in plastic containers. I laughed -but then went home to double check on internet to make sure there is no gluten in “fruit.”
Sure enough, No. But — get this — the article did say something like — “beware of cut-up fruit in bowls at the market unless you Know where it was cut up. It may have been “glutenized” if cut up in the Deli section as the Bakery section is usually right next to the Deli at market.”
Perhaps gluten is airborne.
“Gluten free” is the new “no trans fats” which was the new “carb free” which was the new “with oat bran”. Jiffy Pop for example now puts “gluten free!” on the bag of their one-ingredient product.
Gluten allergies are just another “look-at-me” fad. Man has been eating breads since the dawn of time and now we’re supposed to believe that thousands of people have suddenly developed allergies to its principal ingredient? Uh uh.
I’m sure some of these complaints are legitimate, but I’d guess the majority are hogwash.
What was funny was that the tested people didn’t know which diet they were on, expected to feel bad, and as a result, did feel bad throughout all three tests, including the non-gluten one.
Big Pharm can’t patent something that’s helping people, time to “debunk” it with their “studies”!
More stupid dog tricks, er, science facts:
1. The globe is heading towards a new ice age;
2. The population bomb will kill 10's of millions or even a billion;
3. Boys and girls are the same according to how they are raised (nature versus nurture). Oops, boys and girls have different brain pathways. Big surprise there for any parent or anyone who knows the simple process of hormones;
4. Thamaldahide (sp) will be the end of us all. Now it's considered a treatment for certain diseases;
5. The Ozone layer is disappearing and will kill us all. At 64, I'm still here;
6. Human industry CO2 output will kill Earth. The polar bears will die, yet more exist than ever. The Antarctic ice shelves are shrinking. Yet, certain places are increasing. Plus the Arctic has the biggest amount of ice in years. Where's the Northwest passage?;
7. Alaskan oil pipelines will kill the caribou. Yet, they flourish when hanging around said pipelines for warmth (seen the photos).
8. Einstein was right - Einstein was wrong according to current physicists;
9. Physicists know all until a new math theory pops up;
10. God doesn't exist. Then why can't the physicists explain their own "singularity" theory they propose about the ultra-condensed matter that exploded in the big bang?;
11. The universe is going to stop expanding because gravity will implode on itself. Now they say it will continue to expand forever. I actually feel sorry for astro-physicists because they have NO clue about what's behind this universe;
12. Dinosaurs went extinct because of an asteroid hitting somewhere in the Gulf of Mexico. Again unproven theory;
13. Marriage is an institution for all of any sex. No, marriage is an ancient idea of a union between a man and woman. Anything else is a simple contractual agreement;
14. Fish oil (omega 3 acids) are good for you. Now not so much;
15. Vitamin supplements are good for people with poor diets. Now they are a waste of money.
16. Eggs are bad, bad, bad. Now not so much;
17. Red meat is bad, bad, bad. Now not if limited in fat;
18. Cholesterol is what clogs your arteries. Now, it's tryglycerides and ANYTHING that causes inflammation of the interior walls of arteries;
19. Aspirin will cause stomach ulcers. Now may reduce heart and stroke attacks;
20. Statins were good...now bad;
21. Alcohol bad. Now, in moderation, very good;
22. Cancer incurable. Now treatable depending on the source;
I could go on and on about the absolutes the scientists have predicted.
Sad to say, I just don't trust scientists anymore like I used to when I was young. Seemed they were more into empirical evidence than their government funded studies. Still, the biological sciences have made found cures, treatments, and extended our lifespans. It's the junk science that I don't trust.
Like they label Red Vines licorice “Fat Free”. I get a chuckle out of that. 99% sugar, must be some kinda health food.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.