[quote]Professor X wrote:
I linked to an article about the 30% but it wasn’t allowed to be posted, not sure why, it was just an article. But, either way. Here is the quote from it:
“Gluten might be even worse. Gluten, found in wheat, rye, and barley, is a composite of the proteins gliadin and glutenin. Around 1% of the population are celiacs, people who are completely and utterly intolerant of any gluten. In celiacs, any gluten in the diet can be disastrous. We?re talking compromised calcium and vitamin D3 levels, hyperparathyroidism, bone defects. Really terrible stuff. And it gets worse: just because you?re not celiac doesn?t mean you aren?t susceptible to the ravages of gluten. As Stephan highlights, one study showed that 29% of asymptomatic (read: not celiac) people nonetheless tested positive for anti-gliadin IgA in their stool. Anti-gliadin IgA is an antibody produced by the gut, and it remains there until it?s dispatched to ward off gliadin ? a primary component of gluten. Basically, the only reason anti-gliadin IgA ends up in your stool is because your body sensed an impending threat ? gluten. If gluten poses no threat, the anti-gliadin IgA stays in your gut. And to think, most Americans eat this stuff on a daily basis.”[/quote]
Dude, no offense, but that isn’t a study…and what significance is it that ASYMPTOMATIC people had more IgA in their stool? They are ASYMPTOMATIC remember? I guess I never was one of those “blind book fans” who read this stuff like religion with no critical eye simply because it says what you want it to say.[/quote]
I tracked down “Stephan’s” blog and he describes that figure as being based on “informal research” and links to a page that no longer exists.
JF - would you happen to have any information on hand regarding the prevalence/efficacy of fecal testing vs blood tests for these markers? Stephan states, “Dr. Fine has been conducting informal research using his fecal anti-gliadin IgA test”… so, while I certainly do not want to come off as questioning the man’s integrity, it would be better for the discussion, I’m sure we’d all agree, to see some data that doesn’t come from a guy who works in a lab that specializes in food sensitivity testing that shows “his own” test is the superior method… ya know?