<<Disclaimer: Verify this information before applying it to your situation.>>

At 02:15 PM 6/25/01 -0400, one member of the list wrote:

>This is a horror ...We have the one disease where a
>molecule is as bad as a lb, according to our Assocations.

When I asked Cynthia Kupper, executive director of GIG this question: "does
GIG say anywhere that "one molecule of gluten is as bad as a pound."

She answered: "Absolutely not! CSA is the only one to my knowledge that
does. In fact, I discussed this 'myth' in a talk a couple years ago." Later
she continued: "You also will find that CDF will not support this notion."

So certainly "our associations" do not tell us this old bromide. It's only
CSA that makes this statement, in the most recent edition (second) of the
CSA handbook, "On the Celiac Condition." It's on page 21 under the title of
the chapter (6). It's also in the first edition, likely in the same spot.
(Ann Sokolowski gracefully furnished the preceding CSA info.) And the CSA
has always been far too slow to accept and incorporate new information into
their instructions. Recently they seem to have shown some tendency to make
some changes at least in the area of accepting distilled vinegar and
alcohol. Perhaps soon they will  purge their site of this ridiculous
bromide about the "one molecule."

The following quote is from an article that comes to us from Frederik
Willem Janssen, Zutphen, The Netherlands, e-mail: [log in to unmask] If you
have specific questions about it, please contact him directly.
"Codex Alimentarius Explained - European Gluten-Free Standards":  From
Scott Adam's website: http://www.celiac.com/codex_wheat_starch.html#Codex_01

"There is a new Codex Standard in preparation, and a proposal to set the
limiting level of gluten to 200-mg gluten/kg (20-mg/100 g) gluten-free food
on dry matter. If we assume that half of the gluten is gliadin, this equals
10-mg gliadin/100 g o.d.m., so the level has gone down by a factor two in
comparison to the "old" standard. If accepted, the new standard will be
valid for end products and not for raw materials."

This would mean even by the new more rigid standards that 10 mg of gliadin
(the protein in gluten that actually harms us) in 100 grams (which is a
little more than a quarter pound) of GF food is acceptable for celiacs, if
they are not allergic to wheat as well, thereby being much more sensitive
to minute particles of wheat. Now this is reasonable, and I have seen this
"10 mg" estimate in at least three other places in my reading.

Even by the yet newer and strictest yet standards in Canada, this would
factor out to 5 mg of gliadin in a quarter pound of GF food is acceptable.

Now if we figure that only about half of gluten is actually gliadin, then
10 mg of gluten in a quarter pound of GF food is acceptable even by the
newest and strictest GF standards. Actually, the newest study on the
harmful parts of gliadin tell us that it's only 2 linked proteins of
gliadin that is harmful, out of the entire array of gliadin, which actually
consists of 51 different proteins. So it's fine to have zero gluten as a
goal, but don't expect to achieve it. You breathe in at least a molecule of
gluten every day in the air.

It's hard enough to keep the gluten intake down to the 10 mg without making
it impossible by telling people they must have "zero tolerance," as the
children nowadays are wont to say. Telling people that "one molecule of
gluten is as bad as a pound" is tantamount to the Puritan preacher who told
his flock that if they'd ever committed even one little sin they were
surely doomed to spend eternity in hell. I don't know about you, but I'd
think: Well hell, already done that, I might as well enjoy this time before
I go down to Dante's Muse. And it would sure be Sin City after that :) But
not at my age now. I'm afraid to even buy green bananas any more :)  vance