Date: |
Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:49:50 -0700 |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
<<Disclaimer: Verify this information before applying it to your situation.>>
I found out what the results were to the blood tests my doctor did earlier
this year and I am wondering does this really mean that I am not a celiac.
Here is what they told me:
IgA <4
IgG <43
Can anyone give me any insight into what this all means. Should I push for
a biopsy anyway? If I do, what is the optimum length of time to do a gluten
challenge? I have been gluten free since November when they did these blood
tests. I was consuming mass quantities of gluten up until the day of the
blood tests. Before I got the results, I decided to try giving up gluten to
see if it helped. I got better almost instantly. Up until now I have been
content to just be gluten free because I felt better. In the last 4 weeks I
have been very sick again (gastrointestinally speaking) and now I am
wondering if I would be better off getting a definitive diagnosis, so that I
am not giving up food groups unnecessarily. It seems like every year I give
up a new food group. First alcohol, then dairy, then gluten, what do I give
up now? As you can tell, I am very discouraged.
Thanks in advance,
Colby Ray
Bellevue, WA
|
|
|