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

My mom was recently diagnosed with celiac disease through a biopsy.  Her first
blood test came back negative.  A more recent one, however, after she had been
on the diet for one month, has come back "weakly positive."

The problem we are having is that her gastroenterologist is hesitant in
confirming a diagnosis of celiac disease.  He stated that it is still "iffy"
even though her biopsy showed her villi were completely flattened.  My mother
has had all the classic symptoms of celiac disease all of her life.  She has
been anemic since she was a child, has always been very small and unable to
gain weight (once weighing only 75 pounds) and has had a history of severe
abdominal pain and cramping with diarrhea and constipation.  My question is. .
. what more does the doctor want to give her a confirm diagnosis.  He is
basing his hesitancy on the blood tests, but even he says the blood tests are
not always reliable.  Also, if she was on the gf diet for one month and her
blood tests came back "weakly positive" does that mean she might have been
getting gluten somewhere during that month?  I have read that your blood tests
will come back negative even if you have been on the diet for only two weeks.

I had a scope done yesterday to see if I have celiac disease.  This GI doctor
(the same as my mom's) said he thought everything looked okay, but would be
sending the biopsy to a pathologist.  When I asked him if my biopsy was okay,
if I would ever have to worry about celiac disease, he said I would still have
to worry about it because the disease goes into "remission".  Can the disease
go into remission even without one being on the gf diet?  And if one is not on
the gf diet, and the disease is in "remission" would there still be damage
done to the intestines?

Sorry for all the questions, but this disease gets more and more confusing the
more my mom and I talk to this doctor.

Thanks!

Sonja