CELIAC Archives

Celiac/Coeliac Wheat/Gluten-Free List

CELIAC@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Michael Coe <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 27 Jul 1997 13:43:01 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
<<Disclaimer: Verify this information before applying it to your situation.>>

The new CSA/USA GF shopping guide says the following:

"Many children, older adults, and sensitive celiacs do not do well on Canola
Oil. Until more exact research information is known, we do not recommend the
use of Canola or its several by-products by celiac patients."  CSA/USA, Inc.,
Cooperative Gluten-Free Commercial Products Listing at 26 (3rd Ed., June
1997).

Does anyone know why -- or if -- canola oil is a problem?  Is there any
evidence of a problem for some people?  And, for that matter, does anyone
know what, precisely, is meant by "many," "older," "sensitive," and "well"?
 The TCCSSG shopping guide contains no such cautions about canola oil.

The CSA/USA shopping guide makes a number of other pronoucements that are no
less sweeping for the lack of support given.  Examples: "Celiacs appear to do
better on white wines, such as the Chableaus and Zinfandels" and "Individuals
with a depressed immune system such as celiacs are thought to do better on
regular green and black teas and fresh perked coffees."

Is there ANY basis in fact for these sweeping assertions?  Exactly who thinks
these things, and what evidence leads them to think them?  What does it mean
to "appear" to do better?  If there's uncertainty about whether people do
better or not, the uncertainty should be stated clearly rather than papering
it over with an ambiguous qualifier.

Mike Coe
Arlington, Va.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2