<<Disclaimer: Verify this information before applying it to your situation.>>
 
In a message dated 95-11-30 00:07:25 EST, you write:
 
>I don't agree.  If the damage is only slight, then going on a GF diet
>even for just a few weeks may be enough to heal the damage.  In this
>case, a biopsy will not prove anything; worse still, it might give the
>false impression that the patient doesn't have celiac disease when
>they really do.
>
>I think it is best to continue eating gluten until the biopsy has
>been done.  In fact, it might even be best to eat more gluten than
>usual, to ensure that the biopsy is conclusive.  Otherwise, you may
>never really know if celiac disease is the actual cause of whatever
>symptoms led you to suspect it.
 
I had put Jeff on a GF diet several weeks before his biopsy.  I was desperate
-- my child appeared to be dying and I would have done anything to save him.
 He began improving within three days.  By the time we got to the
gastroenterologist, he was practically back to normal except for the
distended tummy.  The dr. called with the biopsy results and said that there
was **NO** villi seen at all!  He said it was the worst case he had ever seen
in his practice.
 
I think you have to follow your own instincts.  If you are severely sick, it
is hard to wait for the biopsy.  If ingesting gluten is manageable for you,
then maybe waiting for the biopsy isn't so bad.  I already knew Jeff had
celiac disease before the biopsy.  The fact that he got well so fast on a GF
diet said it all.  Also, our dr. wanted me to put him on a gluten challenge
several months after that, and I wouldn't do it.  There is no way I am going
to make my baby sick on purpose.  He has managed to get hold of some gluten
on his own several times, and he has gotten sick every time -- that's proof
enough for me.  Besides, my husband says, "We have had enough challenges with
Jeff.  We don't need another one."  :  )
 
Betty