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

The following is a partial quote from a message that arrived in the morning
CELIAC mail:

>Someone else recently posted a request that we not post erroneous
>information. I agree with that wholeheartedly. Just because one of us reacts
>to something, and not to something else, does not mean that the item in
>question is therefore safe, or gluten-free, or loaded with gluten.
>
>As to mustard, I can say with equal determination that it IS gluten free
>because I do not react to it, and I have quick and unpleasant reactions to
>gluten in any form. However, I realise that this appears to contradict what
>I just stated - so try for yourself!!!

  We get in a lot of trouble saying that we react to various foods with
quick and unpleasant reactions and therefore they must contain gluten.  I'd
be willing to bet that more than half of the people on this LIST have
celiac-type symptoms in reaction to  one or two foods that do NOT contain
gluten. And it is equally possible that many of us can eat one or even two
foods that do contain minimal amounts of gluten and not have a reaction.
That is no reason to tell this list that those foods are safe.

  Let's bend over backwards trying to be scientifically correct in
mentioning foods and stating whether or not they contain gluten.  Many of
us have a really serious concern about the mis-information that is included
in CSA/USA's list of gluten-contaianing foods.  At the risk of sounding
cantankorous (sp?), a few of us hammer away at those errors, hoping to
increase the list of safe foods for celiacs to add to their diets.  I don't
want to see this LIST contributing to mis-information.  We owe it to one
another to be really precise and careful about what we say and how we say
it.

Gayle Kennedy