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:
Tim Jesson - Exchange <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 18 Jul 2001 15:06:21 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (67 lines)
<<Disclaimer: Verify this information before applying it to your situation.>>

There seems to be quite a bit of discussion on whether European standard
"gluten-free flours" that allow wheat starch should be considered safe,
and whether there is any study that can conclusively give us a recommended
maximum. I am not a physician, but have some background in statistics, and
understand the various arguments of why certain studies cannot be
considered 100% conclusive. It seems that most of the contributors to the
list are somewhat in agreement with the reality that we should be able to
consider corn and rice as safe, since there has never been any historical
evidence of them being harmfull. It seems equally logical to me then, that
we can conclude that there is a safe level of gluten which is NON-ZERO. We
know this because every one of us every day is confronted with trace
levels of gluten, yet we consider there to be some Celiac patients that
are "tolerating".  So the premise that there is NO SAFE level of gluten
(even for an individual) is flawed as well.

How then do we determine what is a tolerable level. Several contributors
to the list have mentioned the difficulty in finding Celiacs willing to
challenge themselves for the sake of a study.

I would suggest that there exist natural, unintentional, studies, all
around us, where celiacs have already chosen to, or are unintentionally
challenging themselves. We only need to test these groups of
individuals, starting with the least exposure, until we find a group
that indicates an increased exhibition of symptoms or positive test
results. I live in the Praries and as such I am exposed to wheat
unintentionally every year at harvest time, simply by breathing the air.
Wheat farmers would get an even higher dose. I am a diagnosed Celiac,
but I choose to eat foods cooked on the same grills and in the same deep
fryers etc... as gluten-containing foods, provided I remain
asymptomatic. Whether we agree or not, Europeans have chosen to expose
themselves to the flours containing wheat starch. There is a large
diverse group of people.  If they have chosen to be the guinea pigs, so
be it. We can at least capitalize on that, as I am sure someone is
doing, by testing them.

Whether one agrees with the studies suggesting 14mg or 40mg, or neither,
we do know the following: (a) For most, if not all Celiacs, there is
some NON-ZERO level of gluten that IS "tolerable" (b) We do know that
10g (4 slices of bread daily) is enough to bring about symptoms in most
Celiacs, as per #17 (c) For most, if not all Celiacs, you will
occasionally be ingesting small amounts of gluten unintentionally (d) As
one contributor wrote, 14mg would be found in 1/100th of a slice of
regular bread

So given this, it clearly isn't in the cards for Celiacs to
intentionally consume any major source of gluten. It is of no
consilation to me that I might be able to consume even as much as 5g per
day, if that were to be the case. That would only mean 2 slices of
bread, if the rest of the diet was gluten-free. As a Celiac, I find the
hardest part of the diet is not in avoiding the obvious (breads and
pastas), but rather all the hidden sources, and those would surely add
to more than 5g in a normal diet. Even if there was a known maximum (eg.
14mg), not knowing how much gluten I am unintentionally ingesting, I
would not know the allowable remainder.  Perhaps I am already
unintentionally exposed to 13mg. The only potentially useful decision
that I am aware of that I could make, given a study of the European
experience, might be to also utilize European-standard gluten-free
flours. One would assume that they too are unintentionally exposed to
glutens, so if European Celiacs show little to no increase in symptoms
over a prolonged period of time utilizing their gluten-free flour, then
that will be enough to convince me.  It seems such study results (if
even started) will not be available for years or even decades.  So for
the next 20 years or so, I will work off the premise that I need to try
and stay 100% gluten-free, but will allow some MINOR cross-contamination.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2