<<Disclaimer: Verify this information before applying it to your situation.>> Joel Elias <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >For the last six months or so, I had been suffering from >indigestion....I....found a link to Scott Adams' WWW site on >Celiac. Based on what I learned there, I started a gluten-free >diet....After two days, I feel great. > >I plan to contact the specialist on Monday to ask for a >sigmoidoscopy and biopsy for Celiac. > >Should I also request a blood test? I'd leave that up to the specialist. He may feel your symptoms and subsequent reaction to a GF diet are good enough to go ahead with a biopsy. If not, then he may want (and I'd push for) the celiac antibody blood tests. >Presumably, it will take about a week or so to schedule the test, >so that if I were to continue the gluten free diet, I would have >been on it for about two weeks before the biopsy. Is this too long? >Should I revert to my normal diet before the biopsy/blood test? If you can handle the normal diet again for awhile, and if you want a firm diagnosis, I'd say it is best to eat gluten up to the day of the biopsy. Otherwise, if the damage is not too severe you may heal enough in the two weeks to mess up the diagnosis. (This is the opinion of another lay person, BTW.) Several people have discussed on the list how they or their chidren went on a GF diet without a biopsy-confirmed diagnosis. They were convinced by their recovery or lessening of symptoms that they had celiac disease, and didn't feel an "official" biopsy-confirmed diagnosis was required. This is a personal choice, of course. Certainly, if you've been GF for a long time, and dread the prospect of putting yourself or your child through a long-term gluten challenge, you may choose to have the diagnosis remain "unofficial". However, I think a biopsy-confirmed diagnosis has some benefits: 1. It allows you to claim the extra costs of GF foods as part of a medical deduction on your taxes (in the USA). This is only of value if you have a LOT of medical expenses paid out of your pocket. 2. It eliminates (or at least greatly reduces) the possibility of your symptoms having been caused by some other problem and just coincidentally improving on a GF diet. 3. For children especially, an official diagnosis that you can "point to" can help you to convince your children not to cheat on the diet when they get to those wonderful, rebellious teenage years. 4. If you are hospitalized or need medications for other problems, you made need proof of your celiac condition to get a special diet or avoid generic equivalents when getting prescription drugs. Having an official diagnosis in your files may be of great help in convincing your doctor, the hospital, or your insurance company that you aren't just being picky or unreasonable in demanding GF food and medications. If you agree that an official diagnosis is beneficial, and have only just started a GF diet, then I think it makes a lot of sense to go back to eating gluten until after the biopsy. For those that have been GF a long time but were never biopsied, going back on gluten is not nearly so easy a decision: It will take a long time to get back to the state where a biopsy would be conclusive and during that time your symptoms will probably return. Still, I think it is worth considering. Not medical advice; just the prattlings of a lay person. Jim Lyles ........ <[log in to unmask]> ........ Holly, Michigan, USA