<<Disclaimer: Verify this information before applying it to your situation.>> Helen wrote: >This is just another example of what happens when there isn't world-wide >agreement of the definition of Gluten-Free....When a product labelled >"Gluten-Free" is imported into a country that has a different (stricter) >definition and no one in the government checks the ingredients, then we who >are sensitive to wheat starch or oats suffer... Actually, we have a bigger problem: The expression "gluten-free" does not correctly describe the celiac diet. The following remarks come from the Dec. 1997 issue of _The Sprue-nik Press_ and are summarized from talks by Dr. Martin Kagnoff: K> "Gluten" is somewhat of a misnomer, because corn and other "safe" K> grains also contain a kind of gluten. However the term gluten-free K> (GF) has come to mean "free of grains toxic to celiacs". The actual K> proteins that are the problem for celiacs are gliadins (wheat), K> secalins (rye), hordeins (barley), and avenins (oats). So if "gluten-free" is not correct, what is the correct description of a celiac's diet? In some circles the expression "gluten-restricted, gliadin-free" has come into favor, but that really isn't correct either. For one thing, if you eat a lot of corn then your diet is not "gluten-restricted". The other problem with this expression is that "gliadin" refers specifically to wheat, and does not refer to barley, rye, and oats. So a more descriptive expression for our diet would be "gliadin-, hordein-, secalin-, and avenin-free". This doesn't have a magical ring to it, does it? I suppose we could make an acronym out of the four proteins, and call our diet SHAG-Free or GASH-Free, but these expressions are unlikely to become popular. (I stole most of this post from a post I made in 1997; and I've never seen anyone else refer to a SHAG-free or GASH-free diet. Hmmmm. I guess I was right. These expressions did NOT become popular.) I recommend that when you speak or write to companies, you list the main grains to avoid (wheat, spelt, triticale, barley, rye, and oats) as a way of explaining what you mean by gluten-free, and that you specifically state that corn and rice are not a problem. And, as Helen says, don't automatically assume that a product labeled as "gluten-free" is safe. Most of the time, in the US and Canada, it will be safe, but check the ingredients anyway to be sure. ------- Jim Lyles -------- ----- [log in to unmask] ------ -- Holly, Michigan, USA --