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

In response to the comment on the icellandic study.  I am aware of 2
studies done on healthy individuals to screen for the prevalenvce of
undiagnosed gluten senstivity.  One in Linkoping Sweden and the other in
northern Ireland.  Both looked for gliadin antibodies in the blood of
healthy individauls in the Irish study it was done on volunteer blood
donors( who by selection are asymptomatic and have to weigh more than 110
pounds and have a normal blood count.  In the Irish cas it was claimed
that 1 in 100 were positive.  In the swedish study one in 300.  These
stuies did not confirm all of the cases with biopsies so it is not clear
how many positives were false positives.  nevertheless it suggests that
there is a signifigantly larger number of individuals whpo may harbour
gluten senstivity.

Regarding info in the USA.  There are 2 studies one in children from
Buffalo which suggestted a prevalence of 1 in 10,000 in western New York
state.  and A study reported last year from the Olmsted county
epidemilogical project based at the mayo clinic which suggsted 1 in 5000
inhabitants of that county as having a diagnosis of CD.

These two studies represent only the very tip of the iceberg.  One study
reported from Utah on the prevalrence of dermatiis Herpetiformis ( a skin
manifestation of gluten sensitivity) suggested a prevalence of 1 in
10,000 for it in the Utah pop.  This is interesting in that in Europe DH
is thought to be much less common that CD.  ???? are the ratios reversed
here or is celiac disease much underdiagnosed?

My guess based on my experience in Iowa is that it is underecognised and
may even be more likely to present in more subtle ways here than
elsewhere.  It has been recognised in Scotland and other places that the
rate of diagnosis does parallel suspicion for the illness by the
physicians.

What could, should be done to fill the information void.
We and some others are looking at the preva;lence of CD in what are known
in Europe to be high risk settings such as individuals with autoimmune
disease.

The screening of a large cohort of 'normal individuals with serology,
would be the definiative study and others would like to do.  What
stopping us?  Expense.

To do this study requires a large amount of money.  To get government
funding you have to have preliminary data.  To get prelimuinary data one
has to do the study. To do the study one has to have the money.  So you
see the problem with this type of speculative study.

Any ideas that anyone would like to suggest on this topic would be
gratefully recieved.  Mmeanwhile we'll keep nibbling away at the problem.
Joe Murray