<<Disclaimer:  Verify this information before applying it to your situation.>>
 
Comment from Don Kasarda, Albany, CA, on oats safety.
 
I have not seen the NEJM article from the Finnish group although I had heard
second hand about a meeting presentation of the work.  I have no reason to
doubt the results.  I am coauthor of a paper from an independent study
carried out by the laboratory of Dr. Conleth Feighery, Trinity College,
Dublin, Ireland, and this study (paper submitted) also supports the lack of
toxicity for a pure oats sample.
 
I will remind people that it is easy for oats to be contaminated with wheat
both in the field and in processing.
 
I have no reason to think that oats must be limited to small amounts, but,
of course, it isn't good to focus one's diet too much on a single food, so
moderation of the normal sort is probably good.
 
There are bound to be some people who are sensitive to oats, possibly
through an allergic reaction to one component or another (just as there are
people allergic to rice), but this sensitivity, on the basis of current
results, seems unlikely to be celiac disease in its strict sense.
 
The term gluten in celiac disease is not used in a proper sense (in that
sense it is present only in wheat), but rather as a shorthand term for
peptides derived from prolamins (proteins) that include the harmful amino
acid sequences found in wheat. These peptides set off (in an unknown way) a
series of reactions that ultimately may lead to flattening of the mucosa,
malabsorption, and possibly other effects as well.  Wheat, rye, and barley
have prolamins that contain the toxic sequence(s).  The finding that oats is
(are?) not toxic indicates that the key sequences are not found in the
avenins, the prolamins of oats.  Comparison of the amino acid sequences of
avenins and gliadins yields clues to possibly important differences and I am
pursuing the significance of these differences.