Support NeoGAF

[nelchaar]

Hey, Mr. Scientist. This news came out last May. Really cutting edge here.

Second, many doctors believe that people who have self-diagnosed gluten sensitivity actually have a wheat allergy. But if you remove gluten from your diet, then you obviously aren't ingesting wheat. The diet for these people does not need to be so strict so as to remove all glutens, but the removal of wheat may still be beneficial to a large number of people.

Lastly, celiac disease is still a real thing that affects a lot of people and can cause severe pain and even cancer. Let's not take too much focus away from that by attempting to combat the gluten free diet craze.

You do know that all you did was basically just reiterate what that study and the article say, right? Also, it's weird that you think that only "cutting edge new stories" should be shared. This is important and affects many people.

 

[Krauser Kat]

i think gluten being paired with so much other just crazy shit to make junk food. people think if i take the gluten out it will be all better, but its not.

 

[Tragicomedy]

I'd like to see a similar study on this with ASD participants. Our pediatrician is 95% convinced our son has celiac disease, and he's shown a remarkable improvement health wise when we swapped him over to a GFCF diet. The celiac disease would explain that.

What it doesn't explain is the high incident rate of digestion problems with kids on the spectrum, the above normal levels of bacteria in their stomachs, or why so many parents see remarkable physical and mental improvement in their kids when they get them off of gluten. I highly doubt they all have celiac disease. We're still waiting for a large sample size study to explain what most of us have seen for years now.

 

[Opiate]

Even if it is a nocebo, if people feel better just let them live their lives?

Edit: I have Celiac's though

A few problems.

First, it may mask a more serious effect. Let's say someone has some gastrointestinal pain, and tells their friend, who has heard that sometimes such things are caused by being "gluten sensitive." The person cuts gluten out of their diet and feels better. Four months later, though, the inflammation has become so severe that even the nocebo effect stops working, and the pain returns to the person's consciousness. It turns out they have colon cancer which has been getting worse the whole time and which could have been treated if they didn't try pseudoscientific treatments first.

Second, it may allow pseudoscientific beliefs to proliferate. That is, if we allow people to generally believe whatever they want as long as they're happy, then we may let other ideas through the door that are more obviously and immediately dangerous than this one.

And lastly, I believe truth is a virtue in itself. Even when it's super inconvenient. Even when it's depressing. I wouldn't call it an absolute rule (what is?), but I generally believe it's a valuable thing in itself to understand the universe honestly and truthfully.

Having said all that, I agree that this has been a benefit, generally, for people like you with Celiac disease. It's important we help people like you out, and I agree that even bad or untrue things can sometimes have positive consequences (I'm sure it's much easier for someone like you to find food now than it was 10 years ago).

 

[ampere]

I think the thing is foods people avoid, due to gluten, are generally better for them. "nah i can't have those chips, oo look, a carrot." (Has never actually been said to me, but I imagine thats the exchange). I think gluten is heavy with the world of processed foods too. Just the mindset of being on top of what you can/can't eat, produces a good diet and probably balance.

There was definitely a point where this was true, going gluten free meant you'd have to give up almost all processed foods. Now there are substitutes for everything so it's not necessarily true. You can still eat cake and pizza and cookies, etc.

 

[RumblingRosco]

uh, why share a blog spam link?

link to the journal article, this isn't reddit

I doubt most people on GAF have access to scientific journals... but hey, if they do here is the 2013 article and the larger follow-up from 2014.

Well now things got interesting. I wonder what my sister things about this >_>

edit: the study is year old?

Yeah, I'm surprised this hasn't come up on GAF already. Maybe it did and I missed it.

Hey, Mr. Scientist. This news came out last May. Really cutting edge here.

Second, many doctors believe that people who have self-diagnosed gluten sensitivity actually have a wheat allergy. But if you remove gluten from your diet, then you obviously aren't ingesting wheat. The diet for these people does not need to be so strict so as to remove all glutens, but the removal of wheat may still be beneficial to a large number of people.

Lastly, celiac disease is still a real thing that affects a lot of people and can cause severe pain and even cancer. Let's not take too much focus away from that by attempting to combat the gluten free diet craze.

Jesus, this post is so bad and overly aggressive. Let's break it down:

Hey, Mr. Scientist. This news came out last May. Really cutting edge here.

OP never claimed this to be cutting-edge. He never even claimed it as new. Even if he had, who cares? Just because it is old science doesn't necessarily mean it is inaccurate or no longer useful.

Second, many doctors believe that people who have self-diagnosed gluten sensitivity actually have a wheat allergy. But if you remove gluten from your diet, then you obviously aren't ingesting wheat. The diet for these people does not need to be so strict so as to remove all glutens, but the removal of wheat may still be beneficial to a large number of people.

What's your point? I feel like you're suggesting that this research is pointless because some people see a benefit from removing gluten from their diet despite this benefit only occurring because of the other substances they're avoiding as a result. Personally, it seems that the research shared in the OP is beneficial to helping individuals figure out what it is that is really hurting them.

Lastly, celiac disease is still a real thing that affects a lot of people and can cause severe pain and even cancer. Let's not take too much focus away from that by attempting to combat the gluten free diet craze.

The OP never claims otherwise. He isn't saying celiac disease doesn't exist. He isn't attacking the gluten-free diet. He's simply providing us information which suggests that only people that have celiac's disease are actually negatively affected by gluten. Hell, the OP includes information suggesting what actually may be affecting non-celiac individuals that believe they have issues with gluten, that of course being FODMAPS. Did you even read the OP?

 

[moggio]

I don't think gluten is the problem. A lot of civilizations in the past survived on bread and were just fine. It's more that the bread you find in supermarkets today is a frankenstein creation that people should cut out of their diets as much as possible.

Citation needed.

 

[injurai]

"GASTROPUB?" You might as well say your favorite cuisine is "RESTAURANT"

but it also has a pub, don't be ignant

 

[m_shortpants]

A few problems.

First, it may mask a more serious effect. Let's say someone has some gastrointestinal pain, and tells their friend, who has heard that sometimes such things are caused by being "gluten sensitive." The person cuts gluten out of their diet and feels better. Four months later, though, the inflammation has become so severe that even the nocebo effect stops working, and the pain returns to the person's consciousness. It turns out they have colon cancer which has been getting worse the whole time and which could have been treated if they didn't try pseudoscientific treatments first.

Second, it may allow pseudoscientific beliefs to proliferate. That is, if we allow people to generally believe whatever they want as long as they're happy, then we may let other ideas through the door that are more obviously and immediately dangerous than this one.

And lastly, I believe truth is a virtue in itself. Even when it's super inconvenient. Even when it's depressing. I wouldn't call it an absolute rule (what is?), but I generally believe it's a valuable thing in itself to understand the universe honestly and truthfully.

Having said all that, I agree that this has been a benefit, generally, for people like you with Celiac disease. It's important we help people like you out, and I agree that even bad or untrue things can sometimes have positive consequences (I'm sure it's much easier for someone like you to find food now than it was 10 years ago).

Good points, fair enough.

Like others have pointed out I really dislike asking about gluten in restaraunts for fear of appearing a fad dieter. Most people aren't really aware of the difference between someone just on the diet and someone with Celiac's, so it's a bit of a double edged sword.

 

[zaxon]

What the study says: Most people who self-identify as NCGS probably aren't, and most don't really benefit from the diet. Conclusion drawn by some: NCGS may not exist.

What op says: NCGS conclusively shown to not exist.

What op bases this conclusion on: year old article from a non-scientific publication written by someone whose use of phrases like "here's the backstory that makes us cheer" demonstrate a clear agenda.

In other words, there is nothing new, meaningful, or conclusive here. The op is little more than an attempt to win some imaginary contest of ideas on the internet, and is pretty damn sad coming from someone who claims to be a "cancer scientist."

 

[TangoAlphaLima]

You do know that all you did was basically just reiterate what that study and the article say, right? Also, it's weird that you think that only "cutting edge new stories" should be shared. This is important and affects many people.

If it's important, then maybe you should have shared it when it came out. Waiting eight months just seems like you're bringing this up because you have some ax to grind against the gluten-free community.

The OP never claims otherwise. He isn't saying celiac disease doesn't exist. He isn't attacking the gluten-free diet. He's simply providing us information which suggests that only people that have celiac's disease are actually negatively affected by gluten. Hell, the OP includes information suggesting what actually may be affecting non-celiac individuals that believe they have issues with gluten, that of course being FODMAPS. Did you even read the OP?

In the wake of other GAF threads being negative towards gluten-free individuals, the OP was bare and did not fully inform readers. Maybe it was not OP's intent to attack people who have gone gluten free, but he sure didn't provide a balanced summary of the issue. That combined with posting news that is eight months late just left a bad taste in my mouth (no, that bad taste was not a gluten-free cookie).

 

[devilhawk]

A few problems.

First, it may mask a more serious effect. Let's say someone has some gastrointestinal pain, and tells their friend, who has heard that sometimes such things are caused by being "gluten sensitive." The person cuts gluten out of their diet and feels better. Four months later, though, the inflammation has become so severe that even the nocebo effect stops working, and the pain returns to the person's consciousness. It turns out they have colon cancer which has been getting worse the whole time and which could have been treated if they didn't try pseudoscientific treatments first.

Second, it may allow pseudoscientific beliefs to proliferate. That is, if we allow people to generally believe whatever they want as long as they're happy, then we may let other ideas through the door that are more obviously and immediately dangerous than this one.

And lastly, I believe truth is a virtue in itself. Even when it's super inconvenient. Even when it's depressing. I wouldn't call it an absolute rule (what is?), but I generally believe it's a valuable thing in itself to understand the universe honestly and truthfully.

Having said all that, I agree that this has been a benefit, generally, for people like you with Celiac disease. It's important we help people like you out, and I agree that even bad or untrue things can sometimes have positive consequences (I'm sure it's much easier for someone like you to find food now than it was 10 years ago).

Well said. In the last gluten thread we had someone link to a 911 truther site because it had an article about how great gluten free is.

 

[nelchaar]

If it's important, then maybe you should have shared it when it came out. Waiting eight months just seems like you're bringing this up because you have some ax to grind against the gluten-free community.



In the wake of other GAF threads being negative towards gluten-free individuals, the OP was bare and did not fully inform readers. Maybe it was not OP's intent to attack people who have gone gluten free, but he sure didn't provide a balanced summary of the issue. That combined with posting news that is eight months late just left a bad taste in my mouth (no, that bad taste was not a gluten-free cookie).

WOW...

 

[Stet]

If it's important, then maybe you should have shared it when it came out. Waiting eight months just seems like you're bringing this up because you have some ax to grind against the gluten-free community.



In the wake of other GAF threads being negative towards gluten-free individuals, the OP was bare and did not fully inform readers. Maybe it was not OP's intent to attack people who have gone gluten free, but he sure didn't provide a balanced summary of the issue. That combined with posting news that is eight months late just left a bad taste in my mouth (no, that bad taste was not a gluten-free cookie).

as a scientist i've just discovered an amazing correlation between a lack of gluten in the diet and a persecution complex

 

[DragonSworne]

For a follow-up paper, 37 self-identified gluten-sensitive patients were tested.

Please close this joke of a thread. Self Identified? Do a study on people identified by doctors to be allergic to wheat.

 

[Gustav]

Please close this joke of a thread. Self Identified? Do a study on people identified by doctors to be allergic to wheat.

Wheat allergy is not "gluten sensitive".

 

[PeskyToaster]

Please close this joke of a thread. Self Identified? Do a study on people identified by doctors to be allergic to wheat.

Thats not the point of the study. It was to show that people who did not have Celiac's but claimed problems from gluten are full of shit because gluten was commonly used as a scapegoat for their intermittent problems.

I don't see what your proposal would accomplish?

 

[DragonSworne]

Wheat allergy is not "gluten sensitive".

Being allergic to wheat is "gluten sensitive". Intestinal problems can arise from food allergies and doing a study on self identified "gluten sensitive" people does little to prove that gluten sensitivity doesn't exist when %100 of the people who self-diagnosis are morons.

 

[Opiate]

Being allergic to wheat is "gluten sensitive". Intestinal problems can arise from food allergies and doing a study on self identified "gluten sensitive" people does little to prove that gluten sensitivity doesn't exist when %100 of the people who self-diagnosis are morons.

How else would you suggest we find people who are supposedly gluten sensitive? Serious question.

 

[DragonSworne]

Thats not the point of the study. It was to show that people who did not have Celiac's but claimed problems from gluten are full of shit because gluten was commonly used as a scapegoat for their intermittent problems.

I don't see what your proposal would accomplish?

All the study does it show that people who self-diagnosis are full of shit. Gluten sensitivity does exist and it exist in people who have an allergy to wheat.

 

[Borgnine]

I mean I'm no scientitian, but I think people who are allergic to wheat have a wheat allergy.

 

[entremet]

Everything makes you fat in excess quantities.

Not water, breh. But it can kill you lol.

 

[Gustav]

All the study does it show that people who self-diagnosis are full of shit. Gluten sensitivity does exist and it exist in people who have an allergy to wheat.

That's wheat allergy. Let's say I, for example, am allergic to citrus fruits. I'm not citrus sensitive, I'm allergic to citrus fruits.

Edit: as far as I understand, Celiac disease has a prevalence of about 1%. Wheat allergies under 1%. I know 6 people that claim to be "gluten sensitive" (some of them claiming gluten free healed their tinnitus and their fear of flying). I must be incredibly lucky then.

 

[Haly]

I see this pattern a lot in these threads and other similar threads.

Scientist posits existence of thing -> people buy into it because SCIENCE and it may have had indirect benefits anyway -> literally same scientist goes back to recheck his work, discovers he was probably mistaken -> SAMPLE SIZE IS TOO SMALL, SCIENTISTS CHANGE THEIR MINDS EVERY YEAR I WON'T BELIEVE THIS, DO YOU HAVE SOME KIND OF AGENDA OR SOMETHING

 

[DragonSworne]

How else would you suggest we find people who are supposedly gluten sensitive? Serious question.

People who have known food allergies to wheat but won't have an anaphylaxis reaction. These people would display gluten sensitivity.

 

[DragonSworne]

That's wheat allergy. Let's say I, for example, am allergic to citrus fruits. I'm not citrus sensitive, I'm allergic to citrus fruits.

Why exactly wouldn't you be citrus sensitive?

 

[PeskyToaster]

All the study does it show that people who self-diagnosis are full of shit. Gluten sensitivity does exist and it exist in people who have an allergy to wheat.

An allergy is a more severe reaction though. Gluten sensitivity is like "Whenever I eat gluten my tummy hurts sometimes all the time I think". An allergy is like "Whenever I eat wheat I can't breathe and die".

 

[Gustav]

Why exactly wouldn't you be citrus sensitive?

Oh well, if I have an infection I'm virus sensitive then.

 

[Opiate]

People who have known food allergies to wheat but won't have an anaphylaxis reaction. These people would display gluten sensitivity.

They would not. That's an allergic reaction, which is different than sensitivity and most definitely different than Celiac disease.

 

[Opiate]

Why exactly wouldn't you be citrus sensitive?

Just for starters, wheat has many proteins, and you are not necessarily responding to gluten when you have an allergy to wheat.

That means that other related plants that also have gluten, such as rye, may not cause an allergic reaction like wheat does.

Second, the causal mechanisms are completely different. Wheat allergy isn't just "Celiac disease light," it's an entirely different process of the body. Hopefully this helps clear up some confusion:

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/wheat-allergy/basics/causes/con-20031834

Another:

http://kidshealth.org/parent/medical/allergies/wheat_allergy.html

An allergy to wheat involves an allergic response to a protein in wheat. Gluten is one of the wheat proteins that can cause an allergic reaction. Gluten is also involved in a condition called celiac disease.

It's easy to confuse celiac disease with wheat allergy, but they are very different. Celiac disease does not cause an allergic reaction. With celiac disease, there is a different type of immune system response in the intestines, causing a problem with the absorption of food.

While people with wheat allergy can usually eat other grains, people with celiac disease cannot eat any food containing gluten. Gluten can be found in other grains such as barley, rye, and sometimes oats.

 

[DragonSworne]

An allergy is a more severe reaction though. Gluten sensitivity is like "Whenever I eat gluten my tummy hurts sometimes all the time I think". An allergy is like "Whenever I eat wheat I can't breathe and die".

No it's not. There are degrees to allergies and you can have allergic reactions that only occur externally (on skin and lips, etc) or internally (intestines). Having an anaphylaxis reaction is not the only kind of response to an allergy.

Just for starters, wheat has many proteins, and you are not necessarily responding to gluten when you have an allergy to wheat.

That means that other related plants that also have gluten, such as rye, may not cause an allergic reaction like wheat does.

Second, the causal mechanisms are completely different. Wheat allergy isn't just "Celiac disease light," it's an entirely different process of the body. Hopefully this helps clear up some confusion:

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-c...s/con-20031834

That clears up things. People who claim sensitivity to gluten sensitive should go see a doctor to get a real diagnosis. They may be having issues with a particular grain. But as for the celiac light part, allergies can affect your intestines, but not the same way that celiac does.

 

[MattKeil]

Not it's not. There are degrees to allergies and you can have allergic reactions that only occur externally (on skin and lips, etc) or internally (intestines). Having an anaphylaxis reaction is not the only kind of response to an allergy.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The reaction would still be described as an allergic reaction, not a "sensitivity." I'm allergic to horses. Just because being near a horse doesn't cause anaphylatic shock doesn't mean I am described as "horse sensitive."

 

[Particle Physicist]

I don't know what I suffered from but man eating wheat was like consuming poison daily . At the time I was a vegetarian and that probably made it worse.

I had constant heart burn, bloating, this burning sensation on top of the gums by the nose, involuntary muscle twitches on face, legs and left hand, horrible anxiety problems, brain fog, transparent mucus discharge from nose and very low energy. Out of all these symptoms brain fog was the worst. I felt zoned out and I had absolutely no idea what was going on in any of my classes.

I went to the doctor and had so many tests done, and that idiot never asked about my diet or celiac disease. I honestly thought I was fucked for life. I am glad I started eating meat and gave up on wheat.

Sounds like you were probably vitamin deficient.

 

[RumblingRosco]

Why exactly wouldn't you be citrus sensitive?

No it's not. There are degrees to allergies and you can have allergic reactions that only occur externally (on skin and lips, etc) or internally (intestines). Having an anaphylaxis reaction is not the only kind of response to an allergy.

If I rub a walnut on my skin I'm OK. If I eat a walnut my stomach hurts.
If I rub a Brazil nut on my skin, I break out in hives. If I eat a Brazil nut, I go into extreme anaphylactic shock.

Which of these is an allergy and which is a sensitivity?

 

[TangoAlphaLima]

They would not. That's an allergic reaction, which is different than sensitivity and most definitely different than Celiac disease.

I'm so confused by this alleged distinction between allergy and sensitivity. From the Mayo Clinic:

A child or adult with wheat allergy is likely to develop symptoms within minutes to hours after eating something containing wheat. Wheat allergy symptoms include:

Swelling, itching or irritation of the mouth or throat
Hives, itchy rash or swelling of the skin
Nasal congestion
Headache
Itchy, watery eyes
Difficulty breathing
Cramps, nausea or vomiting
Diarrhea
Anaphylaxis

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/wheat-allergy/basics/symptoms/con-20031834

This is not a checklist by which you have to have all of these symptoms to have an allergy. Some people who are allergic to wheat likely only get a few of these symptoms, and they're likely mild.

This is from the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology:

While the symptoms of a wheat allergy are usually mild, in some cases they may be severe and can be deadly, making a diagnosis and appropriate management of the allergy imperative.

Wheat allergy is most common in children; about two-thirds of them outgrow it at a relatively young age. Though many patients with wheat allergy can eat other grains, that’s not true for everyone. Talk with your allergist about what you can safely eat and what you should avoid.

http://acaai.org/allergies/types/food-allergies/types-food-allergy/wheat-gluten-allergy




People who are allergic to wheat can have a sensitivity to gluten, or at least one particular gluten. Going gluten free can help those people, even if they don't realize that it may just be wheat and other grains that could be causing their problems and not all glutens.

 

[Particle Physicist]

No it's not. There are degrees to allergies and you can have allergic reactions that only occur externally (on skin and lips, etc) or internally (intestines). Having an anaphylaxis reaction is not the only kind of response to an allergy.

That is true, but at the same time, a person with an allergy to something has the potential to have an anaphylactic reaction to that substance, even if they never had an anaphylactic reaction to it. That is why people with true allergies are told to avoid whatever causes their allergic reaction.

 

[Konka]

No it's not. There are degrees to allergies and you can have allergic reactions that only occur externally (on skin and lips, etc) or internally (intestines). Having an anaphylaxis reaction is not the only kind of response to an allergy.



That clears up things. People who claim sensitivity to gluten sensitive should go see a doctor to get a real diagnosis. They may be having issues with a particular grain. But as for the celiac light part, allergies can affect your intestines, but not the same way that celiac does.

How could you call somebody "gluten sensitive" if they are allergic to wheat? Rye has gluten too ya know. It's called "you're allergic to wheat" not "gluten sensitive".

I think I'm DragonSworne sensitive.

 

[Petrie]

You can be gluten sensitive without having celiac disease. I know this because I live with a person who fits such description.

The person you live with is an attention whore and full of shit.

 

[Opiate]

How could you call somebody "gluten sensitive" if they are allergic to wheat? Rye has gluten too ya know. It's called "you're allergic to wheat" not "gluten sensitive".

I think I'm DragonSworne sensitive.

Dragnsworne is clearly listening, even if he doesn't completely agree. He isn't insisting he's right when evidence is presented. That's good people, in my book.

 

[Risible]

My experience in food service has taught me unless you say specifically that you're a celiac, there's a large chance your food will have gluten in it.

Sweet Jesus don't tell me that, I've always suspected that and it's one reason I don't eat out often.

 

[Gustav]

Sweet Jesus don't tell me that, I've always suspected that and it's one reason I don't eat out often.

That's okay though. Telling "gluten sensitive" people their food is "gluten free" should be good enough for them. It's a placebo effect anyway.

 

[Your Entertainer]

Completely agree. my girlfriend was recorded to have delayed gastric emptying. The doctor did not bother to do any other tests outside of a endoscopy and was quick to diagnose her to have Gastroparesis, and then told her there is no cure.

The story has a happy ending. My gf, like myself, is also a scientist, and she was able to delve behind the scientific literature and study up on gastroenterology and gastroparesis. She found out that she did not fit the patient characteristics of that condition, and was able to improve her gastric health by herself by identifying the foods that caused her gastric discomfort. Gastroenterologists are a joke, and their science is very behind on modern times.

Are you kidding? If not, could you elaborate?

That seems like a ridiculously dumb thing to say about an entire field of medicine. The field is extremely vast, and being a scientist you should know first and foremost that you are not the expert outside of your chosen area of your field.

 

[stufte]

Pfft. Next thing those stupid "Scientists" will tell me that squirting is just pee.

 

[DragonSworne]

If I rub a walnut on my skin I'm OK. If I eat a walnut my stomach hurts.
If I rub a Brazil nut on my skin, I break out in hives. If I eat a Brazil nut, I go into extreme anaphylactic shock.

Which of these is an allergy and which is a sensitivity?

An allergy can cause all those issues. The first one may be described as "sensitivity" by someone who does not realize they have an allergy.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Surprise motherfucker, sugar strikes again!

Grain protein is not at fault; grain starches (and derivative sugar alcohols and sugars) are at fault.

The intestinal distress could probably be mitigated by eating wheat products derived from whole wheat or sprouted wheat flours (both having higher levels of fiber, fats, and protein and lower digestible parts starch, sugar alcohol, and sugar relative to their processed, refined counterparts which concentrates the starch while removing the fiber, fat, and some protein).

 

[Timedog]

What is the gluten source of the study? You can get slightly modified gluten from different foods, which could have a different response.

 

[Gustav]

What is the gluten source of the study? You can get slightly modified gluten from different foods, which could have a different response.

Ah, the old "the scientists overlooked something, they should have asked me before publishing this"

 

[zaxon]

Kind of interesting how this was left out of the op:

Biesiekierski recognizes that gluten may very well be the stomach irritant we've been looking for. "There is definitely something going on," she told RCS, "but true NCGS may only affect a very small number of people and may affect more extraintestinal symptoms than first thought. This will only be confirmed with an understanding of its mechanism."

Currently, Biesiekierski is focused on maintaining an open mind and refining her experimental methods to determine whether or not non-celiac gluten sensitivity truly exists.

"Much, much more research is needed."

So, yeah. Something is going on with gluten, but the previous classification they came up with was imperfect/incomplete, so they need to start over and get a better understanding of the underlying mechanism to know what is actually going on.

That neither confirms nor denies the existence of NCGS, it simply confirms what should have been kind of obvious to begin with: there is more going on here, and we barely understand any of it.

Ah, the old "the scientists overlooked something, they should have asked me before publishing this"

Questioning and poking holes in scientific theory/research is one of the fundamental pillars of science. Ridiculing people for questioning things is one of the fundamental pillars of ignorance.

 

[Gustav]

Kind of interesting how this was left out of the op:



So, yeah. Something is going on with gluten, but the previous classification they came up with was imperfect/incomplete, so they need to start over and get a better understanding of the underlying mechanism to know what is actually going on.

That neither confirms nor denies the existence of NCGS, it simply confirms what should have been kind of obvious to begin with: there is more going on here, and we barely understand any of it.



Questioning and poking holes in scientific theory/research is one of the fundamental pillars of science. Ridiculing people for questioning things is one of the fundamental pillars of ignorance.

You certainly agree that poking holes into a study you haven't even read is silly though, yeah?

 

[Rest]

Didn't scientists already know this? Before this whole gluten fad I remember Alton Brown, of all people, saying that only people with Celiac's Disease had trouble with gluten.