Gluten free (reduced) question

[WriterGirl]

So, my family is doing a gluten free experiment just to see if we generally eat better and feel better. Nobody actually has Celiac (I come the closest, showing signs in the blood test, but the actual look inside my intestines being negative).

 

So far, I do like the results.

 

But what I'm wondering is if, for someone who does NOT have Celiac, do you still get a benefit from reducing (as opposed to eliminating) gluten?

 

I can see a time in the future when we might want to allow it back in limited quantities (when eating out especially--ordering things that appear gluten-free, but not necessarily specifically asking the chef--or when on vacation and wanting to just "go wild")

 

I've searched Google hoping to find a scholarly article on the subject and have come up with nothing. Does anyone on the board know?

 

(And as an aside, I'm happy to be back! I've been a looooooong time away, with time only for deadlines and school. But life is easier now. Yay!)

 

Julie

[abbeyej]

Oooh, I was wondering what had happened to you! :) Really, I saw a book of yours on my shelf the other day and thought, "I haven't seen her post in a while -- I wonder if she's gone, or if it's just a name-change I didn't notice." :)

 

I don't know of any scholarly work. My own inclination would be to try to stick as strictly to a gluten free diet as you can for a period of time (ideally 3 months or so -- though anything over a month should still make a difference), then eat a meal that purposely contains a fair amount of gluten. Actually, best would be to start a log of how you feel (physically and emotionally) for a week or more before the meal, and continue for a week or more after. Do you notice significant physical or emotional effects? If you notice anything, try again with a smaller dose in a few weeks. Again, note how you feel immediately after and for a few days following. Compare it to how you felt before. If you notice no symptoms from the first gluten-based meal, wait a few weeks and try again, this time with a higher dose. (If your first meal was pretty gluten-intensive, like pizza or pasta, you might try adding gluten to two meals in a row.)

 

I think, if you don't truly have an allergy to wheat or gluten or celiac, you will likely find that you can tolerate a single dose of gluten here or there (say 1 slice of pizza or cake, or something that slips in accidentally here or there) without much reaction. ... But that's so very individual!

 

You may also find that taking food enzymes any time you *know* you'll be faced with some amount of gluten may help.

[Mejane]

I remember reading somewhere that people who are not gluten-intolerant should not go gluten-free, but I don't remember why. Helpful, I know. :D

[Snickerdoodle]

I remember reading somewhere that people who are not gluten-intolerant should not go gluten-free, but I don't remember why. Helpful, I know. :D

 

 

Are gluten containing products necessary in the diet? I'm trying to think of a nutritional reason they are necessary and I'm not coming up with one. I find this a fascinating topic. :bigear:

[Ferdie]

This is a quote from the gluten article posted this morning:

 

"The gluten-free diet only alleviates symptoms for those with an intolerance. For those without an intolerance, gluten is an important source of protein, iron and calcium."

 

Here is the article:

 

http://www.longislandpress.com/2010/04/15/gluten-free-millions-suffer-from-celiac-few-diagnosed/

[Snickerdoodle]

gluten is an important source of protein, iron and calcium.

 

 

 

All items easily obtained from other sources.

[Jen in PA]

I have a sensitivity to a protein in wheat that is not gluten, but for the most part it's easiest to seek out GF items when I am out of the house. Until about 6 months ago I could tolerate a small serving of wheat a few times a week.... I might have half of an English muffin, a cookie, or a slice of thin crust pizza, each on separate days, over a 5 or 6 day span. If I overindulged I felt awful, but I felt no distinction between having a little bit of wheat and having no wheat at all. Now that is all over -- I can't have any wheat without feeling major symptoms. A couple of weeks ago I ate a handful of tortilla chips that DH had bought and I never checked the label because our usual brand is GF.... turns out these had wheat in them, and I was miserable for quite a while afterwards, even though I had only eaten a few. I think the key is to follow your symptoms and see what level your body can tolerate without consequences. Of course, if you have diagnosed celiac, you just can't risk doing damage that you aren't feeling.... but for a lower level sensitivity, I think it is possible to handle moderate amounts.

[texasmama]

Gluten is not a good source of protein, iron and calcium. Gluten is the protein molecule found in wheat, barley, and rye, with oats being cross-contaminated with gluten. Wheat has been changed by growers over the years and today's wheat contains a much higher level of gluten than it did several hundred years ago. It is quite possible to live very well nutrionally without gluten. Gluten is not "healthy". It causes issues for many people, even those who are not celiacs. My family is gluten free. Many, if not most, people would benefit from limiting or eliminating gluten in their diets, even if they don't have celiac disease. You can look up studies regarding gluten intolerance (not celiac) and studies about children with autism being gluten free.

 

The bottom line is that if you notice you feel better not eating gluten, then there is probably a good reason. It is possible to have only spotty damage in the small intestine and for the damage to be missed even with biopsies. It is also possible to have gluten intolerance and feel much better off of gluten but never have any intestinal damage with gluten. (That is actually the distinction between celiac disease and gluten intolerance, whether or not there is damage in the small intestine from gluten.)

[WriterGirl]

Oooh, I was wondering what had happened to you! :) Really, I saw a book of yours on my shelf the other day and thought, "I haven't seen her post in a while -- I wonder if she's gone, or if it's just a name-change I didn't notice." :)

Hey! Thanks for wondering. I've had an INSANE deadline schedule. Insane! (I actually do have a name-change/addition, too. Starting in September, I'm J.K. Beck as well as Julie Kenner. It's a schizophrenic existence!

 

 

I don't know of any scholarly work. My own inclination would be to try to stick as strictly to a gluten free diet as you can for a period of time (ideally 3 months or so -- though anything over a month should still make a difference), then eat a meal that purposely contains a fair amount of gluten. Actually, best would be to start a log of how you feel (physically and emotionally) for a week or more before the meal, and continue for a week or more after. .....

This is a very good idea; we've been paying attention, but not actually logging. I'll start doing that...

 

You may also find that taking food enzymes any time you *know* you'll be faced with some amount of gluten may help.

Oh! Thanks! I never even thought about that!

[WriterGirl]

The bottom line is that if you notice you feel better not eating gluten, then there is probably a good reason. It is possible to have only spotty damage in the small intestine and for the damage to be missed even with biopsies. It is also possible to have gluten intolerance and feel much better off of gluten but never have any intestinal damage with gluten. (That is actually the distinction between celiac disease and gluten intolerance, whether or not there is damage in the small intestine from gluten.)

 

This is apparently where I am (not yet sure about the kids or husband). I guess what I was wondering is if the benefits if not actually having Celiac are still present if you reduce. But from what everyone is saying, it sounds like, barring Celiac, it all turns on a "how do you feel" aspect, as opposed to a "doing significant harm to your intestines" aspect. At any rate, I really appreciate the feedback!

[Lisa in Jax]

Julie,

 

Dh went gluten-free along with/in support of ds, who has some behavioral reactions to gluten and dairy. He had no digestive or behavioral reason for limiting gluten, but he found to his surprise that he felt better when he didn't eat gluten. He also lost ten pounds. (He is fit, but had gained 10-15 lbs in the last ten years or so.)

 

IMHO, the benefit for those who don't *need* to eliminate gluten would be related to increasing the "whole foods" aspect of your diet, and in making better choices with your processed foods and carbs.

 

Cutting out grocery store bread can't be bad for you, lol. Most commercial breads are made from processed, bleached wheat and contain corn syrup, soy and preservatives. If going gluten free means that you eat simpler foods and make your own bread (as we do), I'd think that the it would be a good diet for many. :)

 

One vitamin that is a concern for those who eliminate gluten is B-6, so be sure that you eat healthy foods with enough B vitamins if you continue to be gluten-free long term.

 

HIH,

 

Lisa

[WriterGirl]

Julie,

 

Dh went gluten-free along with/in support of ds, who has some behavioral reactions to gluten and dairy. He had no digestive or behavioral reason for limiting gluten, but he found to his surprise that he felt better when he didn't eat gluten. He also lost ten pounds. (He is fit, but had gained 10-15 lbs in the last ten years or so.)

 

IMHO, the benefit for those who don't *need* to eliminate gluten would be related to increasing the "whole foods" aspect of your diet, and in making better choices with your processed foods and carbs.

 

Cutting out grocery store bread can't be bad for you, lol. Most commercial breads are made from processed, bleached wheat and contain corn syrup, soy and preservatives. If going gluten free means that you eat simpler foods and make your own bread (as we do), I'd think that the it would be a good diet for many. :)

 

One vitamin that is a concern for those who eliminate gluten is B-6, so be sure that you eat healthy foods with enough B vitamins if you continue to be gluten-free long term.

 

HIH,

 

Lisa

 

Thanks, Lisa. I've been learning to bake bread (in the past, I've done it as a lark), and focusing on eating less processed foods, which is one of the reason I like the gluten-free diet, since (despite an upsurge in processed gluten free products) on the whole we've gotten back to a much more "basics" diet. I know I feel less bloated.

[Lisa in Jax]

Here's a really good gluten- (and dairy-) free bread recipe if you'd like one. :)

 

Preheat the oven to 350F convection/375F conventional.

 

Combine:

1 3/4 c tepid water

1 t sugar

1.5 T yeast

 

In your mixer's bowl, combine:

2c brown rice flour

1 1/3 cup tapioca flour

1/3 cup garbanzo flour

1/4 c potato STARCH flour

2/3 cup Darifree "milk" powder OR milk powder, if not avoiding dairy

1 t salt

3 1/2 t xanthan gum

 

Add 1/4 cup ghee (or olive oil or butter/butter substitute of your choice) to the dry ingredients and mix.

 

When the yeast, sugar and water have become bubbly, add it to the dry ingredients and ghee.

 

Then add:

3 eggs

1 t apple cider vinegar (we use the unfiltered, organic stuff :)

 

Mix all of the wet and dry ingredients until combined.

 

Put 1/2 of the dough into each of two greased bread pans. Cover with plastic wrap and allow to rise for 30-60 minutes, or until it has doubled (approximately).

 

Bake for 30-40 minutes. The top of the bread will have a firm crust, but if the middle isn't completely cooked, it will "sag" under its weight when you take it out of the pan to cool it. If that happens, return it to the pan and give it another 5-10 minutes. <g>

 

When cool, slice the bread, place waxed paper between the slices, and freeze any slices that won't be eaten within a day or two. When you want to eat the frozen slices, wrap each one in a paper towel and microwave for 15-20 seconds, or until the center is warm and the bread feels springy again.

 

HIH,

 

Lisa

Edited April 19, 2010 by Lisa in Jax
Fumble fingers, as always. ;-)

[keptwoman]

OP: I have a friend who's gastroenterologist gave her the option of the biopsy but said that if the blood test indicated gluten issues, she needed to be off it regardless of what the biopsy said. I know that by the official line, she can't be called celiac, but her Dr considers her so. It's such a new area that the "rules" are still evolving. Also the damage to the small intestine can be there but be missed on the biopsy, as they only biopsy a couple of small areas and unless it's very very bad, there will be healthy areas of the intestine.

 

To answer your question, here is a link to some very recent research done here in Australia. I'll see if I can find out more on it, or where it has been published. It says that people without celiac can absolutely react strongly to gluten and be better off without it.

http://oakleigh-monash-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/jessica-applauded-for-coeliac-discovery/

[keptwoman]

This is a quote from the gluten article posted this morning:

 

"The gluten-free diet only alleviates symptoms for those with an intolerance. For those without an intolerance, gluten is an important source of protein, iron and calcium."

 

Here is the article:

 

http://www.longislandpress.com/2010/04/15/gluten-free-millions-suffer-from-celiac-few-diagnosed/

 

This article contradicts itself somewhat. First it says millions may be undiagnosed (not arguing with that bit!) Then it says that anyone who has taken themselves off gluten without the advice of the doctor is participating in a fad diet. What about those who have been dismissed by their doctor for years and eventually worked it out for themselves? The medical profession is not well educated on the effects of gluten, some of the effects are still being learnt and it's ludicrous to suggest that only the piece of paper justifies the gluten free diet. We need to learn to trust what our bodies are saying and I for one am not prepared to undergo 3-4 months of hell on my digestive system just to satisfy a doctors desire for a piece of paper. Doesn't mean my gluten free lifestyle (hardly easy) is a fad.

[texasmama]

This article contradicts itself somewhat. First it says millions may be undiagnosed (not arguing with that bit!) Then it says that anyone who has taken themselves off gluten without the advice of the doctor is participating in a fad diet. What about those who have been dismissed by their doctor for years and eventually worked it out for themselves? The medical profession is not well educated on the effects of gluten, some of the effects are still being learnt and it's ludicrous to suggest that only the piece of paper justifies the gluten free diet. We need to learn to trust what our bodies are saying and I for one am not prepared to undergo 3-4 months of hell on my digestive system just to satisfy a doctors desire for a piece of paper. Doesn't mean my gluten free lifestyle (hardly easy) is a fad.

 

I totally agree! There is absolutely NO harm that can come to someone who decides not to eat gluten. However, many people are harmed by eating even small amounts of it, whether they have celiac disease or just gluten intolerance.

 

My two youngest kids have celiac disease, as did my grandmother and does my dad. Four out of our six family members are gluten free (my oldest dd and dh are not when they eat outside our home). Even my oldest son and I (though not diagnosed as celiac) had improvements in our health when we stopped eating gluten. With my family history, I am glad to avoid gluten because if I avoid it by choice, I can never develop celiac disease and face potentially horrible reactions to minute amounts of gluten.

 

Celiac.com is a great source of information for those trying to get the gluten out of their diets.

[Peela]

Gluten is by no means an essential part of the diet as others have said. Wheat has been hybridized to such an extent that the gluten content is way higher than what it was 100 years ago. Since humanity survived so long with much lower gluten levels in the diet, I think we can safely say that it's not gluten we need!

My breadshop guy was telling me the other day about spelt. Dh is wheat sensitive but can handle spelt bread (which is lower in gluten). The bread shop guy said spelt doesnt need pesticides (as much anyway) because insects arent attracted to it the same way as the huge fields of mono cropping of hybridized wheat. He also said that the nutrition in a spelt grain is fairly well distributed through the grain- so that white spelt flour is actually still very high in nutrition. Wheras the hybridized wheat has most of its nutrition in the outer husk which is taken off to make white flour- hence white flour products are very low in nutrition. That made me feel better about making white bread (from spelt) for my white bread loving son.

 

The information about food nowadays comes from so many prejudiced sources. The meat companies make out that we can't live without red meat. The dairy companies make out that dairy is viritually the only and certainly best source of calcium yet a smal amount of research will uncover the fact that only high meat and dairy consuming countries have high rates of osteoporosis. So much false and misleading information is published as science, and it just isnt science- its about twisting information to make money. Just because you read it or see it somewhere, even if it comes from some sort of authority, check with other sources and your own common sense first.

[Caraway]

This site has a lot of information on why you should avoid wheat/gluten/grains even if you are not Celiac:

 

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/definitive-guide-grains/

[WriterGirl]

Thanks to everyone else who posted this afternoon/evening; I'm going to read the posts and links more closely in the a.m.

 

In talking with my husband and trying to articulate what I'm trying to focus on, I think I've finally narrowed it down to this: we're going to do GF in the home, both b/c of my issues (or potential issues) and b/c I think that going GF tends to make the food choices (at least in our family) healthier.

 

But what I'm wondering is: to the extent that we do have benefits, are we completely destroying those benefits and going back to square one if, when we eat out, we don't deeply investigate the ingredients in foods at restaurants to see if there's a small amount of gluten. Or, so long as we make smart choices re the food and thereby keep gluten intake to non-existent or "hidden" small amounts, are we still "okay" in that we haven't completely negated whatever benefit there might be? (And, obviously, if we feel a change, that would answer that question.)

 

Or, possibly, there is no "benefit" other than healthier eating if you don't actually have Celiac (let's assume that for our family it does promote healthier choices and all vitamin supplements are being taken), in which case it's somewhat analogous to a reasonably healthy eater deciding one Saturday to binge on ice cream and potato chips (can we say "my college days")?

[texasmama]

My opinion is that unless you have celiac disease, incidental gluten through cross contamination at a restaurant will not negate benefits you reap from being gf at home, unless you eat out every day. If you do notice that you feel ill after eating restaurant food, then you are more sensitive to gluten and that is good information for you to avoid it more strictly. I have narrowed down what restaurants we can eat it fairly safely and be gf (though the risk of cross contamination always exists). If you wonder about a restaurant, then google the name of it followed by the words "gluten free" and you can get helpful information. Several restaurants have specific gluten free menus, such as Outback Steakhouse, Chick Fil A and Chilis. Many items that you think would be gluten free are not, shockingly. I spent most of the first month after we went gluten free googling and reading labels.:tongue_smilie: