“Gluten Free”: Overblown?

[Basalt Beach]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Yes higher than 4 % In Sante Fe Argentina according to survey of "self reported" symptoms ?????

It is healthy to be a skeptic and as such, if you don't like the methodology, including the questions and questionnaires used in the study, then go through the paper, research their methodology, review their data & questions and after a detailed and informed review, then challenge the results. I would probably do that before I used an emoji and 5 question marks giving the appearance of dismissing a peer reviewed journal article.

There have been responses in this thread stating facts with no citations or using dated research. The suggestion that Gout has a higher incidence rate than individuals with Gluten Intolerance/sensitivity was a curious one, which resulted in a simple Google search with the NIH linked paper results and also included the research below:

Clinic data from the Center for Celiac Research, University of Maryland, showed that 6% of the 9,000 patients treated there between 2004-2010 met the criteria for NCGS and complained of corresponding symptoms, without having celiac disease or wheat allergy [2]. In a recent UK study 13% of a general population sample reported symptoms attributed to gluten [3].

As you noted, the sensitivity which some believe is attributed to gluten may be the result of other ingredients including in the food item. Further research is required. I have never observed or experienced the "hype" by the food industry or others you and others reference, then again, we love to cook, and we cook from scratch, rarely consuming or using processed foods.

[KevWind]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Basalt Beach

It is healthy to be a skeptic and as such, if you don't like the methodology, including the questions and questionnaires used in the study, then go through the paper, research their methodology, review their data & questions and after a detailed and informed review, then challenge the results. I would probably do that before I used an emoji and 5 question marks giving the appearance of dismissing a peer reviewed journal article.

Ok 5 question marks was admittedly melodramatic, point was and still is, and which the article clearly indicates "Prevalence of Self-Reported Gluten Sensitivity and Adherence to a Gluten-Free Diet in Argentinian Adult Population" .And even though I actually had reviewed the article ( before posting question marks and emoji) that was not really necessary because I was not questioning anything about the validity of the findings of survey related to what, where, and who, it was actually pertaining to.

But I think questioning the relevance of doing "a simple Google search" and then issuing the ambiguous and unclarified, blanket pronouncement "This "NIH study" states gluten intolerance/sensitivity is higher that than 4%."
I would say skepticism is totally valid ...

Not to mention the many potential variables at play , from the fact that is self reported (and all the potential inconsistent and possible "self" misdiagnosed reporting to possibly skew the numbers ) to the fact that there could also be potential significant common local diet differences possible. Thus further calling into question the relevance of said survey to the context of this thread.

As you noted, the sensitivity which some believe is attributed to gluten may be the result of other ingredients including in the food item. Further research is required.

on this we totally agree

I have never observed or experienced the "hype" by the food industry or others you and others reference, then again, we love to cook, and we cook from scratch, rarely consuming or using processed foods.

One need only look at the majority of Restaurant menus and multiple items in supermarket special food isles, to observe that the label "hype" might apply

[Davis Webb]

Originally Posted by Basalt Beach

It is healthy to be a skeptic and as such, if you don't like the methodology, including the questions and questionnaires used in the study, then go through the paper, research their methodology, review their data & questions and after a detailed and informed review, then challenge the results. I would probably do that before I used an emoji and 5 question marks giving the appearance of dismissing a peer reviewed journal article.

There have been responses in this thread stating facts with no citations or using dated research. The suggestion that Gout has a higher incidence rate than individuals with Gluten Intolerance/sensitivity was a curious one, which resulted in a simple Google search with the NIH linked paper results and also included the research below:



As you noted, the sensitivity which some believe is attributed to gluten may be the result of other ingredients including in the food item. Further research is required. I have never observed or experienced the "hype" by the food industry or others you and others reference, then again, we love to cook, and we cook from scratch, rarely consuming or using processed foods.

I don't think you are reading the references carefully. The latter statement is those complaining of symptoms, that does not mean they had celic. The first one is hard to interpret out of context.

All you had to do is search in Google Scholar the incidence of gout and you would see my source. It is not so curious. Gout is much more prevalent than celiac, which comes in a 0.7% compared with gout at nearly 4%.

My point being an entire industry based on gluten free products is out of proportion to the real risk. Its a marketing hype.

I could astound you with other factoids!

1. less than 1% of antioxidants we consume orally enter the gut, making antioxidants such as pomegranate and supplements worthless

2. those who took multivitamin supplements in high doses over a 6 week period compared with those who just ate a balanced diet showed LOWER plasma values for those nutrients, not higher!

3. in another study they bottled water in 3 containers, each with a different label, one was boring, one was eco looking and one said "Oxygen infused" with a high tech label, it was all tap water. Guess what? Most people preferred the flavor and feeling of the oxygen infused water....and were shocked when they discovered the ruse.

Much of what is touted as health promoting is exagerrated. Or false. ColdFx, a leading "anti cold" natural medicine is sold here for $40 a bottle. It was tested and it did nothing, but since Don Cherry, a famous hockey announcer promoted it on TV and in print, people bought the stuff. Its a useless nostrum but marketed to the unsuspecting.

[Martie]

[QUOTE=KevWind;5944498]

One need only look at the majority of Restaurant menus and multiple items in supermarket special food isles, to observe that the label "hype" might apply

Why conflate 'choice' with 'hype'?

[Otterhound]

Originally Posted by Davis Webb

I don't think you are reading the references carefully. The latter statement is those complaining of symptoms, that does not mean they had celic. The first one is hard to interpret out of context.

All you had to do is search in Google Scholar the incidence of gout and you would see my source. It is not so curious. Gout is much more prevalent than celiac, which comes in a 0.7% compared with gout at nearly 4%.

My point being an entire industry based on gluten free products is out of proportion to the real risk. Its a marketing hype.

I could astound you with other factoids!

1. less than 1% of antioxidants we consume orally enter the gut, making antioxidants such as pomegranate and supplements worthless

2. those who took multivitamin supplements in high doses over a 6 week period compared with those who just ate a balanced diet showed LOWER plasma values for those nutrients, not higher!

3. in another study they bottled water in 3 containers, each with a different label, one was boring, one was eco looking and one said "Oxygen infused" with a high tech label, it was all tap water. Guess what? Most people preferred the flavor and feeling of the oxygen infused water....and were shocked when they discovered the ruse.

Much of what is touted as health promoting is exagerrated. Or false. ColdFx, a leading "anti cold" natural medicine is sold here for $40 a bottle. It was tested and it did nothing, but since Don Cherry, a famous hockey announcer promoted it on TV and in print, people bought the stuff. Its a useless nostrum but marketed to the unsuspecting.

Gotta love Don Cherry . Does he still wear dull clothes ?
Give it up . You will never sway anyone with a closed mind and , most importantly , a way to profit from the hype .
Those with the gluten issue know what to look for and learn how to find it just as diabetics do .

[Martie]

Allopathic medicine has 'conditioned' us to deal only with symptoms, whilst masking them with synthetic, profit-wielding drugs and rarely addressing root causes etc. As such, if it can be argued that modern wheat/pesticides/gluten etc. are in any way detrimental to our health, then there has to be a case for avoiding such things as an act of disease prevention? For example, I've spoken to many diabetics who wish they'd never consumed so many refined sugars/carbs over the years, which is clearly a major cause of type 2 diabetes. Better still, as has been said repeatedly in this thread, avoid ALL processed foods, which cuts out the 'rubbish' AND bypasses the hype proliferated by manufacturers of processed gluten-free food, who are still selling us nothing more than re-packaged junk.

Going back to the OP - it seems clear that the answer is both yes and no. Yes, because there is hype - because there's always going to be those willing to cash-in. And no, because it's important that people have different options from which to choose, whether as prevention or because they have a condition, and we mustn't throw the baby out with the bathwater etc. (and that it's definitely best to simply avoid all processed food as much as possible, including the GF stuff).

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Martie

Why conflate 'choice' with 'hype'?

How can you ask this and then turn around in your next post and use the exact wording and make the same basic statement from my previous post number #135 ?
"Going back to the OP - it seems clear that the answer is both yes and no. Yes, because there is hype "

Or are you now conflating choice with hype - There is either hype or there isn't, seems we both agree there is hype


Since quick googling is acceptable here are only the first 3 of 3,050,000 results
from entering---- "is Gluten Free a Fad" in the search field

https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/2012...-fact-or-fad#2

https://www.pharmacytimes.com/public...ts-and-fiction


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5439366/

[Martie]

[QUOTE=KevWind;5944580]

Originally Posted by Martie

How can you ask this and then turn around in your next post and use the exact wording from one of my previous posts ?
"Going back to the OP - it seems clear that the answer is both yes and no. Yes, because there is hype "

I guess because, after taking into account the contents of the entire thread and giving things a little more thought, I am happy to conclude that I have learned much from what is clearly a multi-faceted and complex situation, and that the answer to the OP is indeed yes and no.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Martie

I guess because, after taking into account the contents of the entire thread and giving things a little more thought, I am happy to conclude that I have learned much from what is clearly a multi-faceted and complex situation, and that the answer to the OP is indeed yes and no.

Correct and so the answer to your rhetorical question "why conflate choice with hype" is they are already conflated, the choice is a part of and a result of the hype.

Also Martie : If your going to use "Wrap [Quote] tags around selected text"
(feature) instead of the entire post quote button, then try make sure to edit correctly so you are not putting the wrong person's name in the quote

[Martie]

[QUOTE=KevWind;5944638]Correct and so the answer to your rhetorical question "why conflate choice with hype" is they are already conflated, the choice is a part of and a result of the hype.

Also Martie : If your going to use "Wrap

tags around selected text"
(feature) instead of the entire post quote button, then try make sure to edit correctly so you are not putting the wrong person's name in the quote

I made a rash post, then gave it some thought, and corrected myself because hey, we're not all here to 'win' - most of us are here to explore the general theme and gain a deeper understanding of a multi-faceted and complex situation that affects different people in different (often extremely serious, as is the case with my daughter) ways. And it's not gone un-noticed that those with seemingly no problem with gluten seem to have the biggest problem with the whole gluten-free thing and even though we have reached an agreement you still have to insist that it's all born of 'hype'.

For example, it's truly GREAT that when I go out for a meal with my daughter there's a gluten free menu that saves her trawling through the regular one (for what can feel like an eternity) because IF SHE EATS GLUTEN SHE BECOMES EXTREMELY ILL! But hey, NOW she has a choice - and not because of 'hype' - because there are entrepreneurs out there who cater for ALL of their customers (and good for them if they make a good living out of it!).

YES, there are processed food manufacturers who are milking it, but to suggest that the choice is purely a result of the hype is plain ignorant and utterly absurd. Choice was developed because an option was required and that's nothing more than basic *supply and demand*. And YES, these two can indeed, and often are conflated but that does not mean that the creation of more choice is exclusively the consequence of hype.

Like most things in life, we need to look at this as holistically and cooperatively as possible and again, to agree with you...the answer to the original OP (is the gluten thing 'overblown'?) is both yes (in the way processed food manufacturers milk it) and no for what must surely be obvious reasons by now... (which I had more or less concluded several pages back!).

[Tele1111]

Martie,

I find nothing “competitive” in Kevin pointing out that YOUR name was shown at the beginning of HIS quote. That YOU wrapped.
He simply pointed out, in what I perceived as a light hearted way, your mistake.

Mark

[1neeto]

I’m just going to post my perfectly cooked butter basted filet mignon with chicken breast, avocado with sautéed broccoli and mushrooms. Very low carbs and maybe even gluten free? [emoji23]

[Martie]

Originally Posted by Tele1111

Martie,

I find nothing “competitive” in Kevin pointing out that YOUR name was shown at the beginning of HIS quote. That YOU wrapped.
He simply pointed out, in what I perceived as a light hearted way, your mistake.

Mark

Post #144 contained two paragraphs and my response was referring entirely to the first. The second paragraph pointed out a minor technical error on my part, which I have no issue with at all. In fact, I just looked at my last post and I have no idea what is going on with the whole quote thing, as I simply hit the 'quote' button to reply. To be honest, I don't even know what 'wrap' means in this context!

[RedJoker]

Wow, I never would have guessed that the simple availability of gluten free products could inflame such passion.

Today I learned!

[Martie]

Originally Posted by RedJoker

Wow, I never would have guessed that the simple availability of gluten free products could inflame such passion.

Today I learned!

I know! You'd think we were discussing something REALLY serious, like solid versus laminate...or bridge pin material!!!