If listening to your body has lead you to identify gluten as a health problem and you feel better after removing it, a new study adds to an already extensive body of research that the rapidly expanding gluten free movement is not a fad as critics claim.
The gluten free (GF) movement has taken on powerful momentum in the past few years, with GF labeled products estimated to balloon to about 7 billion dollars globally by 2019. And so, with any popular dietary pattern promising beneficial changes in health and well-being, as well as challenging both centuries old beliefs in the value of wheat and their producer’s and manufacturer’s bottom line, the growing popularity and perceive health benefits of the GF diet is destined to cause controversy and backlash, as evidenced by recent mainstream reporting:
- Eat More Gluten: The Diet Must Be A Fad (Time.com)
- Backlash has begun against gluten free dieters (Washingtonpost.com)
- The dangers of going gluten-free (Macleans.ca)
A new study, however, provides sound evidence that one does not need to have classically defined celiac disease (i.e. validated by HLA DQ2/8 gene tests and intestinal biopsy) in order to benefit from going gluten free. In fact, this is why the gluten free movement is so popular: most people who opt out of eating gluten feel better when they abstain, worse when they partake. But medical professionals, wheat industry spokespersons and even some friendly to advocating for natural, evidence-based alternatives like Dr. Greger, think the case against eating wheat is overblown, if not downright fraudulent.
What the New Gluten Study Revealed
The new study published in the journal Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology titled, “Small Amounts of Gluten in Subjects with Suspected Nonceliac Gluten Sensitivity: a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Cross-Over Trial,“ aimed to add insight into the ”debate over the existence of nonceliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) -intestinal and extra-intestinal symptoms in response to ingestion of gluten-containing foods by people without celiac disease or wheat allergy.”
A Italian group of researchers conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial to determine the effects of administration of low doses of gluten to subjects with suspected non-celiac gluten sensitivity.
The study method was described as follows:
The results clearly showed adverse effects after re-introduction of gluten following the 1 week withdrawal period:
The authors concluded:
Gluten Avoidance Is an Evidence-Based, Precautionary Dietary Approach
If you have followed our work on Greenmedinfo.com related to wheat, first with my essay ’The Dark Side of Wheat,” and second with the ongoing research indexing project to ascertain signals in the accumulating data on wheat and gluten consumption and its adverse effects, we have identified over 200 adverse health issues related to wheat and/or its components (e.g. gluten, wheat lectin), only a small portion of which are specific to those with classical celiac disease. What this means is that the weight of evidence argues for a precautionary approach to including this grain in the diet. The truth is: gluten free options today abound, and the point is to do more than just substitute out gluten-containing foods for others containing processed non-gluten containing grains. Look to the ancestral diet – which is largely if not entirely grain free – for deeper guidance. This approach, which is highly bio-individualized, focuses on foods your ancestors would have hunted or foraged long before the advent of agrarian civilizations approximately 10,000 years ago, none of which included cooked grains (seeds) from the cereal grasses as a source of food, or animal husbandry related products such as cow’s milk and cheese.
This article was originally published on www.GreenMedInfo.com. Join their free GreenMedInfo.com newsletter
*Image of “bread“ via Shutterstock
Friends Read Free