5 ms·

Your own study has a pretty severe flaw as well, namely confirmation bias. To do this better you need to set a fixed time period in which you will look for glut

Your own study has a pretty severe flaw as well, namely confirmation bias. To do this better you need to set a fixed time period in which you will look for gluten consumption and record everything she eats. Then every so often you (the partner) looks back X days to see if she's eaten gluten. The key is, you can't know ahead of time whether she had a reaction, which is tricky I know. The way you're doing it, you would find the same results if she she consumes gluten on a semi-regular basis unknowingly but has no allergy. You're only looking when you expect to find something, which is guaranteed to skew the results.

ysavir 10y ago
Ironically, all the posts calling confirmation bias are, themselves, probably the result of confirmation bias.
- torgoguys 10y ago
  >Ironically, all the posts calling confirmation bias are, themselves, probably the result of confirmation bias. Have a look at my comment (the first reply flagging this as possibly the result of confirmation bias). In what what does it sound to you like it could be the result of confirmation bias? I really want to know your thinking on that. I try to actively attack such biases as best I can, but as I even mention in that comment, I understand that they affect us all. I'm just not seeing it here, though, so please tell me what you think I'm overlooking.
  - Nomentatus 10y ago
    He's claiming a common lag reaction exists, that does exist. For example, the lectins in oatmeal are known to cause immune reactions with as much as a 3-day lag (common for our immune reactions in general, of course) if the oatmeal is not cooked for long enough. When did you last get a flu only an hour after exposure to a virus? Lag is common (not uniform) in our immune system reactions, which encompass a lot more than IgE reactions.
    - torgoguys 10y ago
      Ok, but your reply to my question might want to address the question: >Have a look at my comment (the first reply flagging this as possibly the result of confirmation bias). In what what does it sound to you like it could be the result of confirmation bias? Did you read the comment that that question was referring to? I never attack any notion of lag in a complex system being real possibility, so I'm not sure where you are coming from or why lag excludes the possibility of confirmation bias. (And only loosely related, you might want to rethink using the example of abscense of influenza symptoms immediately after exposure to the virus as being in any way similar. You seem to be implying something I don't think you mean to).
      - Nomentatus 10y ago
        Confirmation bias because we know most about IgE reactions, so tend to expect all other evidence to conform to that form of reaction - but reality is much more complex. Temporal (lag) characteristics fall under that. There's no requirement of prior similar errors with confirmation bias - the bias exists as an expectation and if fulfilled either by ignoring, downplaying or discarding other evidence. The particular bias, that IgE reactions exhaust the category of genuine allergy reactions is very strong - some allergists who don't read much still have it! It's certainly confirmation bias, together with recency. But we know that's false now, it's recent but well established medicine. We know mast cells do a lot more, now. MCAS = Mast Cell Activation Syndrome MCAD (Mast Cell Activation Disorder) = MCAS or mastocytosis Great links here: http://strengthflexibilityhealtheds.com/2016/02/04/diagnosing-mast-cell-activation-syndrome-mcas-update-and-diagnosis-confirmation/ http://strengthflexibilityhealtheds.com/2016/02/04/diagnosin... http://www.mastattack.org/2014/10/mcad-general-information-public/ http://www.mastattack.org/2014/10/mcad-general-information-p... http://evilmastcells.com/ http://evilmastcells.com/ http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(14)02927-3/fulltext http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(14)02927-3/full... Dr. Anne Maitland’s presentation on Allergies & Mast Cell Activation Syndrome in EDS Patients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktFdr-9rpIM&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktFdr-9rpIM&feature=youtu.be https://mastcellblog.wordpress.com/mastcellguide/ https://mastcellblog.wordpress.com/mastcellguide/
  - ysavir 10y ago
    I meant that in the sense that posts claiming the parent was showing confirmation bias were in themselves likely trying to fault the parent's experiments in a way that reaffirmed their own existing beliefs. I'm not saying that they were wrong in pointing out confirmation bias, but that they aren't coming from a much more objective perspective themselves.
    - torgoguys 10y ago
      Gotcha. I appreciate the reply. I understand what you were thinking now, but I reject that assertion, at least for my comment. In it, I explicitly accept the possibility that he's right, after warning him that based (only) on the text of his comment, he might not have sufficiently guarded himself against a confirmation bias. I replied because the way he described it is classic of a "remember this hits, forget the misses" cognitive problem. There's no prospective testing described (other than the initial elimination of gluten from her diet). Their confidence seems to mostly rest on post-hoc examinations of diet once something is noticed (so you're missing most of the data and potentially most of the misses) and even gives himself an out if they do an examination and it does miss (the reference to needing a "deep enough" investigation, implying that he open to chalking up a miss as that this time they just didn't look deep enough).
maxmcorp 10y ago
Confirmation bias does not exclude being correct. I have the same experience with a family member having gluten intolerance. We have experimented with diet. On gluten. Off gluten. Eating what is thought to be gluten free and having the usual reaction. And then finding out it wasnt. Having symptoms dissapear after a while of gluten etc. etc. There might be confirmation bias, and it might be an n=1 test, but it is also 100% repeatable. And it might not be the gluten, but proteins that are in the same foods as gluten. So when you stop with gluten you also stop with the other proteins. But that is really irellevant when you got the sensitivity.
- in_cahoots 10y ago
  There's no use in drawing conclusions from a broken experiment, whether it's from a team of scientists or an at-home test. Having no experience with gluten insensitivity myself, I am simply suggesting a way to bring some rigor to this conversation.

ysavir 10y ago

Ironically, all the posts calling confirmation bias are, themselves, probably the result of confirmation bias.

torgoguys 10y ago
>Ironically, all the posts calling confirmation bias are, themselves, probably the result of confirmation bias. Have a look at my comment (the first reply flagging this as possibly the result of confirmation bias). In what what does it sound to you like it could be the result of confirmation bias? I really want to know your thinking on that. I try to actively attack such biases as best I can, but as I even mention in that comment, I understand that they affect us all. I'm just not seeing it here, though, so please tell me what you think I'm overlooking.
- Nomentatus 10y ago
  He's claiming a common lag reaction exists, that does exist. For example, the lectins in oatmeal are known to cause immune reactions with as much as a 3-day lag (common for our immune reactions in general, of course) if the oatmeal is not cooked for long enough. When did you last get a flu only an hour after exposure to a virus? Lag is common (not uniform) in our immune system reactions, which encompass a lot more than IgE reactions.
  - torgoguys 10y ago
    Ok, but your reply to my question might want to address the question: >Have a look at my comment (the first reply flagging this as possibly the result of confirmation bias). In what what does it sound to you like it could be the result of confirmation bias? Did you read the comment that that question was referring to? I never attack any notion of lag in a complex system being real possibility, so I'm not sure where you are coming from or why lag excludes the possibility of confirmation bias. (And only loosely related, you might want to rethink using the example of abscense of influenza symptoms immediately after exposure to the virus as being in any way similar. You seem to be implying something I don't think you mean to).
    - Nomentatus 10y ago
      Confirmation bias because we know most about IgE reactions, so tend to expect all other evidence to conform to that form of reaction - but reality is much more complex. Temporal (lag) characteristics fall under that. There's no requirement of prior similar errors with confirmation bias - the bias exists as an expectation and if fulfilled either by ignoring, downplaying or discarding other evidence. The particular bias, that IgE reactions exhaust the category of genuine allergy reactions is very strong - some allergists who don't read much still have it! It's certainly confirmation bias, together with recency. But we know that's false now, it's recent but well established medicine. We know mast cells do a lot more, now. MCAS = Mast Cell Activation Syndrome MCAD (Mast Cell Activation Disorder) = MCAS or mastocytosis Great links here: http://strengthflexibilityhealtheds.com/2016/02/04/diagnosing-mast-cell-activation-syndrome-mcas-update-and-diagnosis-confirmation/ http://strengthflexibilityhealtheds.com/2016/02/04/diagnosin... http://www.mastattack.org/2014/10/mcad-general-information-public/ http://www.mastattack.org/2014/10/mcad-general-information-p... http://evilmastcells.com/ http://evilmastcells.com/ http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(14)02927-3/fulltext http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(14)02927-3/full... Dr. Anne Maitland’s presentation on Allergies & Mast Cell Activation Syndrome in EDS Patients. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktFdr-9rpIM&feature=youtu.be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktFdr-9rpIM&feature=youtu.be https://mastcellblog.wordpress.com/mastcellguide/ https://mastcellblog.wordpress.com/mastcellguide/
- ysavir 10y ago
  I meant that in the sense that posts claiming the parent was showing confirmation bias were in themselves likely trying to fault the parent's experiments in a way that reaffirmed their own existing beliefs. I'm not saying that they were wrong in pointing out confirmation bias, but that they aren't coming from a much more objective perspective themselves.
  - torgoguys 10y ago
    Gotcha. I appreciate the reply. I understand what you were thinking now, but I reject that assertion, at least for my comment. In it, I explicitly accept the possibility that he's right, after warning him that based (only) on the text of his comment, he might not have sufficiently guarded himself against a confirmation bias. I replied because the way he described it is classic of a "remember this hits, forget the misses" cognitive problem. There's no prospective testing described (other than the initial elimination of gluten from her diet). Their confidence seems to mostly rest on post-hoc examinations of diet once something is noticed (so you're missing most of the data and potentially most of the misses) and even gives himself an out if they do an examination and it does miss (the reference to needing a "deep enough" investigation, implying that he open to chalking up a miss as that this time they just didn't look deep enough).

maxmcorp 10y ago

Confirmation bias does not exclude being correct. I have the same experience with a family member having gluten intolerance. We have experimented with diet. On gluten. Off gluten. Eating what is thought to be gluten free and having the usual reaction. And then finding out it wasnt. Having symptoms dissapear after a while of gluten etc. etc. There might be confirmation bias, and it might be an n=1 test, but it is also 100% repeatable. And it might not be the gluten, but proteins that are in the same foods as gluten. So when you stop with gluten you also stop with the other proteins. But that is really irellevant when you got the sensitivity.

in_cahoots 10y ago
There's no use in drawing conclusions from a broken experiment, whether it's from a team of scientists or an at-home test. Having no experience with gluten insensitivity myself, I am simply suggesting a way to bring some rigor to this conversation.