> I am saying, semantically, calling "wheat free" "gluten free" when its something else in the wheat, is to misidentify the problem. I never claimed that glute

> I am saying, semantically, calling "wheat free" "gluten free" when its something else in the wheat, is to misidentify the problem. I never claimed that gluten was the problem, or that it was somehow accurate to call gluten the problem if it wasn't gluten! I was responding to your claim that the issue was likely FODMAPs, and I gave two responses to that 1) the people you claim likely had improvements by inadvertently following a low FODMAP diet would likely have been consuming a high FODMAP diet 2) there was more recent research showing that there was an alternative explanation for the FODMAP one. Also, as far as I can tell, they don't know that it is something other than gluten. They don't know what it is. > no thats not what they discover, they discover foods that lack something, that sometimes correlates with foods lacking gluten ... What I said was correct. If they avoid gluten they get improvements. That does not mean that gluten was the problem.