4 ms·
Right, one has to not only eat some gluten but eat it for up to 3 months to avoid a false negative. This is fairly new information to many doctors (neither of m
by code_duck 9y ago
Right, one has to not only eat some gluten but eat it for up to 3 months to avoid a false negative. This is fairly new information to many doctors (neither of my MDs were aware of that, nor my GI specialist - I had to inform myself from the internet and do my own self conducted, self monitored gluten challenge to ensure the test they ordered was accurate).
Now I'm in the position of being very clearly sensitive to gluten, having a first degree family member with celiac, and a 2 positive blood tests. That is enough for most European doctors and some American doctors to firmly diagnose, but most American doctors insist on a biopsy that shows intestinal damage. They gave me a biopsy when I had been on an almost gluten free diet for months, and it didn't show anything. I'll probably never get tested because there is no way I want to go through great suffering and risk permanent damage by eating gluten for weeks or months just to prove it to health insurance.
- opless 9y agoSame here - I'm ridiculously sensitive to gluten. I've not been diagnosed, and I doubt I will ever be. I was contaminated over Xmas, and the past two months have been hell on earth. I managed to drag myself into work but the joint+muscular pain, not to mention the brain fog made me regret that decision - every. single. day. But you have to put food on the table and pay your rent. I would never consider eating gluten for a week let alone three months. I'd be extremely ill.
- code_duck 9y agoExactly - this concept of the gluten challenge is accurate and makes sense clinically, but in practice, one has to continue working or going to school and it isn't reasonable to be in massive pain and mental disarray for 1-3 months for a medical test. Hopefully celiac testing will advance in coming years.