Yeah. That's why it is relevant that the guy who published a study saying there was such a thing as non-celiac gluten intolerance reversed himself after additional research.Best to operate empirically
I have no dog in this fight, but linking to this article is not a reversal in any way, shape, nor form. Sorry, dude.Yeah. That's why it is relevant that the guy who published a study saying there was such a thing as non-celiac gluten intolerance reversed himself after additional research.Best to operate empirically
Saying something probably exists and then following up with saying it may not exist (and that there is no real evidence it does) may not be a 180 degree reversal, but it is a pretty distinct difference in message.I have no dog in this fight, but linking to this article is not a reversal in any way, shape, nor form. Sorry, dude. And that's my last post on the subject, because I don't care enough.Yeah. That's why it is relevant that the guy who published a study saying there was such a thing as non-celiac gluten intolerance reversed himself after additional research.Best to operate empirically
Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity May Not Exist
I agree. I got tested for celiac. I also agree with Mr. Roboto's post. It's like my old boss used to tell me -- "if you take away an entire food aisle, of course you'll lose weight."Saying something probably exists and then following up with saying it may not exist (and that there is no real evidence it does) may not be a 180 degree reversal, but it is a pretty distinct difference in message.I have no dog in this fight, but linking to this article is not a reversal in any way, shape, nor form. Sorry, dude. And that's my last post on the subject, because I don't care enough.Yeah. That's why it is relevant that the guy who published a study saying there was such a thing as non-celiac gluten intolerance reversed himself after additional research.Best to operate empirically
Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity May Not Exist
I'd even be willing to concede that it might exist in some small portion of the population, but the vast majority of people who claim it are full of baloney. Just like the vast majority of people who claim to be sensitive to MSG, another basically harmless substance that has been demonized based on shoddy science and popular self-delusion.
I agree. I got tested for celiac. I also agree with Mr. Roboto's post. It's like my old boss used to tell me -- "if you take away an entire food aisle, of course you'll lose weight."Saying something probably exists and then following up with saying it may not exist (and that there is no real evidence it does) may not be a 180 degree reversal, but it is a pretty distinct difference in message.I have no dog in this fight, but linking to this article is not a reversal in any way, shape, nor form. Sorry, dude. And that's my last post on the subject, because I don't care enough.Yeah. That's why it is relevant that the guy who published a study saying there was such a thing as non-celiac gluten intolerance reversed himself after additional research.Best to operate empirically
Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity May Not Exist
I'd even be willing to concede that it might exist in some small portion of the population, but the vast majority of people who claim it are full of baloney. Just like the vast majority of people who claim to be sensitive to MSG, another basically harmless substance that has been demonized based on shoddy science and popular self-delusion.
Here's my gig, and I'll give up the ghost. Had a dietician. She used to preach about science, science, science, until one day she finally told me, "you know our parents used to know how to eat."
Wisdom and dialectics can sometimes trump one study, is what I'm saying. And empiricism isn't just scientific method, it's personal experience, so I don't want to get hung up on semantics. Basically, I just don't trust anything but inherited wisdom, is all I'm saying. And if inherited wisdom starts to come out against gluten, then maybe there's a humility in examining that.
There is a good chance the above is false attribution. What has probably helped you is reducing caloric intake by eating fewer refined carbohydrates.I know I don't have celiac but I can only speak to how it has helped me to greatly reduce gluten intake.
Includes and then discards, like every other method in the quest for knowledge about life.I agree. I got tested for celiac. I also agree with Mr. Roboto's post. It's like my old boss used to tell me -- "if you take away an entire food aisle, of course you'll lose weight."Saying something probably exists and then following up with saying it may not exist (and that there is no real evidence it does) may not be a 180 degree reversal, but it is a pretty distinct difference in message.I have no dog in this fight, but linking to this article is not a reversal in any way, shape, nor form. Sorry, dude. And that's my last post on the subject, because I don't care enough.Yeah. That's why it is relevant that the guy who published a study saying there was such a thing as non-celiac gluten intolerance reversed himself after additional research.Best to operate empirically
Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity May Not Exist
I'd even be willing to concede that it might exist in some small portion of the population, but the vast majority of people who claim it are full of baloney. Just like the vast majority of people who claim to be sensitive to MSG, another basically harmless substance that has been demonized based on shoddy science and popular self-delusion.
Here's my gig, and I'll give up the ghost. Had a dietician. She used to preach about science, science, science, until one day she finally told me, "you know our parents used to know how to eat."
Wisdom and dialectics can sometimes trump one study, is what I'm saying. And empiricism isn't just scientific method, it's personal experience, so I don't want to get hung up on semantics. Basically, I just don't trust anything but inherited wisdom, is all I'm saying. And if inherited wisdom starts to come out against gluten, then maybe there's a humility in examining that.
Inherited wisdom gets some things right, but also includes large helpings of superstition and old wives tails.
Includes and then discards, like every other method in the quest for knowledge about life.
I edited, brohan. Love your response about the eggs. Whoops.Includes and then discards, like every other method in the quest for knowledge about life.
Yes, "inherited wisdom" and not science has been the key to all the advancements of the last 200 years, not to mention the previous 2,000. Without it, we'd be living in mud huts like our ancestors did for thousands of years.
Also, you promised your "last" post on the topic for posts ago. Time to stand and deliver, pendejo.
Once again:I edited, brohan. Love your response about the eggs. Whoops.Includes and then discards, like every other method in the quest for knowledge about life.
Yes, "inherited wisdom" and not science has been the key to all the advancements of the last 200 years, not to mention the previous 2,000. Without it, we'd be living in mud huts like our ancestors did for thousands of years.
Also, you promised your "last" post on the topic for posts ago. Time to stand and deliver, pendejo.
Why didn't you just entitle this "I ####### LOVE SCIENCE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY TOLD ME!"
1910: Phrenology and certitude.
I love this. Another one that loves science.Once again:I edited, brohan. Love your response about the eggs. Whoops.Includes and then discards, like every other method in the quest for knowledge about life.
Yes, "inherited wisdom" and not science has been the key to all the advancements of the last 200 years, not to mention the previous 2,000. Without it, we'd be living in mud huts like our ancestors did for thousands of years.
Also, you promised your "last" post on the topic for posts ago. Time to stand and deliver, pendejo.
Why didn't you just entitle this "I ####### LOVE SCIENCE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY TOLD ME!"
1910: Phrenology and certitude.
The key thing you are missing is it's easy FOR ME. What you are suggesting isn't as easy for me.There is a good chance the above is false attribution. What has probably helped you is reducing caloric intake by eating fewer refined carbohydrates.I know I don't have celiac but I can only speak to how it has helped me to greatly reduce gluten intake.
In other words, if you ate the same quantitiy of breads, pasta and sweets made with gluten free ingredients, I bet you wouldn't have seen much, if any, difference.
Yes. Good. It's cause they eat better foods.My nephew has a big problem with gluten so my brother and sister-in-law decided their whole family would go gluten-free.
He (and they) are extremely healthy and in great shape.
So it can work for some.
My own personal experience does not back up this assumption.Includes and then discards, like every other method in the quest for knowledge about life.
Yes, "inherited wisdom" and not science has been the key to all the advancements of the last 200 years, not to mention the previous 2,000. Without it, we'd be living in mud huts like our ancestors did for thousands of years.
Also, you promised your "last" post on the topic for posts ago. Time to stand and deliver, pendejo.
As I said later above, I believe there could be some tiny percentage of people who have some kind of real non-celiac gluten sensitivity. The most recent research has neither ruled out nor supported its existence.My own personal experience does not back up this assumption.Includes and then discards, like every other method in the quest for knowledge about life.
Yes, "inherited wisdom" and not science has been the key to all the advancements of the last 200 years, not to mention the previous 2,000. Without it, we'd be living in mud huts like our ancestors did for thousands of years.
Also, you promised your "last" post on the topic for posts ago. Time to stand and deliver, pendejo.
Granted, I haven't been tested for celiac's (my insurance wouldn't cover the cost of the test if I couldn't show family history) and at the time I didn't care enough to pay out of pocket.
I have tried to eat gluten free for stretches. I lose weight, and I feel better overall. Yes, you are correct that is mostly, or entirely due to the fact that I am making better food choices for the most part, but there are a couple of observations I have made. If I am eating gluten free, and make myself a pasta dish made from gluten free noodles, I feel no effects the next day. If I am eating gluten free and have a dish or regular pasta, I will feel like crap the next day. It is definitely not all in my head.
Always critical.Ever since I went gluten free it completely cleared my updog. I feel so much better now.
You do get that is a totally different discussion, right?I seek out foods that are good for me. Tell me why wheat and breads are good for me over vegetables, clean protein, fruits, and other grains.
I don't avoid wheat and wheat products, I just choose to think they don't add any nutrition, they might hurt, and are a waste of a macro. I'd rather have a beer or a glass of wine if I want to take on empty carbs.
I get what you are saying, and unless you are trying to be a jerk, I'm not taking it as such.As I said later above, I believe there could be some tiny percentage of people who have some kind of real non-celiac gluten sensitivity. The most recent research has neither ruled out nor supported its existence.My own personal experience does not back up this assumption.Includes and then discards, like every other method in the quest for knowledge about life.
Yes, "inherited wisdom" and not science has been the key to all the advancements of the last 200 years, not to mention the previous 2,000. Without it, we'd be living in mud huts like our ancestors did for thousands of years.
Also, you promised your "last" post on the topic for posts ago. Time to stand and deliver, pendejo.
Granted, I haven't been tested for celiac's (my insurance wouldn't cover the cost of the test if I couldn't show family history) and at the time I didn't care enough to pay out of pocket.
I have tried to eat gluten free for stretches. I lose weight, and I feel better overall. Yes, you are correct that is mostly, or entirely due to the fact that I am making better food choices for the most part, but there are a couple of observations I have made. If I am eating gluten free, and make myself a pasta dish made from gluten free noodles, I feel no effects the next day. If I am eating gluten free and have a dish or regular pasta, I will feel like crap the next day. It is definitely not all in my head.
At the risk of sounding like a jerk I'll also point out that just because you think it isn't all in your head doesn't mean it isn't all in your head either.
you asked the question, I answered it with my reasoning.You do get that is a totally different discussion, right?I seek out foods that are good for me. Tell me why wheat and breads are good for me over vegetables, clean protein, fruits, and other grains.
I don't avoid wheat and wheat products, I just choose to think they don't add any nutrition, they might hurt, and are a waste of a macro. I'd rather have a beer or a glass of wine if I want to take on empty carbs.
I'd want to advertise my sperm as gluten free.I'm gluten free. "Gluten" is a little code word my wife and I use for sex.
But you aren't avoiding gluten really. You're avoiding wheat.you asked the question, I answered it with my reasoning.You do get that is a totally different discussion, right?I seek out foods that are good for me. Tell me why wheat and breads are good for me over vegetables, clean protein, fruits, and other grains.
I don't avoid wheat and wheat products, I just choose to think they don't add any nutrition, they might hurt, and are a waste of a macro. I'd rather have a beer or a glass of wine if I want to take on empty carbs.
okBut you aren't avoiding gluten really. You're avoiding wheat.you asked the question, I answered it with my reasoning.You do get that is a totally different discussion, right?I seek out foods that are good for me. Tell me why wheat and breads are good for me over vegetables, clean protein, fruits, and other grains.
I don't avoid wheat and wheat products, I just choose to think they don't add any nutrition, they might hurt, and are a waste of a macro. I'd rather have a beer or a glass of wine if I want to take on empty carbs.
Actually I didn't.you asked the question, I answered it with my reasoning.
Are you avoiding gluten? Does it bother you?Actually I didn't.you asked the question, I answered it with my reasoning.
You are talking about diet, weight and calories.
I have never been tested but two years ago after always being lethargic, ALWAYS gassy and having sticky stools I tried going gluten free. About a month later those symptoms went away.RedmondLonghorn said:If you said yes to either and have never been diagnosed with celiac disease (a very real and awful malady), you are likely (1) a goofball hypocondriac, (2) an attention loving drama queen, or (3) just plain full of crap. I can't rule out an "all of the above" option.
Link
Discuss.
What's updog?Ever since I went gluten free it completely cleared my updog. I feel so much better now.
Over the last year or so, we've seen a glut of stories in the popular media suggesting that non-celiac gluten sensitivity (i.e. people that react to gluten but do not have celiac disease) is a myth:
Even late-night TV host Jimmy Kimmel weighed in with a segment that got a lot of attention in both popular and social media.
- Science Proves Gluten Sensitivity Isn’t Real, People Are Just Whiners
- The Science Is In — Why Gluten Sensitivity Is Probably Fake
- Gluten Intolerance May Be Completely Fake: Study
- Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity May Not Exist
- Gluten Intolerance May Not Exist
Just after these stories were published, I wrote an article (“Is Gluten Sensitivity Real?”) showing how the authors grossly misinterpreted and misrepresented the research they claimed to be reviewing.
You can read my article to get the details, but here’s the takeaway: the study those stories were based on in no way disproved the existence of non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS), nor did it overturn the large body of evidence that links NCGS to a variety of health problems ranging from type 1 diabetes, to allergies, to schizophrenia, to autism spectrum disorders. (1, 2, 3, 4)
What struck me about those stories—aside from how embarrassing they are as examples of so-called “science journalism”—is how eager the general public seems to be to prove that gluten intolerance is an imaginary or fake condition. I’m not exactly sure why this is. Maybe it’s because gluten-containing foods and beverages like bread and beer have played such a central role in our culture for thousands of years. Or perhaps people simply distrust anything they perceive to be inauthentic or “faddish”.
If I had to guess, I'd say you yourself are two of the three above, whether you avoid gluten or not.RedmondLonghorn said:If you said yes to either and have never been diagnosed with celiac disease (a very real and awful malady), you are likely (1) a goofball hypocondriac, (2) an attention loving drama queen, or (3) just plain full of crap. I can't rule out an "all of the above" option.
Link
Discuss.
you spelled vodka wrong.Vicodin is another thing that should be chased with fiber fwiw.