Here’s another rant on hearing a medical doctor say gluten sensitivity doesn’t exist.
Houston, we have a problem.
I have a problem, too. I actually really like most of what this guy, this doctor, has to say, most of the time.
We all have flaws, right!? His flaws seem to be (and isn’t it great someone is pointing out someone else’s flaws and the one doing the pointing doesn’t have a recognizable rank or credential like M.D. to assist in earning credibility) discounting what occurs to some people when they eat!
Do you keep a food journal? Do you combine your food journal with a how you’re feeling journal?
Would you think that the food you’re eating can enhance you’re ability to describe your feelings?
I think describing food and feelings is a rough row to hoe. Are there clichés like row to hoe for describing gut-bombs?
But the public can’t go to the books on gluten sensitivity.
Or so I heard. And I won’t mention any names of interviewers, doctors, or the books about to be mentioned. This particular Dr. is good, but I’m discouraged by even a little discounting of gluten sensitivity.
Dr. says: “The lay person doesn’t know how to read the science and understand that that there’s something being put over on them.”
Dr. says: “The science is so bad in those books.”
Both of the books he’s speaking about are written by medical doctors. One of the books was a New York Times best seller. ( So it’s not a peer reviewed journal, but seems statistically nice. ) Anyway, these two doctors are categorized as knowing the science in their work, but this doctor being interviewed discounts these two doctors as putting something over on the lay public.
Which doctors are we supposed to believe?
These are all M.D.’s. Maybe they’re just not in the same club. Same oath — different club? So a food fight breaks out and these doctors are instigating it?
The Dr. appears to want to reinforce his defamation by using a reference to some unknown study.
The example is a study where “they” took a group of people — no group will know the level of the gluten in their diet and they’re divided into 3 groups – high gluten, medium gluten, low gluten. The groups reported no difference in the symptoms.
Interviewer asks, ” Are you saying gluten is not a thing?”
Dr. says: “Gluten’s not a thing.”
Interviewer: “That gluten sensitivity is imagined?”
Dr: “Absolutely imagined.”
Interviewer: “Really!?”
Dr: ” It’s imagined. ”
At this point the interviewer explains symptoms experienced after consuming gluten . . .
The doctor comes back with ” do you know what FODMAPS are ? Fermentable Oligo-Di-Monosaccharides and Polyols. ”
Why the change in discussion from protein to carbohydrates?
And the Dr. is off to gut bacteria and the gut reactions of food in the gut biome.
And he talks fast. The Dr. says sprue celiac is a different story, but goes back to something like “There is no lab value for gluten sensitivity — its a symptomatology without any clinical findings.”
So what?
That’s it?
The old we’ve done all we can for you . . . get along on home.
Not a great way to be stuck . . .
“Anybody can learn to think, or believe, or know, but not a single human being can be taught to feel . . . the moment you feel, you’re nobody — but yourself — in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else . . . .” eecummings: a miscellany revised