You mistake me. I hold you to the highest level of respect as a human being. However, you have given us no reason to treat your opinions on health matters with anything but contempt.
Even if the world medical establishment tomorrow finds that gluten is a health risk, you would still be wrong, because you can articulate no reasons to support your opinions.
tiptoes back in
fine, u r correct i m not quite articulate enuf 2 impress upon u the brevity of this health epidemic.
but that makes u insulting some1 of lesser intellect by ur estimation, so what would this make u, an elitist snob?
my INTENTIONS matter, mayb not 2 u…but according 2 th Dean Radin commentary i caught wind of, what i said of tissue impact is correct…mind & matter r connected & impact each the other…so what impacts 1, impacts the other…y i m not eatng gluten…& y i ask u 2 b nice, because i m rebuilding my self esteem & salvaging remnants of same…not, according 2 Dean that u care…he says my noble INTENTIONS r nominal in impact, regardless…but u r wrong that if the WHO named it as i have described 2morro that ive not contributd…
Dean supports that i m, like u, a DRIP. that is, a drop in the consciousness ocean. .ive just dribbled in..
ripple ripple ripple.
he also says proof isnt a word used in science, evidence can b submitted & we then can hav a degree of confidence.
U r undermining, mine (confidence) in myself by these remarx.
YES, i came here.
2 a public forum.
if i go out my door 2 common area,
do i deserve a pie in th face?
if yes, i prefer crustless, please…
Dean Radin also sez ALL new ideas r wacky, til they become accepted, then they become conservative & orthodox…@ outset, of any new applic8n will b perceived as wacky.
Its good thing i m hinging much upon what Dean thinks & relying less on ur low opinion, of me…
as no matter wat i say, u undermine me.
THIS tells me u r not my pal.
wat is dis, some sorta psych experiment?
U can rest knowing u have kicked some1 when that some1 is down…
id not do the same, 2 u.
which is prob what makes me so eminently kickable in part..
The problem with this is that it’s a very, very, very small percentage of new ideas that actually prove out as true. The rest end up in the trash heap for wacky ideas where they belong, eventually.
And speaking as a physician who was also trained as a medical scientist, I’ve found no convincing evidence that what you allege about gluten is true.
LUCKY GUESS
whomever claimed i was inarticulate nonethless responded 2 my posts, so i could not have failed entirely in efforts.
Inarticulate would have been merely cuttng/pasting. the materials i cited from included materials i m not aware of existing in online format, including material i cited from verbal exchanges which alludes 2 research which i was made aware of. I found it useful 2 have things conveyed in the manner I in turn tried 2 summarize, here; thus does not equal non articulate, its the way i articulated it rubs wrong way & i even apologized 4 it various pts;
this may come as a shock 2 some, but NOT all information exists on the internet.
It also seems some make a hobby of tearing apart others 4 sport.
B well.
moreover, there r times ive articulated FINE & was prevented from speaking, off line…prevented by persons in positions of authority whom had NO right & anything but my best interest, rights in mind…the head games played with me since then have not justified it @ all & this collective criticism doesn’t begin 2 defend it, either. ..since persons r not going by proper name, just wanted 2 state this 4 the record; & i m not the LEAST bit ashamed 4 my contributions, here.
i mentioned a book which contains a collection of findings which are scientifically sound & supported, the publication has been pickd up by a major university medical program; we attended a conferrence during which the author made remarks amounting to what ive shared. It makes FAR more sense 2 me that suitable grains b promoted, over the consideration of having a pill created 2 allow people 2 digest something indigestible; the fact that u r trained as a scientist garners my respect, but i stand behind what i said.
One of the reasons given for wheat in particular having become the non digestible form it is had 2 do with farming equipment advent, which changed the cultivar; a uniform height was sought 4 easier cutting, then bred 4 strength 2 hold up under equipment, insect resistance factored in, all these things achieved but, did not account 4 digestibility factors when eaten. This is PARAPHRASED.
…what was said in part was that eliminating gluten is not harmful 2 anyone, as long as nutrient fortification is factored in & since SO MANY go undiagnosed officially or otherwise unidentified, once sensitivity is factored in as well, the numbers increase as to those whom would benefit; the benefits include persons not developing the issues 2 begin with & that this is the only 100% guaranteed way 2 do so…& with consideration of cross contamination threats factored in, this also lent to what I have conveyed here. THIS PERCENTAGE & observation IS made, in recognizing celiac disease book, the stats concerning QUEST diagnostics gene testing is ACCURATE, as far as reduced percentage efficacy of the available tests…
nobody knows everything, least of all me, but I m sharing what I do know & stand behind what I’ve said. U can get 100 scientists 2 come here & tell me their credentials & I still stand behind those whom conducted the assembling of available information I referred 2. They have met with skepticism & criticism, I am 2 understand, but it is unwarranted.
If u r calling the collective work of Dana Korn or, the research @ ENTEROLAB, or the life’s work of Cleo Libonati, RN BSN ‘wacky’ & deserving of the trash heap, in my unprofessional layperson opinion, respectfully disagree. The examples I gave r not unsupported & I referred discussion THERE to experts; they stand behind their work & findings.
There is also a partial list of medicines & other substances which can contribute twds increased intestinal permeability & gluten sensitivity (which entails that gluten would have been a factor, on a spectrum but is distinguished from celiac sprue).
I totally disagree that this relevant data is bound 4 the trash heap. If it ends up there when placed in certain hands, there will b enough persons supporting this; I am confident it will not be disappearing from the place it deserves, as a relevant consideration.
I do admit 2 literally having participsted in organizing a salvaging of (non gluten related) books which were literally tossed in the trash, by an overstock book company I once worked for…there were numerous participants involved in the book ‘rescue’ & I personally donated several collections 2 various facilities, including medical facilities…the fact the books ended up there was LESS a commentary on their content than the throwaway society we live in.
This book , recognizing celiac disease (abbrev) is for anyone concerned about a loved one whom is celiac/intolerant to gluten & is non specific as far as vegetarian, vegan or omnivorous diet is concerned. It is a set of generally accepted guidelines for eating which are meant to be individualized & specific nutrient reccomendations, practical testing reviews & otherwise information which can b overlooked, otherwise. It is meant 2 serve as educational & guidance/support & is intended as a tool for drs & patients alike. . . It is a timely referrence & should b available thru any library. I thought highly of it from the time the national foundation for celiac awareness first referred us there, think even more highly of it, now & am not alone.
An article that further supports novel approaches to how & why we eat as we do (now, in our future) & tailoring diets (& meds) according to each individual’s needs.
Here is to keeping an open mind (we cannot learn when it is closed):
Gut Microbes Establish Your Identity
By Ed Yong,
Discover Magazine
Trillions of bacteria live inside your bowels, outnumbering your own cells 10 to 1. These microbial communities contain thousands of species that vary from person to person. But according to a new study, they divide into just 3 basic groups, dubbed enterotypes. Everyone has 1 of 4 blood types; apparently we have one of 3 gut-microbe types, too.
Computational biologist Peer Bork from the European Molecular Biology Laboratory in Heidelberg, Germany, discovered the enterotypes by sequencing bacterial DNA in stool from Japanese, European & American volunteers. The sequences clustered into 3 groups that did not follow patterns of age, gender, body weight, or nationality. “It was a surprise to us,” Bork says.
The membership of each community might be influenced by blood groups or our immune systems. Whatever their origins, enterotypes may affect your health by determining how well you break down food or how susceptible you are to certain diseases. “Eventually doctors will be able to prescribe different drugs or diets according to a patient’s enterotype,” Bork says. "I think we’ll find each group’s needs are different. "
The article, here:
& persons whom post citing credentials without disproving the findings which were relayed to us & criticize the researchers & support organization materials as unsupported need to contact the sources yourself & debate about it with THE EXPERIENCED EXPERTS; attempting to invalidate me does NOT negate the findings…resting on credentials does not render those ( authors & others @ the facilities & organizations noted) I’ve mentioned unqualified. I’ve stated before that criticizing me does NOT negate their valid findings; I do not speak FOR them, therefore telling me is WASTED effort. If you do not pursue reviewing the sources, much of which exists OFFLINE, the criticism is considered further unsupported , unwarranted.
I think its scary if a doctor & scientist cannot be bothered to follow a simple directive & question intentions.
Scientists can be wrong. Linus Pauling won a Nobel Prize in chemistry, his ideas about vitamin C still turned out to be wacky and almost completely wrong.
The Straight Dope is not a place to relay findings and research that were relayed to you, without citing and defending the actual research. That scientists and support organizations can be, and often are, biased and unscientific is an indisputable fact, and when the ideas relayed are as extreme as those you’ve parroted, extreme skepticism is warranted.
Unless you’re willing and able to give us better arguments than “these people say they did the research, and I trust them”, you should save yourself the pain. We’re not going to dig for the actual knowledge on your word or theirs as long as it’s buried in a pile of bias.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
tom, you had quoted a whole article, which is against our rules about copyright material. For details, see: FAQ: Rules for Posting on the Straight Dope Message Boards and note post # 3: What’s the policy on copyrights?
I have deleted all but the first two paragraphs of the material you quoted. If you’d like me to insert a link to the article, I’d be glad to – just email me – and then others could read it for themselves.
If you want to cite information that is not available on the web, then you must type in the relevant quotes in order to be taken seriously. If that is too much trouble, as far as I am concerned, your cite doesn’t exist.
I have a great deal of trouble parsing his typing style. It is as if someone transliterated English into Cyrillic script, and so I need to sound out every letter to try to make sense of it. Not worth the effort if it keeps coming back to “I believe what these people said in these books, even if I am still in such pain that I cannot compose in standard English.”
Oh, and many of us do have access to university libraries and suchlike. If given a citation we can look into it.
wrong u r in that assumption…
If u cannot bother 2 contact valid sources I did supply, that is ur choice. I summarized a presentation, conversations & PARAPHRASED them & do not presume 2 speak FOR others … & referred u 2 a valid resources whom can speak 4 selves -a set, of resources -2 validate what I’ve said is fact …
Were I assigned as a spokesperson, or researcher, & was taught how 2 properly cite (in an environ devoid of unwarranted criticism & abuse), that’d b a different story..
Further, statistically I m told these efforts of mine do not matter, any way…as estimates of those affected by this r actually HIGHER than documented cases, this is because many highly probable candidates 4 testing do not bother 2 get tested. People presume this does NOT apply when it more often absolutely does. So, prevalence is said 2 be HIGHER than documented cases. …as high as 1 in every 3 people, potentially 1 in every 2…
I m not a researcher. I have things impacting both my attention & ability beyond my control. I provided relevant sources. ..I did not pen these stats, I m merely messenger.
Peace.
We will never know.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, people (with the exception of an unfortunate few, very much fewer than 1 in 2) are eating wheat gluten on a daily basis with apparent impunity. What you’re saying simply doesn’t ring true - and anyone can see that. Well, almost anyone.
I have just cited specifically, certain events & how it presented an opportunity 4 both education &prevention ABOUT CELIAC, GLUTEN SENSITIVITY which interestingly would not post in spite of available signal on this device & I was,then,booted offline.The text, which I had stored is erased on here as well…its not just patients,whom do not understand the implications of this, its drs…i kept taking family member 2 dr & telling them something is WRONG &no tests,run…finally I made a suggestion as 2 what I SUSPECTED it was, & by a fluke, was close enough that certain tests were, run but without our being told what they were for, no proper guidelines, were provided because the practitioner did not realize…during the two yrs these results sat in chart, we kept asking to have adressed, what had already been confirmed, in part…but we remained unaware of & because they, were unaware…& so, further testing which shouldve been protocol was neglected. In the interim, my spouse became even more ill & was given advisement to ignore his digestive issues & under protest (we felt the,digestive issues were important) he was told to begin taking meds for an accompanying neurologic issue, which made matters WORSE, he was treated badly for reporting additional symptoms, had further digestive complications as well, then, only because I dragged him back to dr did they listen & an assistant to the dr discovered that certain results were there…& the dr became defensive…the upshot is, he now has internal organ damage, which was not present prior & this was all AVOIDABLE…it also turns out, I needed to be tested during all that.
My goal is to PREVENT this from repeating…for others, to know, what we wish we had & by all estimations, the dr would have preferred, to have sooner known. It turns out there are many misperceptions & a widespread lack of AWARENESS due to several factors…this, is WHY I take this OPPORTUNITY for education, prevention & awareness so seriously & I HAVE provided you with RELEVANT info.
I am not interested in emphasizing the errors that were made, in efforts to defame, or punish, any1 for what has passed. The goal is to PREVENT this & worse, from befalling anyone ELSE. Drs & others, in medical community are ALSO patients, potentially, also. This is important, the relevant AWARENESS organization I shared has heard, this kind of thing MANY, many times. I would like for them to hear LESS…they exist for a REASON. They CARE.
I cannot cite, 4 u from offline texts which I have LENT OUT.
Typing “to” instead of “2”: 1 extra letter per instance + coherency, readability, and being taken seriously
Typing again and again and again and again that it hurts to type so much: 100 letters per response + garbled incoherent ranting
Typing more words total in this thread than everyone else combined: Priceless
Hint: http://www.lingo2word.com/translate.php
Oh, and here’s my plan to make money:
Write a book about the evils of dihydrogen monoxide and how it is the single biggest chemical killer in the world. I’ll provide:
-
Plenty of anecdotal evidence from people who have had first, second, or even third-hand experiences
-
References to other people who have may written on the subject, knowing that nobody will bother to look them up. I’ll take them out of context as needed. Or make them up myself.
-
Reasons why dihydrogen monoxide is the cause of nearly every modern health problem, including cancer and deadly flu strains.
-
Quotes from several leading herbologists with “Dr” in front of their name, regardless of whether their doctorate was in relevant field or even earned. Or whether they exist.
-
Remarkable new evidence that a proprietary blend of natural ingredients will help clean the body of the poisons that dihydrogen monoxide has left in the system.
Then I’ll:
-
Point to websites that sell said “cure”. All will be owned by me.
-
Create several other websites touting how wonderful this book is, how it healed them, and how everyone has to get this proprietary blend of all-natural ingredients before they die.
-
Encourage my followers to go to websites dealing with health issues and have them post about my brand new cure to the evils of dihydrogen monoxide. Have them engage in troll warfare to get their point across at all costs.
-
Laugh all the way to the bank, while reading said threads on my smart phone.
To be fair, dihydrogen monoxide does have a tendency to displace air in the lungs when consumed in excess - very rare that such an event is voluntary.