Quote from: guess on November 16, 2014, 12:31:37 PM
And, no, please no one remove this.  It is a textbook example of what specific challenges I face educating not only the non-allergic public but even within the allergic community.  Advocacy my child needs in order to reduce risk and practice avoidance the same as for any other anaphylaxis inducing allergen.

Ding ding ding.  Chiming in as someone who deals withe a child who has life threatening allergies to wheat, rye and barley and who lives with someone who claims to have a gluten intolerance (which I suspect is Celiac but she refuses to be diagnosed because doctors are money grubbing quacks). 

My autism friends are posting this article left and right and suggesting that DS1's allergies would not exist if he was to eat organic "gluten".  Like TT - our allergies have failed to learn the difference between organic and non-organic.  Ironic that one of DS1's reactions were to English Smarties - assuming non-round up sprayed wheat.

Quote from: forvictoria on November 16, 2014, 12:47:10 PM
it wasn't about allergens but about intolerances/sensitivities which I thought were 2 different things. I am lactose intolerant but not allergic to milk. I did not think an intolerance can cause anaphylaxis as allergens do.
If I am mistaken about the difference I apologize.

From the article you posted in this thread on an allergy and anaphylaxis board:

QuoteEmails from folks with allergic or digestive issues to wheat in the United States experienced no symptoms whatsoever when they tried eating pasta on vacation in Italy.

Perpetuation of conflation.  Contribution to misinformation.

All in the same time frame that one of us, the community, had a reaction because even after disclosing a specific allergen is was misconstrued to be mean gluten free.  That is a more common instance, as others pointed out, than should EVER happen.

The message this brings across is:

1. Implying validity posting to a board dedicated to IgE-mediated allergy and anaphylaxis.
2. A mysterious doctor of some sort is cited.  mercola.com?  FDA warnings issued repeatedly to Dr. Mercola.  http://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/mercola.html
3. Posting about a potentially LTFA that affects some of our kids, and getting it dangerously wrong.

Why are you posting about intolerance from an individual that has been warned by the FDA repeatedly when the consequence is possibly death for someone else?  It would be one thing if I was being dramatic.  But as evidenced here this is the unintended consequence.

Quackery can kill us.  We have a unique vulnerability predicated on strict avoidance and education in order to avoid a reaction.  It is key that we keep the lines of communication clear, particularly if you don't understand that allergen or do not wish to talk about it as an allergen.  There are other ways to do it, other ways to frame the conversation such as other health concern subforum or OT.

Respect the allergen as an allergen.  Lactose is a sugar.  Gluten is a protein.  Preserving the integrity and respect to an allergen means not muddying the waters and, letting us be the expert on our IgE-mediated history where applicable.

...  in addition to TT's very concise statements re: allergy, anaphylaxis, and psuedo-science woo...


um.

I've lived in a major wheat-production area in N. America.  It's called "dry farming" for a reason.  I've never seen herbicides used in those fields.  NEVER.  And I lived there for many years, and had a parent live there for decades.  There IS no "treatment" applied prior to harvest.    Harvest happens when weather conditions dictate, usually in mid-August for winter wheat (which is so called because it is sown in late fall and overwintered, sprouting after the snow melts in March).

The cost alone would be beyond staggering-- really, most people have no concept of the kind of scale involved in grain farming.  The dry-farming unit of area?  It's "sections" not acres.    Fertilizer?  Nah-- it's done with crop-rotation of nitrogen-fixing legumes.  Peas, alfalfa or lentils. 



Also--

Mercola is one of the Zen Masters of Woo.*  Truly.  He's right up there with Jenny McCarthy in terms of the wackadoo content-free opinions on all manner of things.



*Oh, and the comments on that link are quite insightful in pointing out Mercola's missed opportunity in not demonizing dihydrogen monoxide, a well-known industrial solvent and a leading cause of mortality and property damage in first-world nations...     Just sayin.


Dr. Mercola is a D. O., by the way-- he's neither a PhD (which would indicate a research-orientation) nor an M.D. (which would indicate a clinical one).

More about him and yet more.

Quote from: forvictoria on November 16, 2014, 12:23:55 PM
I did not mean to upset anyone with the article, it was geared to those with sensitivities not allergies,  and since it was backed up by a Dr at MIT I thought it would be of interest
this is the Drs article on it
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/09/14/glyphosate-celiac-disease-connection.aspx?

I can remove the thread if everyone prefers.

Now, let me end by stating that not all D. O.'s are quacks-- but people like Mercola sure give them a bad name. 

His MIT affiliation, also?   Uhhhh... yeahrite...

Stephanie Seneff, right? 

Dr. Stephanie Seneff is a senior research scientist at MIT where she has been conducting research in computer science for over three decades. She also has an undergraduate degree in biology from MIT, and a minor in food and nutrition. She's affiliated with the Weston A. Price Foundation and will be speaking at their November Dallas conference, and so will I.

Um.  She is NOT a qualified person to be making pronouncements re: cholesterol research, quite frankly, and yet Mercola touts her credentials as though she IS.     She is Mercola's go-to ""Scientist"" on all manner of biomedical opinions, however-- heart disease, statins, round-up, GMO's, etc... none of which she really has the background to be discussing as any kind of expert.





And, incidentally, a DIRECT rebuttal to the link posted about the "MIT study" that isn't.

http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/05/06/navigating-the-agricultural-biotech-minefield-when-an-mit-study-is-not-an-mit-study/

Quote
Respected science journalists Keith Kloor and Paul Raeburn have written thorough take downs of the paper and Reuters article in question. In short: It's not a study (no data is presented); the "MIT" comes from the fact that one of the researchers happens to be affiliated with the university in a way that has nothing to do with genetics or chemistry;  and shame on Reuters for propagating such sketchy journalism masquerading as "science."

You're welcome. 

This is right up there with Christiakis' work on "food allergy" being called a "Harvard" study on the subject, even though he was writing it purely as an anecdotally fueled, pissy RANT and he isn't affiliated with the med school.

it wasn't about allergens but about intolerances/sensitivities which I thought were 2 different things. I am lactose intolerant but not allergic to milk. I did not think an intolerance can cause anaphylaxis as allergens do.
If I am mistaken about the difference I apologize.

And, no, please no one remove this.  It is a textbook example of what specific challenges I face educating not only the non-allergic public but even within the allergic community.  Advocacy my child needs in order to reduce risk and practice avoidance the same as for any other anaphylaxis inducing allergen.

What I would like you to do is consider that if you need people to know that organic lobster doesn't make it okay for you to eat it and live, then reciprocate that respect for someone else's ALLERGENS.  On an allergy and anaphylaxis board.  Preferably in real life, too, but I'll take at least not spreading myths that can get someone else killed.

I did not mean to upset anyone with the article, it was geared to those with sensitivities not allergies,  and since it was backed up by a Dr at MIT I thought it would be of interest
this is the Drs article on it
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/09/14/glyphosate-celiac-disease-connection.aspx?

I can remove the thread if everyone prefers.

I do.  JUNK.  And ultimately hurtful to those with LTFA, particularly to wheat, barley and rye.

When you do things like this it makes advocating for my child harder.  Really.  My efforts to educate about IgE-mediated allergy and anaphylaxis drown out in sea of junk science dedicated to self-diagnosed digestive intolerance. 

It's not different than peanut is the.same.mechanism.  Different proteins, same mechanism.  Same need for strict avoidance, same need for cooperation, same emergency treatment.  These kids need the same level of support in the allergy community that peanut allergic kids need.

To support the kids with LTFA it requires an agnostic approach to allergens while being mindful to protein fractions, denaturing, durability, form factor.  But please, at the very least DO NO FURTHER HARM.

the article did say if ones allergic to wheat to avoid it completely, I think they were addressing people with intolerances or sensitivities not allergies. (I posted the first part of the article with a link to the entire article since it was lengthy)

But I don't know if there is any validity to their claim about Roundup being the cause of sensitivities to wheat.but if that is the farmers practice it cant be good.

Oh, no.  YOU sit down for tears when you hear this one.  Whoever wrote this drivel.

The first bite of grain ever that induced anaphylaxis in my INFANT was non-GMO ORGANIC barley. 

Pseudoallergies, folks.  It's hurting people who anaphylax to conflate self-diagnosed intolerances with documented history of IgE-mediated allergic reactions requiring epinephrine.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23551300

Feel free to take a gander at the data in the Asia Pacific region on top allergens inducing anaphylaxis.  Wheat is way up there.

But hey, why should I who actually have to manage a highly at risk child ruin the quackery.

http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/real-reason-for-toxic-wheat-its-not-gluten/

Emails from folks with allergic or digestive issues to wheat in the United States experienced no symptoms whatsoever when they tried eating pasta on vacation in Italy.

Confused parents wondering why wheat consumption sometimes triggered autoimmune reactions in their children but not at other times.

In my own home, I've long pondered why my husband can eat the wheat I prepare at home, but he experiences negative digestive effects eating even a single roll in a restaurant.

There is clearly something going on with wheat that is not well known by the general public. It goes far and beyond organic versus nonorganic, gluten or hybridization because even conventional wheat triggers no symptoms for some who eat wheat in other parts of the world.

What indeed is going on with wheat?

For quite some time, I secretly harbored the notion that wheat in the United States must, in fact, be genetically modified.  GMO wheat secretly invading the North American food supply seemed the only thing that made sense and could account for the varied experiences I was hearing about.

I reasoned that it couldn't be the gluten or wheat hybridization. Gluten and wheat hybrids have been consumed for thousands of years. It just didn't make sense that this could be the reason for so many people suddenly having problems with wheat and gluten in general in the past 5-10 years.

Finally, the answer came over dinner a couple of months ago with a friend who was well versed in the wheat production process. I started researching the issue for myself, and was, quite frankly, horrified at what I discovered.

The good news is that the reason wheat has become so toxic in the United States is not because it is secretly GMO as I had feared (thank goodness!).

The bad news is that the problem lies with the manner in which wheat is harvested by conventional wheat farmers.

You're going to want to sit down for this one.  I've had some folks burst into tears in horror when I passed along this information before.

Wheat harvest protocol in the United States is to drench the wheat fields with Roundup several days before the combine harvesters work through the fields as withered, dead wheat plants are less taxing on the farm equipment and allows for an earlier, easier and bigger harvest

Pre-harvest application of the herbicide Roundup or other herbicides containing the deadly active ingredient glyphosate to wheat and barley as a desiccant was suggested as early as 1980.  It has since become routine over the past 15 years and is used as a drying agent 7-10 days before harvest within the conventional farming community.
- See more at: http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/real-reason-for-toxic-wheat-its-not-gluten/#sthash.SDL7yV6a.dpuf