Imagine everything we knew about Celiac Disease was erased. Imagine we were starting over fresh. All preconceived notions about the cause, the symptoms, etc, etc, etc were gone. Would we discover something new and manage to go further in research or would we come to the same conclusions as we currently have?
I recently heard that there is no study confirming that Celiac Disease is typically "triggered" by a traumatic event. I have no idea where I heard it originally or where the information keeps coming from, but I've always thought it was common knowledge that those with the gene for Celiac Disease have it triggered by a stressful/traumatic event such as a pregnancy, car accident, a time of extreme stress, etc. I was shocked to read that they were looking into this because I had always assumed that had already been done.
Another example of something I thought had been confirmed is the concept that those with untreated Celiac Disease are more at risk for intestinal lymphoma. I recall this seeming to be "common knowledge" when I was first diagnosed, but through the years it seemed to be something that less and less people knew about. Recently, this article was published that was shocking to the Celiac Disease community. Intestinal lymphoma is much more common in those with untreated Celiac Disease. When I first read the article, I assumed a bunch of idiots did the study because this should be common knowledge. As time went on, I discovered very few of those I know with Celiac Disease had any knowledge of this. So where did I hear this and why did I think it was common knowledge when no one else seemed to have a clue. Did I do a study in a past life? Doubtful.
I'd like to revisit this idea of starting research over, but I'd love to hear what you think to point me in the right direction of where I should go with it. What are your thoughts on this? Do you think we are being held back by our current knowledge or do you think our current knowledge is necessary to continue moving forward?
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Saturday, August 31, 2013
Vices and Throwing Caution to the Wind
I have a problem. My problem is that I am thoroughly incapable of walking by cotton candy without purchasing it. The good news is that cotton candy is typically gluten-free. I appreciate this. I have no actual basis for this statement except that I've never seen cotton candy that contained gluten, but I'm gonna stick by that statement anyway.
So back to my problem. It's been a problem since I was an adult and could choose to purchase my own cotton candy whenever I damn well pleased. I have no idea if it comes from my parents saying no when I would ask for cotton candy when I was a child because I don't remember asking for it. I have no idea if I asked or if the answer was yes or no when/if I did ask. All I know is when I see cotton candy, I MUST HAVE IT.
I remember looking at the food stand with trepidation the first time I saw one of those glorious pink or blue bags in the window after I was diagnosed with Celiac Disease. I thought for sure they somehow threw wheat in there, but I was somewhat hopeful because I had worked at a cotton candy stand when I was in high school, and I was pretty sure it was just sugar and flavoring. I walked up to the window and tried to read the ingredients through the glass.
Success!!! Normally I look in my trusty Grocery Shopping Guide that is ALWAYS in my purse, and then proceed to call the manufacturer if it's one of the few items that is not listed, but I knew it wouldn't be in there because fair food isn't listed. I decided to throw caution to the wind and purchase it without confirming any information.
I of course finished the entire bag by myself within half an hour. Each time since that first, I've always read the ingredients through the window, and then bounced around in line like an excited little kid as I awaited that first bite of sugary goodness. My husband thinks it's hilarious and cute, but he appreciates that I am nice enough to actually share some with him considering I've never shared my precious cotton candy before.
Within the last year, I noticed one of these on the grocery store shelf:
This isn't the exact one, but I was ecstatic! Could I really purchase cotton candy whenever I wanted? That question was answered with a joyous "YES!" while on our honeymoon. That was when I found this on the convenience store shelf at the resort:
Part of me doesn't feel right buying this glorious treat in a package because it should be reserved for special events, but the other part pretty much says, "Who cares??? It's cotton candy!" My only issue with this pre-packaged stuff now is that I'm now seeing the prepackaged stuff at outdoor events rather than seeing the fresh bagged stuff. It's only been once so far, but I fear it will become the norm. The time I saw it pre-packaged was at the fireworks display this last 4th of July. I saw the food stands and told my husband I HAD to go check. Sure enough, they had cotton candy, but it was in a large tub. It made me a little sad that I wasn't getting fresh bagged cotton candy or better yet, cotton candy on a stick, but I was still getting cotton candy so I was ok.
So where does this seemingly meaningless topic come from? Yesterday, I was at Sam's Club getting company supplies when I saw this:
That's right! An 8-pack of cotton candy. (I apologize for the mess in the background, and I apologize for the fact that one tub is missing and another was empty--I gave one to my boss and I ate the other the second I got back to my office.)
I actually thought twice about this purchase because I would have to run two transactions at the register in order to keep business expenses separate from personal expenses, but I didn't care. I HAD TO HAVE IT. However, when I got back to my office, it occurred to me that I had never checked the ingredients. I quickly checked, and I'll even let you see for yourselves:
I would call "sugar, artificial and natural flavors, artificial colors (including FD&C red 40, blue 1)" a success except for those ever frustrating "flavors" which could possibly be derived from gluten.
Once again, I threw caution to the wind and dug in.
When I got home, my husband told me that he has the best wife ever. How many wives come home with an 8 pack of cotton candy? I suppose I am pretty cool.
So, to all my readers out there. Is there any product that causes you to throw caution to the wind? I've heard multiple accounts of people saying they flat out knowingly consume gluten for a lot of things, so is that the case for you, or are you like me and you don't put a certain product through the normal "process" of confirming it is gluten free prior to consuming it? I realize I'm not exactly being a big risk taker with cotton candy, but I find it interesting that there is anything that gets past my normal research process because I am so incredibly careful.
So back to my problem. It's been a problem since I was an adult and could choose to purchase my own cotton candy whenever I damn well pleased. I have no idea if it comes from my parents saying no when I would ask for cotton candy when I was a child because I don't remember asking for it. I have no idea if I asked or if the answer was yes or no when/if I did ask. All I know is when I see cotton candy, I MUST HAVE IT.
I remember looking at the food stand with trepidation the first time I saw one of those glorious pink or blue bags in the window after I was diagnosed with Celiac Disease. I thought for sure they somehow threw wheat in there, but I was somewhat hopeful because I had worked at a cotton candy stand when I was in high school, and I was pretty sure it was just sugar and flavoring. I walked up to the window and tried to read the ingredients through the glass.
Success!!! Normally I look in my trusty Grocery Shopping Guide that is ALWAYS in my purse, and then proceed to call the manufacturer if it's one of the few items that is not listed, but I knew it wouldn't be in there because fair food isn't listed. I decided to throw caution to the wind and purchase it without confirming any information.
I of course finished the entire bag by myself within half an hour. Each time since that first, I've always read the ingredients through the window, and then bounced around in line like an excited little kid as I awaited that first bite of sugary goodness. My husband thinks it's hilarious and cute, but he appreciates that I am nice enough to actually share some with him considering I've never shared my precious cotton candy before.
Within the last year, I noticed one of these on the grocery store shelf:
This isn't the exact one, but I was ecstatic! Could I really purchase cotton candy whenever I wanted? That question was answered with a joyous "YES!" while on our honeymoon. That was when I found this on the convenience store shelf at the resort:
Part of me doesn't feel right buying this glorious treat in a package because it should be reserved for special events, but the other part pretty much says, "Who cares??? It's cotton candy!" My only issue with this pre-packaged stuff now is that I'm now seeing the prepackaged stuff at outdoor events rather than seeing the fresh bagged stuff. It's only been once so far, but I fear it will become the norm. The time I saw it pre-packaged was at the fireworks display this last 4th of July. I saw the food stands and told my husband I HAD to go check. Sure enough, they had cotton candy, but it was in a large tub. It made me a little sad that I wasn't getting fresh bagged cotton candy or better yet, cotton candy on a stick, but I was still getting cotton candy so I was ok.
So where does this seemingly meaningless topic come from? Yesterday, I was at Sam's Club getting company supplies when I saw this:
That's right! An 8-pack of cotton candy. (I apologize for the mess in the background, and I apologize for the fact that one tub is missing and another was empty--I gave one to my boss and I ate the other the second I got back to my office.)
I actually thought twice about this purchase because I would have to run two transactions at the register in order to keep business expenses separate from personal expenses, but I didn't care. I HAD TO HAVE IT. However, when I got back to my office, it occurred to me that I had never checked the ingredients. I quickly checked, and I'll even let you see for yourselves:
I would call "sugar, artificial and natural flavors, artificial colors (including FD&C red 40, blue 1)" a success except for those ever frustrating "flavors" which could possibly be derived from gluten.
Once again, I threw caution to the wind and dug in.
When I got home, my husband told me that he has the best wife ever. How many wives come home with an 8 pack of cotton candy? I suppose I am pretty cool.
So, to all my readers out there. Is there any product that causes you to throw caution to the wind? I've heard multiple accounts of people saying they flat out knowingly consume gluten for a lot of things, so is that the case for you, or are you like me and you don't put a certain product through the normal "process" of confirming it is gluten free prior to consuming it? I realize I'm not exactly being a big risk taker with cotton candy, but I find it interesting that there is anything that gets past my normal research process because I am so incredibly careful.
Good Intentions Gone Wrong? Gluten-Removed Beer
A friend of mine shared this blog with me a while back. It's the story of a man who meets someone who is on a gluten-free diet, but has been unable to find a gluten-free beer that they can truly enjoy. He is a home brewer, so he sets out on a quest to make a great tasting gluten-free beer.
While I appreciate the extensive amount of research he did on how to use substitutions for barley and still create a great tasting product, but he made one VERY large mistake. He used malted oats. I would be perfectly fine with the use of certified gluten-free oats, but he doesn't once mention going to the trouble of finding them. This leads me to believe he incorrectly assumes that wheat, barley, and rye are the only gluten-containing products.
Why do I bring this up? There is currently a lot of controversy regarding various "gluten-removed" beers such as Omission. The largest issue at hand is whether or not they can label this type of beer as "gluten-free." My personal opinion is that I don't understand why they want the gluten-free label. What is wrong with using full disclosure and informing consumers that their product is made with gluten-containing grains and processed to remove the gluten? That is what the Tobacco Tax & Trade Bureau (TTB) currently requires. I understand that they will lose some customers who could possibly safely drink their beer, but the alternative is giving consumers the (possibly) false impression that the product is safe when it is not.
If you'd you like to read a thorough (and somewhat long) description about this issue, click here. The link gives a much clearer understanding of what effect the current FDA labeling law has on gluten-removed beers.
The issue at hand is that there is no scientifically proven method of testing a product that has been processed to remove gluten in the manner that gluten-removed beers are. The most common method of testing products for gluten is the ELISA R5 test. Unfortunately, this test is meant to test for the whole protein. The process of removing gluten from beer includes adding an enzyme that breaks the gluten protein down into fragments and these fragments are supposedly removed. The ELISA test is unable to detect gluten fragments that could cause a reaction. The way I see it, there could easily be enough "fragments" that go undetected to cause horrendous reactions for those sensitive to gluten.
I have not been successful in finding the article, but I once read an article describing the testing of multiple regular and gluten-free beers. In this test, a few of the regular beers tested as gluten-free. Why? Because the tests are unreliable when it comes to testing this type of product.
I realize that business owners main purpose is to make money. I would hope that the manufacturers of Omission truly believe this product is safe even if their desire to make more money is clouding their vision. Considering the long term repercussions of consuming gluten when you have Celiac Disease, I hope they will soon discover that they are doing the right thing by not labeling their product as gluten-free until a scientifically proven test proves one way or the other. (I highly doubt their product will test as gluten free considering the number of individuals who have gotten sick consuming their product.)
It seems that just as the home brewer I mentioned originally had good intentions, lack of knowledge and stubbornness can easily cause good intentions to go wrong.
What are your thoughts on gluten-removed beer?
While I appreciate the extensive amount of research he did on how to use substitutions for barley and still create a great tasting product, but he made one VERY large mistake. He used malted oats. I would be perfectly fine with the use of certified gluten-free oats, but he doesn't once mention going to the trouble of finding them. This leads me to believe he incorrectly assumes that wheat, barley, and rye are the only gluten-containing products.
Why do I bring this up? There is currently a lot of controversy regarding various "gluten-removed" beers such as Omission. The largest issue at hand is whether or not they can label this type of beer as "gluten-free." My personal opinion is that I don't understand why they want the gluten-free label. What is wrong with using full disclosure and informing consumers that their product is made with gluten-containing grains and processed to remove the gluten? That is what the Tobacco Tax & Trade Bureau (TTB) currently requires. I understand that they will lose some customers who could possibly safely drink their beer, but the alternative is giving consumers the (possibly) false impression that the product is safe when it is not.
If you'd you like to read a thorough (and somewhat long) description about this issue, click here. The link gives a much clearer understanding of what effect the current FDA labeling law has on gluten-removed beers.
The issue at hand is that there is no scientifically proven method of testing a product that has been processed to remove gluten in the manner that gluten-removed beers are. The most common method of testing products for gluten is the ELISA R5 test. Unfortunately, this test is meant to test for the whole protein. The process of removing gluten from beer includes adding an enzyme that breaks the gluten protein down into fragments and these fragments are supposedly removed. The ELISA test is unable to detect gluten fragments that could cause a reaction. The way I see it, there could easily be enough "fragments" that go undetected to cause horrendous reactions for those sensitive to gluten.
I have not been successful in finding the article, but I once read an article describing the testing of multiple regular and gluten-free beers. In this test, a few of the regular beers tested as gluten-free. Why? Because the tests are unreliable when it comes to testing this type of product.
I realize that business owners main purpose is to make money. I would hope that the manufacturers of Omission truly believe this product is safe even if their desire to make more money is clouding their vision. Considering the long term repercussions of consuming gluten when you have Celiac Disease, I hope they will soon discover that they are doing the right thing by not labeling their product as gluten-free until a scientifically proven test proves one way or the other. (I highly doubt their product will test as gluten free considering the number of individuals who have gotten sick consuming their product.)
It seems that just as the home brewer I mentioned originally had good intentions, lack of knowledge and stubbornness can easily cause good intentions to go wrong.
What are your thoughts on gluten-removed beer?
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Product Review: 1-2-3 Gluten Free Multi-Purpose Flour
Yay for my first product review! I have quite a few products waiting in the wings, but I've always wanted the Multi-Purpose Flour from 1-2-3 Gluten Free to be my first because I LOVE it sooooo much.
I actually love all of the products from 1-2-3 Gluten Free, but I chose the Multi-Purpose Flour because of its versatility. It is an honest cup for cup substitute for regular recipes. I also like it because if I want brownies, I don't need a brownie mix, I just need a brownie recipe. If I want a chocolate cake, I don't need a chocolate cake mix, I just need a chocolate cake recipe. If I want biscuits, I don't need a biscuit mix, I just need a biscuit recipe. You get the idea. But...if you're looking for any of those mixes--they make them too, and they're true to their name. The mixes are actually as easy as 1-2-3. I still laugh out loud when I think about the first time I used one of these mixes (it was the Sweet Goodness Pan Bars). I literally said "Wow! That was easy," aloud, and then I proceeded to reread the directions because I couldn't possibly be done already. I was wrong--I was done. (I'm also fairly certain I ate the whole pan in one sitting which is not an easy feat because these mixes make about twice as much as regular gluten-free mixes.)
The best part about this flour is that it is the only fortified gluten-free multi-purpose flour on the market today. You know how everyone is always saying that you should only go on a gluten-free diet if absolutely necessary because you're missing out on all sorts of nutrients that gluten-containing foods naturally have? This helps with that for those of us who chose or require a gluten-free diet.
Just like all of the other products, this flour mix is made in a dedicated gluten-free facility, and it is certified gluten-free through the Gluten-Free Certification Organization (GFCO). It is also free of the top 8 allergens.
I've also had excellent luck using substitutions for dairy & soy while still using regular recipes that weren't originally intended to be gluten-free.
I haven't tried it yet, but the new boxes now say "Recipe for Angel Food Cake on the back!" After seeing this on the website, I noticed that the boxes I have already have the recipe on the back--I've just never noticed. I am and always have been in love with angel food cake. Every year for my birthday, my grandma would make me an angel food cake for my birthday, and then douse it in strawberries. I've only had angel food cake once since being diagnosed, and I actually made it myself (this experience made me that much more grateful for all of the effort my grandma went to in order to make me one each year--if you've made one, you know what I'm talking about--whipping those eggs isn't easy. I didn't have anything more than a hand mixer at the time, and she never had anything more than a hand mixer.)
I'm not sure I could possibly name all of the recipes I've done using this flour mix, but I've tried multiple brownie and cake/cupcake recipes, and they've all turned out great. I've actually been on a quest to find a recipe that didn't work well, but I haven't succeeded. There was one brownie recipe that was just kind of "eh," but I guess the gluten-containing counterpart is just kind of "eh" also.
I could go on and on gushing about how great this company and this product is, but I'll just say one more thing: this is the flour mix I planned on using for cupcakes for my wedding until I finally found a bakery to make me an actual wedding cake. I wouldn't have even considered making my own cupcakes if this wasn't available because while I like other mixes, I know this one is ALWAYS reliable. While I didn't use it for the cupcakes, I did use it for the brownies at our rehearsal dinner, and my favorite question was asked multiple times: "These are gluten-free???"
If you'd like to head on over to their website, click here.
If you'd like to read more about the fortified gluten-free flour mix, click here.
If you've tried 1-2-3 Gluten-Free products or this mix, I'd love to hear about it in the comments.
I actually love all of the products from 1-2-3 Gluten Free, but I chose the Multi-Purpose Flour because of its versatility. It is an honest cup for cup substitute for regular recipes. I also like it because if I want brownies, I don't need a brownie mix, I just need a brownie recipe. If I want a chocolate cake, I don't need a chocolate cake mix, I just need a chocolate cake recipe. If I want biscuits, I don't need a biscuit mix, I just need a biscuit recipe. You get the idea. But...if you're looking for any of those mixes--they make them too, and they're true to their name. The mixes are actually as easy as 1-2-3. I still laugh out loud when I think about the first time I used one of these mixes (it was the Sweet Goodness Pan Bars). I literally said "Wow! That was easy," aloud, and then I proceeded to reread the directions because I couldn't possibly be done already. I was wrong--I was done. (I'm also fairly certain I ate the whole pan in one sitting which is not an easy feat because these mixes make about twice as much as regular gluten-free mixes.)
The best part about this flour is that it is the only fortified gluten-free multi-purpose flour on the market today. You know how everyone is always saying that you should only go on a gluten-free diet if absolutely necessary because you're missing out on all sorts of nutrients that gluten-containing foods naturally have? This helps with that for those of us who chose or require a gluten-free diet.
Just like all of the other products, this flour mix is made in a dedicated gluten-free facility, and it is certified gluten-free through the Gluten-Free Certification Organization (GFCO). It is also free of the top 8 allergens.
I've also had excellent luck using substitutions for dairy & soy while still using regular recipes that weren't originally intended to be gluten-free.
I haven't tried it yet, but the new boxes now say "Recipe for Angel Food Cake on the back!" After seeing this on the website, I noticed that the boxes I have already have the recipe on the back--I've just never noticed. I am and always have been in love with angel food cake. Every year for my birthday, my grandma would make me an angel food cake for my birthday, and then douse it in strawberries. I've only had angel food cake once since being diagnosed, and I actually made it myself (this experience made me that much more grateful for all of the effort my grandma went to in order to make me one each year--if you've made one, you know what I'm talking about--whipping those eggs isn't easy. I didn't have anything more than a hand mixer at the time, and she never had anything more than a hand mixer.)
I'm not sure I could possibly name all of the recipes I've done using this flour mix, but I've tried multiple brownie and cake/cupcake recipes, and they've all turned out great. I've actually been on a quest to find a recipe that didn't work well, but I haven't succeeded. There was one brownie recipe that was just kind of "eh," but I guess the gluten-containing counterpart is just kind of "eh" also.
I could go on and on gushing about how great this company and this product is, but I'll just say one more thing: this is the flour mix I planned on using for cupcakes for my wedding until I finally found a bakery to make me an actual wedding cake. I wouldn't have even considered making my own cupcakes if this wasn't available because while I like other mixes, I know this one is ALWAYS reliable. While I didn't use it for the cupcakes, I did use it for the brownies at our rehearsal dinner, and my favorite question was asked multiple times: "These are gluten-free???"
If you'd like to head on over to their website, click here.
If you'd like to read more about the fortified gluten-free flour mix, click here.
If you've tried 1-2-3 Gluten-Free products or this mix, I'd love to hear about it in the comments.
Friday, August 2, 2013
FDA Gluten-Free Labeling Has Passed!
It seems crazy that just the other day, I was talking about the proposed FDA ruling for defining "gluten-free" for food labeling. I say that because the FDA finally ruled.... today.
You can read the FDA article here. In short, they are requiring that the product be free of wheat, barley, and rye (but not oats), and be able to test under 20ppm gluten. (ppm stands for parts per million and seems to be the most common standard worldwide)
I knew what they were planning, but I am still a little bit disappointed. Not for the same reason as it seems everyone else is upset though (I'll talk about that later). I would really prefer that manufacturers be required to disclose all forms of gluten on ingredient labels the same way they're required to disclose wheat and the other top 8 allergens. Why you ask? Because if that way all gluten-free products would be easy to find.
This new labeling law only pertains to those companies that want to state "gluten-free" on their products. According to the FDA, companies have until August 5, 2014 to ensure no products are mislabeled according to the guidelines. My fear is that many companies will worry that they aren't following the guidelines correctly, and they will remove "gluten-free" from their labels. When that happens, there will be no way to tell if the product is gluten-free besides calling the manufacturer to see if they will clearly label all forms of gluten or find another product.
The most common complaint I'm hearing is that others feel the 20ppm guideline is far too high. I see the point in that, but it seems there is a misconception that a 20ppm limit magically causes all products that state gluten-free on the label to have that amount of gluten in them. 20ppm is the limit people. It's kind of like a speed limit. If the speed limit is 55mph, that doesn't mean everyone is going to travel that speed. It doesn't force you to travel that speed. Some people will travel 45mph, and others will travel 65mph. For the purposes of my example, those traveling 65mph will receive a ticket. Those traveling 45mph will be ignored. Translate that to this gluten-free guideline, and any product containing 20ppm gluten and UNDER can be labeled gluten-free. Any product containing over 20ppm is in violation with the FDA and subject to regulatory action if they state gluten-free on the label.
Hopefully I'm not completely wrong, but my assumption is that the majority of products bearing the gluten-free claim actually contain 0ppm gluten. If the product is carefully grown away from gluten, and then manufactured in a dedicated gluten-free facility, it is highly unlikely that a new FDA standard will magically cause that product to now contain ANY gluten.
If I play devil's advocate, I will admit that I completely understand the worry that 20ppm is too high for some people. For all I know, it is too high for me, but if I switch from devil's advocate back to reality (I hope this is the reality anyway), most companies are not going to clean their equipment and manufacture their product in hopes that they can make it just under the 20ppm threshold--they are going to manufacture with the intent of the product containing 0ppm gluten.
I'm incredibly careful about what I consume, and I always worry that something could be cross contaminated. I completely understand the worry about this threshold being too high, but I guess I'm just over all the complaining that makes the assumption that this new ruling will CAUSE products to contain gluten that they did not previously contain.
Someone please raise a debate with me if you disagree about how this whole thing will play out because I yearn to understand why people suddenly seem so... well, I'll let you insert your own adjective there. ;) If you really want to raise a stink about the amount of gluten, why don't you go google the FDA standard for the threshold for rat feces in our food. Totally not the same thing, but ya know, I had to go there.
You can read the FDA article here. In short, they are requiring that the product be free of wheat, barley, and rye (but not oats), and be able to test under 20ppm gluten. (ppm stands for parts per million and seems to be the most common standard worldwide)
I knew what they were planning, but I am still a little bit disappointed. Not for the same reason as it seems everyone else is upset though (I'll talk about that later). I would really prefer that manufacturers be required to disclose all forms of gluten on ingredient labels the same way they're required to disclose wheat and the other top 8 allergens. Why you ask? Because if that way all gluten-free products would be easy to find.
This new labeling law only pertains to those companies that want to state "gluten-free" on their products. According to the FDA, companies have until August 5, 2014 to ensure no products are mislabeled according to the guidelines. My fear is that many companies will worry that they aren't following the guidelines correctly, and they will remove "gluten-free" from their labels. When that happens, there will be no way to tell if the product is gluten-free besides calling the manufacturer to see if they will clearly label all forms of gluten or find another product.
The most common complaint I'm hearing is that others feel the 20ppm guideline is far too high. I see the point in that, but it seems there is a misconception that a 20ppm limit magically causes all products that state gluten-free on the label to have that amount of gluten in them. 20ppm is the limit people. It's kind of like a speed limit. If the speed limit is 55mph, that doesn't mean everyone is going to travel that speed. It doesn't force you to travel that speed. Some people will travel 45mph, and others will travel 65mph. For the purposes of my example, those traveling 65mph will receive a ticket. Those traveling 45mph will be ignored. Translate that to this gluten-free guideline, and any product containing 20ppm gluten and UNDER can be labeled gluten-free. Any product containing over 20ppm is in violation with the FDA and subject to regulatory action if they state gluten-free on the label.
Hopefully I'm not completely wrong, but my assumption is that the majority of products bearing the gluten-free claim actually contain 0ppm gluten. If the product is carefully grown away from gluten, and then manufactured in a dedicated gluten-free facility, it is highly unlikely that a new FDA standard will magically cause that product to now contain ANY gluten.
If I play devil's advocate, I will admit that I completely understand the worry that 20ppm is too high for some people. For all I know, it is too high for me, but if I switch from devil's advocate back to reality (I hope this is the reality anyway), most companies are not going to clean their equipment and manufacture their product in hopes that they can make it just under the 20ppm threshold--they are going to manufacture with the intent of the product containing 0ppm gluten.
I'm incredibly careful about what I consume, and I always worry that something could be cross contaminated. I completely understand the worry about this threshold being too high, but I guess I'm just over all the complaining that makes the assumption that this new ruling will CAUSE products to contain gluten that they did not previously contain.
Someone please raise a debate with me if you disagree about how this whole thing will play out because I yearn to understand why people suddenly seem so... well, I'll let you insert your own adjective there. ;) If you really want to raise a stink about the amount of gluten, why don't you go google the FDA standard for the threshold for rat feces in our food. Totally not the same thing, but ya know, I had to go there.
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Gluten Free Labeling Law
I'm not sure where to start on this one because it seems most people are all over the place with their knowledge of the PROPOSED gluten-free labeling law. Why did I put "proposed" in all capital letters? Because I wanted to catch your attention, and I want to alert the unaware that there currently is no labeling law regarding gluten.
At this time, the FDA requires that companies clearly disclose it if their products contain any of the "top 8 allergens." These include milk, wheat, soy, eggs, peanuts, tree nuts, fish, shellfish, and soy. If you've ever heard of FALCPA otherwise known as the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004, that's what this is. Although some individuals always seem to think that wheat=gluten, it does not. Gluten can also come in the form of barley, rye, and the always controversial oats. At this time, companies are not required to disclose the presence of barley, rye, or oats. Malt vinegar, which is derived from barley, could simply be listed as "vinegar."
So back to the "proposed" labeling law. Part of the FALCPA law required that the FDA establish standards for labeling products gluten-free. Many people believe that the lives of those on a gluten free diet will magically become easier when this law is passed/goes into effect. The problem with the law is right in the law itself:
In the rule, the FDA defines a product as “gluten free” if it does not contain the following: wheat, rye, barley, or any hybrid of these grains; ingredients such as wheat flour that have not been processed to remove gluten; or any item made up of more than 20 parts per million of gluten.
So what's the problem? Did you see anywhere in that short statement that companies will be required to disclose barley and rye? No. The law only affects those companies that want to state "gluten-free" on the label. It also says nothing about oats. It will also scare more companies away from labeling their products as gluten-free.
The good news is that companies will not be able to to label their products as gluten-free if they are not because it will be against the law to do so. At this time, there is no standard, so a company can label their products gluten-free even if they're aware that they are not. It's not ethical to do so, but there is little chance of any legal action (although the gluten-free community tends to be a very strong community, and I've heard of companies going out of business for doing such things).
I think this is a huge step forward for the gluten-free community once the law goes into effect, but we still have a long way to go. I dream of a day when I can easily read an ingredient label. I don't expect companies to state the actual word "gluten" in the ingredient list, but I would like to know that I'm safe to eat something when a product contains ingredients such as vinegar, natural flavors, coloring, etc. I admire companies that will clearly disclose all gluten ingredients in ways such as "natural flavors (barley)..." and I wish all companies would do this.
What is your opinion on the proposed legislation? If you would change it, what do you wish it would say? I'd love to hear a "best-case scenario" along with a realistic scenario.
At this time, the FDA requires that companies clearly disclose it if their products contain any of the "top 8 allergens." These include milk, wheat, soy, eggs, peanuts, tree nuts, fish, shellfish, and soy. If you've ever heard of FALCPA otherwise known as the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004, that's what this is. Although some individuals always seem to think that wheat=gluten, it does not. Gluten can also come in the form of barley, rye, and the always controversial oats. At this time, companies are not required to disclose the presence of barley, rye, or oats. Malt vinegar, which is derived from barley, could simply be listed as "vinegar."
So back to the "proposed" labeling law. Part of the FALCPA law required that the FDA establish standards for labeling products gluten-free. Many people believe that the lives of those on a gluten free diet will magically become easier when this law is passed/goes into effect. The problem with the law is right in the law itself:
In the rule, the FDA defines a product as “gluten free” if it does not contain the following: wheat, rye, barley, or any hybrid of these grains; ingredients such as wheat flour that have not been processed to remove gluten; or any item made up of more than 20 parts per million of gluten.
So what's the problem? Did you see anywhere in that short statement that companies will be required to disclose barley and rye? No. The law only affects those companies that want to state "gluten-free" on the label. It also says nothing about oats. It will also scare more companies away from labeling their products as gluten-free.
The good news is that companies will not be able to to label their products as gluten-free if they are not because it will be against the law to do so. At this time, there is no standard, so a company can label their products gluten-free even if they're aware that they are not. It's not ethical to do so, but there is little chance of any legal action (although the gluten-free community tends to be a very strong community, and I've heard of companies going out of business for doing such things).
I think this is a huge step forward for the gluten-free community once the law goes into effect, but we still have a long way to go. I dream of a day when I can easily read an ingredient label. I don't expect companies to state the actual word "gluten" in the ingredient list, but I would like to know that I'm safe to eat something when a product contains ingredients such as vinegar, natural flavors, coloring, etc. I admire companies that will clearly disclose all gluten ingredients in ways such as "natural flavors (barley)..." and I wish all companies would do this.
What is your opinion on the proposed legislation? If you would change it, what do you wish it would say? I'd love to hear a "best-case scenario" along with a realistic scenario.
Monday, July 1, 2013
When ingredients change...
The gluten-free world has been getting better and better ever since I was first diagnosed with Celiac Disease over 5 years ago. New products are constantly being introduced, and existing products are changing their ingredients to remove gluten. Manufacturing practices are changing to eliminate the possibility of cross contamination.
Questions? Comments?.... I'd love to hear from you.
Until now...
In the past month, I keep coming across information stating products I previously enjoyed are no longer gluten-free. Other manufacturers seem to be taking the cowardly route and they are now stating that they can't guarantee their product is gluten-free because they don't know where the ingredients come from.
Example 1: Advil Liqui-Gels
I used this product prior to going on a gluten-free diet, and I was incredibly relieved to find out it was gluten-free after my diagnosis. Tablet pain relievers often contain gluten as a binder, so it made sense that a liqui-gel wouldn't have the need for gluten. Until now. I don't even remember how I came across the information, but the other day, someone posted a link about this product. http://www.advil.com/faqs?
In case you don't want to click the link, it says:
In case you don't want to click the link, it says:
Advil® Liqui-Gels® and Advil® Migraine and contain a wheat derivative, and are not gluten-free. You should check with your doctor if you have any concerns about taking this product.
I haven't done additional research to see if the generic versions are still gluten-free, but I have to admit I'm bummed that a product I've relied on for at least 10 years pre and post gluten-free is no longer safe for me to use.
Example 2: Kraft
When I first was diagnosed, Kraft was named as one of those brands with exemplary labeling practices, and I knew I could always rely on the ingredient label rather than needing to call the manufacturer. That is no longer the case, which is extremely frustrating considering it is such a large company, and my opinion is that they should somewhat be setting the standard for how things are done and show other companies that it can be done. I heard someone questioned one of their products that I had always relied on as gluten-free, and they were informed that it was not considered by Kraft to be gluten-free.
I decided to do my own research and call them. The call didn't go well. I've worked in customer service, so I always do my best to be upbeat and polite because I realize they don't make the decisions, but this one was tough. I asked if the product was gluten-free, and the response was that Kraft does not consider it to be gluten-free. I was advised that any product that contains "spices, flavorings, or coloring" is not gluten-free because they don't know how their suppliers produce these ingredients and it is proprietary information.
Often times, I am told that I need to call the manufacturer with the UPC each time I'm going to purchase a product so they can determine which manufacturing facility it was made in and where the ingredients were sourced from. This always ticks me off, and I always inform them that I will simply purchase from another company as I don't have the time to call every time I want to purchase one of their products. On a whim, I asked the Kraft representative if I could call to confirm if I needed to purchase one of their products.
Nope. They flat out don't know. Boo Kraft!
So not only was this one product no longer considered to be gluten-free, but ALL Kraft products are subject to this ridiculous rule of "spices, flavorings or coloring."
So not only was this one product no longer considered to be gluten-free, but ALL Kraft products are subject to this ridiculous rule of "spices, flavorings or coloring."
I do my best to always stay positive about everything gluten-free, so here is my solution: we need to nicely contact these companies to let them know their changes have affected us. The gluten-free community needs to stand together and let companies know that it's not ok to suddenly change their labeling practices. When I voiced my displeasure on Facebook, a few of my friends said that I shouldn't be eating Kraft products anyway because they're full of GMO's, etc, etc, etc. For now, I'd like to focus just on the gluten-free thing though (I will cover my opinion of GMO's in an upcoming blog.) I realize there is a large portion of the population that does not care about GMO's along with a large portion that does.
If you decide to contact Kraft, feel free to call Advil as long as you're on the phone ;)
Contact information for companies:
Kraft: 1-877-535-5666
Advil: 1-800-882-3845
Questions? Comments?.... I'd love to hear from you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)