I never cease to be amazed at how difficult it often is, to convince people who are so sick that that they are practically chained to their bathrooms, that something in their diet is the cause of all their symptoms. It's almost as if we're trying to sell some kind of snake oil.
Most people are very reluctant to eliminate a food that they consider to be a staple, from their diet, as if it's somehow risky to do so. The reality is, if worse comes to worst, the only risk is that it might not help. 
That's not exactly the worst thing that can happen to us. Is it?On the other hand, without hesitation, our doctors will prescribe drugs with the most Draconian side effect risks imaginable, and those same people who are reluctant to try changing their diet, will gladly take those drugs, (even though they can't possibly be sure that the drugs will actually help, because frequently, they don't), and if the side effects become reality, they go back to the doctor, who prescribes some more drugs to counteract the side effects of the first drug.
Sometimes the drug will bring remission, but as soon as the treatment is discontinued, a relapse occurs, and the doctor pretends to be surprised, and writes another prescription, either for the same drug, or a more powerful one, (with worse side effect risks), and the drug merry-go-round goes on and on.Looking at the accumulated experiences of the members of this board, realistically, the diet probably brings remission, (without the need for a maintenance drug dosage), for roughly 60 to 70% of those who try it, and something like 90%, or better, are able to attain remission by using diet changes in combination with Entocort or a 5-ASA med. (I'm just guessing at those statistics, obviously, but I believe they're reasonable ballpark figures). When you compare that success rate with typical drug efficacy rates, it looks pretty good, because most of the better drugs, (for treating any issue), are only about 60 to 65% effective, and many are not even that effective, (of course, a few do better than the average, as well). But unfortunately, there are no drugs that show acceptable results for treating MC.
Consider this:
How well do drugs alone treat MC? Well, according to research studies, not very well. In the most recent published study that I can find, (published in 2006), the study showed that "up to 50 % of patients receiving anti-inflammatory treatment", were able to resolve their symptoms. That's not a very good success rate, and yet it's the treatment of choice for most GI specialists. The article concludes that, "About 30 % of patients may experience persistent diarrhea even 10 years after diagnosis", and remember - that's under the condition that they're following the best treatment plan known to modern medicine.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16981069CONCLUSION:
The long-term outcome of CC is benign with a resolution of diarrhea in up to 50 % of patients receiving anti-inflammatory treatment. About 30 % of patients may experience persistent diarrhea even 10 years after diagnosis. Our data confirm that CC is a chronic disorder with a variable course of symptoms during a long-term follow-up.
In view of that, why on earth are so many people reluctant to change their diet, in order to get rid of their symptoms. The diet is by far the most effective, safest way to treat the disease. In fact, it's risk free, and waaaaaaaaay more effective than any drug treatment. Doesn't that make it a no-brainer, or am I overlooking something?
Tex
