http://www.thepaleomom.com/2013/03/glut ... it-up.html
Pat
An interesting article
Moderators: Rosie, Stanz, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
Hi Pat,
I agree that the blog connected with the link that you posted is interesting, and the author of that blog is not the only one promoting Cyrex Labs, but paint me skeptical. That information doesn't appear on Medscape for a reason — it's strictly theory (mostly promoted by Cyrex Labs). There are even quite a few MDs who use the tests that Cyrex offers, and many/most of them don't seem to accept many/most of the insurance policies offered by many companies. The tests are expensive, and Cyrex offers zillions of them, so a testing program can really run up a big bill in a hurry. Cyrex makes a ton of money off those tests, so they certainly have good reason to respond quickly to inquires about them.
The author of that blog seems to think that just because Cyrex responded to her inquiry quickly, that somehow gives their response increased credibility. But there is no reason why fast responses would have any more correlation with a high degree of credibility than slower responses. It simply means that they are eager for business (and who wouldn't be, if they were making that kind of money.
).
That said, all of us here are well aware that many of us are sensitive to at least some of the foods and chemicals that Cyrex offers tests for. But that doesn't mean that the tests offered by Cyrex are accurate and reliable. They are, after all, blood tests, and blood tests are notorious for false negatives, false positives, and lack of repeatability. Zizzle had a bunch of those tests done a year or 2 ago, but after spending a pile of money, I'm not sure that she actually derived any significant benefits from the testing.
Maybe she will see this and correct my faulty reasoning.
The author of that blog posted a bunch of information about amino acids, and protein chains made of amino acids (aka molecules), antibodies, etc., but none of that is new information. Maybe it was an update to her "official" position on the topic (I don't normally read her blog), but it certainly wasn't an update of new and compelling information that included any mention of proof of anything, regarding cross-reactivity. Maybe I read it too fast, and missed it.
Anyway, FWIW, I do believe that there is a gluten connection with sensitivities to at least some of those foods, but I'm not convinced that the tests that Cyrex offers are actually able to deliver the goods that they promise. IMO, they lean more toward using half-truths and smoke and mirrors to exploit an issue that they don't actually understand, in order to transfer as much of their client's bank accounts as possible, into their own bank account.
What was your take on the article? Did I misread it?
Tex
I agree that the blog connected with the link that you posted is interesting, and the author of that blog is not the only one promoting Cyrex Labs, but paint me skeptical. That information doesn't appear on Medscape for a reason — it's strictly theory (mostly promoted by Cyrex Labs). There are even quite a few MDs who use the tests that Cyrex offers, and many/most of them don't seem to accept many/most of the insurance policies offered by many companies. The tests are expensive, and Cyrex offers zillions of them, so a testing program can really run up a big bill in a hurry. Cyrex makes a ton of money off those tests, so they certainly have good reason to respond quickly to inquires about them.
The author of that blog seems to think that just because Cyrex responded to her inquiry quickly, that somehow gives their response increased credibility. But there is no reason why fast responses would have any more correlation with a high degree of credibility than slower responses. It simply means that they are eager for business (and who wouldn't be, if they were making that kind of money.
).That said, all of us here are well aware that many of us are sensitive to at least some of the foods and chemicals that Cyrex offers tests for. But that doesn't mean that the tests offered by Cyrex are accurate and reliable. They are, after all, blood tests, and blood tests are notorious for false negatives, false positives, and lack of repeatability. Zizzle had a bunch of those tests done a year or 2 ago, but after spending a pile of money, I'm not sure that she actually derived any significant benefits from the testing.
Maybe she will see this and correct my faulty reasoning. The author of that blog posted a bunch of information about amino acids, and protein chains made of amino acids (aka molecules), antibodies, etc., but none of that is new information. Maybe it was an update to her "official" position on the topic
(I don't normally read her blog), but it certainly wasn't an update of new and compelling information that included any mention of proof of anything, regarding cross-reactivity. Maybe I read it too fast, and missed it. Anyway, FWIW, I do believe that there is a gluten connection with sensitivities to at least some of those foods, but I'm not convinced that the tests that Cyrex offers are actually able to deliver the goods that they promise. IMO, they lean more toward using half-truths and smoke and mirrors to exploit an issue that they don't actually understand, in order to transfer as much of their client's bank accounts as possible, into their own bank account.
What was your take on the article? Did I misread it?
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Tex,
I guess I didn't dwell on the Cyrex part of the article as much as just how many things can cross react with gluten sensitivity. Many of us remove gluten, dairy, soy, and eggs and still have big problems. Maybe its because our bodies see everything as gluten. Mine must! I don't know I just thought this was an interesting article.
Pat
I guess I didn't dwell on the Cyrex part of the article as much as just how many things can cross react with gluten sensitivity. Many of us remove gluten, dairy, soy, and eggs and still have big problems. Maybe its because our bodies see everything as gluten. Mine must! I don't know I just thought this was an interesting article.
Pat
Hi Pat,
That's very true. Many of us do indeed react to many of the items that were listed in the article. It's actually a phenomenon of molecular mimicry, but whether one calls it molecular mimicry, or cross-reactivity, it still causes the same problems. I suspect that Cyrex chose to call it cross-reactivity, because that opens the door to fears about reacting to a broad range of foods/chemicals, thus facilitating their decision to offer many, many specific tests and combinations of tests. Cross-reactivity is a more "sensational" (and therefore more ad-worthy) term than molecular mimicry, and I'm guessing that it surely inspires more orders for tests.
Thanks. And I do agree — it's an interesting article. And I also agree with your comment, "Maybe its because our bodies see everything as gluten". Before I cut gluten out of my diet, that seems to be exactly what was happening, because looking at my food diary, I seemed to react to anything and everything, in random fashion. It didn't make a bit of sense to me. But after I removed gluten from my diet, then eventually I began to see patterns that involved other foods. IMO, gluten excels at obfuscation.
Tex
That's very true. Many of us do indeed react to many of the items that were listed in the article. It's actually a phenomenon of molecular mimicry, but whether one calls it molecular mimicry, or cross-reactivity, it still causes the same problems. I suspect that Cyrex chose to call it cross-reactivity, because that opens the door to fears about reacting to a broad range of foods/chemicals, thus facilitating their decision to offer many, many specific tests and combinations of tests. Cross-reactivity is a more "sensational" (and therefore more ad-worthy) term than molecular mimicry, and I'm guessing that it surely inspires more orders for tests.
Thanks. And I do agree — it's an interesting article. And I also agree with your comment, "Maybe its because our bodies see everything as gluten". Before I cut gluten out of my diet, that seems to be exactly what was happening, because looking at my food diary, I seemed to react to anything and everything, in random fashion. It didn't make a bit of sense to me. But after I removed gluten from my diet, then eventually I began to see patterns that involved other foods. IMO, gluten excels at obfuscation.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.