Tex,
The end of June I had a blood test. An IGg. I think that is how it should be printed. Anyway, I still don't have the results back. The doctors assistant said first he was reviewing it. Then last week she said he has contacted a Rheumatologist. What do you make of this?
Pat
Tex, I have a question
Moderators: Rosie, Stanz, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
Hi Pat,
I would guess that the test showed that you are highly intolerant to one or more, (in fact, probably many), foods. As you probably recall, I have virtually no confidence in the findings of IgG tests, simply because they are very questionable in terms of both theory, and validity. Typically, if you submit the same sample to several different labs, you will almost always receive extremely different results from all the labs. IOW, the tests have very poor reproducibility. Reproducibility, as you well know, is essential, if a lab test is to have any value.
Here's a report by a laboratory director, where she had three different labs run IgG tests on the same sample. The results, as you can see, would be funny, if they weren't so pathetic. It's sad to think that so many people actually have faith in these tests, and spend good money on them. Doctors, of all people, should know better.
http://www.tldp.com/issue/174/IgG%20Food%20Allergy.html
That said, it's certainly not impossible that the lab that did your tests might be far above par. Statistically, though, that's a pretty long shot, based on the evidence. The main problem with these tests, I believe, is that the interpretation of the results depends far too much on the skills of the operator, and his or her ability to judge subtle differences in color changes of the test medium. Every lot of test kits displays these color changes differently, and every technician interprets them differently. It's not that they don't try to do it right, it's just that there are too many variables to allow acceptable consistency. Therefore, whatever the findings of the test might turn out to be, I wouldn't get very excited about the implications.
Of course, we all know that you do indeed have many food intolerances, so that the only way the test could "hurt", is if it showed that you had none, (this is assuming that your doctor has a lot more faith in the test than I have). Maybe it will convince him that you are indeed intolerant to certain foods.
Consulting with a rheumatologist, though, is not a bad idea. I think that most of them know a heck of a lot more about autoimmune mediated digestive system diseases than most GI docs. Maybe he or she can shed some insight into your case, and offer some fresh ideas.
Tex
I would guess that the test showed that you are highly intolerant to one or more, (in fact, probably many), foods. As you probably recall, I have virtually no confidence in the findings of IgG tests, simply because they are very questionable in terms of both theory, and validity. Typically, if you submit the same sample to several different labs, you will almost always receive extremely different results from all the labs. IOW, the tests have very poor reproducibility. Reproducibility, as you well know, is essential, if a lab test is to have any value.
Here's a report by a laboratory director, where she had three different labs run IgG tests on the same sample. The results, as you can see, would be funny, if they weren't so pathetic. It's sad to think that so many people actually have faith in these tests, and spend good money on them. Doctors, of all people, should know better.
http://www.tldp.com/issue/174/IgG%20Food%20Allergy.html
That said, it's certainly not impossible that the lab that did your tests might be far above par. Statistically, though, that's a pretty long shot, based on the evidence. The main problem with these tests, I believe, is that the interpretation of the results depends far too much on the skills of the operator, and his or her ability to judge subtle differences in color changes of the test medium. Every lot of test kits displays these color changes differently, and every technician interprets them differently. It's not that they don't try to do it right, it's just that there are too many variables to allow acceptable consistency. Therefore, whatever the findings of the test might turn out to be, I wouldn't get very excited about the implications.
Of course, we all know that you do indeed have many food intolerances, so that the only way the test could "hurt", is if it showed that you had none, (this is assuming that your doctor has a lot more faith in the test than I have). Maybe it will convince him that you are indeed intolerant to certain foods.
Consulting with a rheumatologist, though, is not a bad idea. I think that most of them know a heck of a lot more about autoimmune mediated digestive system diseases than most GI docs. Maybe he or she can shed some insight into your case, and offer some fresh ideas.
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,
Well, we were incorrect about the IgG test. He said it was not to check for intolerances. It was to check protein in my blood that protects me against infection. Mine was slightly low but that was not a surprise since I am taking the Imuran. After my blood test late in August to check the thiopurine levels and if I am at a therapeutic level then he will send me to Dr. Schiller in Dallas for a second opinion. I am very interested in this visit.
Pat
Well, we were incorrect about the IgG test. He said it was not to check for intolerances. It was to check protein in my blood that protects me against infection. Mine was slightly low but that was not a surprise since I am taking the Imuran. After my blood test late in August to check the thiopurine levels and if I am at a therapeutic level then he will send me to Dr. Schiller in Dallas for a second opinion. I am very interested in this visit.
Pat
Well I'll be darn - never heard of that before. I have a hunch that the trip to Dallas will be productive, and I'm looking forward to hearing what Dr. Shiller has to say, also. I wonder if he's kin to the Shillers that I know around Temple - one runs the local Texas Land Bank office in Temple, and another is a highway patrolman, who farms on the side, (or at least he used to farm - I haven't seen him in years).
Tex
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.
Hi there,
I think there's a Dr. Schiller at Baylor in Dallas who was probably there while Dr. Fine was there. Is he a gastroenterologist? If so, my sister heard him speak not earlier in the year at a national GI docs seminar thingie.
Baylor in Dallas has one of those Centers of Excellence for the GI specialty. There are usually say, only about 12 of these for any given specialty.
I'm not online here much these days, but it's nice to see some new "faces."
Will try to check in a little more often when I can.
Yours, Luce
I think there's a Dr. Schiller at Baylor in Dallas who was probably there while Dr. Fine was there. Is he a gastroenterologist? If so, my sister heard him speak not earlier in the year at a national GI docs seminar thingie.
Baylor in Dallas has one of those Centers of Excellence for the GI specialty. There are usually say, only about 12 of these for any given specialty.
I'm not online here much these days, but it's nice to see some new "faces."
Will try to check in a little more often when I can.
Yours, Luce