Shona wrote:I'll have to double check what adverse reaction she had, but from memory it was things like vision (started with sensitivity to light but got to very blurred vision), vomiting - I'll find out more details and report back :)
If she is having those symptoms without taking any drugs, those sound like classic migraine symptoms, which is a somewhat common issue with MC. I had problems with those symptoms myself, when I was reacting. Gluten can cross the blood/brain barrier, to cause such neurological issues. It's even possible to have migraines without a headache. Those are called acephalgic migraines, if a visual aura is involved, without pain.
Shona wrote:I guess I don't understand the point of the gluten gene test or the transglutaminase test if you are already testing for the gluten sensitivity?
The gene test can be useful in some cases, but it is not necessary. It can define whether or not celiac disease is a possibility, and in some cases, it can predict how many food sensitivities are likely to be a problem, and how difficult it may be to achieve remission. IOW, people with double DQ genes have more food sensitivities, and usually have a more difficult time achieving remission. The tissue transglutaminase antibody test simply determines whether or not an autoimmune reaction is present. For most of us who are symptomatic, that test result will be positive, of course. When uncontrollable diarrhea is present, along with a diagnosis of MC, the existence of an autoimmune reaction is pretty much of a no-brainer.
The fecal fat malabsorption test simply determines whether or not a significant fat malabsorption problem exists. Essentially, what this implies, is whether or not the small intestine is involved in the reaction, since fat is normally absorbed in the small intestine. Many of us with MC have a mild to moderate fat malabsorption problem while we are reacting, but if there is a serious malabsorption problem, then celiac disease may be a possibility, since a large number for a malabsorption test result implies the possibility of significant damage to the villi of the small intestine. This test result is reported as a number. Anything below 300 is considered normal. No other information is provided with the test result, however.
The most common food sensitivities among the members of this board, are gluten, dairy products, and soy, in that order of prevalence.
I'm not familiar with the test offered in Australia, but the tests we are referring to on this board, are only offered by the lab in Dallas, Texas, USA. No other lab in the world is licensed to use this technology. Prior to the development of the food sensitivity stool tests at Enterolab, all of the stool tests offered by other labs, (for food sensitivities), were notorious for providing unreliable results, and they are the primary reason why so many doctors are so reluctant to adopt the tests offered by Enterolab.
Incidentally, regarding enzyme supplements - I once tried a highly-recommended enzyme blend, to see if it would improve my digestion while my gut was still healing. The first pill I took, made me sick as a dog for about 4 days. Within 2 hours I was vomiting, and after that, every hour or two, the process was repeated. Of course after a few episodes, I was down to the dry heaves, but it still wasn't much fun. Fortunately, that part of it only lasted for one day. I never touched another enzyme supplement again.
Of course, that doesn't mean that they might not work for someone else, but I learned that they definitely don't work for me.
Tex
