Julia Llewellyn Smith has caused a predictable storm with her article in yesterday’s Telegraph, The Great Gluten-free Scam. In essence she is saying (backed by coeliac nutritionist, Ian Marber) that gluten is being demonised. It is not the cause of every ill from which you suffer. Bloating, pain, diarrhoea, fatigue etc could be caused by the yeast in the bread, the manufacturing process, the other foods that you eat, your life style or half a dozen other culprits – all of which is perfectly true. (See the very interesting research carried out some years ago by the University of Surrey which showed that 50% of those who complained of having a food intolerance got better when put on a healthy-eating diet for two weeks.)
She also points out that gluten free food is more expensive (which it is, but usually with perfectly good reason – see my blog last week) and that it is not healthier than non gluten-free food – indeed quite the opposite. This is certainly true of some, but not all, g-f foods.
However, she wraps all of these perfectly valid points in some rather inflammatory prose:
Novak Djokovic, who attributes his gluten-free regime to transforming his tennis, now has his dog following it (though Andy Murray who beat him in this year’s Wimbledon final says the same diet made him “lose strength”.) (Not strictly true as, if you can be bothered to read the book, going gluten-free was only one of a whole range of healthy eating and living measures that Djokovic adopted.)
Tesco peddles a heart-warming story of how its former chief executive Sir Terry Leahy appointed the mother of a child who suffered from several food allergies to set up his “free-from” range, after she wrote to him complaining about the lack of suitable foods available. (As it happens, true, although the mother in question, Patricia Wheway, was already a buyer at Tesco, so not quite as heart-warming as it sounds.)
Predictably, there has been a flood of more or less peeved (and amusing) rants from the coeliac/gluten-free community focusing on Ms Llewellyn’s Smith’s more inflammatory comments. They would make good morning coffee reading for those who are interested. Try:
Alex at Food Allergy and Intolerance Ink
The Happy Coeliac (quoted by Alex)
The Gluten Dude (quoted by The Happy Coeliac….)
Fuelled for Fitness (not quoted by anyone…)
I was just about to post this when a link to an article on the Huffington Post plopped into my in-box:
Gluten Allergies Don’t Exist, Says Specialist Doctor – and the UK’s leading charity, Allergy UK agrees!
“It was shocking to me, the amount of misinformation that is available to the general public,” said Dr Stukus, an allergist at Nationwide Children’s Hospital and assistant professor of pediatrics at Ohio State University. At the top of his list is people claiming to be allergic to bread…….”
Oh dear….. I know that it is frustrating, as a professional, to have everyone constantly using the terminology of your trade incorrectly, but why can’t medics just lighten up a bit!!
When the average man/woman in the street talks about an ‘allergy’ they are using the term in the way in which it originally was conceived – an inappropriate response to a perfectly harmless substance. They are not remotely interested in whether it is immune mediated, involves IgE antibodies, has an immediate response or a delayed response – they only know that when they eat/breathe/touch certain things they don’t feel well.
So please could the medical profession just focus on their ill health and what might have caused it rather than wittering on endlessly about whether or not they are calling it by the right name!
If you are up for more discussion of the subject, check in to Alex’s Food Allergy and Intolerance Ink blog here.
Specialists in every field rely on abstruse terminology to set them apart from the rest of us. Look at lawyers and financiers. Its not just their white coats that allow consultants to charge fat fees!
Re: ‘gluten allergy doesn’t exist’ – I suppose allergists are allowed their pet peeves (which is what seemed to have motivated Dr Stukus to make a point of this), but perhaps it was naive of him to not consider how the media may run with what he was saying … predictably, the end result is the free from / food sensitive community suffers and gets a bashing!
I am afraid that I don’t think allergists are allowed their pet peeves. Their job in life is to help a community that has a hard enough time trying to improve their health anyhow without their doctors castigating them for getting the terminology wrong! Less time worrying about what the problem is called and more time trying to solve it please…..
I think it was the tone of Ms Llewellyn Smith’s article that prompted the rants. I felt quite uncomfortable reading it! There were some excellent points, it was a shame they got lost in the inflammatory language.
Unfortunately, the gluten free diet has become a bit of an Aunt Sally recently and it’s the people who live with it every day who get caught in the firing line. I agree with you, Michelle, less emphasis on pedantry, more effort into treating sufferers!
I guess also we should consider that he was interviewed here and someone chose that heading. It may not have been Dr Stukus himself. Headings for articles are often sensationalist but this one is unfortunate. The fact that it is technically true is irrelevant. The words people will see here are ‘allergies’ ‘don’t’ and ‘exist’. Which is not a good message. I am all in favour of raising awareness and explaining away all those myths that confuse everyone. Like the fact that eggs are not dairy… my favourite pet peev. But the whole allergy industry suffers here. Some will click through, read the article and understand the point being made but many will just read the headling and draw their own conclusions -sadly.
Sadly, you are absolutely right, Ruth. But, as we all know, sensationalist headlines grab readers so I fear that we have to put up with them. Just hope that enough people are intrigued/irritated enough by the headline to actually read the article!
All I meant was that he’s allowed his pet peeve – but whether he should be sharing it, broadcasting it, confiding it with a journalist … that’s another matter entirely. I may be playing devil’s advocate, but to put oneself in his shoes – it must be deeply frustrating to be confronted with the often wild and crazy misinformation about sensitivities on the web, and unpicking poor diagnoses from unqualified people / dodgy tests, or indeed self-diagnoses, when you’re a dedicated, long-standing allergist – I’ve interviewed enough specialists to know how much of a problem this can be. If indeed he has been irritated by this, then I have some sympathy, I’m afraid. It was certain sections of the media who inflated his point, tabloid style, and introduced the whole ‘all in the head’ dimension. (He would have had zero to do with the headline, Ruth – and I don’t think he was interviewed, just extracts taken from his presentation / talk.) If it weren’t for the populist media, and this had been covered, rationally, in the medical media, we all could have been having a sensible discussion about terminology and wheat proteins and reactions etc … Instead, many people are going to think the whole GF ‘thing’ is a fiction. I’m getting mad all over again!!