One of the challenges when talking about non-Celiac gluten sensitivities is the tests for Celiac itself. In order to avoid false negatives, one must eat significant amounts of gluten for an extended period of time. For some folks, it's just not worth it to experience vomiting, extreme cramping, etc. just to get a positive test result when they know they can avoid it by not eating certain foods. That said, they also can't claim to have Celiac ... so they call it a sensitivity. Is it accurate? Hard to say.
At the same time, I also haven't seen any evidence that eating gluten free is unquestionably a bad thing. Granted, too many folks eating "gluten free" replace it with sugary, processed crap. But many others simply eat whole foods - veggies, meat, etc. - that are naturally gluten free. I don't see anyone arguing that gluten is a necessary component of a well-rounded diet, so if someone chooses to eat gluten free, is it really a problem?
Of course, the entire study has been sensationalized by the media; the authors of the study definitely did not say definitevely that "gluten sensitivity is fake". If anything, they acknowledged that their results were unusual - everyone, whether on a high-gluten diet or a low-gluten diet - ended up feeling unwell once they were no longer on a low-FODMAP diet. The study also focused on a very specific population (those with IBS), rather than a sample reflective of the general population.
In a separate interview, the lead researcher had this to say:
Quote:
|
"There is definitely something going on," [Biesiekierski] told [Real Clear Science], "but true NCGS may only affect a very small number of people and may affect more extraintestinal symptoms than first thought. This will only be confirmed with an understanding of its mechanism."
|
(Source:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rosspome...may-not-exist/)
My emphasis added; note she acknowledges that non-Celiac gluten sensitivity may, in fact, exist. They don't know enough to say for sure one way or another. Which is why her final quote in that Forbes column is:
"Much, much more research is needed."