Justin Bieber Ditches Corona Beer for Omission in Response to Gluten Intolerance

On 10/31/2019 at 11:52 AM, Jefferson Adams said:

It's true that US labeling laws don't allow gluten-removed beers to be labeled "gluten-free." However, the Europeans have led the way on gluten-free standards and labeling for more than two decades now, always being at the forefront of technology. The beers are labeled gluten-free in Europe. They are most certainly gluten-free, and likely safe for people with celiac disease. The study you site has a tiny population size, and since two of the controls reacted to rice flour, the study should simply be disregarded. Interestingly, the data show that 90% of people tolerate gluten-removed beers just fine. The only controversy comes from the small number of people who claim not to tolerate such beers. Gluten-removed beers are not remotely controversial for the vast majority of people with celiac disease who drink beer.

 

Again, my  issue was not whether gluten-reduced beers are safe for celiacs (this is a controversial topic in the celiac community) but that you based your article on “The Blast” which is a celebrity and entertainment website.  

Open Original Shared Link

But since you brought the topic of Europeans being the leader of celiac disease research and gluten-reduced beers, please provide links to those European celiac research centers or published medical journals that show that gluten-reduced beers are safe for those with celiac disease even in a language other than English.  I am confident some of our members can help translate, if needed or we can download app translators.  

Thank you.  

This is pretty silly to report about.  with his previous drug and alcohol problems - he probably shouldn’t be drinking any kind of beer.  Maybe he wants them to sponsor a tour?  

On 11/1/2019 at 11:33 AM, Scott Adams said:

I’ve never gotten sick from it, and have been drinking it for years.

Well, we all know you are a sick puppy Scott!   Are you sure it doesn't affect you?  I wonder if you tried stopping it for a couple months if you'd feel different/better.  Sometimes we don't notice changes if they happen slowly.  Like in slight contamination over a period of time.  Just a thot.

On 10/31/2019 at 1:22 PM, Scott Adams said:

Open Original Shared Link here definitely has issues. Clearly when "two active-celiac disease patient samples gave responses to the rice flour extract" that was used as a control, you cannot then claim in the same study that the 3 out of 31 celiacs who reacted to gluten-removed beer is statistically more significant than the two who reacted to the rice flour, can you? Clearly there is an issue with how the study was set up and run.

• "Three active celiac disease patients showed a response to barley and the gluten-removed beer, and again, none of the non-celiac control subjects showed this reaction pattern"

If we can conclude after 90% of celiacs in the study DID NOT have a measurable reaction to gluten-removed beers, but because 3 might have (we really don't know what else these subjects were eating during this study, because it doesn't really talk about this) that gluten-removed beers are not safe, then can't we also conclude that rice flour is unsafe for celiacs, because "two active-celiac disease patient samples gave responses to the rice flour extract"?

Since the rice flour control used in this study produced similar antibody reactions as the gluten-removed beer (7% vs 10%), I don't think you can conclude anything from this study other than the subjects were not all eating a gluten-free diet while participating in the study, because rice is definitely gluten-free.

I think there is a bit of confusion about the study.  What they did is use blood from celiac disease patients who were all eating gluten at the time.  These are not blood samples from people who were on the gluten-free diet.  They then used those active celiac disease blood samples to test for antibody reactions to things like barley flour, gluten-free beer and gluten removed beers and rice flour.  The barley flour reaction was used to identify strong reactors to barley gluten.  A few people's blood had antibody reactions to rice flour also.  That doesn't  mean their blood reacting to barley fragments isn't important.  The study is trying to find a way of testing celiac disease patients antibody reaction to barley fragments  since the R5 ELISA test is not good at doing that detection.  The study showed that some celiac disease patients blood antibodies do react to gluten removed beers with an antibody response.  Not all of the celiac disease patients blood samples reacted, but some did.  So the conclusion should be that gluten removed beers are unsafe for some celiac disease people.  Some might be fine with it, but others are not.

The study shows that 90% of celiacs don’t react to gluten removed beers, but since the control in the study—the rice flour—was totally blown because a nearly identical number of participants showed a reaction to it, which is gluten-free, it doesn’t even show that. If you were to be generous and not throw out the results of an obviously flawed study entirely, you would, at the very least need to toss out the two positive rice flour results along with two of the positive gluten-removed beer results and you would be left with 1/27 who reacted to the gluten removed beer, or ~3%. You simply can’t ignore the issue with the controls, that’s why they are used.

On 10/31/2019 at 6:51 PM, NNowak said:

Thank you for all the information and the discussion on “gluten removed” labeling. I’m skeptical of any labels referring to gluten and ALWAYS look at the ingredients. The ignorance of servers who boldly state the distillation process removes the gluten in certain liquors is dangerous. For some reason the population seems to lose common sense when alcohol is the topic. If something is made from gluten containing grains, it will undoubtedly illicit an autoimmune response. Ultimately we are responsible for what we put in our mouths. Conversations like this are as valuable as research we do on our own. 

While I agree that everyone should read ingredient labels to determine what they are putting in their biome, you simply do not understand what gluten is and how a still/alambic works.  Your sentiment is clearly not on the side of SCIENCE because you haven't taken the time to educate yourself on the semi-complex process of distilling (and the tests that have been done on the end distillate).  I can't blame you too much, because until the past few years, finding complex information on the process of distilling was a closely guarded secret. Thankfully times have changed.  

On 10/31/2019 at 3:51 PM, NNowak said:

Thank you for all the information and the discussion on “gluten removed” labeling. I’m skeptical of any labels referring to gluten and ALWAYS look at the ingredients. The ignorance of servers who boldly state the distillation process removes the gluten in certain liquors is dangerous. For some reason the population seems to lose common sense when alcohol is the topic. If something is made from gluten containing grains, it will undoubtedly illicit an autoimmune response. Ultimately we are responsible for what we put in our mouths. Conversations like this are as valuable as research we do on our own. 

The vast majority of people with celiac disease who drink gluten-removed beers have no adverse reaction. People with celiac disease drink these beers regularly.

On 11/2/2019 at 10:56 AM, cyclinglady said:

I was not disputing the study.  I said that gluten-removed beers are a controversial topic within the celiac community.  I suggested that celiacs or NCGS patients follow the recommendations of celiac research centers or non-profit organizations who work with celiac research centers.  My link to one celiac organization was just one example, but you can find others.  If you can find one celiac research center or affiliated celiac disease non-profit organization that states that gluten-reduced beers are safe, then please provide the links.  I would really appreciate it.  

My dispute is that the author passed on an article based on a news feed where the source is questionable.  A site that promotes celebrities and entertainment, is not the best place to get health information in my personal opinion.  

Open Original Shared Link

It is unfortunate that most celiac disease studies concerning dietary issues are tiny and underfunded.    Even the original celiac study that helped determine FDA gluten free guidelines was tiny (less than 50 participants).  

 

The facts in the article are accurate. You can check Justin Bieber's Twitter feed for confirmation. 

You claim that "gluten-removed beers are a controversial topic within the celiac community." No, they are not. They are controversial among the small percentage of people who claim that they cannot tolerate these beers, and that the reason is that they must contain gluten. The problem is that there just isn't any evidence to support that. Gluten-removed beers are labeled as gluten-free in Europe, and they since those countries actually pay for the healthcare of their citizens, I'm guessing that they would be quick to notice any health-related issues. These beers are not controversial among celiacs in Europe from what I can see.

From the Omission web site:

GOVERNMENT DISCLAIMER

Beer fermented from barley, a grain containing gluten, and crafted to remove gluten. The gluten content of this beer cannot be verified, and this beer may contain gluten.

This is clearly a government required disclaimer based on using barley as an ingredient and doesn’t indicate that the beer actually contains any gluten. The elephant in the room about the study on gluten removed beers is the fact that around 88% of celiacs in the study did not test positive for any antibodies when they drank regular barley beer.