Jump to content
This site uses cookies. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. More Info... ×

  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.



  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):

    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):

  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Healing In Older Celiacs Vs. Younger Celiacs

trents

By trents
in Related Issues & Disorders

Recommended Posts

trents Grand Master
trents
Posted

Say did you guys see the article in the most recent Celiac.com newsletter about studies comparing healing in older celiacs vs. younger celiacs after going gluten-free? If I understood it correctly, it said that both groups showed demonstrated substantial healing of the small bowel by the end of two years of gluten-free eating when endoscopies/biopsies were done. However, when more in depth histological studies were done, only the under 30 years age group showed substantial healing of the intersticial celluar damage, i.e., the spaces between the cells. The over 30 age group showed little if any healing at that level. The concern expressed in the review of the studies was that older gluten-free celiacs may still be experiencing liver damage and food sensitivity/allergy issues because of that. Did anyone else read the article. What was your take on it?

Steve

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):


AndreaB Contributor
AndreaB
Posted

I didn't read it either. Sounds really interesting.

gfp Enthusiast
gfp
Posted

Well spotted and posted.

I thiunk its really interesting because until something like this is identified noone can work on a way to repair or reduce it .

loraleena Contributor
loraleena
Posted

Yea, I saw this. It kind of worried me since I am 36 and found out last year. If only those bastards hadn't kept telling me I had IBS 9years ago.

swittenauer Enthusiast
swittenauer
Posted

I haven't seen the article. Where can I view it?

nikki-uk Enthusiast
nikki-uk
Posted

Here it is

https://www.celiac.com/st_prod.html?p_prodid=1351

mouse Enthusiast
mouse
Posted

I read it and found it very depressing. Hopefully I read it wrong. I was diagnosed at age 62 and am now 64. We had already figured and had been told that this is where I was going to end up at. BUT, I guess I don't want reminders. :ph34r:

Which would explain how my food allergies went sky high.

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):

Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):


jerseyangel Proficient
jerseyangel
Posted

I'm with you, Armetta!

I was finally diagnosed last year at age 49. By then I'd been sick for a good 20 years--and misdiagnosed and prescribed many unnecessary medicines.

There are so many things that I can no longer eat--and drugs that I'm allergic to--I truly hope that I have hit bottom, and will at least stay at this level, if not improve.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):


  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      128,385
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748
    Jenal
    Newest Member
    Jenal
    Joined
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.1k
    • Total Posts
      70.9k
  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):



  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):


  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • trents
      Negative biopsy and seeking doctor recs in Los Angeles

      By trents · Posted

      If you have been eating the gluten equivalent of 4-6 slices of wheat bread daily for say, 4 weeks, I think a repeat blood test would be valid.
    • englishbunny
      Negative biopsy and seeking doctor recs in Los Angeles

      By englishbunny · Posted

      it did include Total Immunoglobin A which was 135, and said to be in normal range. when i did the blood test in January I would say I was on a "light' gluten diet, but def not gluten free.  I didn't have any clue about the celiac thing then.  Since then I have been eating a tonne of gluten for the purpose of the endoscopy....so I'm debating just getting my blood test redone right away to see if it has changed so I'm not waiting another month...
    • trents
      Negative biopsy and seeking doctor recs in Los Angeles

      By trents · Posted

      Welcome to the forum, @englishbunny! Did your celiac panel include a test for "Total IGA"? That is a test for IGA deficiency. If you are IGA deficient, other IGA test resultls will likely be falsely low. Were you by any chance already practicing a reduced gluten free diet when the blood draw was done?
    • englishbunny
      Negative biopsy and seeking doctor recs in Los Angeles

      By englishbunny · Posted

      I'm upset & confused and really need help finding a new gastro who specializes in celiac in California.  Also will welcome any insights on my results. I tested with an isolated positive for deamidated IGA a few months ago (it was 124.3, all other values on celiac panel <1.0), I also have low ferritin and Hashimotos. Mild gastro symptoms which don't seem to get significantly worse with gluten but I can't really tell... my main issues being extreme fatigue and joint pain. The celiac panel was done by my endocrinologist to try and get to the bottom of my fatigue and I was shocked to have a positive result. Just got negative biposy result from endoscopy. Doctor only took two biopsies from small intestine (from an area that appeared red), and both are normal. Problem is his Physician's Assistant can't give me an answer whether I have celiac or not, or what possible reason I might have for having positive antibodies if I don't have it. She wants me to retest bloods in a month and says in the meantime to either "eat gluten or not, it's up to you, but your bloodwork won't be accurate if you don't" I asked if it could be I have early stage celiac so the damage is patchy and missed by only having two samples taken, and she said doctor would've seen damaged areas when performing endoscopy (?) and that it's a good sign if my whole intestine isn't damaged all over, so even if there is spotty damage I am fine.  This doesn't exactly seem satisfactory, and seems to be contrary to so much of the reading and research I have done. I haven't seen the doctor except at my endoscopy, and he was pretty arrogant and didn't take much time to talk. I can't see him or even talk to him for another month. I'm really confused about what I should do. I don't want to just "wait and see" if I have celiac and do real damage in the meantime. Because I know celiac is more that just 'not eating bread' and if I am going to make such a huge lifestyle adjustment I need an actual diagnosis. So in summary I want to find another doctor in CA, preferably Los Angeles but I don't care at this stage if they can do telehealth! I just need some real answers from someone who doesn't talk in riddles. So recommendations would be highly welcomed. I have Blue Shield CA insurance, loads of gastros in LA don’t take insurance at all 😣
    • trents
      Oats gluten free?

      By trents · Posted

      Okay, Lori, we can agree on the term "gluten-like". My concern here is that you and other celiacs who do experience celiac reactions to other grains besides wheat, barley and rye are trying to make this normative for the whole celiac community when it isn't. And using the term "gluten" to refer to these other grain proteins is going to be confusing to new celiacs trying to figure out what grains they actually do need to avoid and which they don't. Your experience is not normative so please don't proselytize as if it were.
×
×
  • Create New...