Recently, struggling to come up with food for Bumblebee, I couldn't help but wonder when we got to this point. And was immediately assaulted by the memory of sitting in a professionals office, discussing Bumblebee's reluctance to attend school and food issues and being told that she shouldn't be expected to eat the veggies and whole grains I make, since she doesn't have Celiac Disease she deserves "real food". And an interview with a nutritionist shortly after I was diagnosed with both Celiac Disease and Corn Allergy, tearfully explaining that there was NOTHING I could eat, and the kids needed food too...and being told that I couldn't deprive them of "real food".
Each time I was on overload, so I nodded, blinked away any tears threatening to fall, and agreed that my limited diet was intolerable for kids.
But I never thought to step back, narrow my eyes and ask what exactly they considered "Real Food"? What, exactly, is wrong with a gluten free diet that makes people think of it as "fake" food? Rice bread isn't any less valid than wheat bread...it just tastes different. Rice pasta, again, simply has a different texture and taste than 'regular' pasta. It's not fake. It's just made from a different grain.
Looking through gluten-free cookbooks always makes me shake my head. While I am in need of inspiration for nightly meals, I find that specific cookbooks for gluten free foods have a distinct focus on baking. Breads, cakes, cookies. Carbs. Of which we, as a society, get way too many of to begin with.
Real food. Is it cake? Pizza? Macaroni? And when did it get that way?
I look at last night's meal (which was a sort of quiche-filling poured over leftover pasta. Not gourmet, but tasty and chock full of spinach and pepper and onion, as well as protein from eggs) I wonder what ever possessed me to think that serving cereal or a sandwich to Bumblebee was somehow superior? A valid choice if she doesn't like the meal, sure. But more appropriate because it's "real" and has gluten and/or dairy plus corn?
What's happened to our priorities?
I'm exaggerating a bit. I've never really thought a sandwich was "superior" to the rest of the meal. But there's been that nugget of guilt. Poor Bumblebee. Poor Mr. Violets. They have to put up with fake food, when they could be eating...GLUTEN.
Well, the guilt is ending (er, well, okay...by ending I mean 'being hidden away and ignored to the best of my ability') right now.
Tonight's meal is rice and beans with salad. It's a meal offered on dozens of restaurant menus, and enjoyed by thousands of households in the american continents. Plural. There's nothing fake about it, even if I only serve avocado and no cheese or sour cream. In fact, I believe some would find it even more traditional that way.
Real food isn't about gluten, or dairy, or any other allergen. It's about food. It's about seeing your food, knowing where it came from, and enjoying it. It's about food that's approachable. Simple. Nourishing. It's the opposite of what you'd pull out of the Star Trek Enterprise holo-replicator mechanism. It's the good chocolate. (you know, the only kind I can safely eat that costs a fortune) It's old fashioned oats or Quinoa flakes. It's pure cane sugar. It's water instead of Kool Aid. It's food that formed on a farm, not in a laboratory, and grew from seeds that weren't GM. (at least, in my opinion)
Real food is a recurring theme on allergy boards. Missing, wishing, dreaming of "real food". But food without allergens IS real. It's valid. It's tasty. It's nourishing because of what IS in it, not lacking because of what's not.
And you know what? In many ways, it CAN be superior to the so called "real" of the Standard American Diet. Real Food is often gluten free. Why shouldn't it be?
Showing posts with label celiac. Show all posts
Showing posts with label celiac. Show all posts
Friday, July 08, 2011
Thursday, June 23, 2011
So...What do you eat?
Last week we started a Candida diet that was also (mostly) free of gluten, casein, corn, and a host of other smaller allergens.
The verdict? Success. And Mr. Violets is sick of salad.
In the world of food allergies, one question seems to arise more than any other. At least, when the subject of either corn or gluten is involved. That questions is..."What do you eat?" (said in a variety of tones ranging from pity to suspicion or outrage)
So here's a list of dinner dishes for a week's worth of meals.
Baked cod on a bed of spinach and onions. (3 thumbs up. Bumblebee declined to taste.)
Homemade 'quiche' (4 wavery thumbs up. It's better with some sort of cheese. Off the candida diet, we make two dishes, one with dairy cheese one with dairy free corny cheese.)
Chicken breast with mashed turnips and salad. (It's better than it sounds. 3 thumbs up, Bumblebee only gives a 4th thumb up for the salad. But she at least contemplated the turnips.)
Tuna casserole. (not gourmet, but we like it.)
Crepes with nut butter and soup.
Spaghetti soufflee
Omelets
There are a lot of eggs in there, but eggs are a good source of protein, calories and fat. And they're cheap, which goes a long ways in their favor. Next week, we're looking forward to Mr. Violet's diet including beans and sweet potatoes again...adding several potential delights to our menu.
We found that the second week was a bit harder than the first week. We wanted to revert to our old "make a starch and everyone chooses their own veggies and protein" cycle. And the heat wave that hit made our appetites wane. But we seem to be muddling through. Tonight's menu is stuffed squash for Mr. Violets and the girls; leftovers for me. Not bad; and could be made corn free if you have a safe source of ground beef. (or you could probably use lentils. They aren't listed on the candida free diet, and I haven't actually tried adding them back to my own diet...but I can't eat squash and am still deciding how well tomato sits.) While nothing we made was gourmet, and probably doesn't compete much with restaurant fare, it was homey and tasty and filling. What more can you ask for?
That it feed a whole family? Well, it did that, too. (Or it would have if Bumblebee were just a little less stubborn. But again, she tried and gets points for eating salad almost everynight.)
The verdict? Success. And Mr. Violets is sick of salad.
In the world of food allergies, one question seems to arise more than any other. At least, when the subject of either corn or gluten is involved. That questions is..."What do you eat?" (said in a variety of tones ranging from pity to suspicion or outrage)
So here's a list of dinner dishes for a week's worth of meals.
Baked cod on a bed of spinach and onions. (3 thumbs up. Bumblebee declined to taste.)
Homemade 'quiche' (4 wavery thumbs up. It's better with some sort of cheese. Off the candida diet, we make two dishes, one with dairy cheese one with dairy free corny cheese.)
Chicken breast with mashed turnips and salad. (It's better than it sounds. 3 thumbs up, Bumblebee only gives a 4th thumb up for the salad. But she at least contemplated the turnips.)
Tuna casserole. (not gourmet, but we like it.)
Crepes with nut butter and soup.
Spaghetti soufflee
Omelets
There are a lot of eggs in there, but eggs are a good source of protein, calories and fat. And they're cheap, which goes a long ways in their favor. Next week, we're looking forward to Mr. Violet's diet including beans and sweet potatoes again...adding several potential delights to our menu.
We found that the second week was a bit harder than the first week. We wanted to revert to our old "make a starch and everyone chooses their own veggies and protein" cycle. And the heat wave that hit made our appetites wane. But we seem to be muddling through. Tonight's menu is stuffed squash for Mr. Violets and the girls; leftovers for me. Not bad; and could be made corn free if you have a safe source of ground beef. (or you could probably use lentils. They aren't listed on the candida free diet, and I haven't actually tried adding them back to my own diet...but I can't eat squash and am still deciding how well tomato sits.) While nothing we made was gourmet, and probably doesn't compete much with restaurant fare, it was homey and tasty and filling. What more can you ask for?
That it feed a whole family? Well, it did that, too. (Or it would have if Bumblebee were just a little less stubborn. But again, she tried and gets points for eating salad almost everynight.)
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Is it safe to go allergen free?
There's a new slew of "all in your head" diagnosis coming out. First up, doctors have supposedly identified an eating disorder known as orthorexia. Essentially, sufferers believe that certain foods are pure evil and begin to restrict their diet to the point that it is unhealthy and dangerous.
Next up is a spin-off of anorexia. People with eating disorders begin to blame gluten or other food allergies as the reason that they can't eat what is put before them, or offered at parties, or why they aren't eating at social functions.
"Whether confirmed as celiac disease through blood tests or self-diagnosed as intolerance...the condition requires treatment by way of a highly restrictive diet. ... it also requires monitoring trace elements of protein present in foods or its preparation becomes necessary lest upset stomachs, painful GI tracts or other debilitating symptoms strike." (emphasis mine)
In the article I site above, this paragraph disturbs me even more than this upsetting practice. Because it indicates that even if one has a documented, medically rational reason for complete and total avoidance...the worst that can happen is a stomach ache (the word debilitating is in there, but I doubt most people really comprehend how debilitating physical GI symptoms can feel) The truth is that with the (albeit relatively rare) true IgE food allergies, which are NOT limited to the top 8, even a small crumb can cause anaphylaxis. If a peanut falls on the salad, and the cook immediately fishes it out and sends the salad out to a nut allergic individual, their throat can swell shut before the rest of the party is done commenting on how delicious the first course looks.
If someone with celiac accepts a plate with toast on it, and simply removes the toast and brushes off the crumbs...not only will they suffer from debilitating stomach issues for a few days, their intestines will sustain physical damage that can be viewed and verified by endoscopy. This damage leads to malnutrition, along with a host of other related problems and, worst case scenario, even cancer.
I don't doubt that there are some people who are afraid of food for unhealthy reasons. Nor do I doubt that there are people with unhealthy obsessions about food, or avoiding too many foods. But is the best way to address that fear to label restrictive eating as a psychiatric disorder? Or is it to do more research?
I firmly believe that most people seeking a restrictive diet are motivated by physical symptoms. Maybe they have an intolerance or allergy. Maybe their bodies are just fed up with soda and fried foods. Maybe they just need a little help balancing nutrition. Regardless, identifying the motivation should be the first step. And then rule out causes.
And if an individual is adament about avoiding foods, then it seems likely that they may not need to reintroduce those foods. Instead, therapy or medical support should focus on identifying what one *can* eat. And instituting a balanced diet. So many people these days do not know how to cook, or find vegetables...or what to do with them when they do, that if they decide to give up gluten and nightshades they feel like they're stuck with white rice and carrots. There are a host of little known veggies out there...and others that are just scary looking.
Maybe the orthorexic would be more adventurous if they learned how to prepare and eat an artichoke, a salad, their own dressing or sauces. Those with anorexia and other eating disorders obviously do need counseling toward reaching a healthy body image. But it might be easier if any digestive problems (like bloating, which can make a teenager feel inexplicably "fat") were addressed at the same time.
At any rate, when someone has a valid reason for total avoidance, their choices need to be respected. And they will be less likely to obsess over their food choices if they weren't concerned with mental health labels. At least in the long run. It seems reasonable and healthy to me for someone newly diagnosed to spend a little time obsessing about food, since they quite likely have been told to drastically change their way of looking at food.
As someone with a unique allergy, I don't want to be blown off and made sick or worse because of a 'trend' in 'it's all in your head' diagnoses. As the mother of a food allergy sufferer, I don't want her labeled as eating disordered just because a few of her peers use the word 'allergy' inappropriately. I see her eat a wide variety of fruits, veggies, carbs and protein every day. What we don't eat doesn't matter nearly as much as what we DO eat. And I sincerely hope the medical practitioners diagnosing these conditions, as well as the laymen labeling them, acknowledge the difference.
Next up is a spin-off of anorexia. People with eating disorders begin to blame gluten or other food allergies as the reason that they can't eat what is put before them, or offered at parties, or why they aren't eating at social functions.
"Whether confirmed as celiac disease through blood tests or self-diagnosed as intolerance...the condition requires treatment by way of a highly restrictive diet. ... it also requires monitoring trace elements of protein present in foods or its preparation becomes necessary lest upset stomachs, painful GI tracts or other debilitating symptoms strike." (emphasis mine)
In the article I site above, this paragraph disturbs me even more than this upsetting practice. Because it indicates that even if one has a documented, medically rational reason for complete and total avoidance...the worst that can happen is a stomach ache (the word debilitating is in there, but I doubt most people really comprehend how debilitating physical GI symptoms can feel) The truth is that with the (albeit relatively rare) true IgE food allergies, which are NOT limited to the top 8, even a small crumb can cause anaphylaxis. If a peanut falls on the salad, and the cook immediately fishes it out and sends the salad out to a nut allergic individual, their throat can swell shut before the rest of the party is done commenting on how delicious the first course looks.
If someone with celiac accepts a plate with toast on it, and simply removes the toast and brushes off the crumbs...not only will they suffer from debilitating stomach issues for a few days, their intestines will sustain physical damage that can be viewed and verified by endoscopy. This damage leads to malnutrition, along with a host of other related problems and, worst case scenario, even cancer.
I don't doubt that there are some people who are afraid of food for unhealthy reasons. Nor do I doubt that there are people with unhealthy obsessions about food, or avoiding too many foods. But is the best way to address that fear to label restrictive eating as a psychiatric disorder? Or is it to do more research?
I firmly believe that most people seeking a restrictive diet are motivated by physical symptoms. Maybe they have an intolerance or allergy. Maybe their bodies are just fed up with soda and fried foods. Maybe they just need a little help balancing nutrition. Regardless, identifying the motivation should be the first step. And then rule out causes.
And if an individual is adament about avoiding foods, then it seems likely that they may not need to reintroduce those foods. Instead, therapy or medical support should focus on identifying what one *can* eat. And instituting a balanced diet. So many people these days do not know how to cook, or find vegetables...or what to do with them when they do, that if they decide to give up gluten and nightshades they feel like they're stuck with white rice and carrots. There are a host of little known veggies out there...and others that are just scary looking.
Maybe the orthorexic would be more adventurous if they learned how to prepare and eat an artichoke, a salad, their own dressing or sauces. Those with anorexia and other eating disorders obviously do need counseling toward reaching a healthy body image. But it might be easier if any digestive problems (like bloating, which can make a teenager feel inexplicably "fat") were addressed at the same time.
At any rate, when someone has a valid reason for total avoidance, their choices need to be respected. And they will be less likely to obsess over their food choices if they weren't concerned with mental health labels. At least in the long run. It seems reasonable and healthy to me for someone newly diagnosed to spend a little time obsessing about food, since they quite likely have been told to drastically change their way of looking at food.
As someone with a unique allergy, I don't want to be blown off and made sick or worse because of a 'trend' in 'it's all in your head' diagnoses. As the mother of a food allergy sufferer, I don't want her labeled as eating disordered just because a few of her peers use the word 'allergy' inappropriately. I see her eat a wide variety of fruits, veggies, carbs and protein every day. What we don't eat doesn't matter nearly as much as what we DO eat. And I sincerely hope the medical practitioners diagnosing these conditions, as well as the laymen labeling them, acknowledge the difference.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Note to self: do not move to Chicago.
Or, if it's ever necessary, plan to homeschool.
No, it's not the academic values, or the teacher quality, or the test scores. It's nothing to do with the lovely folk who live there. My problem with Chicago?
Some schools have a mandatory "purchase lunch here" policy. Of course, there is the standard "medical conditions are exempt" caveat.
My questions: How must the medical conditions be documented? And what constitutes a worthy medical excuse? Diabetes, food allergies, Celiac Disease...migraines? IBS? Lactose intolerance? Kosher requirements? Vegetarian or vegan choices? Behavior issues? Autism?
If they require a simple doctor's note, they usually require it every single year. And sometimes a new one midyear when some policy or another changes. It sounds reasonable to get your medical professional to write out a note for you. But doctors seem to HATE this policy. They have better things to do than take a 15 minute appointment to write a note stating that a medical condition has not been outgrown and that the parents, not the school administrators who have never met your child, should decide what, exactly, can and can not pass your child's teeth.
And then there's the simple fact that some medical conditions, like IBS, don't require one specific diet. It's an ongoing balancing act...and one day's requirements may be completely counter to another day's. Control over diet is critical to the overall health of someone with severe IBS or chronic digestive issues...and I guarantee that by High School; digestive concerns are the last thing any child wants to discuss over lunch.
Which brings up my next concern. If bagged lunches are banned, then anyone who brings a bagged lunch will be under scrutiny. The third degree can come about whether they are the best of friends, mortal enemies or complete strangers. Why did you bring a lunch? Why are you exempt from the hard and fast rules? What are you eating...Why are you different?
It's hard enough to be different. To be unique. And now some schools insist that the unique individuals get a doctor to document their needs and then go around in obvious defiance of the school rule because they are exempt? This sends the wrong message.
I don't know about other kids with food allergies. But mine wants to slip just under the radar. She wants to bring enough chocolate chip cookies to share so that she isn't 'different'. She wants to donate a normal fruit platter, or be in charge of the crackers, or offer safe snacks that taste and appear 'normal' to her friends and schoolmates. She wants to be safe and cocooned in her food world...but she doesn't want anyone else to question it or tease her about it.
I'm sure there are kids who don't really care where their lunch comes from, or what's in it, as long as it tastes good. And parents who are happy to let the school make good decisions. There are plenty of families not paying any attention to the ratio of doughnuts and chips and cookies to fresh produce consumed in the household. But taking control by removing choice from consumers (You must purchase lunch here, no outside food in a school where children are required by a court of law to attend) doesn't solve anything.
I say ban soda if you have to ban something (it makes a sticky mess when spilled, and the way it sprays after being shaken up in a backpack all day can make a custodian cry), provide plenty of healthy options at the school...and turn a blind eye to the 'junk food' as long as it isn't consumed during class hours. Continue encouraging and teaching about good choices, start a garden (They won't be interested the first year, so give it 5 years) and eventually kids will start to make better and better choices. They have to be the ones to choose in the long run, we have to trust them with their own health. Which means, we start by trusting them with their own lunch.
Or, if it's ever necessary, plan to homeschool.
No, it's not the academic values, or the teacher quality, or the test scores. It's nothing to do with the lovely folk who live there. My problem with Chicago?
Some schools have a mandatory "purchase lunch here" policy. Of course, there is the standard "medical conditions are exempt" caveat.
My questions: How must the medical conditions be documented? And what constitutes a worthy medical excuse? Diabetes, food allergies, Celiac Disease...migraines? IBS? Lactose intolerance? Kosher requirements? Vegetarian or vegan choices? Behavior issues? Autism?
If they require a simple doctor's note, they usually require it every single year. And sometimes a new one midyear when some policy or another changes. It sounds reasonable to get your medical professional to write out a note for you. But doctors seem to HATE this policy. They have better things to do than take a 15 minute appointment to write a note stating that a medical condition has not been outgrown and that the parents, not the school administrators who have never met your child, should decide what, exactly, can and can not pass your child's teeth.
And then there's the simple fact that some medical conditions, like IBS, don't require one specific diet. It's an ongoing balancing act...and one day's requirements may be completely counter to another day's. Control over diet is critical to the overall health of someone with severe IBS or chronic digestive issues...and I guarantee that by High School; digestive concerns are the last thing any child wants to discuss over lunch.
Which brings up my next concern. If bagged lunches are banned, then anyone who brings a bagged lunch will be under scrutiny. The third degree can come about whether they are the best of friends, mortal enemies or complete strangers. Why did you bring a lunch? Why are you exempt from the hard and fast rules? What are you eating...Why are you different?
It's hard enough to be different. To be unique. And now some schools insist that the unique individuals get a doctor to document their needs and then go around in obvious defiance of the school rule because they are exempt? This sends the wrong message.
I don't know about other kids with food allergies. But mine wants to slip just under the radar. She wants to bring enough chocolate chip cookies to share so that she isn't 'different'. She wants to donate a normal fruit platter, or be in charge of the crackers, or offer safe snacks that taste and appear 'normal' to her friends and schoolmates. She wants to be safe and cocooned in her food world...but she doesn't want anyone else to question it or tease her about it.
I'm sure there are kids who don't really care where their lunch comes from, or what's in it, as long as it tastes good. And parents who are happy to let the school make good decisions. There are plenty of families not paying any attention to the ratio of doughnuts and chips and cookies to fresh produce consumed in the household. But taking control by removing choice from consumers (You must purchase lunch here, no outside food in a school where children are required by a court of law to attend) doesn't solve anything.
I say ban soda if you have to ban something (it makes a sticky mess when spilled, and the way it sprays after being shaken up in a backpack all day can make a custodian cry), provide plenty of healthy options at the school...and turn a blind eye to the 'junk food' as long as it isn't consumed during class hours. Continue encouraging and teaching about good choices, start a garden (They won't be interested the first year, so give it 5 years) and eventually kids will start to make better and better choices. They have to be the ones to choose in the long run, we have to trust them with their own health. Which means, we start by trusting them with their own lunch.
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
Gluten Free idiots
Gee. Just when you thought things were settling down and the Gluten Free community was getting some respect, a famous chef comes out of the closet with his REAL feelings on the subject.
I won't repost his full condemnation. You can read it at ABC. Or here. Or here.
It's obvious this guy has anger management issues.
But the gist of the post isn't generic anger or irritation. He's not just angry. He's mad enough to do something. And dangerous enough to apparently smile while poisoning anyone with Celiac who walks through his door.
The worst part is...he seems educated. He knows what gluten is. He states that he will reassure gluten free diners that their food is gluten free, and then he will knowingly serve them homemade high-gluten pasta (extra gluten in dough can improve texture), and take their compliments.
What he doesn't realize is that Celiac disease is not anaphylaxis. It doesn't strike immediately. The gluten has to hit the intestines before it does it's damage. And different people react differently.
Some might have no symptoms at all. Some poor bloke could eat weekly at this restaurant, assured that the pasta is gluten free, and die from intestinal cancer. Because of the damage caused by the gluten he unknowingly ingested. Others will have their romantic night out spoiled...just about the time they're settling in for a movie, or bed. Or possibly not until tomorrow morning's early meeting that can't be missed.
Yes, grains have been a part of the human diet for hundreds of years. And Celiac has existed for just as long (there are reports in the Bible of wasting diseases that are suspected cases of Celiac disease. That means it's at least 2000 years old.)
But the sanity of a gluten free diet isn't the question. Any individual in America has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We have the right to protect our lives the way we see fit. (By pursuing whatever diet...medically proven or fad...that we believe will be most suitable to our needs) We have the right to CHOOSE what we eat. Now, we don't have to choose to eat in restaurants. But, if we do, we have the right to know what exactly they are putting in the food if we choose to ask. And we have the right to pursue happiness. Some chef who has decided that a medical diagnosis of Celiac Disease is ridiculous and therefore derails attempts to live a normal life within the constraints of a medically restricted diet interferes with our right to pursue happiness.
In fact, he could cause irreprable harm. Not just to a person's health (eventually, there is an exposure that you really don't come back all the way from) but to their psyche. If he's assuring a gluten free consumer that they received a gluten free meal, while they are developing symptoms, they will blame the symptoms on something else. Like nerves, or eating out in general (the stress or the airborne particles) or kissing their significant other. A well placed reaction can lead to a fight between even the most understanding of spouses. Just because it's disappointing to have well made plans go astray for bathroom access.
I don't think this man is alone in thinking people following a gluten free diet are "idiots". (liberal hippie idiots, in fact) And that's the real danger. I've seen the poker face that slides over someone's face when I clarify that no, we don't make exceptions for parties. No, we don't make exceptions for really good pizza or really expensive cookies. It's all or nothing for our family. Mr. Violets and Bumblebee eat all the gluten they want outside of the home and ask for no accomodation. Penguin and I eat none. At all. Period.
The reactions are miserable and it sends the wrong message. Some people think the diet is too restrictive. I think that it's only restrictive when there are people we can't trust to respect our choices and physical needs. And statements like the ones made by Chef Cardone make those of us with dietary needs feel that we can't trust others, even ones who seem supportive.
I won't repost his full condemnation. You can read it at ABC. Or here. Or here.
It's obvious this guy has anger management issues.
But the gist of the post isn't generic anger or irritation. He's not just angry. He's mad enough to do something. And dangerous enough to apparently smile while poisoning anyone with Celiac who walks through his door.
The worst part is...he seems educated. He knows what gluten is. He states that he will reassure gluten free diners that their food is gluten free, and then he will knowingly serve them homemade high-gluten pasta (extra gluten in dough can improve texture), and take their compliments.
What he doesn't realize is that Celiac disease is not anaphylaxis. It doesn't strike immediately. The gluten has to hit the intestines before it does it's damage. And different people react differently.
Some might have no symptoms at all. Some poor bloke could eat weekly at this restaurant, assured that the pasta is gluten free, and die from intestinal cancer. Because of the damage caused by the gluten he unknowingly ingested. Others will have their romantic night out spoiled...just about the time they're settling in for a movie, or bed. Or possibly not until tomorrow morning's early meeting that can't be missed.
Yes, grains have been a part of the human diet for hundreds of years. And Celiac has existed for just as long (there are reports in the Bible of wasting diseases that are suspected cases of Celiac disease. That means it's at least 2000 years old.)
But the sanity of a gluten free diet isn't the question. Any individual in America has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We have the right to protect our lives the way we see fit. (By pursuing whatever diet...medically proven or fad...that we believe will be most suitable to our needs) We have the right to CHOOSE what we eat. Now, we don't have to choose to eat in restaurants. But, if we do, we have the right to know what exactly they are putting in the food if we choose to ask. And we have the right to pursue happiness. Some chef who has decided that a medical diagnosis of Celiac Disease is ridiculous and therefore derails attempts to live a normal life within the constraints of a medically restricted diet interferes with our right to pursue happiness.
In fact, he could cause irreprable harm. Not just to a person's health (eventually, there is an exposure that you really don't come back all the way from) but to their psyche. If he's assuring a gluten free consumer that they received a gluten free meal, while they are developing symptoms, they will blame the symptoms on something else. Like nerves, or eating out in general (the stress or the airborne particles) or kissing their significant other. A well placed reaction can lead to a fight between even the most understanding of spouses. Just because it's disappointing to have well made plans go astray for bathroom access.
I don't think this man is alone in thinking people following a gluten free diet are "idiots". (liberal hippie idiots, in fact) And that's the real danger. I've seen the poker face that slides over someone's face when I clarify that no, we don't make exceptions for parties. No, we don't make exceptions for really good pizza or really expensive cookies. It's all or nothing for our family. Mr. Violets and Bumblebee eat all the gluten they want outside of the home and ask for no accomodation. Penguin and I eat none. At all. Period.
The reactions are miserable and it sends the wrong message. Some people think the diet is too restrictive. I think that it's only restrictive when there are people we can't trust to respect our choices and physical needs. And statements like the ones made by Chef Cardone make those of us with dietary needs feel that we can't trust others, even ones who seem supportive.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
I love it when dinner goes surprisingly well.
Tonight's plan was to finally make that tuna noodle casserole Penguin was too sick for last night. (Friday is casserole night; and this week it was going to be Thursday because of rehearsal but everyone got sick.)
This is a meal that will feed Mr Violets, myself and Penguin. Bumblebee will eat the noodles with a bit of cheese, if I save the noodles before assembling. Sometimes. Other times she makes faces at the dinner table and licks her veggies until her toast is ready. Yes, she's a bit old for that kind of behavior. But since it's an improvement and we can see the visual struggle she goes through not to throw a full out tantrum...it's a compromise we live with. Most of the time.
Anyways. Back to my story.
I started with the onion. Chopped it up and started carmelizing it on the stove. (I'm not very good at this part...I usually charcoalize bits and soften bits and brown bits. But I didn't do too bad tonight.) Then I rinsed out the spinach. Then I discovered we were out of peas, so I decided that tonight's experiment would be to add peppers.
Bell peppers are an excellent source of vitamin C, and since the kids both have an exceptionally nasty case of the flu vitamin C sounds like a good plan.
The water was boiling by now, so I opened the cupboard to pull out the pasta.
I found spice cake mix for making lunch 'muffins'.
I found spaghetti.
I found the Trader Joe's brand rice spaghetti my husband bought by accident and Bumblebee didn't like because it's thinner than Tinkyada and doesn't hold up to overcooking as well.
I found an extra bottle of grapeseed oil, the mint tea bag I keep up there as protection against food moths and a mysterious curly ribbon.
Drat.
Then I remembered telling myself to write "TJ--corkscrew pasta" on the list last time I made pasta. Before I got distracted by having to play referee and Mr Violet's arrival home.
Double drat.
I looked at the softening onions, the casserole dish with spinach and bell peppers and the boiling water. I furrowed my brow. I looked at the spaghetti in my hand and thought "But, spaghetti and tuna just sounds...gross. It's...wrong."
Then Penguin called out, and I answered.
"Mommy, if it's not too much trouble, could I have rice and beans for dinner? I think there's leftovers. And then you and Bumblebee can have mac and cheese I guess." (This is a big sacrifice. Penguin hates when the rest of us have mac and cheese because she can't eat it. But she's sick, she knows her sister is sick and she wanted to do something nice for her.)
I looked at the casserole dish again, and let the wheels in my brain turn, vaguely a recipe for savory noodle kugel I once read about. I assessed my options...and made the spaghetti. We weren't going to eat it as spaghetti anyways. Well, I might. The kids and my husband will continue to hem and haw and choose cereal if we're out of Tinkyada. (Ironically, they prefer the TJ corkscrews, though.)
Then I cubed up teensy tiny cubes of cheese. I didn't feel like grating it.
I beat 2 eggs. I probably could have beaten 3, but I was just experimenting at that point. I really didn't want tuna with spaghetti, I didn't want beans with all those veggies tonight, and I did want a protein.
I mixed it all together. Added a ladle full of veggie broth. Stuffed it in the oven and let it bake for half an hour while I refreshed water bottles, redosed everyone on medecine and started Penguin's leftover rice and beans on the back burner.
I ended up with a meal that fed 3; just as planned. It just didn't feed the 3 that I expected it to feed. And Bumblebee wasn't nearly as thrilled with my concoction as Penguin tends to enjoy regular casserole.
So it's a definite make again meal. Maybe next time I'll even try it with an extra egg or two and no cheese. But, I like the cheese. It added extra pockets of creamy flavor. It wasn't a 5 star meal. It wouldn't earn any acclaim.
But it was tasty and free of corn, gluten, nuts and dye. What more can one ask for in a meal?
Tonight's plan was to finally make that tuna noodle casserole Penguin was too sick for last night. (Friday is casserole night; and this week it was going to be Thursday because of rehearsal but everyone got sick.)
This is a meal that will feed Mr Violets, myself and Penguin. Bumblebee will eat the noodles with a bit of cheese, if I save the noodles before assembling. Sometimes. Other times she makes faces at the dinner table and licks her veggies until her toast is ready. Yes, she's a bit old for that kind of behavior. But since it's an improvement and we can see the visual struggle she goes through not to throw a full out tantrum...it's a compromise we live with. Most of the time.
Anyways. Back to my story.
I started with the onion. Chopped it up and started carmelizing it on the stove. (I'm not very good at this part...I usually charcoalize bits and soften bits and brown bits. But I didn't do too bad tonight.) Then I rinsed out the spinach. Then I discovered we were out of peas, so I decided that tonight's experiment would be to add peppers.
Bell peppers are an excellent source of vitamin C, and since the kids both have an exceptionally nasty case of the flu vitamin C sounds like a good plan.
The water was boiling by now, so I opened the cupboard to pull out the pasta.
I found spice cake mix for making lunch 'muffins'.
I found spaghetti.
I found the Trader Joe's brand rice spaghetti my husband bought by accident and Bumblebee didn't like because it's thinner than Tinkyada and doesn't hold up to overcooking as well.
I found an extra bottle of grapeseed oil, the mint tea bag I keep up there as protection against food moths and a mysterious curly ribbon.
Drat.
Then I remembered telling myself to write "TJ--corkscrew pasta" on the list last time I made pasta. Before I got distracted by having to play referee and Mr Violet's arrival home.
Double drat.
I looked at the softening onions, the casserole dish with spinach and bell peppers and the boiling water. I furrowed my brow. I looked at the spaghetti in my hand and thought "But, spaghetti and tuna just sounds...gross. It's...wrong."
Then Penguin called out, and I answered.
"Mommy, if it's not too much trouble, could I have rice and beans for dinner? I think there's leftovers. And then you and Bumblebee can have mac and cheese I guess." (This is a big sacrifice. Penguin hates when the rest of us have mac and cheese because she can't eat it. But she's sick, she knows her sister is sick and she wanted to do something nice for her.)
I looked at the casserole dish again, and let the wheels in my brain turn, vaguely a recipe for savory noodle kugel I once read about. I assessed my options...and made the spaghetti. We weren't going to eat it as spaghetti anyways. Well, I might. The kids and my husband will continue to hem and haw and choose cereal if we're out of Tinkyada. (Ironically, they prefer the TJ corkscrews, though.)
Then I cubed up teensy tiny cubes of cheese. I didn't feel like grating it.
I beat 2 eggs. I probably could have beaten 3, but I was just experimenting at that point. I really didn't want tuna with spaghetti, I didn't want beans with all those veggies tonight, and I did want a protein.
I mixed it all together. Added a ladle full of veggie broth. Stuffed it in the oven and let it bake for half an hour while I refreshed water bottles, redosed everyone on medecine and started Penguin's leftover rice and beans on the back burner.
I ended up with a meal that fed 3; just as planned. It just didn't feed the 3 that I expected it to feed. And Bumblebee wasn't nearly as thrilled with my concoction as Penguin tends to enjoy regular casserole.
So it's a definite make again meal. Maybe next time I'll even try it with an extra egg or two and no cheese. But, I like the cheese. It added extra pockets of creamy flavor. It wasn't a 5 star meal. It wouldn't earn any acclaim.
But it was tasty and free of corn, gluten, nuts and dye. What more can one ask for in a meal?
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Halloween Horrors
It's that time of year, again. My sewing machine has been singing, cloth snippets sprinkle the floor, and everyone checks clothes piles for pins before snatching them off the sofa or lounging over them. (A nasty habit I discourage, growl about, snap over yet never quite manage to eradicate)
Costumes have taken shape. Plans are made to decorate the front yard (although I'm not so sure the cobwebs will make it out...) and the excitement surrounding trick or treating is beginning to build.
School parties are also being planned, and the buzz on all the parenting with food allergy boards centers on the challenge of preparing appealing treats that the kids will enjoy.
Unfortunately, although we've all read and raved over "The Unhealthy Truth", I see that it just hasn't been taken to heart by many.
In the face of adversity...and potential tears or disappointment...the worst in us comes out. Parents who spring for organic milk, hormone free meat, and all natural juice are stocking their cupboards with vibrant sprinkles, frighteningly neon chewy candies, bright lollipops and other chemical experiments. Favorite ghoul goodies of the year include crispy rice treats, made with marshmallows (corn syrup, blue dye and powdered sugar), crisped rice cereal, margarine and lots of sugar, colored with bottled coloring or decorated with canned frosting (more corn syrup and several preservatives and artificial flavoring compounds) and food coloring gels; clear cups filled with artificially vibrant colors of gelatin decorated to look like monster heads, and of course homemade cookies and cupcakes with monstrous amounts of tinted icing.
These goodies can be made without gluten, or dairy, or nuts. They are free of the top 8 allergens and sometimes even a few more. They can delight kids who eat the evil eight on a daily basis, while allowing our own necessarily deprived kids feel like one of the bunch.
It's lonely having allergies that preclude even those decorations. Although, I'm happy for the excited parents and the smiling recipients.
Unfortunately, I can't help but wonder what the long term trade off is.
Artificial colors trigger major migraines in my oldest. Studies show that they cause hyperactive activity in children not diagnosed with ADHD. They are a neurological stimulant. And certain ones are linked to cancer in laboratory animals.
And they don't even have any redeeming nutritional flavor. And, as petrochemicals derived from coal tar, they're bad for the environment to boot.
Halloween isn't just a once a year, rare treat excuse for a food fest. It's the gateway to 3 months full of food related activities. As we finish off the Trick or Treat leftovers, we'll start in on Friendship Feasts, winter wonderlands, and ending with Valentines. Then a short break before spring and summer parties. More sugar, more food coloring to cover the absence of allergens.
As we drift farther into the year away from 'candy day' we tell ourselves that we're cutting back. But in reality, Halloween is the setback day. We make an allowance for this one "special day" of sugar and sweet poisons, then we simply spend the next several months making less bad choices, remembering how much junk we sent coursing through our brains and intestines to celebrate the spirits...and congratulate ourselves on comparative restraint.
My kids know that food colorings aren't a special treat. They'll be not only content, but giddy over a few chocolate bars and some Yummy Earth Lollipops, supplemented with silly bandz.
Of course, they are blessed with an immediate reaction. They can look at a confection and weigh it's tantalizing taste with tonight's pain, and although I recognize the maturity involved it breaks my heart to see them struggle.
Unfortunately, this is the time of year when dye triggered reactions or 'allergies' are the loneliest. As I bond with other food allergy moms, I'm still the odd man out...but even if I COULD give my kids that stuff, I like to think I wouldn't want to. I realize that it would be a slippery slope, one I'm glad not to have to navigate.
Meanwhile, we'll enjoy the finer points of Halloween. The harvest festivals, the scarecrows and pumpkin carving, the costumes and spooky decorations. We'll bake cookies, and squash, and put away the air conditioner. We'll turn on the porch light and sip cocoa. And the kids will tumble into bed, having survived the toughest food allergy holiday of the year.
Costumes have taken shape. Plans are made to decorate the front yard (although I'm not so sure the cobwebs will make it out...) and the excitement surrounding trick or treating is beginning to build.
School parties are also being planned, and the buzz on all the parenting with food allergy boards centers on the challenge of preparing appealing treats that the kids will enjoy.
Unfortunately, although we've all read and raved over "The Unhealthy Truth", I see that it just hasn't been taken to heart by many.
In the face of adversity...and potential tears or disappointment...the worst in us comes out. Parents who spring for organic milk, hormone free meat, and all natural juice are stocking their cupboards with vibrant sprinkles, frighteningly neon chewy candies, bright lollipops and other chemical experiments. Favorite ghoul goodies of the year include crispy rice treats, made with marshmallows (corn syrup, blue dye and powdered sugar), crisped rice cereal, margarine and lots of sugar, colored with bottled coloring or decorated with canned frosting (more corn syrup and several preservatives and artificial flavoring compounds) and food coloring gels; clear cups filled with artificially vibrant colors of gelatin decorated to look like monster heads, and of course homemade cookies and cupcakes with monstrous amounts of tinted icing.
These goodies can be made without gluten, or dairy, or nuts. They are free of the top 8 allergens and sometimes even a few more. They can delight kids who eat the evil eight on a daily basis, while allowing our own necessarily deprived kids feel like one of the bunch.
It's lonely having allergies that preclude even those decorations. Although, I'm happy for the excited parents and the smiling recipients.
Unfortunately, I can't help but wonder what the long term trade off is.
Artificial colors trigger major migraines in my oldest. Studies show that they cause hyperactive activity in children not diagnosed with ADHD. They are a neurological stimulant. And certain ones are linked to cancer in laboratory animals.
And they don't even have any redeeming nutritional flavor. And, as petrochemicals derived from coal tar, they're bad for the environment to boot.
Halloween isn't just a once a year, rare treat excuse for a food fest. It's the gateway to 3 months full of food related activities. As we finish off the Trick or Treat leftovers, we'll start in on Friendship Feasts, winter wonderlands, and ending with Valentines. Then a short break before spring and summer parties. More sugar, more food coloring to cover the absence of allergens.
As we drift farther into the year away from 'candy day' we tell ourselves that we're cutting back. But in reality, Halloween is the setback day. We make an allowance for this one "special day" of sugar and sweet poisons, then we simply spend the next several months making less bad choices, remembering how much junk we sent coursing through our brains and intestines to celebrate the spirits...and congratulate ourselves on comparative restraint.
My kids know that food colorings aren't a special treat. They'll be not only content, but giddy over a few chocolate bars and some Yummy Earth Lollipops, supplemented with silly bandz.
Of course, they are blessed with an immediate reaction. They can look at a confection and weigh it's tantalizing taste with tonight's pain, and although I recognize the maturity involved it breaks my heart to see them struggle.
Unfortunately, this is the time of year when dye triggered reactions or 'allergies' are the loneliest. As I bond with other food allergy moms, I'm still the odd man out...but even if I COULD give my kids that stuff, I like to think I wouldn't want to. I realize that it would be a slippery slope, one I'm glad not to have to navigate.
Meanwhile, we'll enjoy the finer points of Halloween. The harvest festivals, the scarecrows and pumpkin carving, the costumes and spooky decorations. We'll bake cookies, and squash, and put away the air conditioner. We'll turn on the porch light and sip cocoa. And the kids will tumble into bed, having survived the toughest food allergy holiday of the year.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Baking free
No gluten. No dairy. No corn.
After 4-5 years, you'd think I had this down. But no, I still manage to burn a batch of cookies by doing something dumb, like not thinking.
So here are a few of my lessons learned the hard way:
Turn the oven down. This is the one I get caught on most frequently. I go into autopilot and turn the oven up to 350*. Casseroles still cook at 350*. Cookies and cake go in at 325*.
Cream the sugar with the eggs, not the fat. Something about gluten free foods reduces the structural stability of the finished product. Beating the eggs with sugar helps to build the framework that gluten would otherwise offer.
To help things rise, beat the eggs in a liquid. I have no idea why this works. But if I measure out the liquid first, then beat in the eggs, then fold the dry mix in, I get nice floofy pancakes instead of creamy crepes. No baking soda required (which, in turn, means no sugar is necessary. The batter isn't sweet, but it isn't bitter either.)
Use a smaller container. There just isn't the same stability in gluten free cooking. Especially when you don't have butter. (or margarine) Smaller containers offer the batter something to climb up against, to cling to, to push on. Whatever the mechanism, they are less likely to come out of the oven with a dense, flat cake.
Extra grease or parchment paper is a must. GF goodies stick, and crumble. Loosen them ASAP, too.
Chill the dough. Cookies spread less and really are easier to work with if you take the time to toss the dough into the fridge for half of an hour. (Yes, I still skip this step a lot. And I get a lot of well-done cookies to show for it.)
Use spices for flavor. Nutmeg and cinnamon add a nice touch to just about anything sweet, especially when you don't have vanilla. Using brown sugar instead of white addsd more depth of flavor, too.
Don't expect your creations to mimic Mrs. Field's famous cookies. Just be happy that they are sweet and satisfying, especially if you can't handle the gums.
After 4-5 years, you'd think I had this down. But no, I still manage to burn a batch of cookies by doing something dumb, like not thinking.
So here are a few of my lessons learned the hard way:
Turn the oven down. This is the one I get caught on most frequently. I go into autopilot and turn the oven up to 350*. Casseroles still cook at 350*. Cookies and cake go in at 325*.
Cream the sugar with the eggs, not the fat. Something about gluten free foods reduces the structural stability of the finished product. Beating the eggs with sugar helps to build the framework that gluten would otherwise offer.
To help things rise, beat the eggs in a liquid. I have no idea why this works. But if I measure out the liquid first, then beat in the eggs, then fold the dry mix in, I get nice floofy pancakes instead of creamy crepes. No baking soda required (which, in turn, means no sugar is necessary. The batter isn't sweet, but it isn't bitter either.)
Use a smaller container. There just isn't the same stability in gluten free cooking. Especially when you don't have butter. (or margarine) Smaller containers offer the batter something to climb up against, to cling to, to push on. Whatever the mechanism, they are less likely to come out of the oven with a dense, flat cake.
Extra grease or parchment paper is a must. GF goodies stick, and crumble. Loosen them ASAP, too.
Chill the dough. Cookies spread less and really are easier to work with if you take the time to toss the dough into the fridge for half of an hour. (Yes, I still skip this step a lot. And I get a lot of well-done cookies to show for it.)
Use spices for flavor. Nutmeg and cinnamon add a nice touch to just about anything sweet, especially when you don't have vanilla. Using brown sugar instead of white addsd more depth of flavor, too.
Don't expect your creations to mimic Mrs. Field's famous cookies. Just be happy that they are sweet and satisfying, especially if you can't handle the gums.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
The Gluten Free Fad
For the past few years the gluten free bubble has been filling, quickly. There's been increased demand for Gluten free foods, awareness has skyrocketed, and offerings increased.
People have used to gluten free diet to lose weight, treat autism, improve depression, and cure a range of digestive issues. Some even latched onto it as the next great health phenomenon. Gluten free was to the 2000's as granola was to the 70's.
But research shows, or claims to show, that the fad is slowly fading. The masses find a strict gluten free diet difficult to adhere to, and the concept of 'simply' removing a dietary mainstay is proving not so simple. Choosing gluten free products can be confusing and frustrating. Substitutions that are high in fat and starches and artificial substances are gumming up the "healthy, natural" niche that gluten free used to fall in.
It makes sense that people who found success in the GF lifestyle because they were opting for whole foods, rather than prepackaged calories, are now finding that a whole food diet including some gluten grains is perfectly acceptable for them, in fact may work better than one full of gluten free pastries. For those who jumped on the bandwagon simply because it was a bandwagon, the next new trend is coming (whatever it is) and they'll happily leave gluten free labels by the wayside. And those who were buying gluten free simply because of the China dog food scandal are relaxing, realizing that gluten as an additive and gluten as a naturally occurring substance are two very different things.
Meanwhile, those who are gluten free out of medical necessity are both revelling in the widened selection in the marketplace, brought about by the gluten free trend, and wading through the increased muddy definitions of "gluten free". When it was just a health requirement, the concept was relatively easy. Either it was gluten free, or not. Products that took the time to proclaim themselves gluten free were generally aware of the concerns and requirements. Products that were naturally gluten free were, well, naturally gluten free.
Times have changed. Food producers recognize that the general masses, the majority of individuals that they are trying to appeal to, don't care if their gluten free food is tested or not. They don't care about cross contamination. So they are adjusting their packaging or recipes accordingly. The savvy gluten free eater needs to discriminate between gluten free food, and food that doesn't contain gluten ingredients but may have been exposed to some flour sediment. (Which contains gluten) This brings about a lot of debates. "That's not gluten free!" "Oh, but it is!"
No wonder the gluten free fad is fading. For the sake of ease, and variety, a person following any diet for medical reasons needs to not only understand their own dietary restrictions, but the reasons surrounding why different people might follow a similar diet. And how strict they need to be. Unless you see clear, definitive results and have a supportive network of friends and family, a restrictive diet is too confining. And the complications and expense simply aren't worth it for the sake of a fad.
The flip side is that the fad reputation gives those of us following the diet religiously for the sake of their own health a bad name. Those following the fad can cheat, and even give up. Those of us who need to be strict, need to be strict. Which is hard on the host as well as the guest or customer. Hopefully as the fad fades, awareness will continue to increase, and we will get truth in labeling...not just a few isolated ingredients deemed dangerous by the government, but any ingredient...because the statistically insignificant strict, picky eaters count.
People have used to gluten free diet to lose weight, treat autism, improve depression, and cure a range of digestive issues. Some even latched onto it as the next great health phenomenon. Gluten free was to the 2000's as granola was to the 70's.
But research shows, or claims to show, that the fad is slowly fading. The masses find a strict gluten free diet difficult to adhere to, and the concept of 'simply' removing a dietary mainstay is proving not so simple. Choosing gluten free products can be confusing and frustrating. Substitutions that are high in fat and starches and artificial substances are gumming up the "healthy, natural" niche that gluten free used to fall in.
It makes sense that people who found success in the GF lifestyle because they were opting for whole foods, rather than prepackaged calories, are now finding that a whole food diet including some gluten grains is perfectly acceptable for them, in fact may work better than one full of gluten free pastries. For those who jumped on the bandwagon simply because it was a bandwagon, the next new trend is coming (whatever it is) and they'll happily leave gluten free labels by the wayside. And those who were buying gluten free simply because of the China dog food scandal are relaxing, realizing that gluten as an additive and gluten as a naturally occurring substance are two very different things.
Meanwhile, those who are gluten free out of medical necessity are both revelling in the widened selection in the marketplace, brought about by the gluten free trend, and wading through the increased muddy definitions of "gluten free". When it was just a health requirement, the concept was relatively easy. Either it was gluten free, or not. Products that took the time to proclaim themselves gluten free were generally aware of the concerns and requirements. Products that were naturally gluten free were, well, naturally gluten free.
Times have changed. Food producers recognize that the general masses, the majority of individuals that they are trying to appeal to, don't care if their gluten free food is tested or not. They don't care about cross contamination. So they are adjusting their packaging or recipes accordingly. The savvy gluten free eater needs to discriminate between gluten free food, and food that doesn't contain gluten ingredients but may have been exposed to some flour sediment. (Which contains gluten) This brings about a lot of debates. "That's not gluten free!" "Oh, but it is!"
No wonder the gluten free fad is fading. For the sake of ease, and variety, a person following any diet for medical reasons needs to not only understand their own dietary restrictions, but the reasons surrounding why different people might follow a similar diet. And how strict they need to be. Unless you see clear, definitive results and have a supportive network of friends and family, a restrictive diet is too confining. And the complications and expense simply aren't worth it for the sake of a fad.
The flip side is that the fad reputation gives those of us following the diet religiously for the sake of their own health a bad name. Those following the fad can cheat, and even give up. Those of us who need to be strict, need to be strict. Which is hard on the host as well as the guest or customer. Hopefully as the fad fades, awareness will continue to increase, and we will get truth in labeling...not just a few isolated ingredients deemed dangerous by the government, but any ingredient...because the statistically insignificant strict, picky eaters count.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Passover and Gluten
They say there are two things in this world that must never be discussed over a friendly dinner. And those are religion and politics.
Unfortunately, when it comes to food, religion sometimes is intricately linked with what one desires to ingest.
In fact, Passover is right around the corner. And with the Passover, comes a seder. And at every seder is a very important rule. Throughout Passover, strict Judaic law prohibits the ingestion of any fermentable grains. The exception to this rule is matzo, grown, harvested and treated in strict accordance with Old Testament laws.
Since traditional grains are forbidden during the Passover, many people presume that all Passover foods are gluten free. This is, unfortunately, not true.
While many Kosher for Passover items are, indeed, gluten free, anything containing Matzo or Matzo flour is not. Macaroons, safe. Matzo balls, not safe.
There is some discussion about whether or not gluten is found in matzo meal. This debate often crosses into religious territory. There are individuals who believe that for the sake of unity, they must consume a small amount of Matzo during the Passover seder. They feel that during the processing of the matzo meal, and the Rabbi's blessing, the gluten is essentially removed from the grain. Now, it may be that in faith G-d will bless the individual and help their body to avoid damage from a small amount of gluten grain taken solely as a religious ritual. It may also be that a small amount of gluten grain once a year is not enough to cause permanent damage to an individual who is otherwise extremely cautious.
However, the matzo meal itself remains a gluten grain. And as such, it poses a risk to those with Celiac disease, and anyone with a wheat allergy.
On the other hand, it's corn free for the uncorny wheat eater.
The corn free celiac will be happy to know that most kosher-for-passover items are safe for cosumption. The ingredient list should be scrutinized for the words "matzo" or "matzo meal", both of which must be avoided. There may be a few organizations which do permit corn derivatives in their products, under the assumption that to avoid corn completely only for Passover is an unrealistic endeavor. However, they will state the source if corn is, indeed, used, out of respect for the strict observers.
For most traditional wheat and corn ingredients, potato is used as a starch source. Almond meal is also used freely in Passover foods, so if there is a nut allergy in the house read carefully for that, too.
Kosher is not allergy friendly. Nor is it a health conscious certification. My kids were disappointed to see that of all the kosher for passover candy displayed, not one was free of artificial coloring and flavoring. It's also worth noting that many of the products are full of sulfites. Kosher products can be a wonderful addition to a food allergy family, but only in that grains are clearly listed on Passover products (as is soy, which is also forbidden during Passover) and milk is also clearly listed, since milk and meat cannot be consumed at the same time.
Unfortunately, when it comes to food, religion sometimes is intricately linked with what one desires to ingest.
In fact, Passover is right around the corner. And with the Passover, comes a seder. And at every seder is a very important rule. Throughout Passover, strict Judaic law prohibits the ingestion of any fermentable grains. The exception to this rule is matzo, grown, harvested and treated in strict accordance with Old Testament laws.
Since traditional grains are forbidden during the Passover, many people presume that all Passover foods are gluten free. This is, unfortunately, not true.
While many Kosher for Passover items are, indeed, gluten free, anything containing Matzo or Matzo flour is not. Macaroons, safe. Matzo balls, not safe.
There is some discussion about whether or not gluten is found in matzo meal. This debate often crosses into religious territory. There are individuals who believe that for the sake of unity, they must consume a small amount of Matzo during the Passover seder. They feel that during the processing of the matzo meal, and the Rabbi's blessing, the gluten is essentially removed from the grain. Now, it may be that in faith G-d will bless the individual and help their body to avoid damage from a small amount of gluten grain taken solely as a religious ritual. It may also be that a small amount of gluten grain once a year is not enough to cause permanent damage to an individual who is otherwise extremely cautious.
However, the matzo meal itself remains a gluten grain. And as such, it poses a risk to those with Celiac disease, and anyone with a wheat allergy.
On the other hand, it's corn free for the uncorny wheat eater.
The corn free celiac will be happy to know that most kosher-for-passover items are safe for cosumption. The ingredient list should be scrutinized for the words "matzo" or "matzo meal", both of which must be avoided. There may be a few organizations which do permit corn derivatives in their products, under the assumption that to avoid corn completely only for Passover is an unrealistic endeavor. However, they will state the source if corn is, indeed, used, out of respect for the strict observers.
For most traditional wheat and corn ingredients, potato is used as a starch source. Almond meal is also used freely in Passover foods, so if there is a nut allergy in the house read carefully for that, too.
Kosher is not allergy friendly. Nor is it a health conscious certification. My kids were disappointed to see that of all the kosher for passover candy displayed, not one was free of artificial coloring and flavoring. It's also worth noting that many of the products are full of sulfites. Kosher products can be a wonderful addition to a food allergy family, but only in that grains are clearly listed on Passover products (as is soy, which is also forbidden during Passover) and milk is also clearly listed, since milk and meat cannot be consumed at the same time.
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Holidays, food and allergies
It's that time of year again. The dreaded, *ahem* I mean Much Anticipated holidays. Complete with holiday parties, potlucks, cookie exchanges, and other winter celebrations.
Every one of them seem to involve food.
And again, support boards are filling with questions. They run along the lines of "I want to make this particular kind of recipe for my child's class/neighbor/church group. But, we have a very strict no (insert allergen list here) because so and so has a severe allergy. I really want to include so and so. Will this be safe?" Sometimes there are addendums about overprotective parents. Sometimes there are addendums about being knowledgeable because of personal experience. But it all boils down to the exact same firm answer.
Maybe.
First things first: Don't assume that someone is overprotective or overcautious. Only the intolerant individual (or their parents) really know the extent of their personal risk. And if you've ever seen an anaphylactic reaction, especially in a young child, you will do anything at all to prevent it. (From banning peanut butter to chopping down walnut orchards.) Worst case scenario in the case of anaphylactic allergies really is death. It may not be likely to happen, but it certainly spoils the holidays for the unlucky few. And for those who simply experience food "intolerances", shall we say that some believe in fates worse than death and leave it at that? Their holidays might not be much fun even if they DO survive buttered muffin tins.
The point I'm trying to make is that even if you do go the extra mile to ensure that your food offering is safe, accept the possibility that the recipient will still politely decline it. After all, they are the ones who will deal with any consequences.
The less severe the potential reaction is, the more likely a person is to risk "other people's food". Especially in classrooms. (everyone wants to feed kids sugary treats.) And the younger the kids, the more important the difference is.
Before going the extra mile, it's important to know how "allergic" the potential reactor is. There are 3 general levels of food avoiders. Level 1...Will break out in hives and need benedryl if someone opens a jar of peanut butter in the same building. (Okay, I'm exaggerating. A lot. But Level 1 has a severe allergy, and will not be allowed to eat your cookies no matter how safe you think your kitchen is. Mom will need to actually supervise any food prep. Bring fruit if you really want them to be safe, unless they're anaphylactic to it, too.) Level 2 has an allergy, may carry an epi, but can tolerate low levels of cross contamination. This means they might eat a box of crackers that carries the statement "Made in a facility that also processes: XYZ" but can't eat a cracker off the same platter that has cheese slices on it, even if the cheese slices aren't touching. Level 3 is the tricky gray area of intolerance and potential allergens. Usually these parents have been advised to avoid the offending foods for a variety of reasons, and left to decide how cautious they need to be. Some will make exceptions for special occasions and deal with the ensuing reactions. Others will be super vigilant. Most will permit food that doesn't contain the allergen (or obviously contain the allergen)
The best thing you can do is talk to the parent or the sufferer ahead of time. Ask what their comfort zone is, and see if you both are comfortable accomodating their needs. Of course, this isn't always feasible, and sometimes you get vague answers. Hopefully the vague answers will lead you to an approximate reaction level (1, 2 or 3) and you can proceed with the following in mind.
For a level 1 reactor, make sure to avoid their allergen in the actual food product, bring recipe or product labels just in case, but make your peace wit the fact that the kid in question probably will skip it. Your part is to avoid putting them in the hospital just by being in the same room.
For a level 2 reactor, start with safe ingredients (preferably from a new package, since it's easy to cross things like flour and sugar by using the same measuring cup) And make sure your tools are all doubly clean. Avoid wooden spoons, which have deep crevices that may not grow bacteria but certainly make good hiding places for allergenic substances. Keep all of the potential allergens covered and put away during the prep process. (In other words, don't let your husband scramble eggs while you're carefully preparing eggless cupcake mix. The chances of cross contamination are slight, but they disappear when the eggs stay in their shell.) Think out each step of the process. It won't do to grease the pans with an allergen after you've carefully avoided it. Consider decorations, too. Powdered sugar can have wheat or cornstarch. Sprinkles, chocolate chips, frosting...all have potential red flags. Bring ingredient lists with you. Cut them out or take a picture with your phone/digital camera just in case there are questions later.
For a level 3 reactor...you can relax. Read ingredients. Bring labels if you can, and try to remember brand names. But don't gnaw your nails off worrying about the cup of milk your son was sipping as he watched you whip up those top 8 free brownies. Knowing your kitchen isn't allergy friendly, but that the brownies are (and having the ingredient list) is all the level 3 person needs to make a decision. (I wish we were all level 3's)
Of course, the best thing you can do for allergy families is take the focus off of food. Bring stickers, boxes of crayons, or junk jewelry. Or jump on the healthy food bandwagon and look for healthy alternatives. Fruit skewers, veggie platters, meat and cheese platters will all help to avoid the mystery ingredient issues and they lower everyone's stress levels. No one worries if veggie trays will crumble without the egg, if fruit skewers will taste wrong without real butter, or if the crackers will fall in the middle. There's also the benefit of having "real" food available. Most kids are too excited to eat before parties...but will happily devour anything that ends up on their plate and looks appealing. Even if it's healthy. And when you've had 4 other class parties in the past week, anything that isn't covered in frosting will appeal to all the parents.
Everyone wants their goodies to get rave reviews. Everyone wants to be "That Mom". They want to provide the eye popping experience, the awesome dish that gets raved about for weeks to come. But food really does add stress to the lives of allergy sufferers in ways that "normal" people can't imagine. Kids have to be trusted to have willpower beyond their ears. Adults have to walk a fine line between precaution and courtesy. And everyone wants to sit back and enjoy the holidays.
So if you really want to do something nice for someone with allergies...relax. Make your favorite signature dish, taking reasonable precautions. Give details of the ingredients in minute detail. (Even cooking spray has potential allergens) And then turn a blind eye to those who choose not to partake. They aren't trying to spite you. And they are just trying to enjoy the holidays as much as you.
Maybe it would help if we think of it this way. Allergy sufferers aren't just trying to avoid a nasty reaction. They're also protecting the baker from the guilt of causing one, and the other guests from witnessing it.
Every one of them seem to involve food.
And again, support boards are filling with questions. They run along the lines of "I want to make this particular kind of recipe for my child's class/neighbor/church group. But, we have a very strict no (insert allergen list here) because so and so has a severe allergy. I really want to include so and so. Will this be safe?" Sometimes there are addendums about overprotective parents. Sometimes there are addendums about being knowledgeable because of personal experience. But it all boils down to the exact same firm answer.
Maybe.
First things first: Don't assume that someone is overprotective or overcautious. Only the intolerant individual (or their parents) really know the extent of their personal risk. And if you've ever seen an anaphylactic reaction, especially in a young child, you will do anything at all to prevent it. (From banning peanut butter to chopping down walnut orchards.) Worst case scenario in the case of anaphylactic allergies really is death. It may not be likely to happen, but it certainly spoils the holidays for the unlucky few. And for those who simply experience food "intolerances", shall we say that some believe in fates worse than death and leave it at that? Their holidays might not be much fun even if they DO survive buttered muffin tins.
The point I'm trying to make is that even if you do go the extra mile to ensure that your food offering is safe, accept the possibility that the recipient will still politely decline it. After all, they are the ones who will deal with any consequences.
The less severe the potential reaction is, the more likely a person is to risk "other people's food". Especially in classrooms. (everyone wants to feed kids sugary treats.) And the younger the kids, the more important the difference is.
Before going the extra mile, it's important to know how "allergic" the potential reactor is. There are 3 general levels of food avoiders. Level 1...Will break out in hives and need benedryl if someone opens a jar of peanut butter in the same building. (Okay, I'm exaggerating. A lot. But Level 1 has a severe allergy, and will not be allowed to eat your cookies no matter how safe you think your kitchen is. Mom will need to actually supervise any food prep. Bring fruit if you really want them to be safe, unless they're anaphylactic to it, too.) Level 2 has an allergy, may carry an epi, but can tolerate low levels of cross contamination. This means they might eat a box of crackers that carries the statement "Made in a facility that also processes: XYZ" but can't eat a cracker off the same platter that has cheese slices on it, even if the cheese slices aren't touching. Level 3 is the tricky gray area of intolerance and potential allergens. Usually these parents have been advised to avoid the offending foods for a variety of reasons, and left to decide how cautious they need to be. Some will make exceptions for special occasions and deal with the ensuing reactions. Others will be super vigilant. Most will permit food that doesn't contain the allergen (or obviously contain the allergen)
The best thing you can do is talk to the parent or the sufferer ahead of time. Ask what their comfort zone is, and see if you both are comfortable accomodating their needs. Of course, this isn't always feasible, and sometimes you get vague answers. Hopefully the vague answers will lead you to an approximate reaction level (1, 2 or 3) and you can proceed with the following in mind.
For a level 1 reactor, make sure to avoid their allergen in the actual food product, bring recipe or product labels just in case, but make your peace wit the fact that the kid in question probably will skip it. Your part is to avoid putting them in the hospital just by being in the same room.
For a level 2 reactor, start with safe ingredients (preferably from a new package, since it's easy to cross things like flour and sugar by using the same measuring cup) And make sure your tools are all doubly clean. Avoid wooden spoons, which have deep crevices that may not grow bacteria but certainly make good hiding places for allergenic substances. Keep all of the potential allergens covered and put away during the prep process. (In other words, don't let your husband scramble eggs while you're carefully preparing eggless cupcake mix. The chances of cross contamination are slight, but they disappear when the eggs stay in their shell.) Think out each step of the process. It won't do to grease the pans with an allergen after you've carefully avoided it. Consider decorations, too. Powdered sugar can have wheat or cornstarch. Sprinkles, chocolate chips, frosting...all have potential red flags. Bring ingredient lists with you. Cut them out or take a picture with your phone/digital camera just in case there are questions later.
For a level 3 reactor...you can relax. Read ingredients. Bring labels if you can, and try to remember brand names. But don't gnaw your nails off worrying about the cup of milk your son was sipping as he watched you whip up those top 8 free brownies. Knowing your kitchen isn't allergy friendly, but that the brownies are (and having the ingredient list) is all the level 3 person needs to make a decision. (I wish we were all level 3's)
Of course, the best thing you can do for allergy families is take the focus off of food. Bring stickers, boxes of crayons, or junk jewelry. Or jump on the healthy food bandwagon and look for healthy alternatives. Fruit skewers, veggie platters, meat and cheese platters will all help to avoid the mystery ingredient issues and they lower everyone's stress levels. No one worries if veggie trays will crumble without the egg, if fruit skewers will taste wrong without real butter, or if the crackers will fall in the middle. There's also the benefit of having "real" food available. Most kids are too excited to eat before parties...but will happily devour anything that ends up on their plate and looks appealing. Even if it's healthy. And when you've had 4 other class parties in the past week, anything that isn't covered in frosting will appeal to all the parents.
Everyone wants their goodies to get rave reviews. Everyone wants to be "That Mom". They want to provide the eye popping experience, the awesome dish that gets raved about for weeks to come. But food really does add stress to the lives of allergy sufferers in ways that "normal" people can't imagine. Kids have to be trusted to have willpower beyond their ears. Adults have to walk a fine line between precaution and courtesy. And everyone wants to sit back and enjoy the holidays.
So if you really want to do something nice for someone with allergies...relax. Make your favorite signature dish, taking reasonable precautions. Give details of the ingredients in minute detail. (Even cooking spray has potential allergens) And then turn a blind eye to those who choose not to partake. They aren't trying to spite you. And they are just trying to enjoy the holidays as much as you.
Maybe it would help if we think of it this way. Allergy sufferers aren't just trying to avoid a nasty reaction. They're also protecting the baker from the guilt of causing one, and the other guests from witnessing it.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Is Gluten Free really Healthier?
The new "fad diet"; Gluten free! Is it really healthier?
There seems to be a lot of confusion. Whole foods offers healthy options. Whole foods offers organic produce. Whole foods offers eco friendly products. Whole Foods also offers Gluten Free goodies. Therefore; gluten free is healthy for everyone, right?
Well, maybe. But simply eating gluten free products isn't necessarily healthy for anyone (Celiac patients included!)
As we've covered before, gluten is the protein found in wheat, rye, barley and sometimes oats. For people with Celiac Disease, it causes an immune response which damages the intestines. This is serious...without the little villi in your intestinal walls, you don't digest your food properly. Which means, you can get malnourished.
Some people are simple sensitive to gluten. And with all the research going on, some people wonder if gluten is good for anyone. Others are concerned because a gluten free diet appears limiting. Could it possibly be safe to give up wheat?
The thing is, our society relies too heavily on grains. It's not unusual for the typical American to eat a bowl of wheat cereal with some toast, snack on a bagel, eat a sandwich for lunch, some pizza and salad with croutons for dinner, wash it down with a handful of cookies and call it a relatively rounded diet. In fact, they just ate several days' worth of gluten (and corn) with a bit of veggie and meat thrown in for flavor.
If you eat the typical American fare, and simply substitute your bread for a gluten free variety your pocketbook is going to take a serious hit. Your body won't thank you much, either. Gluten free baking relies on a variety of starches and sugars to create an acceptable mouthfeel, and please our tastebuds. In some ways, a slice of gluten free white bread isn't nearly as healthy as a slice of whole grain wheat. (Unless you have Celiac Disease, of course, in which case the whole grain wheat is equivalent to eating arsenic. Don't do it.)
However, a healthy diet can be gluten free. Vegetables are gluten free. Potatoes, meats, eggs and fruit are gluten free. You can eat a varied diet, a rainbow of nutrients, without touching a grain of gluten. A gluten free diet that involves a variety of nutrients, from a plethora of sources, is perfectly healthy.
However, like most diets, its easy to follow an unhealthy version. And too many people look for the easy way out. Eating gluten free convenience items, which have been altered to be gluten free, is no different than eating regular convenience foods all the time. Except that most gluten free foods aren't enriched with synthetic vitamins to make them look a little healthier.
In other words, turning a dish gluten free doesn't "healthy it up". Leaving an ingredient out of a meal does not improve it's health content in and of itself. But there are a myriad of healthy, whole food menus that don't include gluten (Or dairy, or corn. At least, in their natural state). Since grains are a relatively recent addition to the human diet, real food can naturally be gluten free. And tasty too.
I know my diet is far from ideal. My goal is simply healthIER. Not genuinely healthy. In this society, it would be pretty difficult to reach that lofty ambition.
There seems to be a lot of confusion. Whole foods offers healthy options. Whole foods offers organic produce. Whole foods offers eco friendly products. Whole Foods also offers Gluten Free goodies. Therefore; gluten free is healthy for everyone, right?
Well, maybe. But simply eating gluten free products isn't necessarily healthy for anyone (Celiac patients included!)
As we've covered before, gluten is the protein found in wheat, rye, barley and sometimes oats. For people with Celiac Disease, it causes an immune response which damages the intestines. This is serious...without the little villi in your intestinal walls, you don't digest your food properly. Which means, you can get malnourished.
Some people are simple sensitive to gluten. And with all the research going on, some people wonder if gluten is good for anyone. Others are concerned because a gluten free diet appears limiting. Could it possibly be safe to give up wheat?
The thing is, our society relies too heavily on grains. It's not unusual for the typical American to eat a bowl of wheat cereal with some toast, snack on a bagel, eat a sandwich for lunch, some pizza and salad with croutons for dinner, wash it down with a handful of cookies and call it a relatively rounded diet. In fact, they just ate several days' worth of gluten (and corn) with a bit of veggie and meat thrown in for flavor.
If you eat the typical American fare, and simply substitute your bread for a gluten free variety your pocketbook is going to take a serious hit. Your body won't thank you much, either. Gluten free baking relies on a variety of starches and sugars to create an acceptable mouthfeel, and please our tastebuds. In some ways, a slice of gluten free white bread isn't nearly as healthy as a slice of whole grain wheat. (Unless you have Celiac Disease, of course, in which case the whole grain wheat is equivalent to eating arsenic. Don't do it.)
However, a healthy diet can be gluten free. Vegetables are gluten free. Potatoes, meats, eggs and fruit are gluten free. You can eat a varied diet, a rainbow of nutrients, without touching a grain of gluten. A gluten free diet that involves a variety of nutrients, from a plethora of sources, is perfectly healthy.
However, like most diets, its easy to follow an unhealthy version. And too many people look for the easy way out. Eating gluten free convenience items, which have been altered to be gluten free, is no different than eating regular convenience foods all the time. Except that most gluten free foods aren't enriched with synthetic vitamins to make them look a little healthier.
In other words, turning a dish gluten free doesn't "healthy it up". Leaving an ingredient out of a meal does not improve it's health content in and of itself. But there are a myriad of healthy, whole food menus that don't include gluten (Or dairy, or corn. At least, in their natural state). Since grains are a relatively recent addition to the human diet, real food can naturally be gluten free. And tasty too.
I know my diet is far from ideal. My goal is simply healthIER. Not genuinely healthy. In this society, it would be pretty difficult to reach that lofty ambition.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Maybe we're all crazy...
I'm seeing a disturbing trend on message boards I frequent.
It's laughed about on the Avoiding Corn forum. It's subtly hinted at on Celiac listserves. It's vented over in special diet groups. And it's pondered, rhetorically, in various self-help corners of the world wide web.
"Maybe I'm wrong..."
"I must be crazy..."
"Except, that what I know just doesn't correlate to what I see..." (The words are different, but the gist is the same)
Why do we so easily doubt ourselves when what we witness just doesn't fit in with the world as we believe (or want) it to be?
Parents watch their children melt down after neon-colored cupcakes, candy and medicine...but tell themselves that it has to be...um, the excitement. Right? It's not the additives. Except (They anonymously vent inner doubts online) the child only really loses it when they have artificial coloring. And, well, it sounds crazy...but they've read a few things that made them wonder...It's probably a coincidence, right?
Adults note that certain foods cause bloating, and abdominal discomfort...digestive distress. But it isn't an allergy. It isn't an intolerance...it's, well, it's...um...something else.
People with intolerances start noting reactions and trace them to the "impossible" (like a banana) and tell themselves that they're crazy. Only to learn that their cereal is being recalled for contamination, or the bananas are sprayed with corn ethanol, or that their favorite potato chips now have a healthier oil (that just doesn't agree with that particular consumer.)
People who have Celiac and don't respond quickly to the diet are encouraged to wait it out, their questions about whether it could be something MORE are brushed aside like annoying spiderwebs. But, like those spiderwebs, they return until the problem is dealt with. Or, we learn to deal with symptoms and leave the doctor alone.
Concerned parents recite generic symptoms that doctors brush off, knowing that "chronic" isn't often serious. They play statistics, and statistically...parents stop complaining either because things DO get better or, more likely, they become normal. The warnings on the package say to consult a doctor if the condition doesn't go away. And most doctors run a few labs, shrug, and call it normal. Eventually, it is. Or abnormal becomes normal and we move on, with the suspicion that we're missing a piece of the puzzle.
At what point do we decide that Drs know more about everything than us?
As I tell my daughter, doctors know more about the human body and how to fix it than we do. However...we know our bodies. And it's our job to take care of them, and report problems to the doctor so that he can look for answers.
Unfortunately, it seems that many (if not most) doctors are so bent on brushing off their patients they forget that they can learn from them. Doctors DON'T know it all. They're human. Their skill is found in being a tool, only one tool that we the consumer utilize in our quest for health.
Sometimes, eventually some come back and say that not only were they NOT crazy...they have living, breathing proof (in a healthier body) accompanied by black and white test results that showed they had a physical cause for the "stress" or "over anxiety" (about their kids) all along.
Why did they waste time doubting themselves?
Just as actors are a tool in the art of entertainment, and editors are a tool in the world of publishing; the doctor is one of many tools we the consumer should use in our quest for health.
We need to educate ourselves about the food supply, about our medications and nutritional supplements, our water. We need to question doctors and other authority figures. Why are we taking this course of action? Why are my observances invalid? What makes these concerns invalid? And how many others have you successfully treated? Are any still your patient? (Okay, so I'm not quite brave enough to ask these questions. But they need to be asked.)
We need to question food companies, and pharmaceutical companies. We need to hold them responsible for the truth...and accountable for lies (but not necessarily honest mistakes). And we need to learn to trust ourselves. Another trait that has been victimized from society...sheep are rewarded, the inquisitive left behind or punished. We want to be normal. But I don't think there is a normal anymore.
Maybe there never was.
It's laughed about on the Avoiding Corn forum. It's subtly hinted at on Celiac listserves. It's vented over in special diet groups. And it's pondered, rhetorically, in various self-help corners of the world wide web.
"Maybe I'm wrong..."
"I must be crazy..."
"Except, that what I know just doesn't correlate to what I see..." (The words are different, but the gist is the same)
Why do we so easily doubt ourselves when what we witness just doesn't fit in with the world as we believe (or want) it to be?
Parents watch their children melt down after neon-colored cupcakes, candy and medicine...but tell themselves that it has to be...um, the excitement. Right? It's not the additives. Except (They anonymously vent inner doubts online) the child only really loses it when they have artificial coloring. And, well, it sounds crazy...but they've read a few things that made them wonder...It's probably a coincidence, right?
Adults note that certain foods cause bloating, and abdominal discomfort...digestive distress. But it isn't an allergy. It isn't an intolerance...it's, well, it's...um...something else.
People with intolerances start noting reactions and trace them to the "impossible" (like a banana) and tell themselves that they're crazy. Only to learn that their cereal is being recalled for contamination, or the bananas are sprayed with corn ethanol, or that their favorite potato chips now have a healthier oil (that just doesn't agree with that particular consumer.)
People who have Celiac and don't respond quickly to the diet are encouraged to wait it out, their questions about whether it could be something MORE are brushed aside like annoying spiderwebs. But, like those spiderwebs, they return until the problem is dealt with. Or, we learn to deal with symptoms and leave the doctor alone.
Concerned parents recite generic symptoms that doctors brush off, knowing that "chronic" isn't often serious. They play statistics, and statistically...parents stop complaining either because things DO get better or, more likely, they become normal. The warnings on the package say to consult a doctor if the condition doesn't go away. And most doctors run a few labs, shrug, and call it normal. Eventually, it is. Or abnormal becomes normal and we move on, with the suspicion that we're missing a piece of the puzzle.
At what point do we decide that Drs know more about everything than us?
As I tell my daughter, doctors know more about the human body and how to fix it than we do. However...we know our bodies. And it's our job to take care of them, and report problems to the doctor so that he can look for answers.
Unfortunately, it seems that many (if not most) doctors are so bent on brushing off their patients they forget that they can learn from them. Doctors DON'T know it all. They're human. Their skill is found in being a tool, only one tool that we the consumer utilize in our quest for health.
Sometimes, eventually some come back and say that not only were they NOT crazy...they have living, breathing proof (in a healthier body) accompanied by black and white test results that showed they had a physical cause for the "stress" or "over anxiety" (about their kids) all along.
Why did they waste time doubting themselves?
Just as actors are a tool in the art of entertainment, and editors are a tool in the world of publishing; the doctor is one of many tools we the consumer should use in our quest for health.
We need to educate ourselves about the food supply, about our medications and nutritional supplements, our water. We need to question doctors and other authority figures. Why are we taking this course of action? Why are my observances invalid? What makes these concerns invalid? And how many others have you successfully treated? Are any still your patient? (Okay, so I'm not quite brave enough to ask these questions. But they need to be asked.)
We need to question food companies, and pharmaceutical companies. We need to hold them responsible for the truth...and accountable for lies (but not necessarily honest mistakes). And we need to learn to trust ourselves. Another trait that has been victimized from society...sheep are rewarded, the inquisitive left behind or punished. We want to be normal. But I don't think there is a normal anymore.
Maybe there never was.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Science Fair Fun
Third, fourth and fifth graders in my daughter's school are required to do "proper" science projects. Most anyone who has kids knows what this really means. It's code-speak for "Parents, get ready to stress out!"
My inlaws have some great pictures of my husband at Penguin's age. He's sitting at a table, looking increasingly bored as the montage continues. His dad is sitting beside him, fiddling with wires and screws while his big brother occasionally takes part.
We've decided not to let the same thing happen in our house.
That doesn't mean that science fair is easy. In fact, it might be even harder when I can't just take care of some part of the project that needs to get done...I have to walk Penguin through it while her sister whines that it just isn't fair. But, it gets done (Whether it gets done "right" or "well" or "the way I'd have done it" is a different story. I'm learning to let go of my image of right, and let her do it her way. If nothing else, at least the judges can tell it was obviously done by a kid.)
Anyways, she chose an interesting subject this year. One that I was eager to help participate in. She wanted to do something that would help tie in food allergies; although obviously food allergies are not exactly a scientific experiment a young girl can design. She settled on recreating a project that was referenced on Delphi's Celiac Disease Support group about a year ago. In that project, high school students borrowed colanders and such from gluten eaters and tested them for the presence of starch using iodine.
We didn't want to collect colanders. We also didn't want gluten in the house. Our final design involved using wooden spoons to make rice (although rice does not contain gluten, it's a starchy grain. The starch would show up if present. If the spoons are holding grains, they'll hold flour. And flour has starch AND gluten.) She settled on the unpretentious question "Is there a way to wash all the starch off of a spoon?" She tested by making rice (Er, having Mom make rice and then stir it thoroughly with a spoon) Testing the spoon as a "control". Yep, it was starchy. She rinsed all the rice off the spoon. Still starchy, which surprised her a little.
The big one was the final test of washing it with soap and water. To our surprise, there was still small amounts of starchy purple flecks floating around in the water. No matter how well we washed the spoon, we still could find bits of starch in that water. This means that nutritionists and those crazy, zealous gluten haters are right...you do, indeed, need to dispose of your old glutened wooden spoons after going gluten free. Starch remains, and where there are bits of flour (starch) there is gluten (protein).
Intriguingly, the prior experiment that this was based on showed that items like colanders could be cleaned thoroughly enough for there to be no remaining starch. It makes use wonder if one of the experiments was done incorrectly (we did find that it was easier to see results when we stirred the water and transferred 2 TBS to a small, clear bowl before adding iodine. This necessitated less iodine to see starch in the control.) Or if wooden utensils just had more big pores for starch to hide out in. Obviously...as a kitchen test done by a 10 year old with a sketchy (at best) understanding of what she was doing, the experiment bears repeating again and again. But, she did prove that there's good reason to investigate the issue. And that the zealots have merit.
Just for fun we tested some clean spoons from other kitchens, and they had bits of purply starch in them, too.
I really think this could apply across the board to other allergies as well...can nut protein hide out in wood? Dairy? Obviously, I won't use my spoon to cook for my friend's rice-allergic son. But I will still use it for safe recipes...after all, studies show that germs just don't live as long on wood as they do on plastic. And I'd rather have flecks of old rice that germs!
My inlaws have some great pictures of my husband at Penguin's age. He's sitting at a table, looking increasingly bored as the montage continues. His dad is sitting beside him, fiddling with wires and screws while his big brother occasionally takes part.
We've decided not to let the same thing happen in our house.
That doesn't mean that science fair is easy. In fact, it might be even harder when I can't just take care of some part of the project that needs to get done...I have to walk Penguin through it while her sister whines that it just isn't fair. But, it gets done (Whether it gets done "right" or "well" or "the way I'd have done it" is a different story. I'm learning to let go of my image of right, and let her do it her way. If nothing else, at least the judges can tell it was obviously done by a kid.)
Anyways, she chose an interesting subject this year. One that I was eager to help participate in. She wanted to do something that would help tie in food allergies; although obviously food allergies are not exactly a scientific experiment a young girl can design. She settled on recreating a project that was referenced on Delphi's Celiac Disease Support group about a year ago. In that project, high school students borrowed colanders and such from gluten eaters and tested them for the presence of starch using iodine.
We didn't want to collect colanders. We also didn't want gluten in the house. Our final design involved using wooden spoons to make rice (although rice does not contain gluten, it's a starchy grain. The starch would show up if present. If the spoons are holding grains, they'll hold flour. And flour has starch AND gluten.) She settled on the unpretentious question "Is there a way to wash all the starch off of a spoon?" She tested by making rice (Er, having Mom make rice and then stir it thoroughly with a spoon) Testing the spoon as a "control". Yep, it was starchy. She rinsed all the rice off the spoon. Still starchy, which surprised her a little.
The big one was the final test of washing it with soap and water. To our surprise, there was still small amounts of starchy purple flecks floating around in the water. No matter how well we washed the spoon, we still could find bits of starch in that water. This means that nutritionists and those crazy, zealous gluten haters are right...you do, indeed, need to dispose of your old glutened wooden spoons after going gluten free. Starch remains, and where there are bits of flour (starch) there is gluten (protein).
Intriguingly, the prior experiment that this was based on showed that items like colanders could be cleaned thoroughly enough for there to be no remaining starch. It makes use wonder if one of the experiments was done incorrectly (we did find that it was easier to see results when we stirred the water and transferred 2 TBS to a small, clear bowl before adding iodine. This necessitated less iodine to see starch in the control.) Or if wooden utensils just had more big pores for starch to hide out in. Obviously...as a kitchen test done by a 10 year old with a sketchy (at best) understanding of what she was doing, the experiment bears repeating again and again. But, she did prove that there's good reason to investigate the issue. And that the zealots have merit.
Just for fun we tested some clean spoons from other kitchens, and they had bits of purply starch in them, too.
I really think this could apply across the board to other allergies as well...can nut protein hide out in wood? Dairy? Obviously, I won't use my spoon to cook for my friend's rice-allergic son. But I will still use it for safe recipes...after all, studies show that germs just don't live as long on wood as they do on plastic. And I'd rather have flecks of old rice that germs!
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
My daughter's a hero; or...It's okay to break into your own house.
Sometimes in parenthood; you find yourself encouraging the strangest behavior.
Today was one of those times. We finally arrived home from school; laden down with backpacks, undelivered girl scout cookies and a science fair backboard. While balancing these items in my arms and hollering for the girls to please lock the car when they finally manage to get themselves extracted...I realized that the gate simply wasn't going to open.
I pushed. I prodded. I jiggled the chain. The chain was loose. In fact; it was only attached to my end of the pulley. Which meant, the 6 foot fence was locked up tight.
What to do?
I did what any good parent would do. I sent my 10 year old up there to investigate. She willingly climbed the wall next to the gate, and then balked. It's a long ways down.
But, there was no choice. I was not in climbing clothes. She's young, she's spry, and she was going to do it. I called encouraging remarks and walked along the wall with my hand out to steady her (my side was cement, the other side was grass and clover.) I tried to get her to let herself down onto one of the lawnchairs, but it was a no go. She would have jumped into the raised bed (filled with bermuda grass) but someone (probably me) left a garden claw sticking up out of it.
Finally she managed to maneuver herself down along the other side of the fence, repeating "I'm scared, I'm scared, I'm scared" as her sister repeated the same refrain...but adding in "We're going to get in trouble!"
The men at the gas station nearby were amused. Or confused. I'm not sure which.
My exasperated "You're allowed to break into your own house!" was met with chuckles.
And then she was down, and manipulated the latch, and we were in.
"I'm a hero!" she proclaimed.
Yup. She's a hero. And I'm proud to say very unlikely to ever embark in a career of criminal activity.
Today was one of those times. We finally arrived home from school; laden down with backpacks, undelivered girl scout cookies and a science fair backboard. While balancing these items in my arms and hollering for the girls to please lock the car when they finally manage to get themselves extracted...I realized that the gate simply wasn't going to open.
I pushed. I prodded. I jiggled the chain. The chain was loose. In fact; it was only attached to my end of the pulley. Which meant, the 6 foot fence was locked up tight.
What to do?
I did what any good parent would do. I sent my 10 year old up there to investigate. She willingly climbed the wall next to the gate, and then balked. It's a long ways down.
But, there was no choice. I was not in climbing clothes. She's young, she's spry, and she was going to do it. I called encouraging remarks and walked along the wall with my hand out to steady her (my side was cement, the other side was grass and clover.) I tried to get her to let herself down onto one of the lawnchairs, but it was a no go. She would have jumped into the raised bed (filled with bermuda grass) but someone (probably me) left a garden claw sticking up out of it.
Finally she managed to maneuver herself down along the other side of the fence, repeating "I'm scared, I'm scared, I'm scared" as her sister repeated the same refrain...but adding in "We're going to get in trouble!"
The men at the gas station nearby were amused. Or confused. I'm not sure which.
My exasperated "You're allowed to break into your own house!" was met with chuckles.
And then she was down, and manipulated the latch, and we were in.
"I'm a hero!" she proclaimed.
Yup. She's a hero. And I'm proud to say very unlikely to ever embark in a career of criminal activity.
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
The Gluten Conundrum
I find myself writing this out over and over and over. So here goes, in my blog, where I can later cut and paste or just link it. :-)
The evil of gluten:
With most food allergies, as I've learned, the gial is to track them down. The best tool for this is a food diary (to help note trends) and an elimination diet followed by food challenges. (The challenges are vital because you do not want to live in unnecessary fear, nor do you want a diet that is too restrictive.)
However (!!!) Gluten does not follow the same food allergy rule. If you suspect gluten is the root of your health issues (and increasing evidence links it with arthritis, weight gain, autism, asthma, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, and any other dx that leaves a dr proudly smiling and reassuring you that while there is no treatment, you aren't dying.) then you have more to do than 'simply' cut it out of your diet, note symptoms, and challenge it.
You see, gluten intolerance could be Celiac Disease. And Celiac Disease, while easy to manage, is important to diagnose properly. People with Celiac experience intestinal damage when they ingest even small amounts of gluten. And; they may experience damage without correlating symptoms. In other words...when you "challenge" gluten, you might find that you can "tolerate" small amounts. But those small amounts that don't cause symptoms can flatten your intestinal villi, and leave you malnourished; setting you up for a host of serious conditions down the road.
So, before going gluten free it's a really good idea to go to the doctor, discuss the idea with him and insist on a blood test first. Request a FULL celiac panel, not just the TTG. This will guide your decision on whether to follow up with a GI, or get a biopsy, or just give gluten free a go. This is particularly important with children...they are less likely to continue the diet in their teen and adult years without a proper diagnosis. But, if they aren't thriving and gluten is impacting growth, it's better for them to be healthy and gluten free than wait around for enough damage to occur for a diagnosis to be made. Only you, in conjunction with a good doctor, can know what's best for your particular situation.
It doesn't hurt to go gluten free. It can be a healthy, well balanced diet. Many cultures have a traditionally low gluten or gluten free diet. But once you do give up gluten, the intestines will start to heal. When the antibodies are no longer active, it will be impossible for a doctor to definitively dx Celiac Disease. While you don't need a doctor's permission to eat gluten free; you may need that note for college, or kid's camp, or employment reasons, or if you're ever hospitalized or need long term care and they aren't keen on a special needs diet. And adding gluten back in can create symptoms before damage is severe enough to detect. Or, it can cause damage without symptoms...leading you to believe you're cured until you collapse.
If you go gluten free, and then challenge it without symptoms, it is important to regularly monitor your antibodies with blood tests. If you do develop Celiac damage; you want to catch it as early as possible.
Also...if wheat, rye, barley or oats seem to cause rashes or shortness of breath, contact your dr. This could be a traditional IgE mediated allergy; and challenging it on your own at home could be dangerous. IgE allergies can be tested with a blood RAST or skin prick test; and an educated guess made as to the potential severity of reaction.
The evil of gluten:
With most food allergies, as I've learned, the gial is to track them down. The best tool for this is a food diary (to help note trends) and an elimination diet followed by food challenges. (The challenges are vital because you do not want to live in unnecessary fear, nor do you want a diet that is too restrictive.)
However (!!!) Gluten does not follow the same food allergy rule. If you suspect gluten is the root of your health issues (and increasing evidence links it with arthritis, weight gain, autism, asthma, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, and any other dx that leaves a dr proudly smiling and reassuring you that while there is no treatment, you aren't dying.) then you have more to do than 'simply' cut it out of your diet, note symptoms, and challenge it.
You see, gluten intolerance could be Celiac Disease. And Celiac Disease, while easy to manage, is important to diagnose properly. People with Celiac experience intestinal damage when they ingest even small amounts of gluten. And; they may experience damage without correlating symptoms. In other words...when you "challenge" gluten, you might find that you can "tolerate" small amounts. But those small amounts that don't cause symptoms can flatten your intestinal villi, and leave you malnourished; setting you up for a host of serious conditions down the road.
So, before going gluten free it's a really good idea to go to the doctor, discuss the idea with him and insist on a blood test first. Request a FULL celiac panel, not just the TTG. This will guide your decision on whether to follow up with a GI, or get a biopsy, or just give gluten free a go. This is particularly important with children...they are less likely to continue the diet in their teen and adult years without a proper diagnosis. But, if they aren't thriving and gluten is impacting growth, it's better for them to be healthy and gluten free than wait around for enough damage to occur for a diagnosis to be made. Only you, in conjunction with a good doctor, can know what's best for your particular situation.
It doesn't hurt to go gluten free. It can be a healthy, well balanced diet. Many cultures have a traditionally low gluten or gluten free diet. But once you do give up gluten, the intestines will start to heal. When the antibodies are no longer active, it will be impossible for a doctor to definitively dx Celiac Disease. While you don't need a doctor's permission to eat gluten free; you may need that note for college, or kid's camp, or employment reasons, or if you're ever hospitalized or need long term care and they aren't keen on a special needs diet. And adding gluten back in can create symptoms before damage is severe enough to detect. Or, it can cause damage without symptoms...leading you to believe you're cured until you collapse.
If you go gluten free, and then challenge it without symptoms, it is important to regularly monitor your antibodies with blood tests. If you do develop Celiac damage; you want to catch it as early as possible.
Also...if wheat, rye, barley or oats seem to cause rashes or shortness of breath, contact your dr. This could be a traditional IgE mediated allergy; and challenging it on your own at home could be dangerous. IgE allergies can be tested with a blood RAST or skin prick test; and an educated guess made as to the potential severity of reaction.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
The Tie That's Stressed
When we take our vows, most of us think of them romantically. For better or worse (Insert image of him snoring, or an image of her frantic scrubbing when the in-laws are due.) For richer or poorer (Image of Caroline Ingalls leaving the cushy town life to follow Charles into the Big Woods, the Prairie and so on.) In sickness and in health. (An image of an elderly couple entering a retirement home together).
But very few of us are lucky enough to stay healthy until we're a ripe old age. And for some of us, that "sickness and in health" bit doesn't just refer to the common cold. Nor does it mean anything out of a Nicholas Sparks novel.
When diagnosed with food mediated illness, most people are given a few dietary pointers, a reassuring smile and a few lists to bring with them to the grocery store. They can buy as many cookbooks as they want and there are many support groups out there to help them learn to navigate society with a food restriction. But there aren't many guidebooks that address how devastating a food restriction can be to your relationship.
Your marriage partner signs up to love you despite your faults (and sometimes because of them.) He (or she) is supposed to be the rock that you lean on when you just aren't strong enough to go it alone, and in return, you are supposed to be healthy and strong when they need you most. This give and take is tantamount to any relationship.
So, what happens when one partner suddenly can't hold up their end of the bargain, for an extended period of time? Both partners are frustrated. The dishes don't get washed, the laundry isn't done "right" and a few bills might slip through the cracks. Tension mounts. Eventually, one or the other may get fed up.
It can be especially frustrating when a diagnosis takes a long time coming. Celiac Disease can take 11 years, on average, to diagnose. One study found that half the patients involved had suffered for 28 years from unexplained symptoms and abnormal lab results before finally being properly diagnosed. Although education among doctors is rising, and they are slowly chipping that average down, years upon years of "stress" diagnosis and trips to the hospital (not to mention the innumerable pit stops) wear a person, and a couple, down. The suffering partner may begin to doubt themselves, or distance themselves. They are embarassed at their weakness and their physical symptoms. (No one, and I do mean No One, wants their lover to know how much time the need to spend in the bathroom. Any abdominal attack is a huge romance killer.)
The healthy partner may be frustrated by their own helplessness, and after awhile start to resent their suffering counterpart. After all, most people bounce back after a bout of the flu. So why aren't they? They may harbor secret fears that there's something more sinister about the malady, or they may take the low road and suspect that the real culprit lies somewhere in the head, rather than the gut. Such a diagnosis is devastating to someone who is suffering.
Not only is it miserable to be sick day in and day out, but the one person you should be able to count on, the one person who you can let your hair down in front of and break down in tears of frustration or rage against the latest doctor who shrugged you off is your spouse. And if they suddenly "take sides" against you, then you really start to feel like it might be hopeless.
Then comes the diagnosis. There is elation, for both parties. There is an adjustment period. And for some, that's all there is. Sure, it will take two to prepare dinners and both spouses will need to double check ingredients and be willing to make sacrifices, but there's hope.
Unfortunately, not all couples are able to come together and be made stronger by suffering. And the resultant dietary restrictions (which impact the freedom of eating out, the customary food bonding rituals, the parties and many holiday traditions) make it difficult to find common ground. Most magazine articles dealing with the subject of how to re-connect suggest relaxing with a regular date night. A relaxing dinner out is great for some...but not if your allergies are severe or if you're still learning how to manage them. For dietary-restricted individuals, a restaurant meal can be a nightmare. And it certainly won't bring you closer if you can't relax.
There are numerous counselors who suggest that a spouse spontaneously bring dinner home, another nightmare. Chocolate? Well, if he gets the "wrong one" she might end up crying, and not with happiness.
Dinnertime conversation can be difficult as well. After years of suffering, and then a period of learning, food restrictions may be paramount in your mind or theirs. There is a steep learning curve, and most people share what they are learning and excited about. (Trust me, it's exciting to learn that you aren't "just" stressed.) Sometimes that learning period lasts longer for one spouse or the other.
Parents of food allergic kids have the added stress of trying to balance their approach to the restrictions. One parent may focus on simply keeping the child safe, while the other wants to make sure that they don't "miss out" on life. And sometimes, one parent takes a stronger role in educating themselves in the restriction. There are many cases where a parent of a food allergic child chooses to "fight" the diagnosis, to the child's danger and obviously the detriment of the marriage. Our allergist says he hates being called as a witness in custody disputes, because he doesn't know which parent is right. He can only state in a court of law the same thing he's told both parents in person...avoid the offending substance.
And yet, still there remains little emotional support for those who are dealing with food restrictions, especially food allergies. There are groups such as FAAN and POFAK; but these focus on educating the masses and encouraging the food allergy sufferer to continue to live. Very little effort is put into preserving a relationship.
After all, it's just food. And once you know the problem, you're healed. It sounds easy. And from a simply medical standpoint, it is. Problem identified, treatment initiated. Problem solved.
Well, one problem is solved, but that problem opens the door to several more.
I've known several people who go through a divorce or end a long term relationship and cite their food restrictions as the final straw, if not the trigger. Many healthy partners feel that they didn't "sign up" for dietary changes and restrictions. They have their own pressures in daily life.
They don't seem to see that just because their loved one is suffering doesn't mean that they can't be a sounding board. And they may have spent a long time dreaming about "when things get back to normal". Not only are they needing to adjust to the their partner's new diet, they have to deal with the staunch reality that it will never be "the same". Their dreams need to change, too. They need a mourning period, and unfortunately, they usually feel guilty for it.
I wonder why there aren't more support groups for spouses of food allergic individuals? Or couples counselling designed for couples who are dealing with dietary restrictions. Googling has revealed very little on the subject. Even asking for help just dealing with the emtional aspect of food restrictions reveals that there is not nearly enough known about the psychological aspects of not only imposing self will to protect yourself from well meant peer pressure (Pizza! Ice Cream!) but a prolonged misdiagnosis of "stress" or "eating disorder".
If we really want to help people with food restrictions, we need to address all their needs, and work with the loved ones who are supporting them, too.
But very few of us are lucky enough to stay healthy until we're a ripe old age. And for some of us, that "sickness and in health" bit doesn't just refer to the common cold. Nor does it mean anything out of a Nicholas Sparks novel.
When diagnosed with food mediated illness, most people are given a few dietary pointers, a reassuring smile and a few lists to bring with them to the grocery store. They can buy as many cookbooks as they want and there are many support groups out there to help them learn to navigate society with a food restriction. But there aren't many guidebooks that address how devastating a food restriction can be to your relationship.
Your marriage partner signs up to love you despite your faults (and sometimes because of them.) He (or she) is supposed to be the rock that you lean on when you just aren't strong enough to go it alone, and in return, you are supposed to be healthy and strong when they need you most. This give and take is tantamount to any relationship.
So, what happens when one partner suddenly can't hold up their end of the bargain, for an extended period of time? Both partners are frustrated. The dishes don't get washed, the laundry isn't done "right" and a few bills might slip through the cracks. Tension mounts. Eventually, one or the other may get fed up.
It can be especially frustrating when a diagnosis takes a long time coming. Celiac Disease can take 11 years, on average, to diagnose. One study found that half the patients involved had suffered for 28 years from unexplained symptoms and abnormal lab results before finally being properly diagnosed. Although education among doctors is rising, and they are slowly chipping that average down, years upon years of "stress" diagnosis and trips to the hospital (not to mention the innumerable pit stops) wear a person, and a couple, down. The suffering partner may begin to doubt themselves, or distance themselves. They are embarassed at their weakness and their physical symptoms. (No one, and I do mean No One, wants their lover to know how much time the need to spend in the bathroom. Any abdominal attack is a huge romance killer.)
The healthy partner may be frustrated by their own helplessness, and after awhile start to resent their suffering counterpart. After all, most people bounce back after a bout of the flu. So why aren't they? They may harbor secret fears that there's something more sinister about the malady, or they may take the low road and suspect that the real culprit lies somewhere in the head, rather than the gut. Such a diagnosis is devastating to someone who is suffering.
Not only is it miserable to be sick day in and day out, but the one person you should be able to count on, the one person who you can let your hair down in front of and break down in tears of frustration or rage against the latest doctor who shrugged you off is your spouse. And if they suddenly "take sides" against you, then you really start to feel like it might be hopeless.
Then comes the diagnosis. There is elation, for both parties. There is an adjustment period. And for some, that's all there is. Sure, it will take two to prepare dinners and both spouses will need to double check ingredients and be willing to make sacrifices, but there's hope.
Unfortunately, not all couples are able to come together and be made stronger by suffering. And the resultant dietary restrictions (which impact the freedom of eating out, the customary food bonding rituals, the parties and many holiday traditions) make it difficult to find common ground. Most magazine articles dealing with the subject of how to re-connect suggest relaxing with a regular date night. A relaxing dinner out is great for some...but not if your allergies are severe or if you're still learning how to manage them. For dietary-restricted individuals, a restaurant meal can be a nightmare. And it certainly won't bring you closer if you can't relax.
There are numerous counselors who suggest that a spouse spontaneously bring dinner home, another nightmare. Chocolate? Well, if he gets the "wrong one" she might end up crying, and not with happiness.
Dinnertime conversation can be difficult as well. After years of suffering, and then a period of learning, food restrictions may be paramount in your mind or theirs. There is a steep learning curve, and most people share what they are learning and excited about. (Trust me, it's exciting to learn that you aren't "just" stressed.) Sometimes that learning period lasts longer for one spouse or the other.
Parents of food allergic kids have the added stress of trying to balance their approach to the restrictions. One parent may focus on simply keeping the child safe, while the other wants to make sure that they don't "miss out" on life. And sometimes, one parent takes a stronger role in educating themselves in the restriction. There are many cases where a parent of a food allergic child chooses to "fight" the diagnosis, to the child's danger and obviously the detriment of the marriage. Our allergist says he hates being called as a witness in custody disputes, because he doesn't know which parent is right. He can only state in a court of law the same thing he's told both parents in person...avoid the offending substance.
And yet, still there remains little emotional support for those who are dealing with food restrictions, especially food allergies. There are groups such as FAAN and POFAK; but these focus on educating the masses and encouraging the food allergy sufferer to continue to live. Very little effort is put into preserving a relationship.
After all, it's just food. And once you know the problem, you're healed. It sounds easy. And from a simply medical standpoint, it is. Problem identified, treatment initiated. Problem solved.
Well, one problem is solved, but that problem opens the door to several more.
I've known several people who go through a divorce or end a long term relationship and cite their food restrictions as the final straw, if not the trigger. Many healthy partners feel that they didn't "sign up" for dietary changes and restrictions. They have their own pressures in daily life.
They don't seem to see that just because their loved one is suffering doesn't mean that they can't be a sounding board. And they may have spent a long time dreaming about "when things get back to normal". Not only are they needing to adjust to the their partner's new diet, they have to deal with the staunch reality that it will never be "the same". Their dreams need to change, too. They need a mourning period, and unfortunately, they usually feel guilty for it.
I wonder why there aren't more support groups for spouses of food allergic individuals? Or couples counselling designed for couples who are dealing with dietary restrictions. Googling has revealed very little on the subject. Even asking for help just dealing with the emtional aspect of food restrictions reveals that there is not nearly enough known about the psychological aspects of not only imposing self will to protect yourself from well meant peer pressure (Pizza! Ice Cream!) but a prolonged misdiagnosis of "stress" or "eating disorder".
If we really want to help people with food restrictions, we need to address all their needs, and work with the loved ones who are supporting them, too.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Depression, perhaps?
Although I've had this blog for some time, I don't think I've ever formally defined it's purpose.
I'm not sure anyone formally defines their blogs, so hopefully that isn't a problem!
Is it here to detail highlights of my life? To inform others of the trials of allergy free living? Perhaps it's an attempt to connect and say "you aren't alone" to strangers who are in their own "Can it really be just stress?" quandry. Or maybe it's a bit of everything. I know there are a few friends who follow faithfully, a few family members who drop by occassionally, and fellow allergy sufferers who pop by just to nod and agree...or shake their heads and say to themselves that they're glad they aren't THAT bad off. :P
I think today's post is directed at the latter.
I've been dealing with some sort of reaction for nearly a month now. I got a good dose of...something...just around Thanksgiving, vomiting and all that good stuff. It hit at a particularly poignant moment since I was dreading leaving the house and then conveniently ill.
Maybe it was stress?
But why hasn't it gone away? And why is it getting worse at moments when I want, very much, for it to get better?
I've found myself wondering which comes first, the reaction or depression. Because while it's much harder to deal with a reaction while depressed, the fact is that it's pretty depressing to feel like there's a shattered disco ball being used like a pin-ball machine in your abdomen, especially when the muscles are also feeling very sore and bruised. And then the chills set in, ironically I feel like it's a hundred degrees in here while my teeth are chattering loudly enough to accompany the CD player and I'm sweating. Ick.
The only difference between now and the days before I'd identified triggers are that I harbor hope. There's hope that I'll track the reaction down. I know what normal is, sort of. At least...I know this isn't it. And it isn't a constant tide of pain vs discomfort. There's bits of normalcy in there. There never used to be.
I'm hopeful, but I'm scared too. I don't want to deal with this on a regular basis. I don't like not knowing when it's going to hit. Whenever it DOES hit I get so skittish. I shun company, I hide out at home. I want to ignore the phone and the door and the call of the grocery store (It's not like I'm that hungry, after all.) I used to get the stomach flu, and it was a distant memory within the week.
Now, it's long and drawn out and there's very unnecessary weight loss involved...especially when it ISN'T the flu.
To be honest, the discomfort and embarrassing nature of this malady isn't the only thing I'm afraid of. I know I ought to slip into the doctor's office, recite my list of complaints along with their severity and wait for prognosis. And I know that it's not serious...I'm not even concerned that it might be serious. What scares me is the thought that there's nothing more to do.
I know I don't have something scary like Cancer. I'm lucky, very lucky! I also don't have something scary but treatable like diabetes. Again...I'm lucky. I can eat chocolate now and then! But the mystery digestive ailment that responds violently to comfort drugs and pops up mysteriously; tracked to triggers such as minute amounts of corn in the new tube of my usual toothpaste or helping the kids to decorate "real" gingerbread houses is getting to me. I wish I had something to say other than "I'm just not feeling well today," I feel so whiny. And I'm whining about whining which simply makes it worse!
At any rate, I go back to my checklist. Foods haven't changed drastically, or even that subtly. All the same ingredients, all the same brands, all the same labels (even on eggs). Maybe it isn't food. I'm more prone to reactions this time of year, usually tracked to a trigger but maybe I'm wrong? Maybe I'm crazy? (Wait, blind tests have proven there's SOMETHING physical occurring beyond the state of my psyche)
What about stress?
It's my official diagnosis, one I've been given countless times. Maybe I'm depressed, something I've considered as well.
The thing is, I'm more mad at my body than I am "stressed". And I feel too happy to really be "depressed", if that makes sense. I may not feel like going to a downtown museum and walking through the crowds of the Christmas displays but lying down and listening to my kids play with their nativity set makes me grin. And I enjoy the Christmas displays when there aren't elbows in my ribs and strangers feet tripping me. When I awaken beside a bedtime invader ("It's cold in my room!") I just lay and savor the weight of her body and the sound of her breathing. Candles burning in the menorah filled me with peace. I missed reading together when a child fell asleep before her bedtime book.
Would I feel that way if I were depressed?
The landlord stopped by unexpectedly, and caught me with the living room a mess and my baking unfinished. (At least the kids were dressed...) And I laughed, even at the gentle critique (Yes...my yard's a disaster, it's worse than the living room. It's cold out there for cleaning, though!). If stress were the issue, wouldn't that have tied my stomach in knots? Or wouldn't I lose my calm when I discover that there are beads, scissors and a flurry of paper snowflake-makings filling my now-recently vacuumed living room?
Okay, so I did think "why even bother"? But then the snowflakes made me smile. And if I were depressed, I wouldn't keep re-cleaning...would I?
I'm starting to wonder how many other allergy/digestive sufferers go through this process during a reaction. If you struggle with depression in conjunction with a reaction (but don't know if it's really depression) let me know I'm not alone! You can let me know if I'm crazy too...everyone else does :P And if you know of a good way to get through the emotional aspects of a reaction cycle, post that, too. It's the most frustrating part. Because sometimes it leads to not caring anymore. Whats the point if its not going to permanently cure me?
I know that eventually I'll be fine again. I know that it isn't just stress. I also know that it stresses me out, and that stress exacerbates things...so maybe it is stress to a degree. At any rate, I have to get better. I want to enjoy playing with the kids. We've got playgrounds to explore, and games to play, and recipes to adapt. Not to mention holidays to celebrate...
I'm not sure anyone formally defines their blogs, so hopefully that isn't a problem!
Is it here to detail highlights of my life? To inform others of the trials of allergy free living? Perhaps it's an attempt to connect and say "you aren't alone" to strangers who are in their own "Can it really be just stress?" quandry. Or maybe it's a bit of everything. I know there are a few friends who follow faithfully, a few family members who drop by occassionally, and fellow allergy sufferers who pop by just to nod and agree...or shake their heads and say to themselves that they're glad they aren't THAT bad off. :P
I think today's post is directed at the latter.
I've been dealing with some sort of reaction for nearly a month now. I got a good dose of...something...just around Thanksgiving, vomiting and all that good stuff. It hit at a particularly poignant moment since I was dreading leaving the house and then conveniently ill.
Maybe it was stress?
But why hasn't it gone away? And why is it getting worse at moments when I want, very much, for it to get better?
I've found myself wondering which comes first, the reaction or depression. Because while it's much harder to deal with a reaction while depressed, the fact is that it's pretty depressing to feel like there's a shattered disco ball being used like a pin-ball machine in your abdomen, especially when the muscles are also feeling very sore and bruised. And then the chills set in, ironically I feel like it's a hundred degrees in here while my teeth are chattering loudly enough to accompany the CD player and I'm sweating. Ick.
The only difference between now and the days before I'd identified triggers are that I harbor hope. There's hope that I'll track the reaction down. I know what normal is, sort of. At least...I know this isn't it. And it isn't a constant tide of pain vs discomfort. There's bits of normalcy in there. There never used to be.
I'm hopeful, but I'm scared too. I don't want to deal with this on a regular basis. I don't like not knowing when it's going to hit. Whenever it DOES hit I get so skittish. I shun company, I hide out at home. I want to ignore the phone and the door and the call of the grocery store (It's not like I'm that hungry, after all.) I used to get the stomach flu, and it was a distant memory within the week.
Now, it's long and drawn out and there's very unnecessary weight loss involved...especially when it ISN'T the flu.
To be honest, the discomfort and embarrassing nature of this malady isn't the only thing I'm afraid of. I know I ought to slip into the doctor's office, recite my list of complaints along with their severity and wait for prognosis. And I know that it's not serious...I'm not even concerned that it might be serious. What scares me is the thought that there's nothing more to do.
I know I don't have something scary like Cancer. I'm lucky, very lucky! I also don't have something scary but treatable like diabetes. Again...I'm lucky. I can eat chocolate now and then! But the mystery digestive ailment that responds violently to comfort drugs and pops up mysteriously; tracked to triggers such as minute amounts of corn in the new tube of my usual toothpaste or helping the kids to decorate "real" gingerbread houses is getting to me. I wish I had something to say other than "I'm just not feeling well today," I feel so whiny. And I'm whining about whining which simply makes it worse!
At any rate, I go back to my checklist. Foods haven't changed drastically, or even that subtly. All the same ingredients, all the same brands, all the same labels (even on eggs). Maybe it isn't food. I'm more prone to reactions this time of year, usually tracked to a trigger but maybe I'm wrong? Maybe I'm crazy? (Wait, blind tests have proven there's SOMETHING physical occurring beyond the state of my psyche)
What about stress?
It's my official diagnosis, one I've been given countless times. Maybe I'm depressed, something I've considered as well.
The thing is, I'm more mad at my body than I am "stressed". And I feel too happy to really be "depressed", if that makes sense. I may not feel like going to a downtown museum and walking through the crowds of the Christmas displays but lying down and listening to my kids play with their nativity set makes me grin. And I enjoy the Christmas displays when there aren't elbows in my ribs and strangers feet tripping me. When I awaken beside a bedtime invader ("It's cold in my room!") I just lay and savor the weight of her body and the sound of her breathing. Candles burning in the menorah filled me with peace. I missed reading together when a child fell asleep before her bedtime book.
Would I feel that way if I were depressed?
The landlord stopped by unexpectedly, and caught me with the living room a mess and my baking unfinished. (At least the kids were dressed...) And I laughed, even at the gentle critique (Yes...my yard's a disaster, it's worse than the living room. It's cold out there for cleaning, though!). If stress were the issue, wouldn't that have tied my stomach in knots? Or wouldn't I lose my calm when I discover that there are beads, scissors and a flurry of paper snowflake-makings filling my now-recently vacuumed living room?
Okay, so I did think "why even bother"? But then the snowflakes made me smile. And if I were depressed, I wouldn't keep re-cleaning...would I?
I'm starting to wonder how many other allergy/digestive sufferers go through this process during a reaction. If you struggle with depression in conjunction with a reaction (but don't know if it's really depression) let me know I'm not alone! You can let me know if I'm crazy too...everyone else does :P And if you know of a good way to get through the emotional aspects of a reaction cycle, post that, too. It's the most frustrating part. Because sometimes it leads to not caring anymore. Whats the point if its not going to permanently cure me?
I know that eventually I'll be fine again. I know that it isn't just stress. I also know that it stresses me out, and that stress exacerbates things...so maybe it is stress to a degree. At any rate, I have to get better. I want to enjoy playing with the kids. We've got playgrounds to explore, and games to play, and recipes to adapt. Not to mention holidays to celebrate...
Friday, October 03, 2008
Fixing FAAN
On another board, I was asked what my solution is, since I don't think that FAAN is helping. Scratch that, I know that in their good intentions toward the 90% of food related life threatening reactions, they are hurting the rest of us.
This surprises many. Especially the ones who deal with food allergies every day. But it doesn't surprise those of us dealing with corn. Corn is everywhere, it's touted as hypoallergenic, and it doesn't have to be an ingredient in the traditional sense of the word to jump out and attack a sensitive individual. Many sufferers react to food they later find out was wrapped in corn dusted cryovac. The irritated CSRs tell us that these are company standards, federal standards, it's just the way things are. They don't have to tell us that the package has poison in it, just the food. (Sorry, but corn, to many, is poison.)
Maybe the most frustrating thing is that I actually see their point of view. It's just a bit, and of all their customers...just one doesn't matter. The odds are, to them, that one phone call is a fluke anyways. Someone who really doesn't "get" the way things work.
That's why I wish the FAAN were doing things differently.
If I were to design a "better" food labelling program, this is what I'd start:
*Labelling sources for all ingredients where feasible. Vitamins (including excipients), xanthum gum, etc all come from somewhere whether it's petroleum or corn or soy.
*All Customer Service Reps need to be trained minimally in the existence of food allergies and the broad range of reactions. Then they need to be able to access whether or not a product contains any specific ingredients. They can answer yes or no to specific questions without giving away secret recipes. (Asking doctors to call is not acceptable. It seems simple enough, but very few medical personnel have the time or energy to put into researching daily food. Or even meds, for that matter.)
*Source materials for packaging need to be logged as well. There are computer programs to cross reference things, in this day and age it shouldn't be impossible to get a straight answer within 24 hours.
*Allergen and source labeling need to extend to medications. The excipients in different brands of drugs can cause problems and that needs to be addressed.
*Most importantly, education. Any food can cause an adverse reaction. All adverse reactions are undesirable and only an individual can decide for themselves what the acceptable risk is. Therefore, individuals need access to information about their food supply. Period.
I'm not a member of FAAN because only 1 of the several people I've dealt with there have seemed remotely interested in the statistically insignificant allergies. And yet every company I contact seems to send me to FAAN. For the most part, they diplomatically refer me back to the FDA who kindly responds that I may want to contact the FAAN for more info.
I've found that companies are proud to comply with FAAN's top 8 guidelines, and yet get distant and suspicious when they are pressed for more info because those guidelines don't meet my needs. I'm happy with a simple life...but seriously, when apples aren't safe because they're waxed and plain grains of rice are dusted with cornstarch laden vitamins "for the consumers own good" things are getting a bit out of hand, don't you think?
It seems simpler to just disclose. Yeah, there's corn in this. Let me decide, in the end, what kind of risk that means for me.
This surprises many. Especially the ones who deal with food allergies every day. But it doesn't surprise those of us dealing with corn. Corn is everywhere, it's touted as hypoallergenic, and it doesn't have to be an ingredient in the traditional sense of the word to jump out and attack a sensitive individual. Many sufferers react to food they later find out was wrapped in corn dusted cryovac. The irritated CSRs tell us that these are company standards, federal standards, it's just the way things are. They don't have to tell us that the package has poison in it, just the food. (Sorry, but corn, to many, is poison.)
Maybe the most frustrating thing is that I actually see their point of view. It's just a bit, and of all their customers...just one doesn't matter. The odds are, to them, that one phone call is a fluke anyways. Someone who really doesn't "get" the way things work.
That's why I wish the FAAN were doing things differently.
If I were to design a "better" food labelling program, this is what I'd start:
*Labelling sources for all ingredients where feasible. Vitamins (including excipients), xanthum gum, etc all come from somewhere whether it's petroleum or corn or soy.
*All Customer Service Reps need to be trained minimally in the existence of food allergies and the broad range of reactions. Then they need to be able to access whether or not a product contains any specific ingredients. They can answer yes or no to specific questions without giving away secret recipes. (Asking doctors to call is not acceptable. It seems simple enough, but very few medical personnel have the time or energy to put into researching daily food. Or even meds, for that matter.)
*Source materials for packaging need to be logged as well. There are computer programs to cross reference things, in this day and age it shouldn't be impossible to get a straight answer within 24 hours.
*Allergen and source labeling need to extend to medications. The excipients in different brands of drugs can cause problems and that needs to be addressed.
*Most importantly, education. Any food can cause an adverse reaction. All adverse reactions are undesirable and only an individual can decide for themselves what the acceptable risk is. Therefore, individuals need access to information about their food supply. Period.
I'm not a member of FAAN because only 1 of the several people I've dealt with there have seemed remotely interested in the statistically insignificant allergies. And yet every company I contact seems to send me to FAAN. For the most part, they diplomatically refer me back to the FDA who kindly responds that I may want to contact the FAAN for more info.
I've found that companies are proud to comply with FAAN's top 8 guidelines, and yet get distant and suspicious when they are pressed for more info because those guidelines don't meet my needs. I'm happy with a simple life...but seriously, when apples aren't safe because they're waxed and plain grains of rice are dusted with cornstarch laden vitamins "for the consumers own good" things are getting a bit out of hand, don't you think?
It seems simpler to just disclose. Yeah, there's corn in this. Let me decide, in the end, what kind of risk that means for me.
Saturday, August 02, 2008
You Can't get to heaven without Gluten...
No, I don't believe it.
But, the woman who was going door to door trying to recruit for a new religious movement does. Or did. I'm not sure if I convinced her.
You see, I like to be nice to these people. I suppose that's the problem. They knock, offer to discuss theology and I smile and say I only have a minute but, sure, why not? I'm up front with the fact that I am a believer and not planning to convert. I know, I know...I present them with a challenge.
But I never walked away hurting before.
Today's evangelist is convinced that there is a Mother God in addition to (or perhaps combined with?) the well known "Father" God. I followed her reasoning, smiled and said I'd pray on it. Who am I to argue with a belief? I keep an open mind, and do my praying in private.
Then she asked if I realized that I couldn't get to heaven without taking part in Passover or Communion under the Mother God.
Um, what?
She went on, some scare tactics blanketed in a loving, concerned tone. She asked if I had ever taken part in a Passover or Communion. And her question shook me back to reality enough to sputter that I had a medical condition which prevented me from ingesting gluten grains.
Yes, even holy ones. They cause digestive damage.
"But, oh, you poor, then you can't..." the horror danced over her face, tears swam in her eyes, surely there was some way...but, just a little, it clearly states right here in Revelation that you must partake of the body and blood of Christ in order to gain entrance to heaven. You've never participated? Confusion, compassion, concern. Is this a heathen? Who can quote the bible back to me?
I was suddenly aware that my daughter was watching with wide eyes. I pulled my dignity around my shoulders like a cloaked, asked for the right words and managed to say in an even tone that if God saw fit to allow me this condition, known as Celiac Disease, then surely he wouldn't banish me from Heaven for not choosing to suffer the consequences.
She grasped my forearm, and gave me that "look". One you might give to someone you know isn't going to survive but there's nothing more you can do. And left.
Communion has been a sore spot with me for years. I wondered why my first Communion sat so uncomfortably in my stomach, and why I felt so nauseous after Communion Sundays. I quit going up front, at times I requested just the blessing.
Was God trying to tell me something?
I married a man who is half Jewish. In the Jewish culture, the Passover is celebrated with the drinking of wine and the ingesting of Matzoh. There's more to the celebration, much more, but those are the relevant points for food allergies.
Every year, around spring, the question of whether Matzoh is safe for Celiac patients comes up somewhere. And every so often, during my more reflective states, I notice the concern surrounding communion. Jesus broke bread, at the last supper (Which may or may not have been a proper Passover Seder) and instructed his disciples to break bread together, to share wine together, to eat and drink in remembrance of the sacrifice He made.
What happens when a true believer can't take and eat, or drink?
The Catholic Church has struggled with the answer, as have Rabbis. Surely God doesn't want his children to suffer intestinal damage simply for taking part in a religious ritual. And yet, what does that mean? Will he heal them for acting in faith? Or do we need to have faith that he will forgive us for abstaining?
It seems to me that the right route is often the harder one. And I doubt this case is any different. Just more emotional, because it's about devout believers debating their health versus eternal life.
I choose both. If suicide is a sin, then surely choosing to damage the body God gave you is one.
I'm not ashamed of that decision. But, the look I was given earlier continues to haunt me.
Another reminder that food is an integral part of our society. And when there is a restriction, it can impact you in the least expected ways.
But, the woman who was going door to door trying to recruit for a new religious movement does. Or did. I'm not sure if I convinced her.
You see, I like to be nice to these people. I suppose that's the problem. They knock, offer to discuss theology and I smile and say I only have a minute but, sure, why not? I'm up front with the fact that I am a believer and not planning to convert. I know, I know...I present them with a challenge.
But I never walked away hurting before.
Today's evangelist is convinced that there is a Mother God in addition to (or perhaps combined with?) the well known "Father" God. I followed her reasoning, smiled and said I'd pray on it. Who am I to argue with a belief? I keep an open mind, and do my praying in private.
Then she asked if I realized that I couldn't get to heaven without taking part in Passover or Communion under the Mother God.
Um, what?
She went on, some scare tactics blanketed in a loving, concerned tone. She asked if I had ever taken part in a Passover or Communion. And her question shook me back to reality enough to sputter that I had a medical condition which prevented me from ingesting gluten grains.
Yes, even holy ones. They cause digestive damage.
"But, oh, you poor, then you can't..." the horror danced over her face, tears swam in her eyes, surely there was some way...but, just a little, it clearly states right here in Revelation that you must partake of the body and blood of Christ in order to gain entrance to heaven. You've never participated? Confusion, compassion, concern. Is this a heathen? Who can quote the bible back to me?
I was suddenly aware that my daughter was watching with wide eyes. I pulled my dignity around my shoulders like a cloaked, asked for the right words and managed to say in an even tone that if God saw fit to allow me this condition, known as Celiac Disease, then surely he wouldn't banish me from Heaven for not choosing to suffer the consequences.
She grasped my forearm, and gave me that "look". One you might give to someone you know isn't going to survive but there's nothing more you can do. And left.
Communion has been a sore spot with me for years. I wondered why my first Communion sat so uncomfortably in my stomach, and why I felt so nauseous after Communion Sundays. I quit going up front, at times I requested just the blessing.
Was God trying to tell me something?
I married a man who is half Jewish. In the Jewish culture, the Passover is celebrated with the drinking of wine and the ingesting of Matzoh. There's more to the celebration, much more, but those are the relevant points for food allergies.
Every year, around spring, the question of whether Matzoh is safe for Celiac patients comes up somewhere. And every so often, during my more reflective states, I notice the concern surrounding communion. Jesus broke bread, at the last supper (Which may or may not have been a proper Passover Seder) and instructed his disciples to break bread together, to share wine together, to eat and drink in remembrance of the sacrifice He made.
What happens when a true believer can't take and eat, or drink?
The Catholic Church has struggled with the answer, as have Rabbis. Surely God doesn't want his children to suffer intestinal damage simply for taking part in a religious ritual. And yet, what does that mean? Will he heal them for acting in faith? Or do we need to have faith that he will forgive us for abstaining?
It seems to me that the right route is often the harder one. And I doubt this case is any different. Just more emotional, because it's about devout believers debating their health versus eternal life.
I choose both. If suicide is a sin, then surely choosing to damage the body God gave you is one.
I'm not ashamed of that decision. But, the look I was given earlier continues to haunt me.
Another reminder that food is an integral part of our society. And when there is a restriction, it can impact you in the least expected ways.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)