Many people who speak about gluten sensitivity (and other allergic symptoms) think that often even when the antibody levels don’t reach levels that are detectable by antibody tests there can be still gluten sensitivity and making the experiment of reducing gluten to test whether there’s an effect is more sensitive then the antibody tests.
While running tests is you can rationally deal with the results can be useful, actually doing the experiment of whether reducing gluten will have a noticeable effect is worthwhile.
If you do run antigen tests, do blood tests. Skin tests don’t really provide useful medical data use but are easy to bill to insurance companies.
When it comes to running the experiment sometimes heartrate or HRV are sensitive enough to detect allergy reactions that you wouldn’t notice otherwise.
The real high cost action would be “Eat only rice for a week, see if symptoms disappear, then add additional foods one-by-one to see when symptoms reappear”.
As to the high cost action, I am working on prepping to do a true elimination diet. I say true because in many ways I’m already on one, having cut out foods that seemed to clearly give me problems and only keep those I seemed fine to eat, but that scattershot approach has left me without sufficient information to suss out what the actual triggers are.
You mentioning heart rate and HRV is interesting. I’ve been diagnosed as having a large number of preatrial contracts (PACs). We only noticed because I’ve had palpitations after eating whatever the triggering foods are (not the only symptom, though; I’ve also had things like thirst and chest pain that made it necessary to rule out a bunch of stuff like heart conditions and diabetes). I wonder if monitoring my heart would allow me to detect issues when they are below the level of being a problem. But I lack a model of how heart rate is connected to all this for that to make sense to me.
Many people who speak about gluten sensitivity (and other allergic symptoms) think that often even when the antibody levels don’t reach levels that are detectable by antibody tests there can be still gluten sensitivity and making the experiment of reducing gluten to test whether there’s an effect is more sensitive then the antibody tests.
While running tests is you can rationally deal with the results can be useful, actually doing the experiment of whether reducing gluten will have a noticeable effect is worthwhile.
If you do run antigen tests, do blood tests. Skin tests don’t really provide useful medical data use but are easy to bill to insurance companies.
When it comes to running the experiment sometimes heartrate or HRV are sensitive enough to detect allergy reactions that you wouldn’t notice otherwise.
The real high cost action would be “Eat only rice for a week, see if symptoms disappear, then add additional foods one-by-one to see when symptoms reappear”.
As to the high cost action, I am working on prepping to do a true elimination diet. I say true because in many ways I’m already on one, having cut out foods that seemed to clearly give me problems and only keep those I seemed fine to eat, but that scattershot approach has left me without sufficient information to suss out what the actual triggers are.
You mentioning heart rate and HRV is interesting. I’ve been diagnosed as having a large number of preatrial contracts (PACs). We only noticed because I’ve had palpitations after eating whatever the triggering foods are (not the only symptom, though; I’ve also had things like thirst and chest pain that made it necessary to rule out a bunch of stuff like heart conditions and diabetes). I wonder if monitoring my heart would allow me to detect issues when they are below the level of being a problem. But I lack a model of how heart rate is connected to all this for that to make sense to me.