Finally, those with actual gluten intolerances can tell Marissa from sales to stop pinching all the GF bread in the office kitchen, because it turns out that unless you actually have a celiac disease diagnosis, you really don’t get any benefits from a gluten-free diet.
According to new research out of the UK, a gluten-free diet does absolutely-fuckin’-nothing, unless you’ve actually got celiac disease.
A bunch of British boffins put the theory that gluten doesn’t have an effect on people without sensitivities by holding a double-blind, randomised placebo trial, where a group of people who aren’t diagnosed with any gluten intolerance issues followed a gluten-free diet for two weeks, before introducing a non-descript flour into their daily meals.
Half of them had a gluten-free flour, while the other had normal, run-of-the-mill glutenous flour.
Trial subjects had to keep a diary on their digestion, and any indications of reflux or issues on the toot, and the results showed that there wasn’t any difference between a gluten-free diet and when gluten was reintroduced.
It also allowed the smart alecs to deliver this sassy conclusion, which is essentially the equivalent of a science nerd dunking.
As the gluten-free diet is not only thought to be no healthier than a “normal” diet, but has been suggested as overall suboptimal, there is possibly clinical justification in actively discouraging people from starting it if they have no diagnosable sensitivity.
So there you have it, folks. If you don’t actually have a sensitivity to gluten, you really aren’t getting any benefits from a gluten-free diet. Just have that bowl of pasta, Helen. There’s no point condemning yourself because it’s not gluten-free, because it’s not changing anything about your guts anyway.
Nobody’s judging you, and it’s not going to make you any less healthy. Leave the GF bread for the ones with the actual intolerances, jeez.