Visit the Microscopic Colitis Foundation Website
Hi Everyone,
I have been doing a lot of reading on this site for several weeks. Thank you all for all of the wonderful information you have assembled here.
I am in my mid-forties and have not been diagnosed yet with MC. I didn't know I needed to specifically insist that biopsies be taken during my colonoscopy. My symptoms are not severe, but occasionally troubling enough to make me avoid social situations. I have been slowly adapting a gluten free diet over the past several months and have noticed it has really helped me. So after doing some reading on this site I decided to get the Enterolab tests taken.
I ordered the Panel A + Fat Malabsorbtion Tests (Total cost was $397). Here are my results:
Fecal Anti-gliadin IgA 29 Units (Normal Range is less than 10 Units)
Fecal Anti-casein (cow’s milk) IgA 6 Units (Normal Range is less than 10 Units)
Fecal Anti-ovalbumin (chicken egg) IgA 10 Units (Normal Range is less than 10 Units)
Fecal Anti-soy IgA 14 Units (Normal Range is less than 10 Units)
Quantitative Microscopic Fecal Fat Score Less than 300 Units (Normal Range is less than 300 Units)
I'm still trying to digest these results (pun intended). I'm surprised by the milk value because I think I react to dairy. Could it just be the lactose that bothers me? And I wish I understood how the "normal range" was developed. So I have more studying to do...
Thanks to everyone who has posted here. You have helped so many more people than just those who login and post, I'm sure.
Best Regards,
Gabby
Hello from another newbie
Moderators: Rosie, Stanz, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
-
Joefnh
- Rockhopper Penguin
- Posts: 2478
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:25 pm
- Location: Southern New Hampshire
Hi Gabby and welcome to the group.
Thanks for the compliment!
You certainly are being proactive and it does look like you have some sensitivities kicking in. I think its great that you are being proactive and addressing this now. Doing this should save you a bunch of suffering. It does look like you are definitively sensitive to soy and gluten and right at the threshold for the others.
Again welcome to the group and thanks for posting your data.
Joe
Thanks for the compliment!
You certainly are being proactive and it does look like you have some sensitivities kicking in. I think its great that you are being proactive and addressing this now. Doing this should save you a bunch of suffering. It does look like you are definitively sensitive to soy and gluten and right at the threshold for the others.
Again welcome to the group and thanks for posting your data.
Joe
Joe
Gabby,
Congratulations on getting the Enterolab tests done Your results are similar to mine, with soy and dairy 'flipped' - and like you, I suspect I react to soy. I'm not testing it thoroughly at the moment (I'm going for "feel great all the time" for now), and there are so many soy foods that also have all kinds of other ingredients that might be the culprit.
I believe you can test low on dairy and still react. It could be the lactose, or a different immune response than the one measured by the excellent Enterolab tests. If you had been avoiding dairy for some time before the test, that could lower your number as well. There's no exact data, I believe, on how fast the antibody levels decline. I think that might be what happened to me, with soy, but I may also be wrong that I react to it.
I'm really impressed that you're tackling this so proactively. Good for you. (And you made Joe blush!)
I'll be interested to know what you think about dairy reactions as you ponder,
Sara
Congratulations on getting the Enterolab tests done Your results are similar to mine, with soy and dairy 'flipped' - and like you, I suspect I react to soy. I'm not testing it thoroughly at the moment (I'm going for "feel great all the time" for now), and there are so many soy foods that also have all kinds of other ingredients that might be the culprit.
I believe you can test low on dairy and still react. It could be the lactose, or a different immune response than the one measured by the excellent Enterolab tests. If you had been avoiding dairy for some time before the test, that could lower your number as well. There's no exact data, I believe, on how fast the antibody levels decline. I think that might be what happened to me, with soy, but I may also be wrong that I react to it.
I'm really impressed that you're tackling this so proactively. Good for you. (And you made Joe blush!)
I'll be interested to know what you think about dairy reactions as you ponder,
Sara
Hi Gabby,
Welcome to our internet family. As Sara mentioned, it's possible, (based on your test results), that you are only sensitive to lactose, because virtually anyone with diarrhea will be intolerant of lactose until the diarrhea is resolved. If I were in your shoes, I would avoid all dairy products, as part of the diet, and then after my bowel movements were normal again, I would try dairy products again, to see what effect they produced, (if any). I had to avoid all dairy products back when I was recovering, because I reacted not only to lactose, but also to the casein in milk. However, a few years after I changed my diet, I was able to slowly reintroduce dairy products back into my diet, without any problems. I never had the Enterolab test for casein, (because at the time I ordered my tests, I knew that I was sensitive to it), so I have no idea what my results might have been, if I had been tested.
The normal ranges are determined by standard statistical analysis methods. IOW, when the number of results at the various respective numerical levels for tests of this type are plotted on a chart, test results for a given group of people will typically follow what is known as a Bell curve. The numerical test result for most people who produce antibodies to a given allergen, will be near the center of the curve, (at the top of the "bell"), and weaker responses will trail off in one direction, and stronger responses will trail off in the opposite direction. Mathematically, it can be shown that certain points at both extremes of the curve represent the 98% level, 95% level, etc., suggesting that above that point, 98%, (or 95%, or whatever), of results at that level, and above, are accurate. And inversely, the other 2%, (or 5%, or whatever), will be false positives.
There is no such thing as an ELISA test that shows perfect response rates, so it is necessary to arbitrarily establish a cutoff point which will represent the upper limit of the "normal" range. IOW, as an example, the developers of the test might decide to use the 98% level, and if they do so, and the corresponding numerical test result at that point on the curve is 10, then 10 will be determined to be the minimum positive test score, and any score of 9 and below, will be considered to be a negative result. In this example, 98% of people who test 10 or above, will actually be sensitive to the allergen, and the higher the numerical score, the higher the confidence level that the determination is correct. Conversely, 2% of people who test 9 or below, will also actually be sensitive to the allergen, so their test result will be a false negative, and the lower the numerical score, the lower the odds of a false negative determination.
Also, at the 98% level, 2% of numerical results at 10 or above will be false positives, but as the numerical score increases, the odds of a false negative result drop rapidly. I just used the 98% level as an example - I have no idea exactly what numerical limits are represented, by the choices that Dr. Fine made to use 10 as the lower limit for a positive test result determination. For most of us, the parameters that he selected for allocating test results, seem to work quite well. Obviously, though, due to the statistical methods required, there are bound to be a small percentage of false positive results, and a small percentage of false negative results. Though both are quite uncommon, there seem to be slightly more false negatives, than false positives, but that may simply be due to the random nature of statistics, meaning that it may depend on whose data you are considering.
Again, welcome aboard, and please feel free to ask anything. Do you mind if I add your test results to our collection, at the following location?
http://www.perskyfarms.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10089
Tex
Welcome to our internet family. As Sara mentioned, it's possible, (based on your test results), that you are only sensitive to lactose, because virtually anyone with diarrhea will be intolerant of lactose until the diarrhea is resolved. If I were in your shoes, I would avoid all dairy products, as part of the diet, and then after my bowel movements were normal again, I would try dairy products again, to see what effect they produced, (if any). I had to avoid all dairy products back when I was recovering, because I reacted not only to lactose, but also to the casein in milk. However, a few years after I changed my diet, I was able to slowly reintroduce dairy products back into my diet, without any problems. I never had the Enterolab test for casein, (because at the time I ordered my tests, I knew that I was sensitive to it), so I have no idea what my results might have been, if I had been tested.
The normal ranges are determined by standard statistical analysis methods. IOW, when the number of results at the various respective numerical levels for tests of this type are plotted on a chart, test results for a given group of people will typically follow what is known as a Bell curve. The numerical test result for most people who produce antibodies to a given allergen, will be near the center of the curve, (at the top of the "bell"), and weaker responses will trail off in one direction, and stronger responses will trail off in the opposite direction. Mathematically, it can be shown that certain points at both extremes of the curve represent the 98% level, 95% level, etc., suggesting that above that point, 98%, (or 95%, or whatever), of results at that level, and above, are accurate. And inversely, the other 2%, (or 5%, or whatever), will be false positives.
There is no such thing as an ELISA test that shows perfect response rates, so it is necessary to arbitrarily establish a cutoff point which will represent the upper limit of the "normal" range. IOW, as an example, the developers of the test might decide to use the 98% level, and if they do so, and the corresponding numerical test result at that point on the curve is 10, then 10 will be determined to be the minimum positive test score, and any score of 9 and below, will be considered to be a negative result. In this example, 98% of people who test 10 or above, will actually be sensitive to the allergen, and the higher the numerical score, the higher the confidence level that the determination is correct. Conversely, 2% of people who test 9 or below, will also actually be sensitive to the allergen, so their test result will be a false negative, and the lower the numerical score, the lower the odds of a false negative determination.
Also, at the 98% level, 2% of numerical results at 10 or above will be false positives, but as the numerical score increases, the odds of a false negative result drop rapidly. I just used the 98% level as an example - I have no idea exactly what numerical limits are represented, by the choices that Dr. Fine made to use 10 as the lower limit for a positive test result determination. For most of us, the parameters that he selected for allocating test results, seem to work quite well. Obviously, though, due to the statistical methods required, there are bound to be a small percentage of false positive results, and a small percentage of false negative results. Though both are quite uncommon, there seem to be slightly more false negatives, than false positives, but that may simply be due to the random nature of statistics, meaning that it may depend on whose data you are considering.
Again, welcome aboard, and please feel free to ask anything. Do you mind if I add your test results to our collection, at the following location?
http://www.perskyfarms.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10089
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Welcome Gabby!!
Good for you for recognizing you may be heading towards your mother's diagnosis and trying to do something proactively. I so wish I had known everything I know now all the years I had self-diagnosed IBS. Cutting out gluten now may mean you can heal quicker and hopefully be able to eat dairy, eggs and soy again. I tested in the low-teens for dairy and soy, and I definitely react to casein (in addition to lactose), both in cow and goats milk. The soy protein is hydrolyzed in soy sauce fermentation, or minimized in oil and lecithin, which may explain why I can have them and not tofu or soymilk. Everyone seems to have a different threshold for each protein which dictates what amount will cause a reaction in you. Hopefully you will get good results without 110% elimination efforts. Keep us posted!
Good for you for recognizing you may be heading towards your mother's diagnosis and trying to do something proactively. I so wish I had known everything I know now all the years I had self-diagnosed IBS. Cutting out gluten now may mean you can heal quicker and hopefully be able to eat dairy, eggs and soy again. I tested in the low-teens for dairy and soy, and I definitely react to casein (in addition to lactose), both in cow and goats milk. The soy protein is hydrolyzed in soy sauce fermentation, or minimized in oil and lecithin, which may explain why I can have them and not tofu or soymilk. Everyone seems to have a different threshold for each protein which dictates what amount will cause a reaction in you. Hopefully you will get good results without 110% elimination efforts. Keep us posted!
Gabby - I also wish I would have know about the gluten connection when I was diagnosed with IBS twenty something years ago. Being proactive is definitely going to save you a lot if grief.
Tex - You are so smart! I sometimes feel I need to get my scientist minded son to decipher the things you write. LOL. Just kidding, but you are really smart!
Hugs,
Denise
"Be the change you want to see in this world."
Mahatma Gandhi
"Be the change you want to see in this world."
Mahatma Gandhi
Dear Gabby
Welcome from Hong Kong. It is good you did the Enterolab tests. It should help you navigate. Did you by any chance also take the gene test for susceptibility to Gluten intolerance? The fact that your mum has MC would suggest you have at least one of the suspect genes.
Best wishes, Ant
Welcome from Hong Kong. It is good you did the Enterolab tests. It should help you navigate. Did you by any chance also take the gene test for susceptibility to Gluten intolerance? The fact that your mum has MC would suggest you have at least one of the suspect genes.
Best wishes, Ant
----------------------------------------
"Softly, softly catchee monkey".....
"Softly, softly catchee monkey".....
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for the warm welcome.
Tex- Thanks for the explaination. And yes you can post my test results.
Ant - No, I didn't take the gene test. I kind of wish I did now. I wish I added the yeast test too.
I'm doing my best to avoid dairy right now. The only thing I am am having a hard time letting go of is cream for my coffee. Plus I think I might be allergic to coffee because I sometime sneeze when I drink it. Bye-bye coffee. What grief stage are you in when you want to pout and kick and scream like a 2 year old?
Gabby
Thanks for the warm welcome.
Tex- Thanks for the explaination. And yes you can post my test results.
Ant - No, I didn't take the gene test. I kind of wish I did now. I wish I added the yeast test too.
I'm doing my best to avoid dairy right now. The only thing I am am having a hard time letting go of is cream for my coffee. Plus I think I might be allergic to coffee because I sometime sneeze when I drink it. Bye-bye coffee. What grief stage are you in when you want to pout and kick and scream like a 2 year old?
Gabby
Gabby,
You could give Enterolab a call, and see if there is still time to add the yeast test. The gene test is a cheek swab test, and you could do that at any time - theirs is much less expensive than other/similar tests available.
Sorry about the coffee
And lots of sympathy for the kicking....
Sara
You could give Enterolab a call, and see if there is still time to add the yeast test. The gene test is a cheek swab test, and you could do that at any time - theirs is much less expensive than other/similar tests available.
Sorry about the coffee
And lots of sympathy for the kicking....
Sara