The Domino's Pizza Fiasco

[tex]

Hi All,

As most of us are aware by now, about a week and a half ago, Domino's Pizza chain announced a GF pizza offering but the announcement included a disclaimer that their GF pizza "may" (read that as "almost surely will be") contaminated with gluten before it reaches the consumer. Personally, I think it was a stupid move, based on greed, and it will eventually come back to bite them in the butt.

In the meantime, my recommendation is to avoid eating the product unless you're doing a gluten challenge, because the odds appear to be unacceptably high that it will cause most people who are sensitive to gluten, to react.

Here are some interesting comments on the issue, by the Gluten Dude.

http://glutendude.com/gluten/dominos-goes-gluten-free/

Even Dr. Fasano has published a special letter to the public about the product, so if he thinks it's risky, it must really be risky.

http://somvweb.som.umaryland.edu/absolu ... a=1873&z=5

Since I never eat pizza anyway, it macht nichts, as far as I'm concerned, but the precedent established for other companies and other products, truly sucks. Now, many more company planners will think that they can produce products that are out of compliance with established standards, as long as they issue a disclaimer along with them. The entire concept stinks, IMO.

Tex

[Zizzle]

There is a petition going around, 2,500 sigtnatures as of yesterday, asking the NFCA to take away its "amber" (partial risk) designation on the Domino's pizza.

However, I was surprised to learn Domino's does not use any loose flour in its shops, so they feel the airborne risk is minimal. I guess all the dough arrives preformed?

Here is the NFCA opinion. They actually studied Domino's pizza-making practices:

http://www.celiaccentral.org/dominos/note-from-alice/

[tex]

The sad part is, this is like saying "here is a gluten-free product, but be sure to read the fine print before you eat it". Some people won't read the fine print, and/or they will conclude "if the NFCA endorses it, it must be safe".

Tex

[Zizzle]

Agreed. This is especially true among kids and teens with Celiac, a large sales demographic for Domino's. They won't read the fine print. They just want to fit in and have pizza like everyone lese.

[brandy]

Hi Tex,

The problem with the "gluten free" marketing when the item is not truly gluten free is that products are going to injure people like my Mom who has lived with celiac for 25 years. For 25 years she has not eaten oats because the medical professionals have told her not to. The last time I was at her house she had a container of oats that had a prominent 1-1/2 inch font on the front labeled Gluten Free. Because the oat box was next to her other health food items in the grocery store and labeled "gluten free" she told me it is now okay for her to eat. Mom is 75 and she believes labels on the front of containers. A true celiac probably should not be eating oats even if the item is marked "gluten free." Brandy

[tex]

Brandy,

You're right on target, because many of us (and many/most celiacs) are also sensitive to the avenin in oats. It's weaker than the gluten in wheat, secalin in rye, and hordein in barley, but it still causes reactions. It just takes longer to initially build up an antibody level. Once the antibody level surpasses our personal threshold, we begin to react, just as we react to the other gluten-related antigens. Eating oats twice a week, it took me 6 weeks to begin to react (and then it took another 6 weeks for the D to stop). I'm pretty sure that I'm a celiac, but I've never pursued a diagnosis -- I just assumed that was a moot point.

Rye and barley are also "gluten-free", and they can be legally labeled as "gluten-free", but the secalin and hordein in them will make us (and virtually any celiac) sick as a dog. The labeling laws leave a lot to be desired.
Tex