Guest guest Posted September 14, 2004 Report Share Posted September 14, 2004 Anyone have experience with or an opinion on York Laboratories 113-Food foodSCAN IgG ELISA Food Intolerance Test? I got an e-mail from celiac.com touting the test. It is a blood test, so I wonder if it is more accurate than the average gluten intolerance blood tests are. Thanks. Kathy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 14, 2004 Report Share Posted September 14, 2004 ----- Original Message ----- From: " murphride " > Anyone have experience with or an opinion on York Laboratories 113-Food > foodSCAN IgG ELISA Food Intolerance Test? Yes. I found it to be reliable and accurate. I got an e-mail from celiac.com > touting the test. It is a blood test, so I wonder if it is more accurate than the > average gluten intolerance blood tests are. If you are testing for gluten, I'd strongly encourage the stool test at http://www.enterolab.com Gluten intolerance is an IgA (mucosal reactions, I believe) mediated reaction, whereas York tests for IgG (delayed reaction intolerances with the potential for reintroduction of the offending food at a later date). My oldest child tested IgG positive for gluten through York as well as IgA positive through Enterolabs, so it is possible that the IgG can be an indicator. I just would find the IgA stool test to be more authoritative. My middle child, who is also GI, *didn't* test IgG positive for gluten. York does point out that separate gluten testing should be considered if there is a positive IgG finding for gluten. LMK if you have other questions. HTH! --s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 14, 2004 Report Share Posted September 14, 2004 >Anyone have experience with or an opinion on York Laboratories 113-Food >foodSCAN IgG ELISA Food Intolerance Test? I got an e-mail from celiac.com >touting the test. It is a blood test, so I wonder if it is more accurate than the >average gluten intolerance blood tests are. > >Thanks. > >Kathy The IgG test is really useful, and I'll likely get it done one of these days. It isn't the same as the IgA test though. IgG allergies can come and go, and IgG is mainly in the blood. But IgA is mainly in the gut, and they seem to be very gene-related, and they are nastier for the health. Dr. Fine's test is the only one I know of that is really accurate for IgA, but even then it's only accurate if you are producing sufficient IgA and have been eating gluten. The one called the " rectal challenge " is likely more accurate, but it isn't done in the US. However, the researchers seem to regard a positive IgG test as similar to an IgA test ... I'm not clear on the logic here, but they say a positive IgG for gliadin is not as " narrow " in scope (i.e. you can be positive for IgG and not have a postive IgA, but if you have positive IgA you probably have positive IgG?). The advantage of IgG testing though is that it will show intolerance even in folks that don't have sufficient IgA (which is about ten percent of celiacs, for some strange reason). Also IgG is cheaper. Anyway, one of these days when I have some extra cash I'd like to have the ELISA test myself, as I'm pretty sure there are some foods that don't like me much. Some folks who have done it and actually eliminated all the foods (sometimes there's lots) report much improved health. York labs is well-regarded though. They also have a new saliva test ... I don't know how that compares to the others but it's easy! Heidi Jean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.