cea Diet

March 18, 2002

(from brady)

> There is enough evidence that a diet high in sugar and

> carbohydrates is a significant tripwire for rosacea even though the

> National cea Society does not recognize this, nor do medical

> authorities. However, one day a clinical study will prove this

> beyond doubt, if someone with the credentials who has money, power

> and courage will objectively investigate this. The

> cea Diet Users Support Group gives enough evidence of this.

> Most rosaceans do not want to change their diet lifestyle, but

> prefer pills, topical treatments, IPL, and any treatment allowing

> them to keep eating and drinking their current food and drink, so

> this does not appeal to the vast majority of rosaceans. But, you

> may be interested in researching this yourself.

I don't know about your diet in particular, Brady -- please let me

know if I'm missing something -- but in general the relationship

between diet and the immune system is fairly well documented in the

medical literature, both as a way of modulating the inflammatory

response and in the area of food allergens.

While certainly effective in decreasing chronic inflammation like

rosacea, immune modulating diets (that strongly limit sugars, among

other things) are notoriously difficult to stay on. ly, it's

also easy to imagine untold long term health effects if these diets

work by causing a decrease in general immune response, not just

chronic inflammation.

A person on an immune modulating diet who eats chocolate, for

example, may well experience increased inflammation, but I wouldn't

call that a rosacea trigger. I would view that as a return to normal

manifestion of inflammation.

Foods, drinks, and manner of cooking that increase facial flushing

are rosacea triggers, and avoiding them makes obvious sense. That's

not a food allergy, since allergies are stereotypic responses.

Allergic rashes can sometimes be difficult to diagnose, especially

when several rashes are present at the same time. But good allergists

can tell with only a glance what's an allergic reaction on the face

and what isn't.

Thank you for your email, and I appreciate your letting me know about

your diet.

Marjorie

Marjorie Lazoff, MD

March 19, 2002

Matija, I deliberately avoided commenting on your diet or any of the

popular diets mentioned by you and others. I really don't want to

disrupt the rhythm and comfort level here, or without great reason

challenge people's beliefs, many of which are closely held. I see

that most of the posts are based on anecdotes and shared readings.

This is a trusting group, of each other and of outside information,

and very welcoming to new posters. I respect that.

I'm much more suspicious of information than most people here. Part

of that is my nature, part comes from undergraduate studies in

philosophy and logical deduction that still influence my thinking,

and a lot comes from my medical training and experience; all doctors

hear so much industry garbage, and so much hopeful research that

never pans out. I commented earlier about an article you shared, from

that perspective. It's habit for me, I first look at where the

information is coming from -- does the person really know what he/she

is talking about, what's their bottom line, are they likely to make

money off this directly or indirectly or is there some other

secondary agenda operating directly or indirectly.

Regarding glycemic index vs load, I would echo Dr. Mifkin (from the

site you referenced): " ...However, all of these tools should be used

for research and not for your daily selection of foods. Use your own

common sense... "

Of course I've heard of Dr. Nase! His name is all over this group,

and I see he has tremendous support here. A few weeks ago I tried

ordering his book but the Web site doesn't function reliably from my

end. I'm told in a few months I'll be able to order it by phone, and

I'm looking forward to reading it then. I understand why you're

interested in my comments, though I'd probably be reluctant to share

them for several reasons. But from what I've read in the medical

literature, I do favor the theory that rosacea is a vascular

disorder, so with me Dr. Nase will be preaching to the converted.

Regarding another thread -- my understanding is that delayed

hypersensitivity reactions are mediated through T cells, not IgG.

Perhaps I missed what you were referring to? (This was in reference

to another poster expressing his belief that rosacea is a delayed

hypersensitivity to food allergy.)

Matija, I truly regret if my reluctance to provide feedback on

personal information is disappointing. I hope you understand.

Marjorie

Marjorie Lazoff, MD

March 20, 2002

> About IgG, I was simply asking the poster for more information

> about it. I tried to look up information on it and just found

> something from a researcher from the National Institutes of Health.

I'm with you, then, because I'm not familiar with IgG-related delayed

food allergies either. I don't really understand the connection

between allergies and rosacea. Whether the presence of histamine or

other immune-mediated substances triggers rosacea flare or facial

flush, it seems to me an allergy or food intolerance should be

identified if possible in its own right.

If my ignorance is due to lack of factual knowledge I hope someone

will point me (all of us) to online references.

It's hard to discuss beliefs that are based on gut feelings or

personal experience, because even when everyone is thoughtful and

polite it can feel hurtful when others don't validate those beliefs.

That goes for me as well -- my beliefs are based on what I've

experienced in science and medicine, so it's hard for me to

understand others who don't prioritize factual information or logical

deduction as a basis for knowledge. It's not the only kind of

knowledge, of course, but we're discussing here real things in the

material world. But I know many people don't.

Humans are by nature imaginative beings, and a few isolated facts and

unexplained connections can sometimes take our imagination to

insightful ventures, though not always. I'm in an email discussion

group where sometimes we talk about conspiracy theories for fun, but

I know there are people in the group who seriously believe them. (I

always tease them extra hard. ) Some of what gets posted here

reminds me of that kind of creative energy, though of course this

topic is very serious to many people here.

> It seems you didn't read my reply that closely.

I did mess up the IgG reference, I'm sorry. Some of my replies to you

(like the above) are intended as general comments and not directed to

you specifically, I hope you know that. It's my way -- I enjoy e-

groups, but it's not a comfortable medium for me as a physician,

there's so much potential for misunderstanding, in all directions,

and worse if I make personal replies. And I don't always have the

free time I've had the past few days.

It's nice to know that your diet works so well for you.

Marjorie

Marjorie Lazoff, MD

March 20, 2002