"Once in remission, you can eat anything you want"

subduedjoy said...
If you could eat whatever you wanted, then you wouldn't have inflammation. Inflammation in the body is a sign that your body is reacting to something you are putting into it.

It seems that it was when I stopped taking tablets (anxiety related unfortunately) that a flare up gradually came into life. For the six years I was taking those tablets I was in a total remission eating what I wanted with no symptoms. My first flare up before that, which led to diagnosis, appeared to arise at a time of chronic stress and anxiety, though it is hard to tell what came first, symptoms or stress / anxiety, as they seem to feed into each other like a loop sometimes.

Is your statement conjecture, a theory, a fact...? Could there be other possibilities e.g. Immune problem?

And - how would I go about troubleshooting my diet in an effective way (especially if I am already on drugs atm)?

NiceCupOfTea said...

subduedjoy said...
If you could eat whatever you wanted, then you wouldn't have inflammation. Inflammation in the body is a sign that your body is reacting to something you are putting into it.

This is incorrect.

There's not a single bit of evidence that food causes inflammation in IBD. IBD can lead to various food intolerances (particularly during flare-ups obviously), which certain people then seem to interpret as "ZOMG, hold the presses, food causes UC!". In reality, it's almost certainly the IBD which causes the resulting IBS, intolerances, etc. and not the other way round.

There's also no evidence that diets which stop food from reaching the colon (enteral nutrition) helps UC flare-ups. Therefore the inflammation must be being driven by something other than food.

i'm thinking you may have missed something there nice - if you indeed have an intolerance to foods that started when you fell off your moped, what makes you think that intolerance doesn't lead to inflammation when you eat those intolerable foods ?

Also ... I do notice that when I'm in a flare I seem to be able to control symptoms to a degree by modifying diet. Does that mean I'm treating the inflammation? Don't think so. Just eating stuff that is less likely to make me run to the toilet, develop lots of wind, etc. So to people controlling their UC with diet: How much of it is symptom control and how much of it is treating / preventing inflammation?

So to people controlling their UC with diet: How much of it is symptom control and how much of it is treating / preventing inflammation?

I think it's both. I have fewer symptoms which come from inflammation when I don't eat food that aggravates my gut. And I've been able to slowly add more food back in that formerly were not tolerated.

Symptoms come from somewhere so lower inflammation (in my case) means less symptoms. At my last c-scope my inflammation was less than all previous scopes and RX meds did nothing to make that happen. I can state that with certainty because I took oral RX for 10+ years but only started getting better when I figured out what foods/drinks my gut preferred. I quit oral RX last August, started back for a month but then quit again because I felt worse taking them than not taking them. Mesalamine enemas however remain as my back-up plan, they help when the wrong food makes things go downhill.

I am one of the unfortunates that oral RX has not helped.

The cause of UC remains unknown. However, food intolerance, and food allergy, are not believed to be the cause. Many people have these conditions but do not have UC.

If simple dietary changes are enough to alleviate symptoms for some sufferers, then that is extremely useful. Many have limited or no success along that path.

It is also possible that some food reactions are misdiagnosed as UC, though that is more likely in older diagnoses, when techniques were less precise.

I could eat all food groups when in remission although haven't had a full remission for a few years now so don't know if there will be changes. I would still though have painful or loose reactions to foods very high in fibre or water (so lettuce is usually out for instance as are rough whole grains and popcorn). I can eat dairy but for all its health claims yogurt has been bad for me.

I won't say I can eat everything I want because I'd want to eat far too many sweet high omega-6 fat foods which are bad for overall health for everyone!

I've listened to a lot of these health summits and most of the practitioners are overly bought in to one way of eating and don't look at the research widely enough. Your genes also play a part. Food is not the first source of inflammation for many. The immune system can be set off by all sorts of things including importantly not feeling safe in the world. Hence higher inflammation seen in adults who as children who have been bullied and abused but not necessarily inflammation in the colon, it may be elsewhere in the body. There was some interesting stuff about histamine reactions which may contribute to inflammation. Also interesting research that once the mucosal barrier has been broken and foods come into contact with the lining of the bowel, the immune system might mark them down as foreign and to be attacked so they didn't start the problem but could become part of it. The gold standard for UC these days seems to be to try to achieve mucosal healing as when the barrier is back intact it can go back to working well.

Post Edited (London Lurker) : 8/10/2016 10:06:08 AM (GMT-6)

subduedjoy said...
I recommend everyone research epigenetics.

Rather than simply turn IBD-related genes 'off', why not aim to disable them permanently so we are not forced to drink low-FODMAP herbal teas in order to avoid switching them back on again?

That's my preferred route. Switch all teh genes off. Make sure your dumbass immune system can't ever make such a catastrophic error of misjudgement again.

They don't damage the lymphatic system, untrue.

Because those genes that are associated with IBD are probably associated with other things. One possibility is inflammation, which doesn't just effect the colon. We actually don't have as many genes as we once thought we did. We have a lot more bacteria than we thought we did. And our organs are more important to our whole body than we once thought. Everything is interrelated.

What we need to do is balance our bodies' systems. We know that healthy living can do this. A big part of healthy living that we do have some control over is what we put into our bodies. In addition to food, I also use only the purest of soaps, Castile; brush my teeth with baking soda; use essential oils, which are made of herbs; etc. I do not use anything that has fragrance in the ingredients. I no longer dye my hair, use makeup, or paint my nails. While I have no evidence that the toxins in beauty products, cleaning products, fragrant candles, etc. increase inflammation and cancer, my body is easy to get inflamed and has precursors to cancer. I don't want to take the chance that toxins put into the air or on my body will get into my body, and I recommend everyone else to do the same.

Wow. I have to justify living a healthy life? Okay...

It was only after I went through menopause and developed precursors to cancer that I became very strict with living a healthy life. I think that's what happens to most of us. We continue to do things that damage our bodies until we get seriously sick or get scary warning signs.

There are a lot of people doing what I'm doing, especially where I live, which is in California.

I am very active. It's very important to me to have a healthy body that can move and do things free of pain. I've been able to continue my active lifestyle through healthy living. I've seen people who have trouble moving. I've seen people who feel uncomfortable in their bodies. I've seen people who are in constant pain. I do not want to be one of them.

Yes, you will probably not find anywhere in the literature that Remicade, 6MP, Humira, etc. hurt the lymphatic system. However, you will find that these drugs can cause swollen lymph nodes and lymphoma. A properly running lymphatic system is not going to be at risk for developing swollen lymph nodes and lymphoma.

Again, they don't harm the lymphatic system, and there's no evidence on which to base that claim. You're talking about a very, very low incidence and rare side effect, lymphoma, that a number of journal articles have called into question whether it's actually caused by immunomodulators or biologics at all. You're claiming they harm everyone's lymph system. You're going to needlessly scare people.