Risk of consuming products with or without precautionary wheat or gluten labelling for persons with coeliac disease

Rasmussen, S.N.; Vigre, Håkan; Madsen, Charlotte Bernhard

doi:10.1016/j.fct.2022.113231

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are a few publications reporting on the frequency of gluten cross‐contact in prepackaged foods not labeled “gluten‐free.” In Denmark, foods with PAL had a gluten content >20 mg/kg in 3.9% of products compared with 5.9% in foods without PAL, 57 with no statistical difference. In a study by Verma et al, 6% of food products without PAL and 2% of products with PAL, had a gluten content >20 mg/kg (no statistically significant difference between groups) 58 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gluten‐free diet for pediatric patients with coeliac disease: A position paper from the ESPGHAN gastroenterology committee, special interest group in coeliac disease

Luque,

Crespo‐Escobar,

Hård af Segerstad

et al. 2024

J. pediatr. gastroenterol. nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and ObjectiveCoeliac disease is a chronic, immune‐mediated disorder for which the only treatment consists of lifelong strict adherence to gluten‐free diet (GFD). However, there is a lack of evidence‐based guidelines on the GFD dietary management of coeliac disease. This position paper, led by the Special Interest Group in coeliac disease of the European Society of Pediatric, Gastroenterology Hepatology, and Nutrition, supported by the Nutrition Committee and the Allied Health Professionals Committee, aims to present evidence‐based recommendations on the GFD as well as how to support dietary adherence.MethodsA wide literature search was performed using the MeSH Terms: “diet, gluten free,” “gluten‐free diet,” “diets, gluten‐free,” “gluten free diet,” and “coeliac disease” in Pubmed until November 8th, 2022.ResultsThe manuscript provides an overview of the definition of the GFD, regulations as basis to define the term “gluten‐free,” which foods are naturally gluten‐free and gluten‐containing. Moreover, it provides recommendations and educational tips and infographics on suitable food substitutes, the importance of reading food labels, risk of gluten cross‐contact at home and in public settings, nutritional considerations as well as factors associated to dietary adherence based on available evidence, or otherwise clinical expertise.ConclusionsThis position paper provides guidance and recommendations to support children with coeliac disease to safely adhere to a GFD.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…60 In adults, the likelihood of developing mucosal damage in the CD population when eating foods not labeled as "gluten-free" in a regular diet, with or without PAL, together with certified products, was estimated to be low, at the level of 0.2%-3.2%. 57…”

Section: Gluten Cross-contact During Production and In The Food Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Gluten‐free diet for pediatric patients with coeliac disease: A position paper from the ESPGHAN gastroenterology committee, special interest group in coeliac disease

Luque,

Crespo‐Escobar,

Hård af Segerstad

et al. 2024

J. pediatr. gastroenterol. nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Notably, some topics, such as allergens and gluten, are not considered at all or are considered only in a few cases or by a few regional training programs. In our opinion, these subjects are relevant, considering the problems resulting from the cross-contamination of lines, which are becoming increasingly important [36,37]. The same consideration applies to traceability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training for Food Handlers at Production Level in Italian Regions

Pattono

Petey

Covarino

et al. 2023

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food safety has always been a public health challenge. Globally, food safety control is supported by laws and preventive measures, such as inspections conducted from primary production to market, “from farm to fork” as emphasized by the European Union and training of Food Handlers (FHs). This latter preventive measure plays a very important role, and for this reason a review of training courses regulations provided in the different Italian regions was conducted. Analysis of the results shows that the Italian regions approach this issue in different ways: some regions provide only general guidelines, while others offer detailed instructions. The most significant differences concern the topics dealt with, the stakeholders, the staff training and the verification of results; topics such as allergens and gluten are often absent. More detailed guidelines tailored to fit the local scenario could provide better support to FHs, thus leading to real changes in their behaviors and mindsets and promoting the development of an actual “prevention culture”.

show abstract