Forbes' intention is not to inform the public on Celiac disease

A recent article in Forbes has drawn the attention and ire of some prominent gluten-free advocates. Unfortunately, I first saw a number of the angry responses before reading the article, and so I was predisposed to a negative opinion of the article. Upon first reading, the article seems to take a critical view of a gluten-free diet. Out of fairness, I waited a day and re-read the article before documenting my response.

So, what does the author say? What is her goal?

Granting the author all possible benefit of the doubt, the goal of the article is to observe that some people with eating disorders such as anorexia may be hiding their disorder from their friends and family by claiming that they are on a restrictive diet, such as a gluten-free diet. Let me be clear, anorexia is a serious eating disorder and families and friends of people with this disorder should help them find help and get healthy. I am no expert in behavioral psychology, so I guess I can only take the author's word that some people with anorexia are lying to their friends and families and saying that they have a specific food intolerance.

However, the article also makes the bold claim that a gluten-free diet can LEAD to an eating disorder. This incredibly bold claim goes completely unjustified and nearly undefended in the article. Specifically, the author offers that "[t]he gluten-free lifestyle, while life-saving for the minority of Americans who suffer real consequences from grains, can be a slippery slope—or simply a means of denial—for some." Two (interviewed?) sources are offered as expert opinions in support of this conclusion. No contrary opinions are offered and one must assume that none were sought.

It seems clear that the author has a negative view of the currently trending gluten-free diet. Take the following quote, which I read as highly condescending, "[t]he gluten-free diet has become a sign of enlightened eating, an intellectual diet supported by a slew of studies and a passionate cadre of celebrity supporters." Why opine that the diet is "enlightened" and observe that it is supported by "a passionate cadre of celebrity supporters"? To my mind, these are not the types of statements one makes if one supports a gluten-free diet. Further, what would it even mean that a diet is intellectual? The avoidance of gluten has nothing to do with intellect. I can only conclude that the author is attempting to achieve a light prose, but instead in her failing has committed a serious offense: superiority and judgment. One might expect a journalist to take a non-judgmental approach to their topic. But, then again this is not reportage. The discussion of celebrities is the first part of an argument that culminates in the author's assumption/conclusion that the increasingly high profile of the gluten-free diet led two cheerleaders to use it as a cover for anorexia.

In response to some of the negative comments, the author has claimed that the "intention is not to inform (or misinform) the public on celiac disease but to raise a question". If the goal was not to inform the public on Celiac disease, then goal achieved. However, I would argue that the article actively misinforms, contrary to the author's claim. The most glaring example is the unsupported claim that a gluten-free diet can lead to anorexia. Read the DSM-IV. A restrictive diet is not a root cause of anorexia. Shockingly, the author does not explain the details of anorexia: its etiology, symptoms, treatment, and prognosis. But this is not an article meant to inform the public about the very serious problem of anorexia.