Sunday, February 6, 2011
More on the Gluten Free Bubble
This article asks some of the same questions that I asked in a previous post. Turns out, others foresee a decline in the gluten free market.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Gluten Free at Jersey Mike's
Eating gluten free at the sub shop. What's the point, right? Well, when the food and service are as good as Jersey Mike's, it might just be worth it.
I had read online that this sub shop had some gluten free offerings so I decided to give it a try. We were lucky to go early enough in the day because it wasn't busy. The manager at the Naperville, IL location was great. He walked us through the menu and explained the "sub in a tub", which is the gluten free option. I could see crumbs all over the preparation area so I asked if he could take precautions to prevent cross-contamination. He immediately understood and made sure his staff used a different preparation area and changed into new gloves.
I ordered the Italian sub in a tub with all the oils and spices. It tasted great. Essentially, the sub in a tub is the sandwich fixin's (sans bread) served in a plastic clamshell thingy. My lunch-mate had the turkey and provolone on white bread. The bread looked and smelled amazing, so stay away you Celiacs if this is too tempting for you! Otherwise I highly recommend this sub shop.
I had read online that this sub shop had some gluten free offerings so I decided to give it a try. We were lucky to go early enough in the day because it wasn't busy. The manager at the Naperville, IL location was great. He walked us through the menu and explained the "sub in a tub", which is the gluten free option. I could see crumbs all over the preparation area so I asked if he could take precautions to prevent cross-contamination. He immediately understood and made sure his staff used a different preparation area and changed into new gloves.
I ordered the Italian sub in a tub with all the oils and spices. It tasted great. Essentially, the sub in a tub is the sandwich fixin's (sans bread) served in a plastic clamshell thingy. My lunch-mate had the turkey and provolone on white bread. The bread looked and smelled amazing, so stay away you Celiacs if this is too tempting for you! Otherwise I highly recommend this sub shop.
When Will the GF Bubble Burst?
I feel incredibly fortunate to live in an area that has an abundance of gluten free options, both in grocery stores and restaurants. I can usually find any gluten free product I want. Sadly, I don't take advantage of all the resources that are available to me. I take for granted that restaurants will have gluten free menus and that Whole Foods will have gluten free seminars. And somewhere in the back of my mind there is a nagging fear that one day this bubble will burst. Someday the market for gluten free products will decline and retailers will reduce shelf space dedicated to specialty products. Someday there won't be enough demand in restaurants to justify specialty training of cooks and servers. But these are all just fears right? There's really no reason to worry, right?
After all, it would stand to reason that the increase in demand for gluten free products is directly related to the increase in diagnosis and awareness of Celiac and gluten intolerance, right? But is that really the case? What if the increase in demand is due to the perception that "gluten free" is inherently healthier? Check out this quote from a recent industry survey:
"Only 8 to 12 percent of gluten free consumers said they bought gluten free products because they or a member of their household has celiac disease or an intolerance to gluten, wheat or other ingredients."
Wow! 46% of respondents said they bought gluten free products because they thought they were healthier overall. This 46% is the bubble.
Of course a gluten free diet is not necessarily healthier for people without gluten intolerance. Typically a gluten free diet lacks in certain nutrients and should be followed with care and intention.
My fearful prediction is that the gluten free bubble will burst once these voluntary gluten free eaters learn that it is not a healthy diet for them. In the mean time, I continue to enjoy the expanding bubble.
After all, it would stand to reason that the increase in demand for gluten free products is directly related to the increase in diagnosis and awareness of Celiac and gluten intolerance, right? But is that really the case? What if the increase in demand is due to the perception that "gluten free" is inherently healthier? Check out this quote from a recent industry survey:
"Only 8 to 12 percent of gluten free consumers said they bought gluten free products because they or a member of their household has celiac disease or an intolerance to gluten, wheat or other ingredients."
Wow! 46% of respondents said they bought gluten free products because they thought they were healthier overall. This 46% is the bubble.
Of course a gluten free diet is not necessarily healthier for people without gluten intolerance. Typically a gluten free diet lacks in certain nutrients and should be followed with care and intention.
My fearful prediction is that the gluten free bubble will burst once these voluntary gluten free eaters learn that it is not a healthy diet for them. In the mean time, I continue to enjoy the expanding bubble.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Are Wow Bakery GF Cookies Available in Chicagoland?
As far as I can remember I have not seen any products from Wow Baking company in my local stores. They look mighty tasty. Now I'm on a mission...
How Do You Respond to Misinformation?
In general, this is a question we all have to deal with on a daily basis. With the normalization of the internet and the increase in potential media inputs, it stands to reason that we all have more information than we need really. But is any of this information reliable? Between Twitter, Facebook, blogs, and even TV and ancient media like radio, one is faced with a wide range of potentially conflicting information. Which inputs are reliable and which can be brushed aside? It is sometimes difficult to make this type of determination. It begins with the assumption that we ourselves have access to correct information upon which to base our conclusions about new inputs. Can I trust any news website? (Hint: No.) Ultimately, we all develop our own filter for evaluating information that we read or hear. Ideally, after a lot of exposure to a given topic we can develop a reliable filter. Maybe even an informed filter. Even if we still cannot say which input is right or wrong, we can at least identify the perspective and viewpoint of a given input.
I would like to think that I have developed a well-informed filter when it comes to a few specific topics, two of these being Celiac disease and the gluten free diet in general. I have read enough medical journal articles, specialized magazines, books, and professional blogs to develop a fairly advanced filter for accurate and inaccurate information. Even if I am not a medical specialist, I can sniff out when a source is somehow not entirely trustworthy. And of course, a lot of information is easily searched out on the internet. So, if someone tweets, "Red Stripe beer is gluten free," I can search the internet and find out pretty quickly that this is false and that perhaps the person meant to tweet Redbridge instead.
All this introduction to ask, what is the appropriate response to incorrect information, whether in print or online? With the Twitter example of Red Stripe, it is rather easy to respond on Twitter and correct the information. In this case I would hate to have someone drink a Red Stripe and react negatively to the gluten content. But, what about other cases where the information is more complex or controversial. For example, every week or so it seems I see an online post about the dangers of using creams, shampoos, and other external products that contain gluten. Immediately, my filter sets off a red blinking light. I think, "Now wait, my understanding is that the negative side effects of gluten intolerance are triggered by ingesting gluten." At first, I doubt myself. Then, I recover my certainty and realize that the person posting this information is either confused or has done a poor job explaining themselves. Either they are talking about a gluten allergy and have confused this with Celiac disease, or they read an unreliable source and accepted it as fact. Ok. So then what is the next step? Do I go through the entire process of explaining the difference between a gluten allergy and Celiac disease? Do I post a response on this person's blog? Sadly, I'm usually too lazy or busy to respond and I just move one.
Thoughts?
I would like to think that I have developed a well-informed filter when it comes to a few specific topics, two of these being Celiac disease and the gluten free diet in general. I have read enough medical journal articles, specialized magazines, books, and professional blogs to develop a fairly advanced filter for accurate and inaccurate information. Even if I am not a medical specialist, I can sniff out when a source is somehow not entirely trustworthy. And of course, a lot of information is easily searched out on the internet. So, if someone tweets, "Red Stripe beer is gluten free," I can search the internet and find out pretty quickly that this is false and that perhaps the person meant to tweet Redbridge instead.
All this introduction to ask, what is the appropriate response to incorrect information, whether in print or online? With the Twitter example of Red Stripe, it is rather easy to respond on Twitter and correct the information. In this case I would hate to have someone drink a Red Stripe and react negatively to the gluten content. But, what about other cases where the information is more complex or controversial. For example, every week or so it seems I see an online post about the dangers of using creams, shampoos, and other external products that contain gluten. Immediately, my filter sets off a red blinking light. I think, "Now wait, my understanding is that the negative side effects of gluten intolerance are triggered by ingesting gluten." At first, I doubt myself. Then, I recover my certainty and realize that the person posting this information is either confused or has done a poor job explaining themselves. Either they are talking about a gluten allergy and have confused this with Celiac disease, or they read an unreliable source and accepted it as fact. Ok. So then what is the next step? Do I go through the entire process of explaining the difference between a gluten allergy and Celiac disease? Do I post a response on this person's blog? Sadly, I'm usually too lazy or busy to respond and I just move one.
Thoughts?
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)