top of page

Nutritional ignorance in medicine: Critique of the garbage published in Journal of Pediatrics on glu

Article being reviewed: Norelle R. Reilly, MD. The Gluten-Free Diet: Recognizing Fact, Fiction, and Fad. Journal of Pediatrics 2016 in press May

Importance: This article was widely distributed in the media via press releases and television coverage; therefore its accuracy/falsity is of potential high importance based on wide distribution and the fact that it was published in a presumably important journal, which has revealed itself to be unreliable by virtue of this publication.

Pleasure: Reading the article was difficult and at times painful due to the lack of logic, inaccuracies, and overall use of "bullshit" per Frankfurt; writing this review will not be enjoyable except as an exercise in critique.

Overall evaluation of this article: This article is total garbage and is an embarrassment to science, Journal of Pediatrics, the discipline and profession of medicine and nutrition.

Process: This article was so stupid, that a one-time all-encompassing critique cannot be written in a single sitting; criticisms of this article will therefore be listed numerically and expanded as my schedule and patience allow. This page will be "refreshed" as updates are made sequentially per the sequence of the original article. Students and doctors and "thinkers" of all genres should benefit by reviewing this dexterous/deft deconstruction of institutional stupidity.

Abbreviations: GFD = gluten-free diet; CD = celiac disease

  1. Column 1, Paragraph #2—insertion of mystery and suspicious motives: After the usual introduction wherein she acknowledges that "the incidence of celiac disease is increasing" (for which she offers no explanation), the author states, "remarkably little is known about the motives of most individuals who adopt a gluten-free lifestyle." This is a common occurrence in articles written by indoctrinated medical doctors on the topic of nutrition, a subject on which they have inadequate training. Medical training in nutrition is virtually non-existent [Eur J Clin Nutr. 1999 May], and this educational deficiency continues into residency training [J Am Coll Nutr2008 Apr], even including specialties such as gastroenterology [J Clin Gastroenterol. 2009 Jul]. You will see that the author repeatedly uses "suspicious" and "unsure" and therefore "mysterious" terminology throughout her description of people who choose a gluten-free diet, a diet which she refers to as a "fad", thereby further denigrating its advocates and adherents. The remainder of her second paragraph is the selection of bad data to slander those who advocate a GFD. Logical fallacy/ies in use: Argument ad hominem, straw-man

  2. Paragraph #3—more of same, but worse: She points out the "belief" that a GFD can prevent celiac disease. This is not a "belief" as the author states with intentional denigration; it is a fact that GFD prevent celiac disease. Her repeated biased use of language reveals her motive of attacking GFD advocates. If patients experience symptom relief or health improvement on a GFD, she states that this improvement is "signifying that CD testing is warranted." NO. If a patient feels better on a GFD they do not need laboratory testing and a consult with a gastroenterologist, one of the best-paid sub-specialties in medicine; rather, the patient can simply enjoy the benefits and congratulate himself/herself on the self-directed and free health improvement. Again inserting mystery and suspicion, she states that a GFD carries "health and social consequences worthy of consideration" even though she just noted in the same paragraph that some patients have health improvement on such a diet. She then denigrates books and online information as failing to provide accurate information regarding the "health and social consequences worthy of consideration in advance of starting a child on a GFD are not described adequately online or in books promoting an empiric GFD trial." So now she is categorically denigrating books and textbooks, as well as information online, despite that most people will read her article online via the internet. Logical fallacy/ies in use: Argument ad hominem, straw-man, contradiction/ignorance of benefit, self-contradiction.

  3. .

work in progress... refresh this page occasionally to see progress from numbered paragraph above

2012 Dr Vasquez reviews the adverse effects of wheat in less than 2 minutes:

Dumbing Us Down; Education as Filtering and Forming (rather than Enlightening and Empowering): Many internationally respected educators and scholars have cultivated and proven the idea that institutional educations have intentional blindspots, leading to a type of "retarded education" that creates and perpetuates ignorance while appearing to provide a profound and broad education. Famous authors and works in this genre include especially Gatto's book Dumbing Us Down, Chomsky's position that "Education is a system of imposed ignorance", and perhaps Giroux's Teachers As Intellectuals: Toward A Critical Pedagogy of Learning.


2012 Dr Vasquez introduces the foundational diet protocol: This overview was later published in an inexpensive ebook and is also included in Chapter 4.1 of Inflammation Mastery, 4th Edition and Textbook of Clinical Nutrition and Functional Medicine, volume 1.

Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Search By Tags
bottom of page