New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Is Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity for Real?

Nutrition Diva: Quick and Dirty Tips for Eating Well and Feeling Fabulous

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Scientific American presents Nutrition Diva by Quick & Dirty Tips. Scientific American and Quick & Dirty Tips are both Macmillan companies.

As I'm sure you've noticed, gluten-free diets have become wildly popular, even among those who do not have Celiac disease. With all the models and actresses insisting that shedding gluten keeps them thin and top tennis pros claiming that avoiding gluten improves their stamina, it's no wonder that gluten-free has become a major diet trend.

Despite all this, many experts insist that there is no reason for people without Celiac disease to avoid gluten. For one thing, avoiding gluten does not automatically lead to weight loss. Many people, in fact, gain weight when they go gluten-free, for reasons I explored in my episode on gluten-free diets. Cutting out wheat and other gluten-containing grains can also increase the risk of certain nutrient deficiencies if you're not paying attention. Suffice it to say that a gluten-free diet is not automatically a healthy diet - nor is it a cure-all.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


On the other hand, many people who suffer from Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) find that their symptoms improve on a gluten-free diet - even when they do not have Celiac disease. This is so common, in fact, that the medical profession has assigned a name to the phenomenon: Non-Celiac Gluten Sensitivity (NCGS). But an interesting new study finds that gluten may not be the culprit after all.

> Continue reading on QuickAndDirtyTips.com

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe