Talk:Gluten-free beer/Archive 1
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
- 1 Gluten Free Beer
- 2 See also
- 3 External links
- 4 discussion
- 5 footnotes
- 6 images
- 7 Changes to references, images, spello's
- 8 external links
- 9 PICTURE
- 10 picture
- 11 does gluten survive brewing? Sadly it does!
- 12 reworking above point
- 13 ELISA, gliadin vs hordein testing, gluten calculation based on gliadin..... NIGHTMARE!
- 14 changed to references etc comment contingued
- 15 General Sort Out
- 16 Please try to recognise the points made here
- 17 Third Party
- 18 not trivial
- 19 Step by step
- 20 Point by Point
Gluten Free Beer
Gluten can be found in many common grains including Barley and Wheat. Even in small quantities it can be very poisonous to those who suffer from coeliacs disease. Almost all beer contains levels of gluten that cannot be tolerated by the coeliac, but a very few specialist breweries do cater for coeliacs or those who suffer from dermatitis herpetiformis.
Along with the review of all available beers there are links to websites from where the brews may be ordered. However, glutenfreebeerfestival itself is a neutral and independent resource that does not have connections with any particular brewery.
In many ways beer seems to be the hardest gluten free product to "get right". However, gluten free beer is now available and there is now a range of ales, beers, and lagers to choose from. Glutenfreebeerfestival.com has divided the field into two camps: "low gluten" and "no gluten" - with no gluten brews using absolutely zero ingredients containing gluten, and low gluten varieties based on barley malt having a very low amount of gluten present.
Around the world standards of "gluten free" vary. For example, while in the United Kingdom a beer with less than 20 parts per million gluten (20ppm) is "gluten free", in Australia it is not possible to describe any product as such if any gluten can be detected at all. Similarly, some "gluten free" breads can contain low levels of gluten in one country, in another they would contravene labelling or food standards legislation.
However, while large scale commercial beers are out of the question for coeliacs (regardless of the sometimes misleading advice on their websites), it is likely that most coeliacs will be able to drink beer at under 20ppm (in moderation) without causing themselves any harm. It is important, however, for consumers of all "low gluten" foods and beverages to tell their consultant, and to ensure that even if the obvious symptoms are absent, there are no other negative effects continuing that they are unaware of.
Notwithstanding this advice, the recent development of gluten free ales, lagers, and beers has been a very positive move forward to liberating those who suffer a variety of related conditions from possible social isolation.
Some users have edited this page and it is appreciated. I created it originally so that wikipedians would have access to a page about gluten free beer. It has been replaced repeatedly without discussion by a user in the past, and I am grateful that more responsible users are adding contributions.
I find that someone repeatedly puts an advertising image on this page. Is it possible for this to be avoided? The current image is neutral, and every available GF beer is seen. Please do not revert to the edit that shows just one brand, no matter how powerful that brand is in the market place. Surely Wikipedia is not the place for such promotion, and it will be better to keep images to those that are public domain and are not placed to sell one product?
Please add to this page. I urge users to be positive. Not to revert on instinct. For some of us there is no place on the beer page, where we have been kicked off as unwelcome. Clearly the beer page is already "owned" by others, and those who cannot consume gluten because of coeliacs, dermatitis herpetiformis, multiple sclerosis... do not have a place discussing beer.
Well, ok, here then is our place to introduce material and edit each other's content. Perhaps those who are not able to share a discussion with us disabled folks in the mainstream section, will leave us alone here?
I have spent some time improving the content and grammer and supporting the material with references (few though they are for this topic). I would be grateful if improvements to this page can be positive rather than be blinkered reversions to a more basic and crude version. Please read the content ! wikwobble
I have recieved a rather childish request from a user, associated with their continual placement of an advertisement for one type of beer. In response, I have removed the images from this page. It seems a bit sad to have to do this, but there you are ! I may post another image in the future, I have emailed glutenfreebeerfestival.com to see what else is public domain. Can we remain adult when I do ? Also, if one is proud of one's comments or suggestions connected with an edit, one would give them here. Those who are ashamed of their actions tuck them away from immediate public view. wikwobble
Changes to references, images, spello's
Changes to references, images, spello's. Thank you for the spello corrections, I have no problem with Duncshine's contribution. I do not understand the changes to images, no reason has been given here in the discussion, so I have reverted. The one present is the one sent to me by the author, and I see no reason why the alternative has more validity. Re references. The reason given was to remove references to a site. Why? Why is Bella online more valid than glutenfreebeerfestival.com? According to both sources, Carolyn Smagalski is the author. If the editor finds an alternative route to a source, I would have thought both should appear in the references. If one is preferred to another, surely the editor has a reason? If the source is actually a different article, both sources can be listed with validity. I am tidying up the references tomorrow. If someone has an actual reason for changing them, perhaps they could be discussed here? wikwobble
Image change was done because it is conventional to put images in the top right corner. There are no hard and fast rules, but that is generally seen as the most useful and aesthetically pleasing place. Long narrow pictures are acceptable, but are awkward to place in a pleasing position. The image change was an edit of the long narrow picture, and placing the edit in the conventional position. The edit also removed some material from the picture which had references to choices and selections made by the glutenfreebeerfestival website. The article had again started to become too heavy on promotional material toward that website. The aim of Wiki is to give balanced views. My continued contention with user wikwobble is that the article is great, and I am continuing to oversee the development of the article. But that Wikipedia must be seen to be fair and unbiased at all times. Extravagant referencing to an external site can be seen to be biased. While reviewing the article I noticed that references to articles written originally for another website (Bella) had been credited to the glutenfreebeerfestival website where the articles had been reprinted. The resulting excessive and misleading use of the glutenfreebeerfestival as a reference source was then adjusted. In reverting those edits wikwobble also reverted grammatical and factual edits, such as the capitalization of wheat and barley, etc. I don't normally go into petty detail for the reason for obvious edits, nor make complaints about other users behaviour, but wikwobble seems to feel I have a personal vendetta, when I have made it clear from the start that my intention has been to ensure that the gluten free beer article is seen to develop fairly and without undue emphasis on an external website. This gluten free beer article is not wikwobble's to do with as he pleases. It is a collaborative article on Wikipedia about Gluten free beer. It should not be used to inform people about how wonderful the glutenfreebeerfestival website is. It should not be used to get as much mention of the glutenfreebeerfestival website onto Wikipedia as possible. Pictures of blue ribbons awarded to beers by the glutenfreebeerwebsite are highly suspect. Such behaviour should be avoided as much as possible. This has been a serious bone of contention from the start, and I'm sure that wikwobble is not unaware of what he is doing. At this point for wikwobble to continue promoting the glutenfreebeerfestival website against all advice to the contrary is deeply worrying. SilkTork 21:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
I have removed one of them - to a coeliac group. There is no refernce to beer on the site, so it seems the best place to link it is at coeliac. If someone sees a contrary argument, please detail it here, thanks. wikwobble
Hello. I wrote the picture on the page and sent it to someone to upload here. I am not particularly happy with how it looks and could create a better one. Anyone know how I can get it from my computer to the article page?
By the way, anyone know what my ugly mug is doing higher up on this page - not the article? - yo umight have asked? funex?
It is on your list of images as public domain. I always thought that this meant that it was open to reuse by others without asking? But sorry if it causes a problem. I'll continue this on your user page. wikwobble
does gluten survive brewing? Sadly it does!
This is my first edit in wikipedia so I have done it in an area I know well. I wanted to evidence the counterclaim that gluten does actually survive brewing. i am quite pleased with it, I pasted in anohter reference and made changes. But if I have not followed a particular procedure please let me know. i am new to this game !! --steve 18:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC)Funex?
reworking above point
Hi Steve, thanks for your emails, I think the addition of this evidence is really helpful and will help stop people rationalizing themselves into the cancer ward! I have reworked the entire paragraph to integrate your point. Have you any thoughts over the gliadin ELISA test for low gluten beer? I know there is some debate here but I know of no source that could help. Also I don't want too much negativity. By the way, I see nothing wrong with you premier into Wikipedia. I only made changes because you added to the paragraph, where perhaps the new point forced the rest of the paragraph into being revised. wikwobble
ELISA, gliadin vs hordein testing, gluten calculation based on gliadin..... NIGHTMARE!
Thanks also for yours. I have put a little bit of prevarication in the article - by the qway your change looks fine to me. the whole ELLISA etc debate is a minefield and I will let yo uknow if anything comes out of it. I am talking to a research chemist about all this and it miught not be for me to write the reply. But there are serious problems with cetain tesgting regimes becasue tests based on gliagin and other GPs in wheat are OBVIOUSLY not necesarily right for barley recipes (or rye etc). See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9849874&dopt=Abstract it might suggest there is a way out. It all suggests that you should ask which test is being used - and make sure it is not the one that gives the most convenient result - thta will almost certianly be the crappiest, and I don't want to drink anything based on a ppm from a test CHOSEN to get a certain ppm !!!! --steve 09:47, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
changed to references etc comment contingued
Hello. I have been asked to reply to this point, though I am not sure if I am comfortable doing so as my website appears in the refrences, and I don’t want to comment on those choices, made by others, other than to note some issues. Firsly the image. I provided that as requested by someone editing Wikipedia. I sent what was asked to that representative of Wiipedia, and made it public domain, but I think it is not really ok for someone within Wikipedia to then chop it up without discussing it. I am not sure where the limits to public domain are, but I would have thought it at least a little rude. I went to the history page to see what refernces were made, and what you had changed. Can I indicate that C Samgalski writes direclty for my site and that articles on the sit3e itself were written by her and sent to me, not reprinted (as opposed to other Smagaldski articdles that are only linkied from my site). I am not sure where else you can find some of them, but they were sent to me directly for putting onto the website. One of them is a completely different article to the one you changed it to, and is more generic advice than the other.. If I undersatned what I am looking at, all the other refernces to Caroline’s articles are to Bella, aren’t they? Lastly on this, it is not my fault that there is no other site that focusses on gf beer and is independent. I wish there was. Then you could fill the page with references eh? And I wouldn’t waste my time running th site. Just one last thing. When I went iinto the history I saw a note from you dated 15 June – 19.08. Just wanted to mention that I had not planned entering any beuty competitions. steve 14:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
General Sort Out
Given the above comments, I have worked in the best of the recent changes with revertion back to use of more generic sources and removal of recent material inaccuracies (eg, not all gf grain ingredients are in fact cereals, the fact that there are exactly zero sources to back the contention that glycoproteins are all neutralised [if you know of one, them by all means change the text and let's see the source] etc) to form what I hope is the most accurate version, that also reads well. I suppoose I could argue every single point, but it might be best if people tackle them one by one here and we can argue them out? I am very happy with contradictory text, but it needs to be substantiated, do you not think? wikwobble
Please try to recognise the points made here
I don't understand the drive to remove evidence, and to put material inacuracies into the article, so I am reverting to the version I put in five minutes ago. wikwobble
- The intention is at all times to create a good article and keep to a minimum the amount of references to the glutenfreebeerfestival website. Please continue to edit the article and improve it without making any more references to the website. There is no need to keep mentioning the website, nor the name of Dr Steve Ford. I am not simply reverting your edits. Improvements and additions are left, or edited. I congratulate you and encourage you on work you have done on the article. I make small improvements here and there to spelling, grammar, clarity, NPOV, wikilinks, etc. And also to remove excessive references to the website. There is a link to the website, and that is appropriate. Any further references to the website are questionable in the context that this is an article about gluten free beer not an article about the glutenfreebeerfestival nor the glutenfreebeerfestival website nor Dr Steve Ford. SilkTork 02:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
your suggestion for a third party is a good one. I am happy to do that, apart from where it refers ot my own site. I have spent some time going through the history of last night. If I understand whay I am sseing, wikwobble worked on the article regulary for over an hour. Looking carefullyu at the edits made i can see that he included improvments SilkTork had made (insertions of worfd "cereals", lower case for barley, wheat) but also corre3cdted statements that where not true. I aslo see that he put in antohrte reference - Australian Coeliac. It seems that SilkTork then reversed everything without including any ofg the improvments wikwobble had made. I never wanted to be brought into this debate, and I am bored with it already, but I dont' think there is any way SilkTork can claim to be being fair. his improvemnts seem to be included - he must surely see value in wikwobble's work in that hour? Did he go throuhg each change or just change the whole lot in one go? wikwobble claimed SilkTork was bullying him. I am too new to this site to knoiw its culture, but his wholesale return to an earlier version seems crude and casual. Most importantly, the point given by wikwobble two paragraphs up is VERY IMPORTANT - this could really hurt people. There is no evidence at all that brewing converts gluten to amino acids. Plenty that it doesn't. The sense of this paragraph MUST be to show the reader that this is tha balance of scientific evidence. If I knew how to change it back in one go I would do so now. If someone else can - please do so urgently. [funex?, forgot to sign earlier]
ok I made the change. i thinki it is really important that changes made here are thought about. i do not want any partr in an article taht could lead people to take a chance hoping beer will not kill them. It kills thousands through bowel cancer and wrecks lives through osteoperosisd. between one in 30 and one in 100 must only drink gf beer (& cider, wine, spirits). there is no debatre about that and anyone who writes otherwise here must take responsibility for helping people to make informed choice, or are partly responsible for anyone who chooses to believe the amino acid myth and top themselves with a beer. Bowel cancer is only 50% survival, and it is a nasty way to go. Please be carful.steve 09:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Step by step
This is not bullying or intolerance. The edits are considered. To ensure that conflicts are resolved it appears to me that perhaps we should go through the edits slowly. Step by step.
Step one: I have moved the image to the conventionally accepted position in the top right corner. This should be a non-controversial move. Placing the image in this position accords with the consensus of the majority of editors. SilkTork 09:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Step two: I have removed the lower image. This is a long image which does not fit the frame accurately. In addition it contains references to the glutenfreebeerfestival website which could be considered to be promotional. The picture in its current form is questionable. There is an edit available in which the image has been trimmed and references to the external website have been removed. That image is less controversial and may be used instead. SilkTork 09:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Step three: Making adjustments to the Gluten free beer section to reflect a balanced view showing points from both sides of the debate, yet showing the notes of concern. Readers are left free to make up their own minds. SilkTork 10:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Step four: I have used two alternate references which provide the same information by the same author. This is to reduce the amount of referencing back to the glutenfreebeerfestival website, and so avoid the possibility that readers may feel the article is promoting that website. SilkTork 13:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Step five: I have used a balanced reference to indicate that while evidence is not firm on the possible danger of beers such as Budweiser, that caution is advised. Both view points are given, and readers are allowed to make their own judgements. SilkTork 14:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Point by Point
Point One - I put that image there, in response to your complaint. It is obviously not an issue with me. wikwobble
- This is not a valid reason for moving the image. I will revert. Please explain why you prefer the image to be in an unconventional and aesthetically unappealing position. SilkTork 13:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Point Two - There is nothing wrong with the lower image, it exploits the source of expertise and equally represents every existing GF brewer. There may be a better image coming, but this is the best available representing the full range of GF beer, that I have seen. wikwobble
- The thinking behind the comment: "it exploits the source of expertise" is what gives me cause for concern. This article is in dispute about the nature of promotion of that source. Until you find the other image it would be in the best interest of the article itself if the image remains off the page. I will again revert. SilkTork 13:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Point Four - I do not see why Bella is seen as more legitimate and valid a source than the existing one. In addition, one article is generic, one refers to one particular brew. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with your source, so I have added it. The more the better - there is no reason to delete one unless it fails to support the statement. To delete it would seem just to represent a venomous attitude to that source. Why would you not worry the article promotes Bella? wikwobble
- As the reference source appears in two places and this article is in dispute because of the potential promotion of one of those sources, for the best interests of the article the least contentious referencing source should be used. Revert again. SilkTork 13:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Points Three and Five - This is just wrong. That source does not refer to residual glycoproteins. Please explain to me why every single brew tested by ELISA gives a positive result? There are five existing GF barley brews across the whole world. Each throws a positive ELISA test. What more is there to say? wikwobble
- Step three edit from-
- "Some brewers claim that beers brewed mainly from grains such as rice, sorghum, buckwheat and corn (which tend not to produce an autoimmune response in coeliacs), but include some barley or wheat are safe for coeliacs, arguing that the proteins from such grains as barley are converted into amino acids. However, there is considerable evidence that the claim is not true (for example see Sheehan, Evans & Skerritt, 2001)." to-
- "Some brewers feel that beers brewed mainly from cereals such as rice, sorghum, buckwheat and corn (which tend not to produce an autoimmune response in coeliacs), and from a proportion of barley are safe to drink. The brewers argue that the proteins from barley are converted into non-harmful amino acids. Statements from brewers such as Sapporo show that their scientists feel confident that their product is non-harmful to those who are gluten intolerant. However, there is some concern and evidence that the claim is not true (for example see Sheehan, Evans & Skerritt, 2001)"
- As this is an encyclopedic entry, one viewpoint is given and considered fairly, along with a source, before the alternate view is given. The point about an encyclopedia is to give all the main viewpoints, regardless of one's opinion of them - regardless of whether we feel such viewpoints are correct or moral. The place for an essay convincing people of a single viewpoint is an external website or web-blog.
- Step five edit from-
- "Consumers of "low gluten" foods and beverages are advised to inform their consultants of their diet, and to ensure that even if the obvious symptoms are absent, there are no hidden negative effects continuing that they are unaware of. Some large scale commercial brewers suggest that their brews may not be dangerous to coeliacs, but the evidence does not support this and there is a risk that coeliacs want to rationalise that they can continue to be exposed to “normal beverages”" to-
- "Consumers of "low gluten" beverages are advised to inform their consultants of their diet, and to ensure that even if the obvious symptoms are absent, there are no hidden negative effects from peptides in the beer. Some brewers suggest that their low barley malt beers may not be dangerous to coeliacs, but not all evidence supports this. There is a risk that some coeliacs will tend to believe the brewery statements that "normal beverages" such as Budweiser are safe, and to pay little or no attention to advise that they drink with caution."
- This was an attempt at making the concerns and reasons for those concerns a little clearer. This is part of the balance. The main objection I think you are making from comments here and on my talk page is to the word peptide rather than gluten? I took that from Donald D. Kasarda, research chemist with the United States Department of Agriculture, one of the experts in this field. A detailed explanation of any controversy regarding his explanation would make for an interesting addition to the article. But, remember, we cannot get into the area of Original Research, so the objections would have to come from reliable sources.
- Conclusion, your objections are not clear. Revert. SilkTork 13:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
In summary, I am reverting to the earlier version which/but includes the whole of Step One, and the best of Step Four, and numerous other little improvements you made such as changes to lower case, which were improvements. However, using this method of debate is a vast improvement on an earlier dismissive style. wikwobble
- Dialogue on this issue was iniated by myself: 01:02, 4 June 2006 and has been maintained throughout as evidenced by your talk page. I have remained civil throughout. And I have endeavored throughout to explain clearly the issues involved and your options. Two experienced admins have looked at this dispute and explained to you that I am doing the Right Thing while you have been hostile. You have concealed comments on your talk page and behaved, frankly, very badly throughout this. I sympathise with your frustration in not getting your own way, but this is not a competition. My intention throughout has been to help create a brilliant Gluten free beer article. Your failure to see that, and to take this personally is tiresome. I ask again that you assume Good Faith on my part. I also ask that you cease from making personal comments. SilkTork 13:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
please remove all references to me and my sebite right now, if you want to run toytown university that is fine by me. take responsibiltiy for what you say, it no longer has anything to do with me. steve
Lets get it right
I have been pesuaded ot return to this site, but it is only one last effort to get it right. iam Steve Ford, I am responsbile for www.glutenfreebeerfestival.com I did not begn this articel and I have nver put any reference to me, my site, or images of myself on it. I accept that someone else doing somay have irritated, but having realised they are known to me (only after the article was written, mind) I undersatnd where the enthusiasm comes form and why. i want it made clear that I do not see ithat enthusiasm as lacknig sincerity. However another person seems to have an oposite agenda that centres on removing any reference to me or anything I have done in this area. That's fine as long as the article does what it should and isnt dangerously unbalalnced, even if my site is the only dedicated and neutral source of info o nthis subject - its still fine.
However, what we have is an article over reliant on one source - even though carolyn is known to me and is a complete Star! - In fact she has written two articles for my site. More worryingly the information in the article gives the impression that there is evdence taht normla beer may not be harmful to coeliacs. This scares me. I removed anyreferecne to me and my site frm the article - I do not want to legitimise what is curretnly said. In fact, as it stands, I feel the entire articler should be removed, lest it empowere those who are looking for excuses to rationalise drinking normal beer. I can give a list of sources showing how people are doing that. some of them will likely die frm this behaviour, others will become ill and have a difficult and painful old age.
I have seen the dbate on userpages, and to me objectivity has left the builidng. if this site is a place for egos to fend & prove then pleae leave me out of it. I have had unconnected medical issues recently that mean I do no thave time for this approach, and I ddo not want a debate with anyone hypersesnitive and thinks I am a god, or a bigot who thinks i'm a git. Can someone else please get involved? I was asked to be 3rd party - that doesn't work becaseu a)its about references and I am too obviously one of them - & b)I am neither a god or a git - but some people here think I am one or the othr.
lastly if anyone here thinks this debate is healthy - read teh lines immedietly under the title "point by point", above. poitn one - one bloke agrees with the other. the Other disagrees with that. Mad! Forget my discussion pages (Funex?), if anyone wants to talk to me go tom my site, see above, and send me a mail. I get 30+ every day from people wanting to drink beer. About 30% of them are telling me about Xbeer Ybeer or Zbeer that the bloke at the pub said was ok. i have never once been able to agree. If anyone wants to make this aerticle less mad, I will send images or material (eg the requested ELISA debate ) btu Im bollocksed if I am going to do it the way thingsare going now.
ps - DEDFINITELY NOT GF* (to save yo mailing me) - Corona, heinekin, Guiness, Straub Beer, Nigerian guiness, Budweiser, Kome rice-beer, Sara, Stella (!), Rogue, ..... and "no GM ingredients" or "organic" does not mean gluten free. Definitley not. (*unless something has hapenned that no one told me about)
Gluten Free Beer and Multiple Sclerosis
Unless someone can provide a reference that gluten free beer is recommended for those with MS, I'm going to cut it out of the article. The citation currently there for that section doesn't back up the claim made. The source does mention that he feels gluten is bad for MS, and that he cut beer out of his diet, but beer also has sugar (notice that sweetened fruit juice is also mentioned in the article) and he never, ever mentioned gluton-free beer. I also have misgivings about generalizing ANYTHING from the source, since the source is a single person reporting his subjective experiences with MS. Vpoko 20:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- I've removed the sentence & citation for the reasons above. Vpoko 14:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)