Originally Posted by mm84321
I think that misdiagnosis, or under-diagnosis, has a lot to do with it.
i think the most recent estimate for celiac disease was 1 in 133. even if it was misdiagnosed or under diagnosed since the vast majority of the population consumes copious amounts of grains wouldnt you think that more people would be diagnosed with it than 1/133 of the population?
so doctors misdiagnose or under diagnose the vast majority of celiac disease?
that's a pretty big claim.
I'm talking about the competition of cellular-uptake between the vitamin-C molecule and glucose. Both are similar in configuration, and since glucose is greatly favored in the contest, the uptake of vitamin C by cells is inhibited when blood-sugar levels are elevated. In effect, glucose regulates how much vitamin C is taken up by the cells. If we increase blood-sugar levels, the cellular uptake of vitamin C will drop accordingly. Glucose will also impair the reabsorption of vitamin C by the kidney, and so, the higher the blood sugar, the more vitamin C will be lost in the urine.
So, determining the level of vitamin C in our cells and tissues really has little to do with how much we are consuming in our diet, but more about the effect the starches and sugars we consume have in flushing it out of our system, while simultaneously inhibiting the use of what vitamin C we do have. It's not the absence of fruits and vegetables that causes the scurvy, but the presence of the refined carbohydrates.
but by how much?
how much glucose will inhibit how much vitamin C?