Clarity-Ferm, Gluten Testing, and Gluten Sensitivity

[ekjohns]

I just want to make sure everyone knows that Proline is not a protein, its an amino acid. It can be combined with other amino acids to form a protein but this statement from igliashon "Proline is the main protein implicated..." i simply not true. I' sure it was a type and he/she meant to say the proline rich peptide, but even if he/she did not mean to write it, the truth is the truth. Proline is an amino acid, not a protein

exactly, I said the same thing two posts up. From my reading there are peptides (possibly just one) that causes the disease. Clarity-Ferm seems to degrade those peptides this preventing the reaction

 

[bumstigedy]

I have been using clarity ferm for about the last 6 months. The beers have turned out fine. My IIPA brewed with it even won a few first places. I haven't noticed the beers to be any clearer though. I don't have a gluten allergy, but just trying to eliminate it as I have gone Paleo.

 

[jbay76]

Sorry EKJohns, when I first read the first posting I had to write the clarification, so forgive me for not seeing yours and "liking" it. I'll go back and "like" yours though. And yes, the antigenic response is a result of the proline rich peptides that results from our enzymatic breakdown of gliadin and hordien. The science shows that the endoprotease in clarity ferm breaks these proline rich peptides into smaller peptide fragments that do not bind to our intestinal epithelium, "essentially" rendering it harmless. Interestingly enough, both barley and wheat have the same percentage of proline, ~17% of the protein content. Cheers

 

[Ste1ny]

I apologize if this has already been answered, however I've been searching and haven't really found a solid answer.

Has anyone who has used Clarity Ferm noticed any difference in taste at all? I know that it's advertised to not mess with the taste at all, but before attempting to use, I'm trying to research and find info from people with experience. So far I haven't found anyone who has said there was any noticeable difference in the final taste of the brew.

Thansk

 

[dirtybear7]

Beer tasted great. It seemed even better because it was super clear. Don't hesitate to use it. I don't have gluten issues. I just like clear beer sometimes.

 

[igliashon]

Sorry EKJohns, when I first read the first posting I had to write the clarification, so forgive me for not seeing yours and "liking" it. I'll go back and "like" yours though. And yes, the antigenic response is a result of the proline rich peptides that results from our enzymatic breakdown of gliadin and hordien. The science shows that the endoprotease in clarity ferm breaks these proline rich peptides into smaller peptide fragments that do not bind to our intestinal epithelium, "essentially" rendering it harmless. Interestingly enough, both barley and wheat have the same percentage of proline, ~17% of the protein content. Cheers

Well, "the science" at this point is all hypothetical in terms of how it will impact those with celiac disease. The 20 ppm threshold is not a magic number, and even in the initial (small sample size and weak design) study that led to the promotion of that threshold, there were subjects who reacted at less than 10 ppm. In fact, a review of the literature leads to the strong conclusion that that 20 ppm number is not based on good science, because there is just very little research out there trying to replicate the results of the first study. And, I might add, the studies are only focused on biopsy-positive celiac patients; there are other forms of gluten intolerance that may operate on different pathophysiological mechanisms, which are still being investigated.

Furthermore, while clarex-treated beers can pass the R5 competitive ELISA, the hypothesis that that makes them safe for celiacs has not actually been tested. For these beers to truly be considered safe, they should be subject to the same FDA standards as any product making a health claim. Currently I am not aware of *any* in vivo studies demonstrating the safety of these beers in randomized double-blind controlled trials.

I am aware of roughly equal amounts of anecdotal evidence supporting both sides (that they do or that they don't cause a reaction), which is not surprising considering it is a known fact that celiac sufferers vary in sensitivity and severity of reaction symptoms, and also that gluten intolerance is significantly over-diagnosed in the general population (mostly due to mistake self-diagnoses or over-zealous alternative medicine practitioners and fad-diet health gurus). The placebo and nocebo effects absolutely SHOULD NOT be discounted!

I would do well to let my argument rest on the above alone, I think, rather than my feeble layman's attempt at deciphering the food chemistry of brewing with Clarex.

 

[SC_Ryan]

Great thread. Bump and subscribe.

 

[spennyj]

I whole-heartedly agree with this. While there may be no physical, noticeable reaction, there can still be damage to the intestine and inflammation. These can lead to long term health issues.

For example, I have been struggling personally with over all body inflammation (measured by the C-reactive protein blood test). If this remains at high levels long term I'm told by my doctors that it can lead to serious issues like h eart disease.

Yeah, but if you are not having visable/noticable physical reactions to a product. What makes you think that product is contributing to your inflammation or blood test at all?

Seems to me that they would almost always go hand in hand. If not always. Couldn't the tests be turning up other products or issues?

I ask because Corona seems to have no effect on me. While usually the smallest amount of gluten absolutely destroys me. Even Omission has a really bad effect on me.

Seems to me that there may be more than 1 or 2 slightly different disorders in play with this. Along with a lot of self diagnosing and flat out misdiagnosing by our incompetent medical professionals. Intestinal overgrowth may be a disorder that many are calling celiac or gluten intolerance ....and may in fact have slightly different causes or treatments but similar symptoms.

 

[CavemanDom]

So I was wandering around the Internet for various gf beer recipes and came across a rather large recipe database, with a variety of amphibian in their name. What I noticed is A LOT of the recipes labeled as GF by their OPs either used clarity ferm or a liquid yeast. This particular site doesn't have a forum, just comments per recipe. Does anyone else participate over there? Is anyone reading this one of the OPs I am side-eyeing? On the other hand, some of the recipes looked like they would be pretty good and safe, aside from the 1# of 2-row...etc

I noticed my LHBS website has fine print on clarity ferm stating it is not 100% gluten removal and not for those with celiac... So that's a comfort, although last time I was in there when someone suggested it, I got looked at like I was crazy.

 

[ICWiener]

Great thread. I'm not GF, but the wife is, and she would straight up shank someone for a decent GF dry stout. I'm going to try Clarity Ferm as soon as my LHBS places their next White Labs order.

 

[igliashon]

For what it's worth, here's a recent blog entry I wrote based on some further research into the original topic of this thread: http://ghostfishbrewing.com/ghostfishblog/why-we-dont-de-glutenize/

Basically, studies are starting to come out that there are actually a variety of peptide sequences found in gluten-containing grains that can trigger reactions in celiacs (and presumably those with non-celiac gluten intolerance). So this is one possible explanation for why Omission could trigger reactions despite being able to pass the R5 competitive ELISA--the process may not degrade other potential triggering components, which also do not show up on the test.

 

[igliashon]

Also, I have to say...I'm a bit disappointed that this thread has turned into a place where people share their Clarity-Ferm recipes.

 

[CavemanDom]

Awesome blog entry on ghostfish.

...now send me a 6-pack!

Also, found out last night another member of the circle of friends has celiac. He had been GI discomfort since September, (and nearly lived off of Little Caesar's Hot-N-Ready) but the doc pinned down the diagnosis this week. The wife and I suspected, but kept quiet.

However, he doesn't drink, so I don't have to share my beer

 

[derek704]

I am going to the Doc on Tuesday, but I think I'm Celiac. When I drink regular beer, I wake up the next morning and all my muscles hurt and I have a headache that lasts for days, even if I just take a sip. Not to mention stomach problems. I made my first 5 gal batch of "wheat beer" with clarity ferm and I am 20 bottles in, no symptoms yet! So it did the trick for me, and I'll update if it turns out that I am Celiac.

 

[Osedax]

Yeah. Wish we had a sub forum for all the deglutenized beer discussions. Clarity ferm may strive off short term side effects but, you may still be doing long term damage to your body. I can personally make it through 2 gluten reduced beers before I get any side effects. However, I feel off for a few days after them. You would be surprised the amount of breweries could pass the Elisa test. Pretty much any brewery that uses an enzymic clearing agent. Brewing barley is already "low gluten" but it is the broken down parts of gluten that do you in. That article about peptides is a great point on the matter.

I'm all about do what makes you feel good. It's just a warning that you may feel fine while still doing damage to your intestines. Who knows, maybe it will lead to a true barley based gluten free beer.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Home Brew mobile app

 

[dirtybear7]

Also, I have to say...I'm a bit disappointed that this thread has turned into a place where people share their Clarity-Ferm recipes.

I know it's the internet, so someone has to be angry about what someone else shared. Time to get off your soapbox and reread. If you read what I wrote you'll see I'm not suggesting to anyone that recipe for the beer is gluten free. I'm just relaying my personal experience with Clarity-Ferm. If that disappoints you, too bad.

BTW: the person I gave the beer to is a PHD level scientist working at a university. This person does have a very strong knowledge of chemistry. I full disclosed everything about the beer including giving her the documentation on Clarity-Ferm. I think she was able to make an informed choice.

Good Day Sir

 

[igliashon]

I know it's the internet, so someone has to be angry about what someone else shared. Time to get off your soapbox and reread. If you read what I wrote you'll see I'm not suggesting to anyone that recipe for the beer is gluten free. I'm just relaying my personal experience with Clarity-Ferm. If that disappoints you, too bad.

BTW: the person I gave the beer to is a PHD level scientist working at a university. This person does have a very strong knowledge of chemistry. I full disclosed everything about the beer including giving her the documentation on Clarity-Ferm. I think she was able to make an informed choice.

Good Day Sir

And if you re-read the title of this post and the original post--which is a sticky, BTW--you would see that the whole point of this thread is to educate newcomers about what clarity-ferm is and does, and why gluten testing in beer is problematic. It's not an open call for people to share their favorite clarity-ferm recipes, or their personal experiences with it. This being an internet forum, of course, thread drift is to be expected. I can't expect to control it (since I'm not a mod), but I have a right to be disappointed about it.

I hope that people will take their discussion of clarity-ferm recipes to a different thread, that's all. Surely that is neither an insulting nor an inappropriate request?

 

[CavemanDom]

One question that I don't recall seeing addressed anywhere... Do these clarifying agents still clarify a naturally GF beer?

 

[ChasidicCalvinist]

I saw a synopsis of this article--but I didn't read it. Anyway, it seems appropriate for this thread: http://www.ttb.gov/rulings/2014-2.pdf

 

[CavemanDom]

I skimmed it. 11 pages is a lot to chew on right now. Seems TTB is intending to be more strict than FDA if I read correctly. SWMBO will probably read the whole thing tomorrow.

However, while it does have language pertaining to "gluten reduced" beers vs naturally GF, I don't see it covering those processes themselves and their labeling. Or, I don't think this covers clarity ferm specifically, just the final product.

Hopefully, restaurants will keep their menus up to date to reflect these changes. I saw Omission listed under "gluten free beers" in a restaurant menu once. It was also the only one listed... I didn't try it either, I was on lunch break at work.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

 

[igliashon]

The TTB ruling, as well as the FDA, are both quite clear:

. In general, the rule provides that foods may be labeled
with the term “gluten-free” if they do not contain any one of the following:

(1) An ingredient that is a gluten-containing grain (e.g., spelt wheat);

(2) An ingredient that is derived from a gluten-containing grain and that has not
been processed to remove gluten (e.g., wheat flour); or

(3) An ingredient that is derived from a gluten-containing grain and that has been
processed to remove gluten (e.g., wheat starch), if the use of that ingredient results in
the presence of 20 parts per million (ppm) or more gluten in the food (i.e., 20 milligrams
(mg) or more gluten per kilogram (kg) of food). See 21 CFR 101.91(a)(3), 78 FR 47178.

Note carefully that the 20ppm standard applies to INGREDIENTS, NOT the finished product. The TTB in its most recent ruling points that out in the following passage:

Thus, foods that are made using an ingredient derived from a gluten-containing grain may be entitled to a “gluten-free” claim if the ingredient itself (not the food) has
been processed to remove gluten, and the use of the ingredient does not result in the presence of 20 ppm or more gluten in the food. TTB does not believe that this provision
will generally be relevant to malt beverages fermented from malted barley and other gluten-containing grains, or distilled spirits distilled from gluten-containing grains, as
these products are usually made from the grains themselves, not from ingredients such as wheat starch or barley starch.

So unless Omission's barley malt can pass the R5 competitive ELISA prior to brewing and prior to treatment with clarex, they cannot be labeled gluten-free under the above definition.

The big problem is that the FDA cannot and will not police individual establishments selling the beer. They will prevent Omission from labeling the product gluten-free, and they will prevent them from advertising it as gluten-free, but their distributors who are selling to restaurants and retailers? And the restaurants and retailers themselves? Let's just say the FDA probably has its hands a little too full to keep tabs on all that stuff.

In most cases the enforcement is left up to state liquor agencies, i.e. the folks granting the license to sell or serve alcohol. The TTB will enforce on the producers (breweries), and maaaaybe if enough people complain they'll try to crack down on point-of-sale misrepresentation. IF, that is, the FDA doesn't come back with a ruling that grants gluten-free label approval to beers where only the finished beer has to pass the 20ppm threshold test. I'm currently investigating whether I can get the ear of someone on the FDA who will have a say in the ruling, because I'm aware of a lot of factors that make the 20ppm standard non-applicable in the case of Clarex-treated beer.

In the meantime, the best thing we can all do is to complain when establishments promote Omission as "gluten-free" (or Daura, or Brunehaut, or Two Brothers, or any of the newer breweries opening up using the same Clarex-oriented model). If you see Omission on a menu as gluten-free, ask to speak with a manager and give them an education. If you see it on the shelf at a store with a "gluten-free" shelf tag or even merchandised with other gluten-free beers, ask to speak with the beer buyer or someone in a supervisor or manager position in the specialty department. Odds are the distributors are feeding these folks a lot of false information, and it's only by raising a ruckus ourselves on the small local scale that we can hope to do anything about it.

Also, it's probably worthwhile to complain to the FDA and the TTB and the State Liquor Control Board (or whatever the agency is called in your state). Snap a photo of the false advertising and submit it with your complaint. Oh, and post complaints to Omission's facebook page too. They'll just delete them, but Pedro at New Planet monitors the page daily and captures all the complaints posted for use as evidence against Omission's case in the FDA ruling.

 

[Osedax]

Yeah well, I saw in one restaurant where they labeled redd's apple ale as gluten free. I nearly strangled a waiter. They did not seem to care.


Sent from space for your convenience

 

[CavemanDom]

Unfortunately the "GF fad" has gotten a lot of people poorly informed, and with the band wagon situation there are a lot of people (including my brothers girlfriend) who seem to think we are faking it. Got in an argument with the manager of Genghis Grill in Waldorf md who refused to cook our orders on the allergen grill insisting that a 600 degree grill would burn off any possible allergen anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

EDIT: I realize this post is off topic of the thread, and really, the entire forum.

 

[celiacguy]

This thread has some misinformation in it. The way it describes the immune response to gluten is off. If you change one amino acid in a peptide it might not fit into the problem receptor anymore, meaning no more immune response. You don't need to break down the amino acids that bind onto the receptor (i.e. glutamine), you just need to change the makeup or shape of the peptides. This is like a key and a lock. Your key can change a little and it will still work, you could change it a fair amount and it will still work, but if the wrong change happens then it won't open the lock. Some of the proteins in gliadin are resistant to our digestive enzymes that cut them up and that is part of the problem. If the peptides could be be chopped up by our bodies they wouldn't be able to cause the immune response.

The enzyme in question here breaks the bond on one side of the amino acid proline. Some enzymes go to the end of a sequence and chop off single pieces, these are what your cells can absorb. Clarex instead chops the big protein up into little chunks from the middle of the chain. So you get a bunch of pieces of the chain. The chains that are implicated in celiac disease happen to contain a bunch of proline so if you cut that chain up it won't fit the receptor anymore.

So that process works. No doubt about it. There may be some issues with it not breaking down all of the gluten or issues with too many false negatives with the tests that are available for testing beer, but the theory of the product is sound.

I came to the forum to find out about brewing with clarex and there seems to be a bit of a bias against it, can anyone explain the bias?

Also can anyone point me to some resources with information on home brewing with clarex and how well/not well it works?

 

[cincypilot]

Yes the bias is some of us are gluten intolerant/celiac, and have reactions to Gluten Reduced products using this product.


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

 

[dirtybear7]

This thread has some misinformation in it. The way it describes the immune response to gluten is off. If you change one amino acid in a peptide it might not fit into the problem receptor anymore, meaning no more immune response. You don't need to break down the amino acids that bind onto the receptor (i.e. glutamine), you just need to change the makeup or shape of the peptides. This is like a key and a lock. Your key can change a little and it will still work, you could change it a fair amount and it will still work, but if the wrong change happens then it won't open the lock. Some of the proteins in gliadin are resistant to our digestive enzymes that cut them up and that is part of the problem. If the peptides could be be chopped up by our bodies they wouldn't be able to cause the immune response.

The enzyme in question here breaks the bond on one side of the amino acid proline. Some enzymes go to the end of a sequence and chop off single pieces, these are what your cells can absorb. Clarex instead chops the big protein up into little chunks from the middle of the chain. So you get a bunch of pieces of the chain. The chains that are implicated in celiac disease happen to contain a bunch of proline so if you cut that chain up it won't fit the receptor anymore.

So that process works. No doubt about it. There may be some issues with it not breaking down all of the gluten or issues with too many false negatives with the tests that are available for testing beer, but the theory of the product is sound.

I came to the forum to find out about brewing with clarex and there seems to be a bit of a bias against it, can anyone explain the bias?

Also can anyone point me to some resources with information on home brewing with clarex and how well/not well it works?

It does a good job clearing beer. I've used it several times. If you want to discuss my experience as far as the gluten issues go with out the fear of being judged, message me.

 

[igliashon]

I think you've got a few things wrong here, mate.

This thread has some misinformation in it. The way it describes the immune response to gluten is off. If you change one amino acid in a peptide it might not fit into the problem receptor anymore, meaning no more immune response.

That's an oversimplification. First of all, they have not produced an exhaustive list of peptides derived from grains that can trigger an immune response in Celiac disease. Second of all, the leading hypothesis about non-Celiac gluten intolerance is that it is an innate immune response, not an antigen-specific one, which will respond differently.

Some of the proteins in gliadin are resistant to our digestive enzymes that cut them up and that is part of the problem. If the peptides could be be chopped up by our bodies they wouldn't be able to cause the immune response.

Incorrect. It is not the gliadin itself that even causes the response, it is potentially a variety of peptide fragments (QQPFP being the most studied one) which must be acted upon by tissue transglutaminase (TTG) first before they/it are typically rendered response-provoking. So it is the very fact that they ARE digested which renders them harmful, at least in Celiac disease. The pathology in NCGI is not well understood at this point so it would be difficult to determine how much digestion plays a role.

The enzyme in question here breaks the bond on one side of the amino acid proline. Some enzymes go to the end of a sequence and chop off single pieces, these are what your cells can absorb. Clarex instead chops the big protein up into little chunks from the middle of the chain. So you get a bunch of pieces of the chain. The chains that are implicated in celiac disease happen to contain a bunch of proline so if you cut that chain up it won't fit the receptor anymore.

The FDA does not approve drugs based on hypotheses alone. The bottom line is that no in-vivo studies have been done to evaluate whether the hypothesis behind clarex is correct, in that it actually renders beer safe. You can talk about the chemistry till the cows come home, but Celiac and NCGI are both not sufficiently understood, to the point where without in-vivo trials, any chemistry-related theorizing counts as nothing more than an untested hypothesis. This is medicine, not just chemistry.

I came to the forum to find out about brewing with clarex and there seems to be a bit of a bias against it, can anyone explain the bias?

Yes: we've tried clarex beers and they make a lot of us sick. And we are angry about it, because the people who make these clarex beers are spreading misinformation about what's really "gluten-free" in beer, resulting in establishments marketing them as GF and causing more and more people to get sick. Because gluten-free beer is such a niche, many establishments opt only to serve one brand, and much of the time it's a clarex beer that is not truly safe for all those who cannot tolerate gluten.

It's the same reason people get angry about drug side-effects in a heavily-marketed drug for some rare disease. If you took a medication and it gave you hours of severe cramping and diarrhea, wouldn't you be a little bit biased against it (especially if it was marketed as an anti-nausea drug)?

Also can anyone point me to some resources with information on home brewing with clarex and how well/not well it works?

Plenty of people will give you some anecdotal info on it working great for them. Clarex comes with instructions, if you want to use it, go ahead and use it, and stick to the regular forums because your process will be identical to barley beer brewing...because that's what you're doing. There's nothing really to discuss about it that's particularly relevant to this forum...you follow the directions and you take your chances.

Would it even matter to you if someone told you they got sick off of clarex-treated beer? It sounds like you've already made up your mind that it's the way to go, so you'll probably ignore any anecdotes that don't support your conclusion anyway. If the answers to your questions on "how well it works" won't actually change your mind about anything, there's not really a point to asking, is there?

 

[celiacguy]

I think you've got a few things wrong here, mate.



That's an oversimplification. First of all, they have not produced an exhaustive list of peptides derived from grains that can trigger an immune response in Celiac disease. Second of all, the leading hypothesis about non-Celiac gluten intolerance is that it is an innate immune response, not an antigen-specific one, which will respond differently.



Incorrect. It is not the gliadin itself that even causes the response, it is potentially a variety of peptide fragments (QQPFP being the most studied one) which must be acted upon by tissue transglutaminase (TTG) first before they/it are typically rendered response-provoking. So it is the very fact that they ARE digested which renders them harmful, at least in Celiac disease. The pathology in NCGI is not well understood at this point so it would be difficult to determine how much digestion plays a role.



The FDA does not approve drugs based on hypotheses alone. The bottom line is that no in-vivo studies have been done to evaluate whether the hypothesis behind clarex is correct, in that it actually renders beer safe. You can talk about the chemistry till the cows come home, but Celiac and NCGI are both not sufficiently understood, to the point where without in-vivo trials, any chemistry-related theorizing counts as nothing more than an untested hypothesis. This is medicine, not just chemistry.



Yes: we've tried clarex beers and they make a lot of us sick. And we are angry about it, because the people who make these clarex beers are spreading misinformation about what's really "gluten-free" in beer, resulting in establishments marketing them as GF and causing more and more people to get sick. Because gluten-free beer is such a niche, many establishments opt only to serve one brand, and much of the time it's a clarex beer that is not truly safe for all those who cannot tolerate gluten.

It's the same reason people get angry about drug side-effects in a heavily-marketed drug for some rare disease. If you took a medication and it gave you hours of severe cramping and diarrhea, wouldn't you be a little bit biased against it (especially if it was marketed as an anti-nausea drug)?



Plenty of people will give you some anecdotal info on it working great for them. Clarex comes with instructions, if you want to use it, go ahead and use it, and stick to the regular forums because your process will be identical to barley beer brewing...because that's what you're doing. There's nothing really to discuss about it that's particularly relevant to this forum...you follow the directions and you take your chances.

Would it even matter to you if someone told you they got sick off of clarex-treated beer? It sounds like you've already made up your mind that it's the way to go, so you'll probably ignore any anecdotes that don't support your conclusion anyway. If the answers to your questions on "how well it works" won't actually change your mind about anything, there's not really a point to asking, is there?

That peptide sequence you referenced is exactly what this enzyme cuts up. That P in the sequence is proline. Not really sure what's going on in this forum so rather than continuing to argue point after point I think I will just bounce and find a new community.

Toodles

 

[robodeath]

All I know for sure is that:

1.) I'm a celiac
2.) Commercial barley beer makes me sick
3.) Homebrew beer (that I brew) with clarity ferm does not make me sick

 

[igliashon]

Robodeath, have you tried Corona? Because it passes the same tests that Omission does.

Celiacguy, I am well aware of how the enzyme works against that peptide sequence, as I think I made quite clear. Yes, the enzyme hydrolyzes the QQPFP peptide sequence such that an R5 competitive ELISA test cannot detect it. Does that mean the beer is harmless? Only a double-blind placebo-controlled experiment with a nice large sample size containing subjects who represent all forms of gluten intolerance can determine that. The FDA has very exacting standards for products that make medical claims, and for good reason: even the best hypotheses based on the best data are derived from a position of incomplete knowledge, and the gold standard is always "try it on people and see if it works". Multiphase clinical trials are the norm for every other product that has a claim of health effects, so why should beer treated with clarity-ferm be any different?

Some people get sick from these beers, period. I am one of them. If they don't make you sick, then more power to you. I'm not in favor of banning them, I'm simply in favor of people acknowledging that they are not universally safe, and adopting standards that allow for a way to distinguish them from beers which are universally safe for those with any form of gluten intolerance or wheat/barley allergy. Why is that so problematic? No one's saying "get rid of Clarity-Ferm" or "yank Omission off the shelves". All I want is for people to be educated about the differences between products and processes, and to call a spade a spade. A beer made from barley and treated with an enzyme, which has not been clinically validated *AT ALL*, is different from a beer made entirely from millet, or rice, or buckwheat, or sorghum. Why call them both gluten-free?