Did you even read the study? They only say that it might be possible that there could be an effect on inflammation, but also stating that there haven't been good studies done on that subject. The problem is that nutritional studies are often very narrow, only for specific cases and the same applies for the results. However, those studies are often broadly generalized by ill-informed people. I'm no expert either, so I can't say if grains would be good or bad, it's just clear to be that neither can all the other people who claim to know so.

My problem seems to be that there is some significant overlap between the groups, “people who use HN” and “people who are the target audience for self help books.” Worse, are people who can’t cite and instead throw articles into the mix, while being condescending and pseudo-psychic.

Just bury me in good citations and we can both be happy.

On the other hand, it might just be that this particular topic is unusually divisive. The science of gluten sensitivity is young, its study fraught with placebos and confounding variables, and adherents of the anti-gluten movement are often nearly religious in fervor. Asking for citations might just be asking for trouble.

True, but there are few better demonstrations of the weakness of an argument than asking for someone to prove it, instead to be met with anger and verbiage.