Argument For: Normal gut flora maintains gut wall integrity through protecting it, feeding it and insuring normal cell turnover. When the beneficial bacteria in the gut are greatly reduced, the gut wall degenerates. 9,10,21,25 At the same time various opportunists, when not controlled by damaged good bacteria, get access to the gut wall and damage its integrity, making it porous and “leaky”. 6,28,29 For example, microbiologists have observed how common opportunistic gut bacteria from families Spirochaetaceae and Spirillaceae due to their spiral shape have an ability to push apart intestinal cells braking down the integrity of the intestinal wall and allowing through substances which normally should not get through. 13, 25 Candida albicanshas this ability as well. Its cells attach themselves to the gut lining literally putting “roots” through it and making it “leaky”.31 Many worms and parasites have that ability as well. 9,10,35Partially digested foods gets through the damaged “leaky” gut wall into the blood stream, where the immune system recognises them as foreign and reacts to them. 36,37.38 This is how food allergies or intolerances develop. So, there is nothing wrong with the food. What is happening is that foods do not get a chance to be digested properly before they are absorbed through the damaged gut wall. So, in order to eliminate food allergies, it in not the foods we need to concentrate on, but the gut wall. In my clinical experience, when the gut wall is healed many food intolerances disappear. Argument against: http://www.healingnaturallybybee.com/articles/dig12.php Both are incredibly convincing and interesting theories and I was wondering what anyone else's view is and which makes more sense to you?