Liz Lipski distills three decades of clinical nutrition practice into a working sequence of thought for digestive assessment.
You will learn to:
Every recommendation is anchored in published research, comparative laboratory data, and cases in which conventional testing returned normal results while the patient continued to decline.
Clinical training covers digestive pathology in the following categories: reflux, IBS, inflammatory bowel disease, and celiac disease, each with its own diagnostic criteria and drug.
Yet what training rarely covers is the assessment sequence that tells you where to begin when a patient presents with six overlapping complaints and a chart full of unremarkable results.
As a result, pancreatic exocrine insufficiency gets managed as IBS for years.
Hypochlorhydria gets treated with acid suppression.
A parasite survives eight negative ova-and-parasite panels because the ordering clinician did not know that detection rates vary by laboratory, not by patient.
Digestive assessment works when it follows a structured order:
Skip that order, and you are selecting interventions by guesswork.
The patient absorbs that cost in years of chronic symptoms, escalating dietary restriction, and appointments that end without an answer.
Why does one patient recover on a protocol that fails the next patient entirely? Liz Lipski has spent her career answering that question by assessing digestion in sequence rather than by symptom label.
This course distills that sequence into something you can apply in your next appointment.
You will work through digestive and absorptive capacity; intestinal permeability and bacterial LPS; microbiome composition and its dietary modulation; inflammation and immune activation; and the enteric nervous system, which determines whether any of it holds.
You will also learn the intake tool she developed to stratify digestive priorities and track changes over time, since patients often forget symptoms once they resolve.
The stool testing comparison alone comes from running seven laboratory methodologies on a single sample and documenting where results agreed, where they contradicted each other, and what that means the next time you order a test.