I know people who are allergic to all manner of foods and things. Peanuts, wheat, strawberries, bee venom, me…so on and so forth. Got me to wondering if there wasn’t someone, somewhere allergic to anything you could name…like are there people allergic to oatmeal, say, or some other presumably innocuous food.
Are there foods that no one is allergic to?
I’m going to guess human breast milk.
Human breast milk wouldn’t be a bad guess - but - what if the mom consumes peanuts, strawberries, elucidator, etc, and baby is allergic to those things?
Then the baby is allergic to those things that happen to be dissolved in something else. That doesn’t make the something else itself allergenic.
Babies can be sensitive to food in their mother’s diet. I think there was an episode of The Learning Channel’s “Mystery Diagnosis” where a baby was unable to digest or breakdown breast milk.
I would assume some simple foods like water, sugar, or salt don’t cause an allergic reaction.
If you expand the definition of ‘allergic’, you’d have to rule out breast milk. An awful lot of adults couldn’t drink human breast milk without problems.
You’re probably thinking of lactose intolerance, which isn’t an allergy under any definition.
People seem to stretch the meaning of allergy out to any reaction. They shouldn’t. Technically a food allergy is a reaction of the IgE immune system to foreign proteins. There are other antibody systems, like IgG, that can produce some symptoms that might overlap and are triggered by other foods or even metals. These are more properly called hypersensitivities than allergies, but people, even doctors, sometimes lump them together.
So, then, if a food has no proteins, it cannot provoke an allegic reaction?
I once heard, many years ago, that if you are suspected of having a food allergy, but it is not clear to which food you are allergic, you may, for a few days, be put on a diet consisting only of lamb and pears (and water). Apparently it is very rare (not impossible but very uncommon) for anyone to be allergic to either lamb meat or pears. The point of the diet is to clear any allergens from what you have previously eaten out of your system. After a few days of the lamb and pears diet you then reintroduce small amounts of other foods to your diet one by one, until the allergic reaction recurs. Then you know what you are allergic to and can avoid it in the future.
This came back to me when I saw this thread, and it seemed so weird (lamb and pears!) that I thought I must have misremembered it, but a quick look on Google confirms it.
See: Food Editorials - Food Articles, Food Tips & Recipies
Pear - Wikipedia
The BBC says rice and sweet potatoes also have similar properties:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/conditions/allergies/allergicconditions_food.shtml
However, I know someone whose child is allergic to rice, which is really tough in Japan.
My mum said they had to feed me formula because I would get the run with her milk.
No - I heard of a man who had a full blown anaphylactic reaction to his wife’s breast milk. Granted, that does make it sound like a FOAF story, but I considered the source reasonably reliable. Wish I could come up with a solid cite on that one, though.
Technically, yes. However, in the real world anaphylactic reactions can be triggered by nanograms of protein. Except for pure grade medicinal products there is always a chance that a food could be contaminated by an otherwise invisible amount of protein.
That’s why you hear stories about parents of kids with allergies who blow up when knives aren’t properly washed between uses or at fast food places that don’t separate their foods or any of the hundred other ways contamination can occur (even airborne). It’s a tiny minority of the tiny minority with allergies who have to be this careful, but the consequences can be deadly. That’s why EpiPens or the equivalent - shots of epinephrine - are mandatory take-alongs.
I did some searchng on anaphylactic reactions to human breast milk and came up with two citations.
Case Reports
Recurrent Postpartum Anaphylaxis With Breast-Feeding
Shank, Jessica J. MD; Olney, Stacey C. MD; Lin, Fang L. MD; McNamara, Michael F. DO
The text is not copyable, but it’s the beginning of a report on a five-month old infant.
So it appears to be possible, but exceedingly rare, and the causes are not clear either.
Apparently, people can be allergic to water, though it’s mighty rare:
Manna.
Hard to imagine Gawd Herself screwing that one up.
.
This may not apply to humans, but I’d read about lamb and rice as good nonallergic foods for dogs (or maybe cats), and in that context, the assumption used to be that the animal would not be allergic to lamb and rice because it had never been exposed to lamb and rice before. Lamb, rice and pears may all have some sort of natural anti-allergy effect, but it makes sense to me that any degree of nonexposure might make a difference as well.
It is my understanding that today it is far more likely than it used to be that your dog or cat has been exposed to lamb. I’m not sure why that has changed other than because pet food is a majorly luxury market.
I’m not claiming that pets are a luxury, just that many of the options out there for food for pets is marketed 100% at the human buying the food, and some of those options are absurd.
I’ve also heard game meat recommended for allergy sufferers, presumably based on the same reason of it being rare in most people’s diets.
How about this one? I’ll bet nobody in history has ever exhibited an allergic reaction to whole fugu.
Well, I heard about the lamb and pears in Britain, where lamb is (or certainly was back then) a much more commonly eaten meat than it seems to be now in America. Indeed, when I was kid (I am not sure about now) I rather think it was cheaper and eaten more often than beef (and perhaps more often than pork or chicken, too).
And of course, rice is probably eaten by more people than any other foodstuff.
I think the low allegenicity (is that a word?) of these foods must be something inherent to them, that perhaps applies to animals as well as humans, and the story about it being due to low rates of exposure to them was just someone’s WAG that got told to you as if it were fact.
:dubious: But didn’t God also “create” peanuts, etc.?