I was trying to keep things very general. I think sometimes it becomes too easy to just say “eliminate all of this category” rather than actually examining the individual patient. If that hasn’t happened to you that’s great. I have run into occasionally over my lifetime. It’s really annoying.
Also, blood testing can give false positives - it was over 30 years ago when I had mine done so I don’t remember all the specific items but on a couple of them the doc said “this says she’s allergic” and mom said “she can’t be - she eats it all the time with no symptoms” and the doctor shrugged, said if there wasn’t a problem then don’t worry about it, but keep an eye out for them. I came up positive for peanuts back then, for example, but for a couple decades after I ate them with no sign of problem whatsoever. Then I started getting tingling/itchy/etc so I stopped eating them.
That, and I came up positive for eggs. I’ve never had a problem eating eggs. I do, however, have a severe problem with egg based vaccines. Apparently my body is fine with eating them but not with having egg proteins injected, thus, I can not have flu shots. Allergies can become complicated like that, hence the need for specialist evaluations and recognition that everyone is different and bodies can act in quirky ways.
I’ve said it before - I’d really like to get a full, expert work up again as it’s been 30 years and I know some things have changed. I’ve been forced to add to my “forbidden list” a few times, I’d love to know if there’s something I can take off that list now… or if I really do still have to avoid all those foods. Unfortunately, unless I have a reaction bad enough to admit me to the hospital my insurance won’t cover it, I don’t have the money for it out of pocket, and I guess I’m way too good at avoiding problems (not that avoiding problems is a bad thing…)
You know the way some people will save thousands of dollars for a nose job or a boob job? I’d do that for an allergy work up. Screw how I look, I’m nowhere near hideous, I’d just like to be able to eat without worrying all the time that I’ll accidentally kill myself if I make a mistake.
As allergies have discrete symptoms, which can be substantiated by objectively observable chemical changes in the blood and body, I think attributing them to “mass hysteria” is a bit out of line.
I think there’s something to this. All throughout my childhood I had chronic problems with flatulence and diarrhoea, and everyone just assumed I was born a disgusting pig. It wasn’t until my 20s that I discovered that avoiding lactose (either by choosing lactose-reduced dairy products or avoiding dairy altogether) nearly eliminated the problem. Now that I think about it, it pisses me off, being humiliated by uncontrollable farting in class all because I had milk every morning with breakfast.
For the record, my peanut allergy was diagnosed when I was about two. My parents gave me a soda cracker with peanut butter on it and my lips swelled up immediately upon contact with the peanut butter. Fortunately for me, I didn’t ingest any. That was in 1967. Since then, I’ve avoided peanuts in nearly all its forms (except, for some unknown reason, peanut oil which I don’t have a problem with at all). Other legumes are okay. However, tree nuts are strictly off limits.
My peanut allergy isn’t so severe that I can’t be in the same room with somebody eating a PB&J sandwich or a Snickers bar. I just have to avoid actually eating anything with peanuts.
After joining Mayo, Dr. Murray decided to research the long-term effects of this “hidden” [asymptomatic] celiac disease. To do so, he needed to identify people who lived for decades with undiagnosed gluten intolerance. As it turns out, just up the road in Minneapolis lay a gold mine of information: A collection of blood samples taken from Air Force recruits in the early 1950s amid concern about streptococcus outbreaks in barracks.
Well-preserved blood samples dating back that far are extremely rare. These had been stored for decades in a researcher’s walk-in freezer in Cleveland. The freezer’s condenser leaked, and the rubber-corked glass test tubes “Were hermetically sealed in an iceberg,” Dr. Murray says. Eventually, the samples were donated to the University of Minnesota and shipped there in a frozen-pizza delivery truck.
Dr. Murray’s team tested the 50-year-old blood for gluten antibodies, assuming that 1 percent would be positive — the same as today’s rate of celiac disease. But the number of positive results was far smaller, indicating that celiac disease was extremely rare among those young airmen. Surprised, the researchers compared those results with two recently collected sets from Olmsted County, Minn. One blood-sample set matched the birth years of the airmen. Those elderly men were four times likelier to have celiac disease than their contemporaries tested 50 years earlier. The second set matched the ages of the airmen at the time their blood was drawn. Today’s young men were 4.5 times likelier to have celiac disease than the 1950s recruits.
“This tells us that whatever has happened with celiac disease has happened since 1950,” Dr. Murray says. “This increase has affected young and old people. It suggests something has happened in a pervasive fashion from the environmental perspective.”
Properly refined peanut oil should have no protein. Allergies are to the proteins in the food, so if the oil has no protein there should be no allergy. Note that there are peanut oils that are not refined, simply made from pressed peanuts that will very likely have peanut protein and elicit a reaction.
Note that I am not a doctor (well, I have a PhD, but not medical), but I do work for a food company, and we have to know a lot about allergies.
I just want to point out here, for the sake of accuracy, that gluten intolerance is NOT an allergy! They are both immune dysfunctions that can be potentially fatal, more typically just make people utterly miserable, and both are managed by diet changes. However, those with gluten *intolerance *do not experience anaphylaxis if they make a mistake and consume some gluten but people allergic to gluten can.
I realize that two conditions are frequently conflated, but they are not the same thing.
It is also the case the incidence of both conditions are increasing.
For what it’s worth, one point of evidence, I am 61 and I have been allergic to both peanuts and all tree nuts for my entire life. I am not allergic to any other legumes. I had other, milder food allergies when I was a child, but either I grew out of them at puberty, or the allergy shots I took all during childhood finally had some effect. Or both.
I don’t know how severe my allergy to peanuts is, since I have been fortunate never to have ingested any; I know the smell of it makes me queasy. I can touch them and the worst that would happen is that some tissue might swell up for a while. I have accidentally eaten tree nuts a very few times, and I have a pretty severe reaction, not quite anaphylaxis but a pretty good swelling of the throat and breaking out in severe hives. The first time, when I was 8, I lost consciousness and was taken to the emergency room where they induced vomiting.
Allergies run in my family; and as far as I know, I was the only child in my grade school who was allergic to peanuts or tree nuts.
Roddy
My hives were caused by penicillin. However, not directly. After getting penicillin, I would become sensitive to certain artificial colors and flavors found in certain soft drinks. For about a month, the only soft drink I could drink was diet coke.
A good friend of mine is allergic to peanuts: at dinner once he ate something that had - unknown to us - been in contact with peanuts. There can only have been microscopic amounts of peanut on his food, but it was enough to make his whole face swell up hideously within minutes, and fortunately he was conscious and able to talk for long enough to tell us what to tell the paramedics when they arrived.
My friend survived: he was fine within a few days because he got the right help soon enough.
Peanut allergies are are in no way psychosomatic. People freak out about them for good reason: if you ever see it happen to someone, you’ll be in no doubt about how serious and potentially deadly a peanut allergy can be.
Peanut allergy, life threatening severe peanut allergy, is without question significantly higher in Western societies today than in times past. It is not psychological or an issue of changed diagnostic labeling. This much is very well established in the scientific literature. The open question is why.
The referenced “hygiene hypothesis” may have something to do with the increase in allergies in general but it is not the whole story for severe peanut allergy.
The whole story includes that our attempt to reduce food allergies by delaying exposures may have had the exact opposite effect.
In Israel there is a snack given to babies beginning at about six months of age made from peanuts; in Israel there is very little peanut allergy. On the other hand Jewish children in the UK are not introduced to peanuts until much later, generally at least 15 months of age, and those children have ten times more peanut allergy.
Theoretically complete avoidance should prevent peanut allergy … problem is that such is not what occurs. Babies instead get very low dose hidden exposures, and that low intermittent exposure is the best way to cause allergies. OTOH high early exposure induces tolerance.
The NIH is currently undertaking a prospective study exposing some high risk children to peanuts regularly and early and aiming for complete avoidance in the other group. The rates of allergy to peanut will be compared at age 5. The study will not be done until 2014. Until then policy guidelines can only say that there is no good evidence that avoiding exposure is useful and few allergist are willing yet to change their avoidance mantra.
Yep. The reaction causes the paranoia, not the other way around. When my daughter was little and we were just figuring out what was going on, we had some bad incidents. I had to learn to be paranoid, and that’s a justified reaction to the severity of the condition.
It’s hard for people to understand, I get that, but I wish people would just realize how truly dangerous it is without having to see a kid get really sick to believe it.
It’s really common for people to accuse parents of allergic children of being unjustifiably overprotective and paranoid. The assumption seems to be that we are bad parents, and if we weren’t our kids wouldn’t have problems. The same thing often happens–only much worse–with parents whose children suffer from mental issues. It used to happen with homosexuality and autism, too, and I think with autism it still does sometimes, though much of the anxiety has been displaced onto vaccines–which can still be blamed on bad parenting.
This reaction seems to very often be a sort of superstition, or a defense mechanism; if you can believe that these problems only happen to kids with bad parents, they’ll never happen to you, because you are (or would be) a good parent, which will keep you safe and in control of the world. Only it doesn’t work that way at all. A lot of it is the luck of the draw, and anyone’s child can wind up with difficulties. The more scientific progress we make, the more we find out that allergies and mental problems both seem to have genetic components that interact with the environment in unpredictable ways. And the physical environment we live in has been filled with all sorts of interesting substances that we don’t know much about, really.
NUTZ, you do realize that there’s a difference between “a lot of it” and “all”, right? Nobody disputes the fact that peanut allergies really do exist, and really can be fatal in some cases. But it’s also hard to dispute that some parents or kids who claim they’re allergic to peanuts are just full of it. The question is just in the relative proportions. And in fact, in some cases the peanut hysteria does considerably more harm than good, when people obsess so much over peanuts that they ignore other, more common (but less publicized) allergies.
Note that I am not saying, by the way, that it’s ever appropriate for someone to try to “sneak” someone peanuts to “prove” that they’re just making it up. That’s cruel, idiotic, and/or evil. But just because we should give folks the benefit of the doubt, doesn’t mean we always have to actually believe them, either.
I have seen things like this reported and I really don’t get it. How on earth does one actually find out that they’re so allergic to peanuts that touching a surface with an imperceptible amount of peanut matter is going to cause a life-threatening reaction? Has this kid ever touched a table, gotten hives, and then they had a forensics team come in and do a swab on the table? While I don’t doubt the seriousness of peanut allergies in general, I suspect that the parents in cases like these are guilty of hyperbole.
Also, what do they think is going to happen after this kid leaves elementary school? He can’t expect every school, business, employer, etc. that he ever comes in contact with in his entire life to all completely ban everything containing peanuts.
