I’ve posted twice previously about Anaphylaxis and food allergies in general. The second post generated a lot of comments, including a couple questioning my intelligence. My comments were based on my experience over the years, not a study or anything particularly scientific.
Today, I have some real science on the subject to share.
Doubt Is Cast on Many Reports of Food Allergies
Many who think they have food allergies actually do not.
A new report, commissioned by the federal government, finds the field is rife with poorly done studies, misdiagnoses and tests that can give misleading results.
While there is no doubt that people can be allergic to certain foods, with reproducible responses ranging from a rash to a severe life-threatening reaction, the true incidence of food allergies is only about 8 percent for children and less than 5 percent for adults, said Dr. Marc Riedl, an author of the new paper and an allergist and immunologist at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Once again, putting on my skeptics hat, I suggest that you read this study very carefully. Coming from the federal government, the one that recently started to question some well established medical screening procedures, one might reasonably wonder if science or anticipation of cost containment is driving this.
This study requires careful scrutiny, because if the results are valid it is likely the definition of allergy and anaphylaxis as well as the prevalence of treatment for them them could change dramatically in the next several years.
The guidelines panel hopes its report will lead to new research as well as clarify the definition and testing for food allergies.
But for now, Dr. Fenton said, doctors should not use either the skin-prick test or the antibody test as the sole reason for thinking their patients have a food allergy.
“By themselves they are not sufficient,” Dr. Fenton said.
Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Yeah, once the Govvies step in, things start getting 'interesting'…
Sometimes the patients take what the doctor mentions as an offhand possibility and run with the idea.My nephew once had a respiratory infection as a toddler that was more persistent than expected. The pediatrician mentioned that he might have asthma as he was examining him. My sister took the diagnosis and puts that history down on all of my nephew's health forms.He's 15 now and has never had any classic asthma symptoms but his mother is still convinced he's an asthmatic. Since we get our medical history from our patient's memory of what some other medical professional told them, we need to ask questions to get to the root of the diagnosis.