Study: Peanut Consumption In Infancy Helps Prevent Peanut Allergy 243
Mr D from 63 writes:
According to a report from the Associated Press, "For years, parents of babies who seem likely to develop a peanut allergy have gone to extremes to keep them away from peanut-based foods. Now a major study suggests that is exactly the wrong thing to do. Here's the published paper in the New England Journal of Medicine. It's interesting how this peanut allergy fear is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The situation involves a complete misconception of risk by many parents, and probably it doesn't stop at peanuts. Is there a bigger underlying problem here?
I refute (Score:2, Insightful)
My mom ate a lot of peanuts when I was a few months old, and I almost died of peanut allergy. I question this result.
55 years later, I'm still deathly allergic to them. It does add some adventure to life.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you read further, they talk about restrictions on mothers eating while lactating as well.
Re: (Score:2)
FTFA: A big warning, though: The babies in the study were checked to make sure they didn't already have a peanut allergy before they were fed foods that included peanuts, so parents of babies thought to be at risk for an allergy should not try this on their own.
"Before you even start any kind of introduction these children need to be skin-tested" to prevent life-threatening reactions, said Dr. Rebecca Gruchalla, an allergy specialist at the University of Texas S
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, in carefully monitored testing, kids with peanut allergies can build significant tolerance to peanuts by consuming tiny but growing amounts.
Ideally, the mother should eat peanuts while still carrying the baby. Evidence suggests that it prevents peanut allergy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I refute (Score:4, Informative)
And if she'd eaten them when you were in the womb, you'd have had her contaminated blood, and all her immune response (i.e. zero) to it.
And if you'd been given them to eat, it would have been different too.
But nobody is saying that there aren't the 1% who might be allergic to peanut. But, unless and until you have a reaction, why avoid them? That's the point. Avoiding them can provoke an immune reaction to a "foreign" agent.
Instead of the 1% having a visible allergic reaction, we have the 50% who say they are "intolerant" to a major food group and/or make themselves allergic by avoiding it altogether. And then guess what reaction their children have, and so on.
Everything in moderation. Don't shove peanuts down your newborn's face, but don't avoid them in pregnancy either.
Re: (Score:2)
And if she'd eaten them when you were in the womb, you'd have had her contaminated blood
Can peanut proteins really pass through the placental barrier ?
Re: (Score:2)
Considering the mother's blood is circulating through the fetus and she is helping to remove its waste product, everything the mother eats/drinks/smokes the fetus also gets.
Re: (Score:3)
Um, no. I'm pretty sure the mother's blood is circulating through the biological equivalent of a heat exchange with the fetus's blood. A nutrient exchange if you will. Baby's blood picks up nutrients from mom's blood, drops off some waste in the blood stream back to mom.
For your viewing pleasure [wikimedia.org]
Re:I refute (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know if protiens from peanuts are passed through to the fetus or not. But our pediatrician did say that such protiens do make it into the breast milk. Which makes me wonder if there has been any correlation shown between allergies and breastfeeding, either positive or negative.
Re:I refute (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me explain this with science.
You have two groups.
One that is exposed to peanuts as infants.
One that is not.
Fewer children in the exposed group developed peanut allergies.
In other words SOME peanut allergies can be prevented by early exposure.
Your argument is the same as. "My uncle never smoked a day in his life and died of lung cancer. Smoking does not cause lung cancer".
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, how do you double blind that away from Group 1 being children of parents who eat peanuts, and are without the allergy? And
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Let me explain how your uncontrolled science is flawed:
One that is exposed to peanuts as infants and where the breastfeeding percentage is nearly 100% (I assume you are talking about Africa or somewhere here)
One that is not and where the breastfeeding percentage is only 77% (the USA for example)
Re: (Score:3)
They said that it lowers the risk, not that it eliminates it. This is why they do studies instead of asking Slashdotters for anecdotes.
Cutting rates 90% is significant (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I refute (Score:4, Insightful)
You can't refute averages by a single counter example.
Re: (Score:3)
I got a butt chewing for giving my daughter honey (Score:2)
when she was only about six months old.
She loved it, I had never heard you weren't supposed to give it to babies, and now that she's 12 she still likes it. I can can get on-board with this theory.
Re: (Score:2)
Ditto.
She's 23 and going strong.
Re:I got a butt chewing for giving my daughter hon (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I got a butt chewing for giving my daughter hon (Score:4, Insightful)
Honey is different as it can cause botulism poisoning in infants. It's not an allergen, but rather often harbors an actual amount of bacteria. In adults and children, the bacteria load is not harmful as the body can easily deal with it. In infants, the body reacts differently to botulism and it can occasionally kill them.
http://kidshealth.org/parent/infections/bacterial_viral/botulism.html
That's why you were given the butt chewing. It's a very different situation to peanuts. Peanuts would be unsafe if they were covered in the same bacteria that honey harbors.
Re: (Score:2)
Honey is different as it can cause botulism poisoning in infants. It's not an allergen, but rather often harbors an actual amount of bacteria. In adults and children, the bacteria load is not harmful as the body can easily deal with it. In infants, the body reacts differently to botulism and it can occasionally kill them.
http://kidshealth.org/parent/infections/bacterial_viral/botulism.html
That's why you were given the butt chewing. It's a very different situation to peanuts. Peanuts would be unsafe if they were covered in the same bacteria that honey harbors.
If I had mod points, I'd vote you up. My son is five months old, cutting his first teeth, and getting his first taste of real food. The pediatricians stressed the dangers of bacteria which may be present in some batches of uncooked honey. They also say to hold off on cow's milk until a year old for different reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Why hold off on cow's milk? Granted that human breast milk is better for human children, but lots of us were raised on cow's milk (frex, I was adopted as an infant) and there did not seem to be a plague stalking us other than polio, for which they were just coming out with the Sabin and Salk vaccines. UNPASTEURIZED milk, I could understand, but it is illegal to buy that in the USA, except commercially to pasteurize and resell.
Re: (Score:2)
Why hold off on cow's milk? Granted that human breast milk is better for human children, but lots of us were raised on cow's milk (frex, I was adopted as an infant) and there did not seem to be a plague stalking us other than polio, for which they were just coming out with the Sabin and Salk vaccines. UNPASTEURIZED milk, I could understand, but it is illegal to buy that in the USA, except commercially to pasteurize and resell.
Why? Because people are idiots.
There really is no other reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Rather than berating young
Re: (Score:2)
Actually there IS some justification on holding off on honey until 12 months, floppy baby syndrome is a real thing. Not saying you did anything wrong, but that's one that does have some scientific reasoning behind it (not just some 'I read it on Natural News blog' kind of pseudoscience)
http://pediatric-medical.blogs... [blogspot.com]
Re: (Score:2)
This has nothing to do with allergies. You don't feed babies honey to avoid the very rare cases where it actually causes immediate problems. After a year it is perfectly fine.
It's like some of the things that are excluded while being pregnant (cats, game meat,...), just a precaution for the possible rare, but severe consequences of an unwanted contamination.
Re: (Score:2)
If avoiding game meat is so necessary, how did our species make it through the old stone age? Maybe avoiding rare meat in general and especially downer does or old roadkill, but I cannot see how cooking well done doesn't kill the germs in anything.
Re:I got a butt chewing for giving my daughter hon (Score:5, Informative)
Guys, the honey-botulism thing is like eggs-salmonella. Not every egg has salmonella, and if you eat the clean ones raw, you'll be fine. Not all honey has C.Botulinum spores (which cause it), but if you give some that is contaminated to a young child, they will be badly affected because their gut bacteria hasn't had time to develop--it's a matter of growth, not resistance through exposure. You played the odds and won. Most kids that eat honey will be fine and most batches aren't contaminated. Some of them will get a bad batch and will be less fortunate.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like honey could be a prime candidate for irradiation.
Re: (Score:2)
Irradiation isn't 100% at inactivating C.Botulinum. Neither is heat pasteurization (to the level that your honey is still, well, honey). There's no guaranteed safe way of making honey edible for infants.
Re: (Score:3)
Honey is very close to pure sugar, anyway. It provides energy, but not a lot of building materials for the infant body. There's no good reason to feed it to infants.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Eh.. I get what you are saying, but is eating honey really some sort of life necessity? Will a child really be not well adjusted in life because they didn't eat honey? I don't think its helicopter parenting to take some basic steps to avoid some risks, like waiting a touch to have honey or anchoring your large furniture to the walls.
This is sort of a turning point with the intenet age where we do have a lot of information at our finger tips, more so than ever before, so the number or perceived risks is over
Re: (Score:2)
I can say my kids love honey. Its one more pleasure in their lives.
Re: (Score:2)
Ever hear of risk/benefit ratios? Some people are very risk-averse, even when there is a real benefit to doing something. That would be people that NEVER drive in a car, etc.
At the other end of the spectrum are people who take unnecessary risks, even when there is no benefit. We even have a name for those people - Darwin Award Candidates.
In the middle we have normal people, who are willing to accept risk if the risk is outweighed by the benefits. This is where 'most people' are - the ones who will let
Re: (Score:2)
Irradiation would be good for many things (I did see the reply saying it isn't 100% in this case).
People are too afraid of "radiation" though.. (Yet use a microwave oven every day.. which I think is unjustly not at pretty much the top of modern conveniences.)
Re: (Score:2)
The advice against feeding honey to babies is not because of allergies, but because there is an -- admittedly small -- risk of it being contaminated. A baby's immune system isn't sufficiently mature yet, and this type of infection is potentially fatal.
So, yes, most parents are probably not going to notice anything bad about giving honey to their little ones. But as there is no particular unique benefit to eating honey, even the minor risk is worthwhile avoiding. This is the same reason, why pregnant women a
Re: (Score:2)
Honey has botulism in it. Sometimes.
Re: (Score:2)
Botulism is an illness, not a thing, so that's a bit like saying cigarettes have lung cancer in them.
Metaphorically correct, but the kind of thing a dedicated pedant would feel compelled to respond to.
Ah...
Re: (Score:2)
This is NOT the same thing. In fact, it's closer to the exact opposite. Infants are born with still-developing immune systems, and honey contains botulism spores which are capable of germinating in subjects with weak or still-developing immune systems. This is a proven risk that presents itself *every time* an infant eats honey, and there's a ton of downside if the risk is realized. On the other side of the coin, there's absolutely no upside to feeding an infant honey while their immune system is still developing the ability attack these spores.
False. Infants like honey. There's you upside.
Parents keeping kids away from peanuts? Not really (Score:3)
Doctors are telling us to keep our children away from peanuts, eggs, and various other foods until two years of age. Then we're supposed to introduce them one at a time, with a few weeks between to monitor results & possible outbreaks. Even if no one in the family has any such allergies.
I'm sure it's not just me, almost every friend across the US with kids in our approximate age range have talked about the same things. I wonder if the people who write this stuff are paying attention...
Re: (Score:2)
Doctors are telling us to keep our children away from peanuts, eggs, and various other foods until two years of age. Then we're supposed to introduce them one at a time, with a few weeks between to monitor results & possible outbreaks. Even if no one in the family has any such allergies.
I'm sure it's not just me, almost every friend across the US with kids in our approximate age range have talked about the same things. I wonder if the people who write this stuff are paying attention...
I have a five month old son, so I've been paying attention to this kind of thing. I've noticed that doctors' recommendations change every few years. My mom's generation was told to introduce rice cereal at six weeks, but now the recommendation is to start at about 6 months. We were also told to introduce at most one new food every three days so that if an allergy is discovered it would be easier to identify the cause.
Here is an exert from a 2008 statement from the AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics) :
Although solid foods should not be introduced before 4 to 6 months of age, there is no current convincing evidence that delaying their introduction beyond this period has a significant protective effect on the development of atopic disease regardless of whether infants are fed cow milk protein formula or human milk. This includes delaying the introduction of foods that are considered to be highly allergic, such as fish, eggs, and foods containing peanut protein.(View Report [aappublications.org])
Most
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the medical community jumped on yet another bandwagon with predictably bad results. In the UK, studies have shown that doctors warning mothers to treat peanuts like radioactive waste have tripled the rate of serious peanut allergies.
What I wonder is if the people giving the crappy advice are paying attention.
It seems we knew a lot more about allergies and how to manage them in the '60s than we do today.
Re: (Score:2)
We waited a while to introduce our oldest to peanut butter, my wife was pretty scared about it because she had a friend growing up with a peanut allergy. It just kinda got to the point where we didn't have peanut butter in the house anyway, it just wasn't a staple, not out of any real thought to specifically avoid it.
There is no history of food allergies in either family, though my side does have some heavy animal allergies. We finally gave him a spoonful of peanut butter and he broke out in hives and then
Exposure? (Score:3, Insightful)
So responsibly exposing kids to risks early in life helps them deal with those same risks later on? Who would have thought ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess the Klingon way of raising kids is the good one after all.
Re: (Score:2)
That was Friedrich Nietzche, not Kahless.
PlumpyNut (Score:5, Interesting)
Back in 2007, Anderson Cooper asked a pediatrician if PlumpyNut (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plumpy%27nut) was affecting people in developing countries suffering from malnutrition with peanut allergies. The Dr. said "We just don't see it. In developing countries food allergy is not nearly the problem that it is in industrialized countries." Sounds like this study backs up that claim.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-... [cbsnews.com]
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The finding backs up the hygiene hypothesis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygiene_hypothesis
Re: (Score:3)
The Viaskin peanut patch (Score:5, Informative)
"SUNDAY, Feb. 22, 2014 (HealthDay News) -- A wearable patch that safely and gradually exposes the body to small amounts of peanut allergen appears effective in easing the allergy, an early new study shows."
http://health.usnews.com/healt... [usnews.com]
Re: (Score:2)
- Sorry, that date is a typo - the news is two days old.
US News must be struggling like other print publishers.
One Vote (Score:2)
Thinking of my nephew. He used to eat a lot of peanuts, then - as a teenager - he ramped that up and pretty much overdosed.
He is in his mid 20's now and allergic to them. Too much of a good thing and all that.
Re: (Score:3)
Its almost seems like problems arise no matter which type of extremist you are. If only there were some other way....
Bigger question - mandatory "vaccine" (Score:2)
The bigger question is . . .
How long is it going to be until there is a mandatory "nut allergy vaccine" in the form of a required patch / injection of peanut dust in order to allow nut-allergic children to go to school?
If nut-allergies are shown to be preventable in the same way as measles, etc., why should a school have to be completely on edge about a child going into shock because some other child brought a sandwich to lunch? The economic benefits alone of doing away with the nonsense of nut separation i
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it a form of child abuse to allow your child to live with a curable allergy that could kill them in a moment's notice?
Well, what are you supposed to do, kill them? Anyway, you can immunize them against instant death by peanut just by feeding them minuscule amounts to start with, and ramping up over an incredibly long time. Eventually, they'll get to the point where they can eat a peanut or two without even needing an epipen, let alone immediate medical care. That's probably enough to keep them alive, albeit not enough to permit them to enjoy the sweet, sweet goodness of peanut sauce.
Bamba (Score:5, Interesting)
There's a popular snack in Israel called Bamba, which consists of puffed corn coated with peanut butter.
Pretty much everyone eats it, and it's pretty common for parents to feed it to children as soon as they can handle solid food.
So I was wondering how that affects the allergy rate for Israelis.
And apparently a study shows that when comparing Israelis to UK Jews of a similar background, the Israelis had a tenth of the peanut allergy rate compared to the UK group.
Re: (Score:3)
Not only does it affect the peanut allergies in Israel (less than 1%), this snack was, in fact, the tirgger that started this particular research.
The story according to the local papers is that the researcher was in a conference in Israel, and, as usual, asked who here has a child that is allergic to peanuts. Unusually, however, hardly anyone raised their hands. That triggered discovery of Bamba.
In fact, during the research, Bamba is what they fed the non-control group children.
Shachar
Huh what? (Score:2)
parents of babies who seem likely to develop a peanut allergy
How does one identify a baby who "seems" likely to develop a peanut allergy?
Re: (Score:2)
Part of it was public awareness. You'd find it common in previous generations that people would tell you "it's all in your head" and other less than helpful answers to problems you had with things as allergies and many other health issues. Now, as this study suggests, that once there was public awareness, people were having their children avoiding high allergy risk foods and in doing so making the problem worse as humans are prone to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Part of it was public awareness. You'd find it common in previous generations that people would tell you "it's all in your head" and other less than helpful answers to problems you had with things as allergies and many other health issues. Now, as this study suggests, that once there was public awareness, people were having their children avoiding high allergy risk foods and in doing so making the problem worse as humans are prone to do.
Or better yet you would just drop dead from an as-yet-unnamed disease (anaphylaxis) and the death certificate would list "Phrenitis" as the cod. What allergies?
Re:Dumb question (Score:5, Insightful)
Helicopter Parents. Protecting them from everything and anything.
Let them play in the mud, eat their own boogers, scrap their knees, eat bugs, roll in the grass and leaves even though the dogs poo there, etc.
When you grow up in a plastic bubble, everything is your enemy.
Re:Dumb question (Score:5, Interesting)
Our pediatrician once told me, every kid should have eaten a pound of dirt by the time they're two. While she didn't mean it literally (at least not that much dirt), she's talked about the 'immune system needing exercise', and that helicopter parenting actually denies kids a certain amount of exposure that's healthy. To be clear she's NOT an anti-vaxxer, on the contrary, but thinks both natural and pharm assisted immunity/resistance is a good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
This advice is probably good, assuming folks aren't stupid.
Please people... this doesn't mean finding someone that has the measles, flu, pneumonia, Ebola, polio, whatever, and getting that person to cough on your kids or swap saliva or blood or anything liquid that comes from that person. That is very dangerous and can cause serious health consequences.
No duh, right? If only...
Re: (Score:3)
I completely agree. I grew up making mud pies, eating dirt, playing in the woods and generally living in the opposite of a clean home. The only allergy I have is cat scratches and dander -- my mother hated cats and refused to have any around.
Meanwhile I now live in Minneapolis and we've got all these tards talking about how there's "chemicals" in their food and they're "gluten intolerant" and they use their own and their bubble boy kids immune responses as evidence that they're right.
Re: (Score:2)
Same here. Fucking Cats.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dumb question (Score:4, Insightful)
Because 30-40 years ago, every mother wasn't a panicky obsessive who was scared to give her kid a peanut butter and jelly sandwich because she read in some magazine that it would be abuse if she didn't treat her kid like a delicate snowflake.
Re: (Score:2)
FTA: "All had been given skin-prick tests to make sure they were not already allergic to peanuts. "
So they took precautions to make sure they kids weren't already allergic, something a parent isn't going to know. If you kids are allergic to eggs or had eczema, they might be at risk to having an allergy to peanuts. So the first thing you don't do is shove peanuts down their throats! You'd better have your child tested fi
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize these kids were tested first to see if they had a peanut allergy.
FTA: "All had been given skin-prick tests to make sure they were not already allergic to peanuts. "
So they took precautions to make sure they kids weren't already allergic, something a parent isn't going to know. If you kids are allergic to eggs or had eczema, they might be at risk to having an allergy to peanuts. So the first thing you don't do is shove peanuts down their throats! You'd better have your child tested first. IF, they don't have an allergy, THEN you can give them peanuts, which should help prevent them from developing one.
Which is interesting because the allergists I've talked to don't seem to think the pin prick test for peanuts is conclusive. Apparently since this headline isn't "Children drop dead after being told to eat peanuts 'For Science'" that it is a decent way to test for it.
Re:Dumb question (Score:5, Funny)
"Were nut allergies always so high and just not reported or is this a more recent development?"
In the 70s at summer camp the government sent us more surplus peanut products than we knew what to do with. The place was littered with open #10 cans* of peanuts. I've never eaten so many peanuts in my life.
No-one ever said the word "allergy".
A.
* that's not "hashtag 10", kids. It's "number 10", a size corresponding to about 110 ounces. It's probably an LD50 quantity of peanuts :-)
Re: (Score:3)
In my research, allergies are compounded by the trend in the late 70s and 80s to prefer formula to breast milk. All allergy studies need to take this into account, since it has been shown that breast milk (especially colostrum) is instrumental in fighting allergies. Why do so many people have allergies today compared to 20-30 years ago?
1. They weren't breast fed.
2. We now have GMO products that may not be the same as non-GMO but since there is no labeling, it's difficult to study this.
Re: (Score:2)
"Yeah, okay... What did you do with the bodies?"
Not our problem - with all those open cans, nobody with a peanut allergy could have survived long enough to reach the property...
A.
Re: (Score:3)
Nut allergies are mostly mass hysteria.
They were never that common, and are still not that common at all. And it's even rarer that exposing someone with a peanut allergy to a few peanuts will cause them to die. There is _zero_ justification for not allowing peanut-based foods in schools. It's mass hysteria with no basis in reality.
If I ever have a kid, I'm going to give them peanut butter sandwiches every week. FUCK the overprotective assholes.
Re: (Score:2)
"Nut allergies are mostly mass hysteria"
Possibly, but be careful here: for people with the allergies, this is very real.
After reading an account of doctors fighting to save the life of a child who was given a *teaspoon* of milk - in a controlled hospital setting - I have a new appreciation for the fear these parents have.
A.
(not to mention that the tone of your post leads one to believe that you would be the first to demand restrictions if it turned out that your child was the one with a deadly allergy and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> After reading an account of doctors fighting to save the life of a child who was given a *teaspoon* of milk - in a controlled hospital setting - I have a new appreciation for the fear these parents have.
There is a world of difference between giving someone with milk allergy milk and getting some peanut dust or butter on someone's skin. Namely, the latter could cause you to die, but the former won't do anything except in incredibly rare circumstances.
Not all allergies are the same. Not all methods of ex
Re: (Score:3)
Fear is a very, very bad advisor. It makes you massively overestimate rare risks, while you get blinded for real risks because they are familiar. That account you read was published exactly because it was an exceptionally rare event.
Re: (Score:3)
Horsepucky. Most allergic reactions are non-fatal, some are almost unnoticeable. Ever get a mosquito bite? That itching is your body's allergic reaction to the bug's saliva.
Re: (Score:2)
Just don't eat eggs...whatever you do.
Wait...
Never mind.
Re: (Score:3)
Our pediatrician recommended that we can start feeding eggs within a couple of months of starting the kids on solids. The nutrients in eggs are great, and the risk of food allergies is not particularly extreme.
Having said that, he recommended we gradually start with small amounts and then slowly increase the serving size, just so that we don't unnecessarily put the kid at risk of having a really severe reaction, if they turn out to be allergic. Also, he suggested to initially only feed soft-boiled egg yolks
Re: (Score:2)
Is part of the whole "X was bad then good then bad" attributable to not understanding percentages? Say food X increases your diabetes risk by 20%. If your risk was 5% to begin with, your new risk is only 6%, with the increase essentially in the noise or the rest of your life. Then it gets picked up by the news with the headline "food X causes diabetes", which ignores the rates entirely and makes it into public common knowledge. Add to that, research usually pumps mice full of far greater quantities of food
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Except it doesn't. Try reading medical research sometime. Repeated exposure to an allergen can cause allergies.
And then one big dose of that allergen [webmd.com] causes it to go away. How fucked up is that? Really, allergies make no fucking sense. This data suggests early exposure doesn't lead to developing an allergy in the absence of some other trigger, but people exposed early and often can still get them. Our bodies really are just fucking with us.
Re: (Score:2)
Really, allergies make no fucking sense.
Yeah, how *do* they work?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Moderation is the best course. But it doesn't grab headlines and research dollars.
re-read it (Score:3)
Repeated exposure to various antigens before the immune system is developed, tells the immune system to regard the antigen as friendly since it does not hurt you.
That is why you want babies exposed to dogs, cats, cows, beef, chicken, eggs, peanuts, etc.
Once they reach toddlers i.e. 2 and above, then the immune system is working, then latent exposure to various things can actually cause allergies.
Re: yes. (Score:2)
Medical science has no clue how allergies are acquired. They know it is a failure happening in the immune system. However it is unclear why. Some assume that it happens when an allergen looks similar to a previously llearned molecule from a virus or bacteria. Others assume exposure . The article assume lack of exposure. All three are hypotheses but we do not have a conclusive model for the issue. Nor do we know how to unlearn things.
Re:yes. (Score:4, Informative)
Indeed.
My ex-wife is a paediatrician. She ought to know better. But she has a skewed perception of risk, because she deals with the tragic cases all day long.
Re: (Score:3)
My parents found out I was allergic to peanuts when I was a little over one year old, I had some peanuts and I almost croaked (anaphylaxis). I'm still allergic to them today; eating anything with peanuts means an epi-pen, a few Benadryl and a trip to the emergency room for high-octane versions of the same.
I lived over in the Philippines for a few years and came into some contact with peanuts there. The interesting thing is that my reactions were nowhere near as severe as they are at home in the US, almost