Posted on 11/29/2005 9:32:46 PM PST by neverdem
Newhouse News Service
Multiple-choice question: Why are more American kids allergic to foods, particularly peanuts?
A) Their immune systems are confused by increasingly clean homes.
B) Nervous parents wait too long to feed their children peanuts.
C) We roast peanuts rather than boil them.
D) Maybe one of the above, and/or something else.
Unfortunately, the answer is "D."
One study estimates American children's rate of allergy to peanuts and tree nuts (like walnuts and pecans) — about 1 percent of those under age 18 — has doubled in recent years. No one can say why.
But whatever biological mysteries are at work, U.S. children are more likely to be allergic to peanuts than kids in China, in Israel and in many underdeveloped nations, experts say.
"It's a moving target," said Dr. Robert Wood, a pediatric immunology professor at Johns Hopkins University. "The numbers may be different by the time the next study gets done."
Deaths from allergic reactions to food are not officially counted, but studies suggest 150-200 fatalities a year, experts say. Case studies of 32 food-allergy deaths during 1994-99 showed that most victims died of reactions to nuts, most had asthma, and 13 were under 18 years old.
Though rare, deaths from food allergies can occur with shocking caprice.
New law on allergies
On Jan. 1, a new federal law goes into effect requiring food manufacturers to use simple language — milk instead of "caseinates," egg instead of "albumin" — in food products' ingredients lists. The law will apply to peanuts, tree nuts, milk, eggs, fish, wheat, soybeans and crustaceans (such as shrimp and crabs). Proteins in these foods cause about 90 percent of allergic reactions. Studies of peanut, tree-nut, fish and shellfish allergies suggest 11.4 million Americans, or about 4 percent of the population, have food allergies, according to the Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network. Ten years ago, scientists believed less than 1 percent of the population was affected.
In 2003, about 1,800 children under 18 were hospitalized due to food allergies, according to a federal estimate. That number had increased only slightly during the preceding decade, but researchers say many allergic episodes go uncounted when hospitals misclassify them.
"The data are not clear enough to say what the true rate of increase has been, but we would be very comfortable saying the rate of food allergy has truly increased," said Wood.
The only treatment for a severe allergic reaction is a shot of epinephrine, a hormone that relaxes the airways of someone struggling with a life-threatening allergic response.
On Jan. 1, a new federal law goes into effect requiring food manufacturers to use simple language — milk instead of "caseinates," egg instead of "albumin" — in food products' ingredients lists. The law will apply to peanuts, tree nuts, milk, eggs, fish, wheat, soybeans and crustaceans (such as shrimp and crabs). Proteins in these foods cause about 90 percent of allergic reactions.
Meanwhile, some advocates are pushing for federal guidelines for schools to create emergency action plans for allergic students.
In well-prepared schools, administrators have assembled teachers, parents, a school nurse and others to discuss how to handle emergencies and how to make a school safe, said Anne Munoz-Furlong, founder of the Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network, a group advocating more protections. "Nut-free" zones are becoming more common on school lunch tables.
Even highly sensitive peanut-allergic children are unlikely to experience a severe reaction from casual external contact with peanut butter, research has shown. Soap and water effectively remove the allergen from surfaces such as tabletops, while disposable wipes work well with hands.
But reactions do occur, most often when a child unknowingly eats something containing an allergen. Serious problems result when a school's files contain nothing from a child's doctor about a condition, what symptoms to look for and how and when to give medication.
"A child eats something, thinks it was safe, but they have a reaction," Munoz-Furlong said. "They're sent to the office, the office staff calls the parents. Or the child has asthma, and they give her an inhaler. The reaction gets completely out of control, and when you bring epinephrine into the picture, it's too late."
An allergic reaction occurs when the body mistakenly identifies something as an invader and activates a portion of the immune system. People with hay fever, for example, overreact to the inhalation of pollen. The same process occurs in food allergies, with protein acting as the trigger.
In someone allergic to peanuts, for example, the body senses a specific protein has attached to cells in the body. To "protect" the cells, it sends out special antibodies called immunoglobulin E, or IgE. When IgE reaches the cells, it causes them to release histamines and other chemicals that may cause itching, nausea or restricted breathing.
In trying to explain the increase in allergies, many scientists have embraced the "hygiene hypothesis." It holds that some people's immune systems have gone out of whack because America's increasing cleanliness has changed the behavior of IgE.
The central role of IgE is to help fight infections. But as America has become more sanitary, and as antibiotics have cut down on infections, IgE has less work to do, making it restless and prone to attack new things.
"The more [IgE] is left 'unbusy' because we're not being exposed to germs early in life, the more it could direct its attention toward allergies," said Wood.
Some data support this idea. Allergy rates are lower in many underdeveloped nations, perhaps because the immune systems of those who live there are constantly exercised.
But the hygiene hypothesis, which would apply to all kinds of allergies, doesn't explain everything.
"It's not clear that it's the whole story," said Dr. Marshall Plaut, chief of allergic mechanisms at the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
Doctors have successfully "desensitized" patients with allergies like hay fever by injecting them with small but increasing doses of pollen. Such "immunotherapy" often causes severe reactions when tried against food allergies — an effect scientists are trying to understand and avert.
Mindful of the hygiene hypothesis, researchers also are studying whether exposing children earlier in life to peanuts and other potential allergens may properly prepare their immune systems.
Peanut allergy rates in Israel are low compared with the United States, and some suspect that's because many Israeli children eat peanut snacks earlier and more often than American children do.
"It could be the hygiene hypothesis," Munoz-Furlong said. "It could be the way peanuts are processed. In China they boil them, and we roast them. Or, it could be how they introduce it; in this country, we wait until the third birthday. In Israel, it's typically before the first birthday."
Possible, but I think non-lethal allergies are more widespread these days than generations ago. One other anecdotal note, I know two older women who developed allergies late in life. Any significance? I don't know.
BTTT
Researchers started messing with the food chain via growth hormones in meats and genetically altering foods. That seems like a possibility. Artificial food additives is another possibility. When I was a kid bologna tasted good and never upset my stomach. Now one piece of it and within minutes I'm sick as a dog.
Nuts in various forms have been with us and eaten safely ever since. Many kids were raised on Carvers discovery of peanut butter. It has always been considered healthy. But when man started messing with our food chain {improving it as they call it} the problems seemed to become more profound.
Now even a loaf of bread can last two weeks and taste just as horrible & stale two weeks later as it did the day you bought it. Remember the term day old bread? It would be highly delicious and far more fresh tasting compared to the preservative filled loafs now being sold in stores. Some persons tolerance to these altered foods is much lower than others. MSG has to be one of the most unhealthiest food additives created by man IMO. I think food allergies for the most part are a result of mans tampering with what was once good food.
Doctors are seeing children especially girls starting into puberty much earlier than several generations ago. It all goes back to the basic scientific law for every action there is a reaction.
In short some of our programs such as vaccine programs carry a significant to a portion of the population for example autism.
Sinus allergies? Likely a reselt of the industrial age. Ozone is a major player in it and any person who has asthma triggered by allergies should not use an Ionizer type of air purifier. They will only make matters worse as they produce ozone. Save your money and buy a cheaper renewable filter type of purifier. Like I said a lot of the problems man causes via mis-applied technology.
Thanks for the links!
Thanks for posting this. As soon as I heard about the "teenage kiss that killed" on the news, I began wondering again, "what is it about peanuts?" It has been such a strange phenomenon.
I'm sympathetic to the kids who have it and I think it's great that the schools are going so "all-out" to keep them away from the allergen, but I have to ask - what about all the other kids who have other allergies?
My worst is perfume and though I've heard of schools now having "perfume-free" zones, I certainly haven't found any anyplace else. Not church, where I had to quit going; not restaurants, where my meals were ruined; not public events, where I have to change seats or keep moving around; not airplanes, which are death traps for me.
That one developed when perfume manufacturers switched from using natural ambergris from whales to a synthetic pheromone from chemicals. Right off the bat, I had hives in my throat and then asthma-like constriction of my bronchii. That was almost 20 years ago ("save the whales").
It was very scary, never having anything like that before, except from strawberries and cats. I could avoid those, but never know when perfume will "strike." I had to do some detective work to find out about the chemical substitute, too--didn't know about that for a long time, but once I read about it, I could pinpoint it exactly to the first bottle I was given that caused the bad reaction.
Yet, I'm fine with natural scents like oils and potpourri--which make others violently ill, if just for the fragrance. It was really restrictive for a long time, before they started making non-scented laundry detergent and fabric sheets, especially. There are still hundreds of products I can't even buy and experiment with, especially cosmetics and hair/skin care items.
Back to peanuts, though. I still don't "get it," but it seems the experts don't, either, so I feel better about it. (Like why did girls' feet sizes get increasingly larger after the Boomer generation?) And I really don't understand the generality that Americans don't give toddlers anything peanutty before age 3. Where did *that* statistic come from?
I do know some older people (70s) who have always had a tree nut allergy. I really do feel sorry for them--pecans and almonds are manna from heaven.
Then again, I know I inherited my strawberry allergy from my grandfather, who also developed his at age 30, just like I did. The thing is, I could still eat raspberries all along, which was wonderful, then all of a sudden, 3 years ago, I became allergic to them, too.
My grandfather thought it was because he loved strawberries so much that he overate them and that's what did it. But I didn't, and still "got it." I compared that to the alcohol/addictive cycle. Late-stage alcoholics are allergic to alcohol, physically, but just keep drinking it, when, in actuality, they've kind of used up their life quota.
I also developed a very severe allergy to poison ivy about 9-10 years ago and the CDC told me to also avoid cashews and mangos, as they have the same "poison" enzyme that I'm now sensitive to. I haven't tested that, since I hate cashews, anyway--and don't eat many mango products.
There again, nuts. I'm now newly asthmatic, at a semi-advanced age, and it's triggered by outdoor mold spores and stress--and very debilitating, plus bad for the heart. I never had any allergies at all, most of my life, except to non-gold metals against my skin and then the strawberry thing! I'm trying to see any common components to these, but I don't yet.
Maybe it's a mold that grows on nut trees or nut bushes or is in the soil of the peanuts as the embryonic nuts are forming. Wish everyone who is allergic to anything could find a permanent, successful cure for it!
As a nurse, I've often wondered if it's not the soy link. Infant formula is made from soy milk. And, let's face it, the medical field is not encouraging mothers to breastfeed...why, I'm not sure, but since infant formula companies subsidize medical equipment purchases, etc. I'd say that there is a link there. But I'd predict that soy is probably pretty closely linked to p-nut allergy.
Not all infant formulas contain soy milk, but it has been noticed that infants fed soy milk don't develop as strong of an immune system. Apparently the problem has been traced to the fact that soy contains compounds that are similar to estrogen. So one would expect that infants fed soy would have less of a reaction to peanuts.
But that would not explain why kids in China don't have the same rate of allergic reaction to nuts. Soy milk is the major drink for breakfast in China, and has historically been more commonly drank than cows milk.
There is a mold that grows on peanuts and produces a highly carcinogenic substance called aflatoxin. Apparently it is something that peanut producers have to watch out for, but I haven't heard of it being linked to peanut allergies.
Most people eat food that has many additives such as artifical food coloring, artificial flavoring, preservatives, hydrogenated oils, and a lot of corn syrup. None of these were used a couple of generations ago. It is actually hard to find any "regular" food without these additives. Even when I was a kid (in the 50s) most food I ate at home was cooked at home. Not so any more.
Often when we shop, I look at other peoples' carts and compare the contents to our cart. Our cart contains ingredients like flour, milk, vegetable and fruit produce, butter, raw beans, plain oatmeal (not the instant flavored kind), cheese, and that's about it. Often other carts don't have one natural ingredient. All either cans, packages, microwaveable this and that, every bit of it pre-prepared.
I don't doubt that this has something to do with childrens' allergies. The body can only take so much garbage without some kind of symptom.
I have read also that babies fed formulas have a higher rate of various kinds of digestive problems than those fed mothers' milk.
I can relate to your comments. I have many of the same allergies. It is a very complex subject. I am amused by the idea that a too clean house will cause children to have allergies, allergies are not caused by germs.
My mother was far from being a clean freak.
After an optometrist told me my retinas were degenerating and I had lattice degeneration condition I did some research. Stay away from all things with high amounts of glutamic acid. Its nasty stuff that was first used as MSG by the Japanese around WWII in order to get their troops to consume larger quantities of marginal foods.
I would have thought so too if we had not had a thread like this one the other day. One Freeper said her son (I believe it was) got hit by a peanut butter cookie in a food fight. His sensitivity to peanuts was such that he had to be hospitalized. That's frightening.
I think some things are "coming home to roost".
For what it's worth, I have a sister who is now in her 60's, and she's been severely allergic to buckwheat and to cashews since childhood. She almost died, when a well-meaning friend served her pancakes. The woman had a small amount of buckwheat flour left over and added it to the pancake batter without informing anyone.
Food allergies are nothing to mess with.
I'm slightly allergic to nearly everything.
I could not breast feed. It didn't matter with my son. He doesn't get sick much, and is very healthy.
My twin daughters however were a different story. At 6 weeks old they almost died of a respiratory virus (RSV). They were on ventilators, one of them for a month.
If they were born when I was born, they would have died because they didn't have ventilators for babies.
I think there are a lot of kids surviving that would have died in the previous generation. I think those kids have problems.
Both of my daughters were sick a lot when they were young. One has asthma, but she is much better now that she is older (9). The other one has brain damage, and she has her own set of issues.
Both of my daughters are going to be successful adults, so I am very thankful they were save by medical technology. However, I just wonder if some of the kids with things like allergies, ADHD, etc are a result of being premature, illnesses, etc that would not have survived a generation ago.
What, saving millions of children's lives?
Would you rather go back to the "good old days" of 30% infant mortality to save us from these pesky allergies?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.