• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Peanut Allergy Risk Overexaggerated

luchog

Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
16,202
Location
The Emerald City
I've been hearing bits and pieces in various places about how the risk associated with peanut allergies is seriously exaggerated, but according to this article, the exaggeration is even worse than I thought. It provides actual numbers that show that current thinking concerning the risk of peanut allergies is over-estimated by several orders of magnitude, and is based on sloppy "junk" science. Not only that, but the precautions taken against peanut allergies may be exacerbating the problem, not helping it.

The fear about peanut allergies is nuts

Excerpt:
What's also misleading is how FAAN couches this information in its press kit: "Food allergy is believed to be the leading cause of anaphylaxis outside the hospital setting, causing an estimated 50,000 emergency department visits each year in the U.S." In fact, the study is citing any cause of anaphylaxis. FAAN suggests that 50,000 people visit an E.R. due solely to anaphylaxis from food allergies. That's simply not true.


The claim that 150 to 200 people die each year from anaphylaxis is grossly exaggerated. In 2004, the Centers for Disease Control cited just 14 deaths due to anaphylaxis. The only known registry of deaths from anaphylaxis noted 33 deaths between 1994 and 1999. Remember, all of these estimates refer to the total number of people who had an anaphylactic reaction for any reason, not just from peanuts or other foods.

Facts ought to be stubborn. In the past, Munoz-Furlong has stated that one child dying from an allergic reaction is too many. But Harvard doctor Christakis, again, puts things into perspective. "There are no doubt thousands of parents who rid their cupboards of peanut butter but not of guns," he writes, comparing the alleged 150 children and adults who died from peanut allergies to the 1,300 who die from gun accidents each year. He goes on to note that 2,000 kids drown each year. Indeed, the most common cause of death in kids is accidents. "More children assuredly die walking or being driven to school each year than die from nut allergies," Christakis writes.

The worst fallout is that doctors and medical groups who have fallen for the FAAN hype are doing more harm than good with their prescriptions to avoid peanuts. A study published last year compared the prevalence of peanut allergies in Jewish children in the United Kingdom (where young kids are told to avoid peanuts) with those in Israel (where peanuts are fine).

Unlike the survey-based studies before it, researchers administered two strictly validated questionnaires to identify kids with allergies. Then those kids were tested. In all, about 5,000 kids were included in each group. The result: Less than 2 percent of U.K. children were allergic to peanuts, compared to a mere 0.17 percent of Israeli children. The authors concluded: "Paradoxically [avoidance of peanuts] might be promoting the development of peanut allergies and could explain the continued increase in the prevalence of peanut allergies."

The study referenced in the quoted passage above can be found here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19000582
 
220px-PeanutShrimp.png
 
I'd like to know what they mean by 'clinically validated survey'. Has anybody read the specifics? ie: are these actually recording the number of people with these problems, or are they asking people to self-identify?

Regardless, I both agree and disagree with the term 'exaggeration' - there are people who are sincerely this allergic, and the seriousness of the risk to their health is not exaggerated. But the prevalence may be exaggerated.

I think the reason for this is something called histrionic personality disorder. In the case of children, a related condition called munchausen-by-proxy.
 
When I was a kid, 3 score and more ago, and since then, I NEVER heard of this "peanut allergy" !
No kids in my group ever popped out in a rash when chowing down on pb&J sandwiches, a staple in many school lunchrooms, and I still have never encountered any!
I give the same credence as the MMR effect on autism. Mostly woo.
 
It's possible that in an earlier era, kids who were allergic to peanuts (and peanut butter) simply instinctively refused to eat them, thus branding themselves as "the kid who doesn't like peanut butter", and nobody would have ever realized that the kid was actually allergic.

This was my daughter's experience; when she was 2 years old, her Sunday School teacher reported in some distress and amazement that she'd refused to eat the nice peanut butter cookies that she'd brought for the kids to Sunday School.

Later on in life, when she was about 3 or 4, and we asked her how come she didn't like peanut butter, all she could tell us was, "It makes my tongue itch", and she consistently refused to eat it.

It wasn't until she was 7 that I ran across a Time magazine cover story on food allergies, and realized that you could actually be allergic to peanut butter. Which explains her refusal to eat those Sunday School teacher's peanut butter cookies.

My daughter is now 24 and has two school age nephews; she once went over to their house, and shortly after she got there, her face started to swell up and itch, and then she found out that just before she got there, they had been making themselves peanut butter sandwiches, and still had sticky peanut butter hands, which they had lovingly caressed her face with when she arrived.

It's not woo. And I don't know why you would think so--other allergies, like to cats, horses, ragweed, and penicillin, are quite well documented, so why wouldn't you think that a peanut allergy could be so, too?
 
It's not woo. And I don't know why you would think so--other allergies, like to cats, horses, ragweed, and penicillin, are quite well documented, so why wouldn't you think that a peanut allergy could be so, too?

The fact that some kids have peanut allergies is accepted as a scientific fact. In severe cases, the allergic reaction to peanuts result in death. I knew a kid who died that way.

The generalization that peanuts are a deadly hazard to all kids is woo.
 
...
It's not woo. And I don't know why you would think so--other allergies, like to cats, horses, ragweed, and penicillin, are quite well documented, so why wouldn't you think that a peanut allergy could be so, too?
.
For the reasons listed.. it's as new a phenomenon as vaccine-linked autism.
Another situation I never encountered in growing up, or ADD, with its alarming result of drugging normal children's behavior when there is nothing to fix there!
Kids being kids don't need medications!
 
I've seen signs on non-peanut-related products warning people that those products might have once been on a tray that had previously had peanuts on it or cut by blades that had previously cut peanuts or such. I've never seen such signs related to any other allergy. (And aside from the fact that one allergy is treated so specially apart from the rest, what's with the implication that the tools aren't cleaned between uses?)
 
.
For the reasons listed.. it's as new a phenomenon as vaccine-linked autism.
Another situation I never encountered in growing up, or ADD, with its alarming result of drugging normal children's behavior when there is nothing to fix there!
Kids being kids don't need medications!


So new=fake? "I didn't see it as a kid"="it's a scam"?

How ridiculous.

As a kid, I don't remember hearing anything about this new-fangled disease called "AIDS" that everyone's talking about now. Must be woo.

:rolleyes:
 
I'd like to know what they mean by 'clinically validated survey'. Has anybody read the specifics? ie: are these actually recording the number of people with these problems, or are they asking people to self-identify?
Read the article, it's all in there, along with links to the study.
Regardless, I both agree and disagree with the term 'exaggeration' - there are people who are sincerely this allergic, and the seriousness of the risk to their health is not exaggerated. But the prevalence may be exaggerated.
Again, read the article, this was addressed, and is exactly what the article is saying.
 
It's possible that in an earlier era, kids who were allergic to peanuts (and peanut butter) simply instinctively refused to eat them, thus branding themselves as "the kid who doesn't like peanut butter", and nobody would have ever realized that the kid was actually allergic.

When I was a young kid I ate all sorts of nuts; I used to love Christmas just for the bowls of unshelled nuts (walnuts, pecans, filberts, etc) that I could crack and eat.

When I was a teenager I came home from watching the then-new movie The Time Machine, and I tried some banana cake which my Mom had baked with crushed nuts in it. That night I experienced the "itchy ongue" menioned above, my tongue swelled up, and I got hives all over my skin. After that happened, I couldn't bear to eat anything that had walnuts in it; on a few occasions I had the same symptoms, and I could always trace it back to something that had a litle finely ground walnuts in it.

An anecdote, one that matches Goshawk's surmise. Not peanuts (which I still enjoy) but something akin.
 
Last edited:
I've seen signs on non-peanut-related products warning people that those products might have once been on a tray that had previously had peanuts on it or cut by blades that had previously cut peanuts or such. I've never seen such signs related to any other allergy. (And aside from the fact that one allergy is treated so specially apart from the rest, what's with the implication that the tools aren't cleaned between uses?)

I have. Celery sticks out for me, but mainly because I have never heard of anyone being allergic to it. I think milk and eggs are also regularly listed there too. And I'm not sure it's anything to do with scaremongering (product advice warnings, anyway) - I'm of the opinion no-one wants to be sued. I remember (but only vaguely) someone dying on a UK aeroplane after eating chicken that had been nuttified in some way but it wasn't listed as such on the menu, and after that seeing the little 'allergy advice ' boxes on food.

I thought it was an accepted that it was more than possible to be allergic to items you had not been exposed to pre and post birth. I also thought it was possible to develop allergies later in life, but that the mechanism for this wasn't well understood - but that a lack of continous exposure had been indicated?

Also, part of the hype surrounding 'give 'em peanuts and you're an evil, uncaring parent' also emphasizes a link between asthma, eczema and peanut consumption. So it's not just 'peanut exposure causes peanut allergy' it's 'peanut exposure causes asthma and eczema'.
 
There's a boy at my son's school who has had to go to hospital twice in a year because someone near him had peanut butter sandwiches for lunch and touched his hand, which he later put in his mouth.
 
So new=fake? "I didn't see it as a kid"="it's a scam"?

How ridiculous.

As a kid, I don't remember hearing anything about this new-fangled disease called "AIDS" that everyone's talking about now. Must be woo.

:rolleyes:
.
A(quired) I(mmune) D(eficency) S(yndrome) is picked up by an individual.
The progress of AIDS can be traced from the source.
The peanut butter "allergy" could most probably be traced to the publication date of the medical journal that first outed it. Being a genetic situation, it could hardly erupt in some many different places so rapidly.
 
My brother and my niece (not his daughter) both have deadly allergies to tree nuts. My brother nearly died on at least three occasions from contact with nuts. It is very real.
 
.
A(quired) I(mmune) D(eficency) S(yndrome) is picked up by an individual.
The progress of AIDS can be traced from the source.
The peanut butter "allergy" could most probably be traced to the publication date of the medical journal that first outed it. Being a genetic situation, it could hardly erupt in some many different places so rapidly.

Yeah those people admitted to hospital for anaphylaxis are obviously just imagining it...
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/acaai/aaai/2008/00000101/00000004/art00009?crawler=true
http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(07)01440-6/abstract
 
Yeah those people admitted to hospital for anaphylaxis are obviously just imagining it...

No doubt people have allergies (I am very respectful of bees for just that reason), but the widespread avoidance of peanuts by those without allergy is more of a fad.
 
No doubt people have allergies (I am very respectful of bees for just that reason), but the widespread avoidance of peanuts by those without allergy is more of a fad.

True that may be; I certainly have no problem eating peanuts, walnuts, or cashews.

But the fact of the matter is, there are some people who can die from eating them. Considering this, I don't think a "WARNING, THERE'S PEANUTS IN HERE, IDIOT!" label on food packaging is really such a ridiculous thing to ask.
 

Back
Top Bottom