Physiological effects of starvation interpreted as food allergy
BMJ 1999; 319 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.319.7205.304 (Published 31 July 1999) Cite this as: BMJ 1999;319:304All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Bethune et al suggest that food allergy is a popular misconception.
They then go on to show that 2% of a population has demonstrable food
allergy using double blind provocation testing. This suggests prevalence
of food allergy equal to the prevalence of diabetes. Those experienced in
food allergy alternative approaches will recognize that masking of food
allergies confounds the traditional double blind challenge, and that the
true incidence of food allergy must therefore be higher.
This paper reveals a major flaw in current allopathic thinking.
Bethune et al share a commonly held medical misperception that food
allergy is a misperception. I quite agree that a detailed clinical history
is essential in examining food allergy, but would add the proviso that an
open mind be kept on the part of an investigator.
As an example, in case 3 the 44 year old man experienced an
improvement in symptoms follwing a fast. Bethune et al fail to explain why
this might have been the case, preferring to concentrate on the question
of glucose tolerance and provocation of symtoms secondary to carbohydrate
withdrawal. Why? If nothing else, this demonstrates a number of issues.
Firstly, symptoms of unknown origin, where no explanation can be
found which accords with current understanding, are ignored or glossed
over. I believe Semmelweiss experienced this in Vienna.
Secondly, a minimum of 2% and possible more, of the population
suffers from food allergies. Little or nothing is offered these sufferers
by my allopathic colleagues.
Thirdly, that entrenched views exist about food allergy. An open mind
is essential in eliciting more information about cause and effect. To
simply decry food allergy as a popular misconception says more about
medical arrogance than medical fact.
Fourthly, while Bethune et al may describe double blind food
challenge as a definitive investigation, those experienced in alternative
food allergy investigation will describe this as grossly incorrect.
Elimination diets and food provocation tests can be subject to huge
errors, but intradermal testing will demonstrate a higher degree of
reaction to foods.
While Bethune et al may be correct in their assertions, and certainly
there is no quibble about their findings as described, I find the closed
mind attitude they present is a serious impediment to understanding
processes as yet poorly understood. Our patients suffering from food
allergies deserve better.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Re: Food allergy a misperception?
I agree, first of all, with Walker’s comments. Let me add as a mental health professional who, for about 25 years, has sought to eliminate adverse food reactions that appeared related to emotional and behavioral symptoms, that these problems are turned on and off when the offending foods are introduced or removed.
Some people will react not only to a specific food, but to all foods within a food family. One of the best known is the nightshade family: white potatoes, red and green peppers, tomatoes, pimiento, cayenne, egg plant, and tobacco. If one is allergic to corn, one will also react to whiskey made from corn mash, even though the chemist can find no trace of corn in the alcohol.. One will also react to soft drinks, which are mostly sweetened with corn syrup. Corn syrup is also about 28% of most ketchups, in much inexpensive ice cream, in most inexpensive salad dressings, and pancake syrups. If one is allergic to white potatoes, you will react to vodka. While most allopathic allergists will agree with this, almost no mental health professionals, be they psychologists, psychiatrists, or social workers, will even consider the possibilities. Since adverse food reactions, as opposed to what are accepted as food allergies do not seem to stimulate the IgE antibody, the reaction is too often dismissed as a stress reaction or a symptom requiring medication. In such cases, only the matching of foods with a host of symptoms, such as hyperactivity, attention deficit, learning problems, concentration, emotional outburst, itching, crying, loss of writing or drawing skills, headache, depression, tension, bed wetting, etc., provides clues to food sensitivities. The more useless the foods one eats (food artifacts or food fractions--foods with natural components removed artificially), the less potentially healthy food is eaten. What is eaten is unlikely to provide the essential nutrient chemicals and the body becomes less able to handle stress and can become more prone to hyperactivity and associated behaviors.
The old saying, "The proof of the puddin’ is in the eatin’," fits this situation exactly. During the past 25 years, when I have recommended the dropping of certain apparently related foods, the above note symptoms tended to disappear, without the need for drugs or very much psychotherapy. Many children have been ale to stop methylphenidate for their Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and many adults and children have been able to drop antidepressants and tranquilizers. I have even seen some success with those diagnosed as schizophrenic.
In the United States the most useless food is also the staple of the diet—white flour products. I have yet to work with a mental health patient who could tolerate it and, when switched to whole grain substitutes (bread, pasta, buns, and pretzels, among others), their symptoms tended to abate. Some children had to drop cow’s milk, although their pediatricians never considered it, and their behavior problems stopped.
I fear this article will give the wrong impression and convince well-meaning physicians that their patients are always barking up the wrong tree and that only drugs can help.
Competing interests: Some people will react not only to a specific food, but to all foods within a food family. One of the best known is the nightshade family: white potatoes, red and green peppers, tomatoes, pimiento, cayenne, egg plant, and tobacco. If one is allergic to corn, one will also react to whiskey made from corn mash, even though the chemist can find no trace of corn in the alcohol.. One will also react to soft drinks, which are mostly sweetened with corn syrup. Corn syrup is also about 28% of most ketchups, in much inexpensive ice cream, in most inexpensive salad dressings, and pancake syrups. If one is allergic to white potatoes, you will react to vodka. While most allopathic allergists will agree with this, almost no mental health professionals, be they psychologists, psychiatrists, or social workers, will even consider the possibilities. Since adverse food reactions, as opposed to what are accepted as