The recent inquest to the death of Natasha Ednan-Laperouse of anaphylaxis after eating a baguette Pret A Manger who was unaware of sesame content, could result in a change in the labeling legislation. Indeed, a recent investigation found that unreported allergens were present in a quarter of the foods sampled. But a more fundamental issue needs to be addressed: why are more people suffering from severe food allergies than ever before?
As I explain in Poisoning Another person: The History of Food Allergy, weird reactions to food have been known for a long time. Ancient doctor Hippocrates (c.460-370BC) described such reactions to different foods, including cheese. Strawberries caused Richard III to cut out to plunder. He was said to have once been eaten a "staggering assault", and then blamed his response on witchcraft organized by one of his opponents, who was headed -tened summary. By time Clemens von Pirquet, the Austrian doctor produced the term "allergy" in 1906, many believed that food could cause problems on the skin, asthma, gastrointestinal distress and even mental disorders.
In the 1930s, a food allergy emerged as a subcategory of notable allergies. But it was also very controversial. Although it's easy to identify the food to blame in anaphylactic reactions, like the one that killed Ednan-Laperouse, these sudden reactions were scarce. Instead, food allergies tend to focus on patients whose responses are deferred, occurring up to 48 hours after eating and suspected foods and, therefore, much harder to diagnose. These reactions were characterized by symptoms such as eczema, diarrhea, asthma, migraine and psychiatric problems, including depression and hyperactivity.
However, many doctors suspected about food allergies that were food allergy responsible for many uninhabited chronic illnesses. In fact, some were unwilling to refer patients complaining about chronic food allergy to psychiatrists, believing their symptoms were psychotic. The widespread arguments that would emerge during the post-war period regarding the prevalence of researchers highlighting food allergy from investigating root causes of the condition.
Put the monkey nuts
In the early 1980's, food allergy became a marginal subject within medicine. Then there was a new phenomenon that enforcing doctors really took seriously: mwn nuts allergy. In 1988, he described an article in the Canadian National Medical Association for a 24-year-old woman who died after eating biscuits containing ground nuts. Although one or two similar stories have been reported in the press in newspapers, here is the first report made in a medical journal. It would not last.
By the 1990's, peanut allergy deaths were common. According to the United States, Food Allergy and Food Allergy Research (FARE), peanuts and peanuts allergy rates have been broadcast between 1997 and 2008 among American children. As a result, food allergy has been associated with severe allergies, which may be fatal, as opposed to chronic food allergies that had previously been food allergies.
FARE charities and other allergies succeeded in lobbying better for better labeling, more non-peanut places (for example schools) and the availability of life-saving epipens that administer dos epinephrine (a chemical that is narrowing blood vessels and opening respiratory tract in the lungs) to anyone suffering from anaphylactic reaction.
But they have failed to convince scientists to carry out detailed investigations of why such allergies are rising so rapidly. On the one hand, this reluctance was understandable. The most important number of people suffering from severe food allergies was most important to provide new treatments and support. On the other hand, scientists were eager to investigate a long considered long state – suspicious and intrusive diagnosis that was too dependent on patient accounts for its justification.
Although research continues to explore possible treatments and treatments, insufficient effort is made on the investigation of underlying causes. Many controversial explanations have come into the vacuum, many of which have not been based on many scientific research.
One suggestion is the hygiene assumption, which argues that children grow in excessive environments, causing their bodies to find it difficult to distinguish between harmful pathogens and harmful proteins, such as those that fat in nuts. Others refer to cooking techniques, stating that peanut allergies are more common in countries where nuts are roasted, rather than boiling.
Read more: What are allergies and why are we getting more of them?
Baby feeding is also associated, the latest advice is that mothers with a family history of allergy should introduce nuts early. It was also suggested that more use of soya (relative of nuts) in food production. But this one of these explanations has not been completely convincing, resulting in the appearance of even more controversial theories.
The truth is that we do not know what stimulates a peanut allergy epidemic or increasing food allergy rates. The main reason for this is the lack of open research into allergic cases. The explanations that arise from such research may not be easy for people to accept if they indicate that food allergy is a by-product of modern lifestyles, new diets or changes in the way people interact with their environment. It will not be easy to investigate food allergy cases, but if medicine is to prevent more disasters such as Ednan-Laperouse in teens, it will be essential.