<p>“I had them for a few years right around then and they are very painful and then you grow out of them”</p>
<p>My D did not grow out of her ear infections. They were very many with few short breaks in between. They were abruptly stopped after she stopped having items that she was allergic to. They took a lot of blood from her to perform test, we were given computer printed booklet with numbers attached to each food and other itiems and eliminated/minimized exposure. Ear infections are mostly caused by allerges and treatment with antibiotics result in more frequent recurrence. She also developed severe allergic reaction to antibiotics, both evident on skin and cough. I stopped immediately taking her to her pediatric office (they apparently almost killed her) and found another MD. I heard similar story from my friend, whose D has been diagnosed with asthma also caused by allergies and she also was in dire condition from antibiotics prescribed by the same pediatric office (many years after my D’s insidence). The apparent fault in both cases was neglect by the same pediatrician to recognize allergies both to food and drugs with almost fatal concequences. It took great effort by other doctors to correct severe health problems with our very young kids.</p>
<p>Wow, Miami, your experience and mine with my D are very similar. I pulled D off dairy 2 days before the ENT saw her one final time before scheduling a 2nd ear tube surgery. He was shocked, shocked that her ear fluid was essentially gone. No more ear infections, no 2nd surgery. Immediate improvement in her behavior.</p>
<p>Who suggested that I pull her off diary? the pediatrician? the ENT? ha ha - it was parents. As barrons has indicated, medical offices often have barely concealed contempt for anyone who ‘claims’ to have an allergy. Thanks for all the help! Afterwards, kid did years of detox and gut healing so she could eat normal foods again - the pediatrician-prescribed antibiotics screwed up her gut badly. (She had lab analysis on her gut, not just my offhand opinion on her gut function. Thank heaven for a few doctors who specialize in these problems!).</p>
<p>To top it off, we have barrons insulting us, assuring us that it’s all our fault for not letting our kids eat dirt. My kid ate dirt and a lot of other dirty things while she was hyper, barrons. You need a new theory. And a nicer attitude. Karma may bite you hard someday.</p>
<p>I can chime in with resentment toward S1’s first pediatrician. S1’s eczema was so bad as an infant that the skin behind his knees and inside his elbows would crack and bleed. He had clear evidence of food allergies, yet the pediatrician did not diagnose them. We were ignorant enough in this area that we gave S1 peanut butter when he was 10 months old - hives! The pediatrician’s suggestion: “Try cashew butter!” Wheneven S1 is tested, and I see the huge welt at the site of the cashew prong, I think of this man with contempt. What an idiot! It is well-known that early exposure to allergens increases the possibility that an allergy will form. The allergist believes that the reason S1 outgrew his peanut allergy is that we were so careful that he not be exposed (again).</p>
<p>Actually for most people early exposure to allergens builds the ability not to become more allergic and gradually it will go away in most cases.<br>
All your dire anecdotes are wonderful but for most cases wrong and exceptions to the rule. I did not just make-up the dirt rule out of thin air. It is a serious suggestion by serious people. Will it work 100%…no. But something is causing all these increases in allergies and I don’t think it’s anything added to the environment but rather the lack of things in the environment and that’s what science says. You all sound like the hysterical anti-vaccine people.</p>
<p>"Actually for most people early exposure to allergens builds the ability not to become more allergic and gradually it will go away in most cases. "</p>
<p>-Again, completely not true in my D case. I actually believe that it is opposite. For example, people in other countries are not so allergy prone as in the USA. I know at least 2 very poisonous substances that we are exposed here in large quantities from birth. They are fluoride and chlorine, big alergy items in my D’s test. You cannot avoid them 100%, but we have minimize exposure greatly, including not letting dentist to have fluoride treatments, non-fluoride toothpaste and water purifier in our tab water system that removes both fluoride and chlorine.</p>
<p>barrons, you are right about the dirt thing. Some experts have proposed lowered exposure to dirt and bacteria as a potential cause of the increased incidence of allergies. This has not, of course, been proven. Your statements about early exposure to allergens are completely wrong. There couldn’t be stronger evidence of your propensity to make strong statement based on nothing than your final statement: “You all sound like the hysterical anti-vaccine people.”</p>
<p>I have to wonder why barrons is picking this fight.</p>
<p>I don’t doubt that some kids would benefit from more dirt, early introduction to peanuts, etc. Others would be harmed by it. It might depend on how healthy the individual is to start with. Why do we continue to want single solutions for these complex problems? Why can’t doctors look at the individual case? These studies rarely look at variables that might help us understand peanut or other allergies. They just say, feed them peanuts and see how the numbers work out.</p>
<p>Thank heaven for the wonderful, open-minded medical pros who understand and actually help people with allergies and other ‘hysterical’ conditions. As for obnoxious, arrogant, close-minded medical people, they won’t get the Nobel when somebody, someday finally understands the immune system well enough to create ways to help allergic people identify their allergens and actually heal rather than the hit-or-miss, maybe-you’ll-outgrow-it (or I hope you’ll quit whining) approach. We’ve waited long enough, I think.</p>
<p>I’d like to hear more on this. I suspect that’s my problem, unless suddenly, I’m allergic to almost all fruits. I was washing and cutting up an apple for my son one day, when I touched my eye. Within minutes, it began itching and I got a huge fluid build-up under my cornea. </p>
<p>Do any of you adults have nut allergies? This is another recent developement for me. I ate one of those yummy Nature Valley Almond Bars and my throat began to close up. I’ve always eaten the Nature Valley Peanut Bars with no problem. It scared the ^&*() out of me. Thank God I was at home and had an antihistimine available. I should get an epi-pen, but I’m having a hard time admitting this is now serious. In researching almond allergies, I’ve learned that it’s the UNROASTED almonds that cause the problems. Most almonds are roasted, but who likes playing Russian roulette!</p>
<p>Because becoming a nation of weaklings running to the doctor over every imagined or real reaction and running up our soon to be national healthcare plan costs is not appealing to me.</p>
<p>The incidence of allergies is or alleged allergies is growing at a high rate. The total cost of treatment is and will be significant. Add the related and overlapping group fearing vaccines and you have a great cause for concern than you very much.
Feel free to choose your own topics. This one came to my attention in recent news reports so I went with it.</p>
<p>barrons, Have you read the Time article carefully? It does not support your statement that I am “completely wrong.” The study they cited, comparing allergy rates between British and Israeli children, does not prove anything about the effects of early exposure on development of allergies. The habit of Israelis of feeding their children peanuts at a very early age is one explanation that is being considered, and it will be investigated in the prospective study to be funded by the NIH, in which I am sure confounding factors will be controlled as much as possible. Because the tendency to develop allergies is inherited, the cause could also be genetic differences between the British and Israeli populations. Even if you don’t recognize the limitations of the study, the author does: “Although Lack can’t draw conclusive explanations from his observational study, he suggests that one reason may have to do with early exposure.” Do you know the difference between an observational study and a prospective study? Do you care?</p>
<p>And I am quite familiar with the desensitization treatment discussed in the article. This is the same principle that has been used for years for allergy shots against environmental allergens. Note Dr. Sampson’s cautions about this treatment. Do you realize that, even if this treatment (of existing allergens at a time when the immune system is relatively mature) is sometimes successful, it has nothing to do with induction of allergies by early exposure (meaning in utero to toddler) to allergens?</p>
<p>Spare me your concerns about the contributions of my kids’ allergy treatments (yes, I have two allergic kids, although S2 was, I have good reason to believe, spared the dreaded food allergies by my strict avoidance of nuts/peanuts/eggs/milk/etc. during the pregnancy and the two years that I nursed him) to our national health care bill. The cost of annual visits to the allergist, occasional testing, Epipen for S1 and generic Allegra for S1 and S2 during pollen season, a handful of food challenges and an emergency room visit for S1, for a condition that was not preventable, pales in comparison to what we spend on treatment of completely preventable conditions such as atherosclerosis, diabetes, lung cancer.</p>
<p>Obviously you said my statement as to early introduction was “completely wrong” I provided indications to the contrary and just threw your hyperbole back at you. Your personal anecdotes mean nothing to me as we are talking entire populations and general welfare/costs.</p>
<p>Yes there there are many other medical issues in the world. But one at a time please.</p>
<p>Time to take the Alfa out for a nice little drive so I leave this for a few hours. Argue amongst yourselves.</p>
<p>Easily solved by the doctors themselves. I really believe that every doctor should post online or on their doors a list of what they do and do not do. If I go into the hardware store, I don’t expect to find lettuce. If I visit my doctor, I should know in advance that they think people with real or imagined reactions are nuts and they can’t or won’t treat them. Some indication regarding what they will and won’t do would help us all avoid unnecessary visits. Maybe they can post this (lol):
“All your dire anecdotes are wonderful but for most cases wrong”</p>
<p>But don’t worry about my running up your bill, barrons. I’ve been patronized by so many doctors for so long, and seen how little help they are if you’re outside their ‘comfort zone’, that I only go if I’m desperate. For things like allergic reactions, I know we’re on our own.</p>
<p>I guess I knew nothing about this kind of thing back when I was having children. The only thing I can remember avoiding when pregnant or nursing was alcohol and second hand smoke exposure. Fortunately, neither of my children has any kind of food allergies, though D2 reacts to some of the seasonal pollens.</p>
<p>Is “strict avoidance” of nuts/eggs/milk now recommended for pregnant women? Not being argumentative, sincerely asking.</p>
<p>You have to go back to 2003 for an article for evidence? Assuming that
202m euros is around $400 million (and that’s being really generous
today), a quick look at 2009 earnings for McDonalds shows $22
billion. $400 million is a small drop in the bucket if you add in
revenues from grocery stores, restaurants and drink companies.</p>
<p>And then there’s this:</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>From your other article:</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>You can get asthma from food?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>That’s, linearly, three percent a year. The compounded growth rate, of
course, is lower. Hardly an “explosion”.</p>
<hr>
<p>I’m a bit surprised that you would take the approach of throwing a few
links to articles over the wall expecting that others won’t actually
read them, to make your case.</p>
<p>Nrdsb4, I am not sure whether avoiding allergens is recommended these days - S2 is 11, and I have not kept up. If it is recommended, it would only be in cases of high risk for food allergies. S1 gave us the knowledge that S2 would be at high risk. The allergist suggested that I avoid everything that S1 was still allergic to while pregant with/nursing S2, and extended nursing is always recommended for babies who are at risk for allergies. At the time, there was no proof that avoiding the foods while I was pregnant/nursing would reduce the chances of food allergies, but the allergist thought it was worth trying. I can’t be positive that S2 would have had food allergies, too, but I am pretty sure he would have. When he was a few weeks old, he developed stomach problems that are characteristic of allergy to milk (coming through my breast milk, as I was drinking it since S2 had, by then, outgrown his milk allergy). I eliminated it, and the problems disappeared immediately. He was too young for allergy testing, so we could not confirm the allergy, and by the time he was off breast milk, he could drink it. </p>
<p>When I was pregnant with S1, I did not realize that he was at risk for food allergies, but he was. Two of my siblings had food allergies as children. I clearly remember eating peanut butter/cheese crackers frequently during that pregnancy. And, of course, there were all the foods he was given during his first year. S2 had almost no food other than breast milk until he was 1 (also at the suggestion of the allergist). He was big, and toward the end of that year he was nursing on a newborn schedule, every 2-3 hours around the clock. But it was worth it - he has no food allergies.</p>
<p>I worried about what he would eat if something happened to me. The allergist said that he would have to have special formula that is available only by prescription.</p>