Infant Food Allergies on the Rise – What’s the Real Cause?
- 21 Comment
Welcome back to Babylicious! Thanks for visiting again. If you've enjoyed reading my blog, subscribe to my RSS feed to get regular updates on what's new at Babylicious.
Over the last couple of years, especially since I have become a mother, I have been aware of the growing number of people (or rather children) that I personally know who have food allergies. This topic has been on my radar ever since Gavin was born. Just like every good mother, I wanted to make sure I did everything within my power to give him the best start in life by protecting him from developing unnecessary foods allergies through early exposure to high risk foods.
We are probably more aware than ever about what foods are advisable to omit from the diets of babies and infants and yet food allergies appear to be on the rise. And yet, I keep hearing from friends not only about children with food allergies but severe and unusual allergies. Why? What are we doing wrong?
I grew up in Australia and studied there for a large part of my school. When I was a growing up, I only knew one girl who had an allergic reaction to nuts. There was no such thing as “nut-free” schools, nor children who brought epi-pens to school in the event of accidental exposure to nuts.
The first I ever heard of the nut allergy since my friend in school was after my nephew was born. Ironically, no one in our family has any food allergies, let alone nut allergies; neither are there any food allergies in my cousin’s wife’s family. His allergy is so severe that he has to keep an epi-pen at home and in school.
In the last few trips I’ve made back to Australia, I heard that some schools have been made “nut-free” because of the number of children who are allergic to nuts. I even saw ads on TV for chocolate spreads that were “nut free” to cater for parents of children who were allergic. Now if there is one lesson I picked up from working in the consumer industry, it is that companies manufacture products if there is a sizable market for it. That must mean that their research tells them there is a growing market for individuals that require “nut-free” foods. And the fact that they are going into sandwich spreads for children suggests that the population that require these foods are children.
Okay, so these are just my observations and just to make sure that I hadn’t watched one too many episodes of The X-Files and fancy myself to be a Scully, I decided to check the statistics on nut allergies in children. A population survey conducted in the US observing children in 1997 to 2002 revealed that the prevalence of nut allergies had doubled. Admitedly, these are self-reported and may not accurately represent the true incidence of nut allergies since there is often a misconception regarding what consists as a true allergic reaction. The increased awareness of nut allergies might also be accountable for the increased number of reported nut allergies. However, I hardly think that either of these explanations would be sufficient to explain a doubling effect on the reporting of nut allergies.
When we were recently in Melbourne, I attended a Christmas party where there was about 8 children. Of those 8 kids, 2 were allergic to nuts. Between my own experiences and the incidences I have been observing in the media, nut allergies are clearly on the rise.
The other allergy that came to my attention was the childhood allergy to bananas. Yes, you read it right. The baby-friendly banana that has been universally loved by so many infants and recommended as a safe food to introduce to babies who have started solids has become an allergen to some infants.
The first time I heard about the banana allergy was through my cousin. They discovered her son was allergic to bananas when he developed a very severe eczema on his arms and legs as an infant. It was so severe that his skin would bleed. I often saw him with bandages on his arms and legs just to prevent him from scratching his sores. When my cousin first told me he was allergic to bananas, I dismissed it as a mistake of some sort, yet I could not deny that the baby with the bad skin and bandages had turned into a boy with beautiful skin after stopping the bananas.
I thought perhaps that my nephew’s banana allergy was some unusually rare case of banana allergies. That was until I heard about the banana allergy again from a friend I studied Dentistry with. Her second son was allergic to bananas. That was when I really took notice of the whole food allergy issue in children. What were the odds of me knowing two people allergic to bananas?
When I discussed the topic of food allergies with my SIL who is a chef formerly working at a restaurant in the Crown Entertainment complex in Melbourne, she also related how she would often get customers who had dietary restrictions because of allergies.
So what is causing this increase in food allergies? Please note that this explanation is purely hearsay and I have no factual evidence to back it up. I thought it was worth noting and food for thought for expectant mothers and parents planning to have more children.
While I was in Australia, I was talking to a grandmother about the increasing prevalence of food allergies in children. She shared with me a “conspiracy theory” that was “hushed up by the pharmaceutical companies”. It seems she knows a doctor in Europe had been conducting a study on certain infant vaccinations linking it with the increased prevalence of food allergies in children.
I honestly don’t know the truth behind this but it is plausible. The suggested link between infant vaccines and food allergies has been documented before, although the conclusion was that the evidence did not support the theory. Dr Harry Hong explains how vaccinations can lead to the development of food allergies:
“too many vaccinations in the first year of life promotes a TH2 immune system in children. TH2 immune systems overproduce antibodies, which can lead to a sensitive immune function causing allergies and other immune system malfunctions.”
There is suggested explanation for the hypothesised link between infant vaccinations and the increased incidence of food allergies. Peanut oil is often used as an adjuvant and is thought to be used in some vaccinations, although I haven’t found evidence that this is so. It appears that only the pharmaceutical companies can answer this for us right now.
Below is what I’ve noticed based on my own experiences (which seem to indicate that there is more to the rise in food allergies than meets the eye):
I live in Malaysia. My son was born in Malaysia. Today, he has no known food allergies that we are aware of. Of all the children who were born in Malaysia that I know through my friends here, none of their children have any food allergies that we are aware of.
All the children that I personally know who have food allergies of some sort were born in Australia. They all came from families with no known food allergies.
Okay, so this is just one mother’s observation and can hardly be documented as factual evidence but it does seem to suggest that something is being done differently with infants in Australia (and US – based on that study I quoted earlier) that must be sensitising the children to food allergens. Perhaps it is the vaccine formulations they use, perhaps it is something else. Maybe that is what we need to study – what is being done differently and how it is affecting our children?
Popularity: 14% [?]
Other posts that might interest you:
- A Further Look at Infant Food Allergies on the Rise
- Solids – Proceeding with Caution
- Allergic Kids
- When in Doubt, Ask Dr Sears…
- What’s in a Name?
What is RSS? How do I subscribe via RSS?
21 Comments on this post
Trackbacks
-
li said:
I still encounter many clients who walk in with so-called food allergies. I think without trivialising mothers with kids who suffer allergies, that the public throw the term “allergy” around too loosely. Many individuals suffer from a variety of dietary intolerance – gluten, lactose, eggs and certain vegetables belonging to the onion family.
Allergies arise from hypersensitivity to a certain agent. Adults have been known to develop very severe allergies to foods that they have grown up eating – shellfish for example. It engages the body’s immune system to launch an attack on the antigen (protein found in the certain type of food).
My hypothesis is that a fetus is exposed to certain antigens in utero that cause them to develop anaphylaxis when they are exposed to the same agent when they are infants/toddlers. With the dietary trends pregnant women follow today; good fats v bad fats etc, they consume more nuts and grains as they are told such foods are healthier snacking alternatives which contain healthier fats and nutrients that will help the development of a fetus. Such foods are considered high-risk allergy foods.
Then again, how would you explain those who suffer from seemingly innocuous foods like tomatoes, eggplant and rice which are included in the daily meals of certain cultures?January 18th, 2009 at 6:36 am -
figur8 said:
Li – I am inclined to agree with regards to the common misuse of the term allergy. When people tell me they are allergic to such and such a food I usually ask them what reactions they get from eating it. Sometimes I hear examples of stomach upsets or other non-allergy related symptoms which often makes me doubtful about their “allergy”. It’s almost like saying I’m allergic to milk because it gives me the runs.
I hear you on your hypothesis which I think is possible but I still believe there is a further underlying cause that we’re missing. I know three mothers personally who have children with nut allergies and they did not alter their prenatal diets to increase consumption of nuts, if at all. And, as you so rightly pointed out, it doesn’t explain the allergies to “innocuous” foods like the banana cases I cited in my post.
Hmmm… care to revive your career in research to figure this one out?
January 19th, 2009 at 6:01 am -
li said:
theres no money in science…
then again, theres no money in cooking.
i think i may be doomed…January 19th, 2009 at 3:58 pm -
figur8 said:
There is money in cooking – but it’s hard work unless you find some lacky to do it for you. So not doomed.
January 20th, 2009 at 9:51 pm -
Ticktock said:
I highly doubt that vaccines are causing allergies. Why would a vaccine specifically trigger a problem with peanuts? Or bananas? That doesn’t make sense to me.
My guess is that awareness and nervousness of allergies has manufactured a problem based on zero early exposure of common allergens. For instance, Israel doesn’t seem to have a problem with peanut allergies, but they offer a popular teething snack called Bamba that is made from peanuts. By exposing their babies to peanuts, against mainstream advice, they are reducing the prevalence of peanut allergies.
January 21st, 2009 at 12:53 pm -
AtheistDad said:
I tend to agree with Ticktock that greater awareness and nervousness about allergies may be a contributing factor.
Change in our food could also be a factor. More and more of our food is genetically modified (often in ways that have very disturbing implications). Countries outside the U.S. seem to be more skittish about allowing genetically modified food to be produced or imported. I don’t know anything about GM nuts in particular, but such modifications strike me as one more variable to twiddle when trying to figure out the whole equation.
January 21st, 2009 at 4:17 pm -
figur8 said:
Firstly, let me state that I am in no way against vaccinations in children. My son was vaccinated with the full list of recommended vaccinations as an infant, including one that was not compulsory. I am just trying to make sense of this sudden increase in allergies, especially pertaining to the children born in Australia as my husband and I have discussed the possibility of having our children born in Australia (which we finally decided against for emotional reasons).
Colin – there are a few ideas behind why vaccinations are suspected as being the cause of the increase in food allergies observed in children (which I think I might go back and add later):
1. The way vaccinations activate the immune system leads to an overproduction of antibodies which lead to hypersensitivity.
2. The presence of peanut oils as adjuvants in vaccinations which constitutes early exposure.
But, neither of these explain my own observation that nut allergies are on the rise in Australia but no so in Malaysia (as far as I am aware).
I am inclined to agree with AtheistDad that GM foods could be a factor, although we’re also getting GM food in Malaysia.
Until I can track down the reason behind this, my hubby will continue to remain convinced that children born in Australia are at higher risk of developing food allergies. So I guess I’m still searching for answers.
January 21st, 2009 at 11:52 pm -
figur8 said:
Oh yes, I have brushed on the topic of food modifications in my last post on this topic:
January 22nd, 2009 at 12:03 am -
Estherar said:
RUN, don’t walk, from websites with names like “Vaccine Awareness” and “Chicago Healers”. They are not likely to contain correct and helpful info.
There are no vaccine adjuvants used in child vaccinations that contain peanut oil – there is one adjuvant like that (adjuvant 65), but it’s not used in any infant vaacine in any schedule I know of.
The hygiene hypothesis is probably our best guess. There’s also the issue of allergies proven by lab tests only. For example, I have a young patient about 8 months old, who is currently on Neocate (a hypoallergenic formula) because he displayed severe allergy symptoms (bloody diarrhea, rash and vomiting) when given cow’s milk based, soy based, and another type of hydrolyzed formula. Blood tests also showed he was allergic to peanuts. But he’s never, of course, actually had peanuts…nor will any sane parent or doctor risk it. But older children have had allergy tests and shown to be allergic to foods they’ve already eaten without mishap, because of cross-reactivity with other allergens.
January 22nd, 2009 at 10:57 am -
figur8 said:
Yes, I realise that Vaccine Awareness and the Chicago Healers might not be correct on this topic but they do provide possibilities. But it is as you say – trust no one, question everything…
The generation of children today are the first to be raised in an environment that has been significantly altered by man. Think all the antibacterial products we use, the genetically modified foods we consume, mobile phone exposures, wireless connections… We don’t really have any long term studies on what the effects of these are to an infant and growing child.
But what I still struggle to understand is why there is a difference between food allergies in children in Malaysia versus Australia. Right now it certainly seems that having a baby in Australia puts a child at greater risk of developing food allergies compared to Malaysia.
This is my real question – what is being done differently between Australia and Malaysia that results in this outcome? To date, I have not found any satisfactory theories that answers this question.
January 22nd, 2009 at 10:26 pm -
abc said:
The vaccine ingredients used in the culture medium to produce vaccines and the actual ingredients in the adjuvant are trade secrets. Neither the manufacturer or any of the governments will give out that information. If you search patents on line, you will find many patents for adjuvants that not only contain peanut oil but can be a mixture of peanut oil, wheat germ oil, sesame oil, etc.
The hygiene theory is pure garbage. We are not suddenly cleaner in the past ~5 years. Besides the Hispanic population of the US have a lower rate of food allergy and also a lower vaccination rate.
Food allergy doesn’t follow the foods eaten either. They eat lots of peanuts in Israel but don’t have a problem with peanut allergy but they do have a problem with sesame allergy. The same vaccinations that Israel uses are used in parts of Europe and they also have a problem with sesame allergies. The Israelis who live in the UK have a problem with peanut allergy – the same as the rest of the population there.
The increase in food allergies follows the increase in the vaccination schedule for children:
1960 – children received on average one or two vaccines
1980 – children received 8-9 vaccines
1990 – children were routinely given 10 vaccines
2000 – Children now receive 33 vaccinations before they enter school
2007 – Children are now to receive 48 doses of 14 vaccines by age six and 53-56 doses of 15 or 16 vaccines by age 12.The “vaccine theory” of food allergy is the only theory that actually makes sense.
How else can a 3-month old baby be allergic to foods that he never ate?
February 5th, 2009 at 2:54 pm -
abc said:
There was a comment: “There are no vaccine adjuvants used in child vaccinations that contain peanut oil – there is one adjuvant like that (adjuvant 65), but it’s not used in any infant vaacine in any schedule I know of.”
Unless you are a vaccine manufacturer, you can’t possibly know that since it is a trade secret. And if you read the package inserts that are available online, a number of the vaccines don’t list any particular number for the adjuvant – they just say “aluminum adjuvant”.
Here are some links to patents for adjuvants that can be used in child and adult vaccines:
February 5th, 2009 at 3:24 pm -
Clara said:
I believe the rise in allergies is partly due to ‘over cleaning’ and the trend of antibacterial soaps and lotions. There’s also the factor of infant formula vs. breast milk that needs more discussion.
February 8th, 2009 at 8:02 am -
Sarah said:
How worrying that so many parents are quick to believe rumours and speculation.
There are a load of things you haven’t considered. Why don’t you read some of the peer-reviewed scientific literature, such as the EuroPrevall study to become more informed. There is no simple ’cause and affect’ answer.
Here’s another thought. In the late 90s, the advice was to avoid introducing potentially allergenic foods to infants until a certain age e.g. three for peanuts (from memory). This advice has been rescinded. It’s actually now thought this might have been the wrong thing to do, since you need to be exposed to something to develop tolerance. See http://www.allergy.org.au/content/view/350/287/ and http://www.allergy.org.au/content/view/182/127/
As for the vaccine conspiracy theory, what a load of bunkum. Our immune systems are incredibly complex – as babies crawling on the floor etc..we encounter far more ‘foreign’ particles, bacteria, viruses (e.g. when siblings have coughs and colds) in our environment than we do in a few vaccines.
Vaccines save lives and the hard working scientists and clinicians in Universities and hospitals rely on pharma companies to invest the huge amounts of money needed to test their discoveries in the clinic. And, no, I don’t work for a pharma company.February 12th, 2009 at 2:34 am -
Sarah said:
BTW – for abc, you don’t have to eat something to be exposed to it. Look up this paper: Household peanut consumption as a risk factor for the development of peanut allergy.
One more point, those with food allergies have a high chance of having some other form of atopic disease e.g. eczema or a family history of these conditions.
I find it interesting that many parents looking for explanations don’t think about what they do differently to their parents e.g. how many people bathe babies every day and rub copious amounts of lotions on them! There’s no need! Our skin secretes oil and harbours good bacteria to protect us. Babies used to get bathed once a week. Perhaps the route of exposure/sensitization is due to a break down in our natural physical barrier, the skin! That is certainly how you sensitize animal models to food allergens.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:57 am -
abc said:
It’s been known for a very long time that injections cause food allergies:
The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Food Allergies by Lee H. Freude, M.D., and Jeanne Rejaunier, Penguin Group, 2003, pg 14:
“In 1839, the French physiologist Francois Magendie (1783-1855), while investigating the effects of substances on living organisms, created allergylike symptoms in animals, and found that animals sensitized to egg white by injection died after a subsequent injection.”
“In 1901, French scientist Charles Richet (1850-1935) coined the word anaphylaxis to designate the sensitivity developed by an organism after being given an injection of protein or toxin.”
===========================
Here’s some sites about trade secret.
===========================
http://www.vran.org/vaccines/anaphylaxis/vaccine-ana.htmWhat is being injected into our children? Why can’t we find out? What adjuvants are used in the vaccines?
An Access to Information request to Health Canada for the 100% composition of vaccines given to infants received the response, “I regret to inform you that the exact composition of these vaccines cannot be disclosed to you as the information is protected under ATIA (Access to Information Act) Section 20(1)(a)(b)(c). This is a mandatory exemption which protects confidential business information.”
The Act, under Third Party Information, states, 20. (1) Subject to this section, the head of a government institution shall refuse to disclose any record requested under this Act that contains a) trade secrets of a third party; b) financial, commercial, scientific or technical information that is confidential information supplied to a government institution by a third party and is treated consistently in a confidential manner by the third party; c) information the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to result in material financial loss or gain to, or could reasonably be expected to prejudice the competitive position of, a third party; or d) information the disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to interfere with contractual or other negotiations of a third party.”
===========================
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/vet_biologics/publications/memo_800_51.pdfVETERINARY SERVICES MEMORANDUM NO. 800.51
It is understood that in some cases, adjuvants are purchased from another firm and therefore some of the data listed may be the proprietary information of the supplier and may not be available to an applicant buying the materials from that source. In this case, it is acceptable for the applicant to arrange to have the adjuvant supplier submit adjuvant information to the CVB, in a manner that protects confidential business information.
==================================
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9a00e2d8153ff934a15754c0a9609c8b63The nature of GlaxoSmithKline’s adjuvant is a trade secret, but David Stout, president for worldwide pharmaceuticals at the company, said the ingredients had already been given to people in other products, though not in this particular combination.
================================
http://www.henkebartram.com/articles/Qualifying-for-Trade-Secret-Protection.pdfQualifying for Trade Secret Protection
The case of Merck & Co., Inc. v. Smithkline Beecham Pharmaceuticals gives an example. The plaintiff claimed trade secret protection for a process it developed for the production of a vaccine. The defendant claimed that the process was not a trade secret because its aspects were readily ascertainable in publications. The court rejected the defendant’s argument, stating that “[T]he choice of individually known components and techniques to create a working manufacturing process is often, as here, a difficult undertaking. Where at individual steps of a process there are a variety of alternatives, the choice made through much effort of specific ingredients, materials, conditions and steps in an actual, working process constitutes a trade secret.”
=============================Here’s a patent for an adjuvant:
—————————-http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6720001/claims.html
US Patent 6720001 – Emulsion compositions for polyfunctional active ingredients
1. A stabilized pharmaceutical oil-in-water emulsion for delivery of a polyfunctional drug, wherein the emulsion has a mean particle diameter of less than about 5 ?m and consists essentially of:(a) a therapeutically effective amount of a polyfunctional drug selected from the group consisting of analgesics, anti-inflammatory agents, anthelmintics, antiarrhythimic agents, anti-asthma agents, anti-bacterial agents, anti-viral agents, anti-coagulants, anti-depressants, anti-diabetic agents, anti-epileptic agents, anti-fungal agents, anti-gout agents, anti-hypertensive agents, anti-malarials, anti-migraine agents, anti-muscarinic agents, anti-neoplostic agents, immunosuppressants, anti-protozoal agents, anti-thyroid agents, anti-tussives, anxiolytics, sedatives, hypnotics, neuroleptic agents, ?-blockers, cardiac inotropic agents, corticosteroids, diuretics, anti-parkinsonism agents, gastrointestinal agents, histamine receptor antagonists, keratolytics, lipid regulating agents, muscle relaxants, anti-anginal agents, sex hormones, stimulants, cytokines, peptidomimetics, proteins, peptides, toxoids, antibodies, vaccines, nucleosides, nucleotides, nucleic acids, DNA, RNA, oligonucleotides, oligodeoxynucleotides, and combinations thereof;
(b) an aqueous phase;
(c) an oil phase consisting essentially of…
8. The pharmaceutical emulsion of claim 1, wherein the oil phase further comprises almond oil; babassu oil; borage oil; black currant seed oil; canola oil; castor oil; coconut oil; corn oil; cottonseed oil; emu oil; evening primrose oil; flax seed oil; grapeseed oil; groundnut oil; mustard seed oil; olive oil; palm oil; palm kernel oil; peanut oil; rapeseed oil; safflower oil; sesame oil; shark liver oil; soybean oil; sunflower oil; hydrogenated castor oil; hydrogenated coconut oil; hydrogenated palm oil; hydrogenated soybean oil; hydrogenated vegetable oil; a mixture of hydrogenated cottonseed oil and hydrogenated castor oil; partially hydrogenated soybean oil; a mixture of partially hydrogenated soybean oil and partially hydrogenated cottonseed oil; glyceryl trioleate; glyceryl trilinoleate; glyceryl trilinolenate; a ?3 polyunsaturated fatty acid triglyceride containing oil; or a mixture thereof.9. The pharmaceutical composition of claim 1, wherein the oil phase further comprises coconut oil; corn oil; olive oil; palm oil; peanut oil; safflower oil; sesame oil; soybean oil; hydrogenated castor oil; hydrogenated coconut oil; partially hydrogenated soybean oil; glyceryl trioleate; glyceryl trilinoleate; glyceryl trilinolenate; a ?3 polyunsaturated fatty acid triglyceride containing oil; or a mixture thereof.
10. The pharmaceutical composition of claim 1, wherein the oil phase further comprises corn oil; olive oil; palm oil; peanut oil; safflower oil; sesame oil; soybean oil; hydrogenated castor oil; partially hydrogenated soybean oil; glyceryl trioleate; glyceryl trilinoleate; a ?3 polyunsaturated fatty acid triglyceride containing oil; or a mixture thereof.
======================================That is just a small sample. There are many patents for vaccine adjuvants. The ingredients do not appear on the labels and they can mix the oils.
====================================
Vaccines may have saved lots of lives but now they are costing us in allergies. There is no reason the ingredients can’t be put on the package.
February 12th, 2009 at 5:41 pm -
figur8 said:
ABC – when you line up such facts like that, it does look like vaccines could be a factor in the rise of allergies, however, there still isn’t really enough evidence to substantiate it as a fact. That vaccines might play some role is a possibility. That is it the main cause – I’m not convinced because surely there would be studies by now that would have proven this fact as opposed to proving it to be unfounded. Too many things still don’t add up. Personally, I feel that there are too many “loose ends” to this theory.
Yes, there are patents listed online but that doesn’t mean they were used. All it confirms is that there may be vaccines that use nut oils as adjuvants.
Clara – you’re right, I haven’t covered “overcleaning” or the “infant formula vs breast feeding” in this post. In my haste to get this blog post out while my son sleeps, I’m afraid I wasn’t very thorough.
Regarding the use of antibacterial soaps and lotions – I do believe this has played a part in weakening the immunity of this generation of children. The early years are when a child’s immunity is developing and they need to be exposed to germs to build up their immune system. Certainly being “over protected” from germs won’t help them. That said, neither am I convinced that this is the answer to the rise in allergies we are observing. It might play a part, but don’t think it is the answer.
As for infant formula versus breastfeeding – well, I was raised largely from a generation that didn’t believe in breastfeeding. Infant formula was the biggest thing since sliced bread and every mother was feeding it to her babies. Still, I don’t see a lot of food allergies amongst the people who grew up in my generation.
Sarah – I think you are mistaken. I don’t believe the “rumours and speculation”. I highlighted it as a conspiracy theory worthy of a second look. Even when after I heard it, it didn’t seem to explain a lot of things. However, I don’t dismiss the possibility that it might be part of the reason. I agree with you that the rise in allergies is too complicated to have a simple “cause and effect” answer.
Besides, even if I did believe that vaccines lead to an increased susceptibility of food allergies, I’m not foolish enough to stop vaccinating my children because the benefits of vaccination clearly outweigh the side-effects. And yes, I used to work for a pharma company so I do know the good that they do.
The more I ponder over it, the more I think there is something in what you’ve raised about the late exposure of children to potentially allergenic foods. TickTock raised it in his comment but I didn’t think much of it back then. I’ve been thinking more about it since then and I realise that there must be quite a number of parents in our country don’t really pay heed to the medical advice of not exposing babies to nuts, more due to low awareness than anything else.
I do know parents who have fed nut-foods to their infants but there doesn’t appear to be a correlated increase of children with nut allergies here among the children that I come in contact with. Besides, before the medical advice of avoiding offering nuts, etc. to infants, I’m sure it was being done (I’m thinking my parents generation and grandparents generation). Where were all the nut allergies back then?
Okay, I realise this is a very small sample, but the children I know personally in Australia with nut allergies have no family history of such conditions. That’s what surprised me. And the nature of the allergies – for instance banana? Who’s ever heard of that? When I first heard it I thought it had to be some mistake. Besides, aren’t bananas supposed to be baby friendly food?
Anyway, I’m asking questions and throwing out ideas because I want answers. It may be at the end of the day that we’ll do nothing differently to what we’ve always been doing when we have the answers, maybe not. But I just think it’s uncanny that such things are happening and we have no concrete theories.
February 12th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
[...] A first-time mother’s blog about pregnancy, motherhood and evidence-based parenting following the Sear’s attachment parenting philosophy. New South Beach Diet Recipes… [...]
[...] This is a follow-up to my earlier post on Infant Food Allergies on the Rise – What’s the Real Cause? [...]
[...] Shen-Li of Babylicious says Infant Food Allergies on the Rise – What?s the Real Cause? [...]
[...] Lee presents Infant Food Allergies on the Rise – What’s the Real Cause? posted at [...]