Nearly 10 percent of the population believes that they have a food allergy, but a new study says that half of us may be wrong.
The problem is testing. Traditional methods such as the skin-prick test and the blood test only indicate if the body produces antibodies, but don't necessarily mean that the body can't tolerate the food.
Are any of the tests that are done for food allergies better than any other?
"The oral food challenge is probably the most definitive, and it's what we call the gold standard, because there, we're actually having the person ingest it and see whether or not symptoms come on," explained Dr. Hugh Sampson, professor of pediatrics at Mount Sinai School of Medicine. "The problem with doing that is it puts the person at risk of having allergic reaction."
Some are worried that this study might make people less vigilant about food allergies. "It presents one side of the story," challenged Robyn O'Brien, the director of the Allergy Kids Foundation. "We absolutely should exercise precaution until further testing and further science is available."
Oliver, who has suffered from food allergies all his life, is being retested. "He has food allergies to milk, dairy products, eggs, fish and possibly tree nuts. But the dairy allergy is a life-threatening allergy," said his mother, Laurie Prose.
Oliver gets a common test and an oral food challenge every year. This year there is good news: He's outgrown his peanut allergy and his body can now handle eggs in baked goods.
"Now that I'm not allergic to baked eggs, it's easier for me to eat stuff," Oliver said.
Dr. Besser stresses that if you are at any time concerned you may have a food allergy or your that child may have one, talk to your doctor right away.
