Read Aloud the Text Content

This audio was created by Woord's Text to Speech service by content creators from all around the world.

Text Content or SSML code:

Lack and his colleagues were able to account for that variable since asthma rates among youngsters in both nations were comparable. It would appear to rule out heredity and asthma if the two groups of kids still had varying percentages of peanut allergy despite having these characteristics. That's exactly what they found, and sure enough. In reality, Lack and his associates were able to advance much further as a result of the findings of their study. They were able to eliminate a wide range of other hypotheses by gathering information and running the statistics, including variations in the children's socioeconomic classes and how frequently they experienced other allergic illnesses that may be connected to peanut allergies. These included hay fever, eczema, and allergies to milk, eggs, sesame, and tree nuts. Eczema is characterized by red, itchy skin. Having various food sensitivities may not seem unusual at this point. But what connection is there between an allergy to eating peanuts and a skin problem like eczema? The relationship is not readily apparent. It does, however, undoubtedly exist. According to research, children who have severe eczema are much more likely to acquire peanut allergies. Why? Well, what Lack and his associates did next was heavily influenced by the answer to that question. Chapter 5 - According to the dual-allergen exposure theory, one of the primary routes for the development of food allergies may be through our skin. Remembering the purpose of having skin in the first place will help with understanding the relationship between eczema and peanut allergies. From a biological perspective, our skin essentially serves as a barrier between the inside of our bodies and the outside environment. It stops alien entities like bacteria from entering our bodies and causing damage. In any case, that's what it's meant to do. Unfortunately, skin problems like eczema can weaken it and make it more porous, which allows intruders to get through. What relevance does this have to food allergies? The solution to that query, however, introduces us to a concept known as the dual-allergen exposure theory. As a young child, imagine that your parents avoid giving you anything that contains peanuts since that is the accepted knowledge of food allergies. This strategy makes sense in theory: if eating peanuts might result in allergic responses, just avoid them, and you'll also avoid any hazards associated with doing so. The issue is that peanut proteins can also enter your body through your skin. If anyone in your family consumes anything that contains peanuts, some peanut crumbs will get up in your home's dust. Additionally, it might stay for up to three hours in their saliva and on their skin after eating - plenty of time for them to touch you or kiss you and spread it to your flesh. Once that occurs, there is a minor possibility that some peanut proteins will enter your body via your skin. This risk increases significantly if you have a skin disease like eczema. Let's assume that some peanut crumbs do find their way into your body. How will your immune system respond? Well, you won't be familiar with their proteins if you've never eaten peanuts. This will raise the likelihood that it will perceive them as dangerous alien invaders that need to be repelled rather than as helpful nutrients that should be left alone. And as a result, there will be a higher possibility that the immune system would produce an allergic reaction to combat the perceived threat. You have the beginnings of a peanut allergy at that stage. The dual-allergen exposure idea also states that this can occur with any other dietary allergen. Chapter 6 - Gideon Lack proposed the hypothesis that eating food containing allergens might prevent food allergies in newborns and the converse. So, is there any support for the dual-allergen exposure theory? It does. According to one study, due to variations in their settings, babies with peanut allergies were exposed to peanut residue on their skin 10 times more frequently than their non-allergic peers. According to different research, children's chance of acquiring peanut allergies by the age of five might be increased by as little as one drop of skin contact with peanut oil. However, don't just place the responsibility on the skin, any polluted lips, hands, or dust that may come into touch with it. The issue isn't skin exposure per se; rather, it's skin exposure in combination with the propensity to refrain from giving young children food that may contain allergies, sometimes known as allergic food. This brings up Gideon Lack's theory once more. Lack made two main points in his argument. On the one hand, consuming allergenic food could train a baby's immune system to view them as allies rather than enemies. However, avoiding that dish can have the opposite effect. When the immune system ultimately came into contact with such allergens through skin contact or unintentional ingestion, it may learn to see them as foes. The repercussions would be huge if everything there is accurate. Medical professionals have been recommending parents keep their children away from allergic foods for many years. Additionally, they had been advising mothers to abstain from eating that food while they were pregnant or nursing. In this manner, they would stop the allergens from being passed to the infants through the umbilical cords or breastmilk of their mothers. This counsel permeated the public awareness of many parents over the years, and they obediently adopted the avoidance method it is recommended. Unfortunately, this does not affect preventing food allergies in infants. As we've seen, though, the prevalence of food allergies increased sharply. If Lack was right, then those two things may be connected. Avoidance could exacerbate the issue of food allergies rather than addressing it. And in such a situation, the prevailing wisdom would be gravely flawed. Instead of avoiding allergenic foods, parents should actively endeavor to incorporate them into their children's diets; women should also not abstain from eating them when pregnant or breastfeeding. Only if Lack was right, which is very large if. Chapter 7 - The LEAP research supported Lack's claim that early exposure to peanuts lowers the risk of peanut allergies in children. The crucial issue is now at hand: was Lack's theory true? Does early exposure to peanuts protect infants from acquiring peanut allergies? Lack and a few coworkers started attempting to address that query in 2006. The LEAP research stood for Learning Early About Peanut Allergy, a clever abbreviation for a far less appealing statement. The research, which was finally published in 2015, needed financing from three different organizations, the cooperation of hundreds of newborns and parents, and who knows how many peanuts. It also took nearly ten years to complete. But in the end, all of the efforts were worthwhile. It was discovered that Lack was in fact right. Lack and his colleagues enrolled 640 newborns in the LEAP research (along with their parents, of course). Some of the infants were already allergic to peanuts. The majority didn't. They were all at a high risk of developing peanut allergies since they all either had severe dermatitis, an egg allergy, or both. Following that, all of these newborns were divided into two groups by Lack and his associates. The majority of them would entirely avoid consuming any food items containing peanuts during the first two years of their existence. The other half would frequently consume foods containing peanuts in a method that was closely observed and controlled. The researchers followed up with their little participants, who were now young children, five years later. How many of them had allergies to peanuts? In comparison to the group who avoided eating peanuts, did the peanut-eating group have fewer allergies? In other words, did feeding peanuts to newborns assist them to avoid developing peanut allergies? It turned out that the response was a resounding yes. There were astonishingly 86 percent fewer newborns that had peanut allergies than the babies who consumed peanuts before the trial began. There was an astonishing 70% decrease in peanut allergies, even among the infants who had them before the research started. To put it another way, consuming peanuts enabled these newborns to overcome their sensitivities to them! Lack and his colleagues have achieved a significant advancement in the field of food allergies, thus it would appear that the name of the LEAP research was wisely chosen. Chapter 8 - In general, it seems like a good idea to introduce allergic food to infants, but there are several crucial exceptions. Following the LEAP study's amazing success, food allergists from all over the world were motivated to investigate a variety of further lines of investigation. A whole alphabet soup of acronyms followed. There was the LEAP-ON research first. The EAT, PETIT, BEAT, STAR, STEP, and HEAP trials followed. If this were a Hollywood film adaptation of the story, the subsequent section would discuss how further research expanded the LEAP study's original conclusions concerning peanut allergies to include other food allergies. And sort of, that is what transpired. But unlike the triumphant story of clear success in a feel-good movie, the reality of food allergy science is a little trickier. The short version is that we won't get into the specifics or even the acronyms of all those follow-up studies. The LEAP-ON research added support to the LEAP study's conclusions regarding peanut allergy. The EAT research later demonstrated that within the first six months of life, infants may safely consume sesame, milk, fish, eggs, and wheat.