SELECTED ARTICLES FROM THE RECENT LITERATURE 2005

9/9/05

Unproven techniques in allergy diagnosis

Summary
Background - The mainstream diagnosis of allergic disorders is based on well-validated diagnostic approaches. However, a number of other approaches have been strongly advocated for evaluating possible allergies.

Findings - Wuthrich of the Univ of Zurich in Switzerland reviewed studies using these "alternative" diagnostic approaches to allergic disorders. He concluded that there is little or no scientific rationale for approaches such as cytotoxic food testing, reflexology, or applied kinesiology. Results of such tests are not reproducible when analyzed rigorously and do not correlate well with clinical evidence of allergy or results of double blind, placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC). Although some reports suggest a possible pathogenic role of IgG or IgG4 anti-food antibodies, the levels of such antibodies are not predictive of clinical allergic responses in DBPCFC, and may be just harmless responses to food ingestion. The so-called “Food Allergy Profile” in which levels of IgE and IgG antibodies against a very large number of foods are measured is not only not cost-effective but also may lead to misleading findings.

Reference
 J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 2005;15:86-90

Editor's Comments
These comments by an experienced investigator appear to be based on a thorough balanced review of the relevant literature. Despite the sometimes very vocal advocacy of these “alternative” diagnostic approaches in some quarters, I agree that there is little, if any, validity of such approaches when they have been subjected to rigorous analyses. Such analyses have validated a number of mainstream diagnostic approaches to allergic disorders.

 

<-- BACK