[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.197.65.227. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
November 25, 1983

Food Allergy-Reply

Author Affiliations

Duke University Medical Center Durham, NC
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases National Institutes of Health Bethesda, Md

JAMA. 1983;250(20):2792. doi:10.1001/jama.1983.03340200025018

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

In Reply.—  The diagnosis and treatment of adverse reactions to foods remain unsatisfactory. Basic research is needed to explore the pathogenesis of these reactions and clinical research required to improve diagnostic approaches as well as therapeutic alternatives. As might be expected, this situation has led to a number of inadequately tested individual approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of adverse reactions to foods, and there were, no doubt, physicians in addition to Dr Wilson who found themselves in disagreement with aspects of the review on food allergy. Specifically, Dr Wilson has made a series of statements in a critique of this chapter that require comment. First, he has written that exclusion of a food and "its products" from the diet for five days before challenge eliminates the "phenomenon of adaptation," which "may prevent the recognition of common offending ingestants." Conversely, he states that eliminating a specific food beyond ten days

×