Harpers goes off on the food allergy "threat"
From January's Harper's, Meredith Broussard with "Everybody's Gone Nuts"...
Her subject: a brochure from FAAN (Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network)
Her thesis: "The rash of fatal food allergies is mostly myth, a cultural hysteria cooked up with a few key ingredients: fearful parents in an age of increased anxiety, sensationalist news coverage, and a coterie of well-placed advocates whose dubious science has fed the frenzy."
I've seen one or more of those action quite frequently, so this sounds credible, I guess (although I have no expertise in this specific arena).
But what does FAAN gain (a common part of such activity). Her most compelling answer is that Dey and Verus Pharmaceuticals benefit as the demand for EpiPen-like devices increases dramatically.
FAAN estimates that 30K Americans go to emergency rooms and 150-200 die every year from allergic reactions to food. According to Broussard, this is based on a 1999 study of rural Minnesota in which 133 people had an anaphylactic reaction over a five-year period. (Anaphylactic can refer to anything from itching to going into shock.) But only 9 of these required hospitalization-- and only one died (and that in combination with exercise).
In contrast, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention recorded 12 deaths in 2004.
Broussard also downplays the possibilities of second-hand contact and notes that most kids grow out of their food allergies.
She concludes by saying that food allergies are real-- but also really exaggerated.
3 Comments:
I couldn't agree with her more.
We think we can protect ourselves against everything.
Here's the process- something bad happens, car wreck, tragedy, accident, food allergy and we immediately get all the experts rounded up. The talking heads come on TV and they usually have an attorney with them. The story goes like this- this is the United States of America in the 21st century. The most technologically advanced country in the world. If we can't figure out a way to end all ________________ then we should be appalled. You fill in the blank- poverty, car wrecks, food allergies, tragic accidents, trans fats, there are too many to name.
Bryce, most do not think we can protect ourselves against everything.
However, as humans, as creatures with the intelligence to assess our current state to see how we can make it better, we do so. We've been in a cycle of self-improvement since the invention of the wheel. Probably before that.
You're right. This IS the United States of America in the 21st century. We're trying to make it better.
And yes, you're going to hear more about poverty, car wrecks, trans fats, and food allergies, because we live in the information age -- a product of our desire for self-improvement.
You can call them talking heads or you can call them people with information that will improve your life.
We now know that washing your hands after relieving yourself in the bathroom helps prevent the spread of disease. That's pretty useful, right? And using epinephrine after inadvertently ingesting an allergen can save your life. That's useful, too, for those with food allergies.
If you don't believe that food allergies are increasing at an alarming rate, you don't need to ask an expert. Ask a teacher.
If you haven't been affected directly by food allergies, you're lucky. But, I'm telling you, stay away from those trans fats.
Schansberg, I infer you added this comment to your blog to stir up something, since you admit you have no expertise in this arena. But I'd put the Harper's article in the "sensationalist news coverage" category.
Natalie, I posted the Harpers piece because I found it interesting-- and thought others might as well. I found it interesting because I had only heard the other side-- and I know there are tendencies in science and media (and political economy) to find sensational things to sell. And since I don't know much about the topic, I was figuring that more information is preferable to less.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home