Study: Guidelines for Managing Anaphylaxis in Children Need an Update

“When in doubt, just do it!” A recent study by Canadian researchers found the best possible outcomes for those experiencing anaphylaxis resulted when epinephrine was administered before the patient reached the hospital. With 3,500 participants, the study also found that administering steroids and antihistamines can have a negative effect on patient outcomes. Antihistamines are part of many treatment plans in a pre-hospital setting for managing anaphylaxis (such as in schools or at home). This is certainly something that should be addressed in the medical community since many treatment plans given to schools indicate that Benadryl should be administered first. Sadly, less than one-third of anaphylactic reactions in these 3,500 patients were treated with epinephrine before arriving at the hospital, while antihistamines were used in 46 percent of cases.

Study: Guidelines for Managing Anaphylaxis in Children Need an Update

Abmulance at Emergency Room Entrance

By News Wire
2019/06/04

New study shows that pre-hospital treatment with epinephrine has the highest protective effect against uncontrolled allergic reaction

MONTREAL, QC (30 May 2019)

Treatment guidelines for managing anaphylaxis in children should be reassessed, according to a new Canadian study published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice.

Involving nearly 3,500 patients, it is the largest study to assess the clinical outcomes of pre-hospital treatment of anaphylaxis, including the use of epinephrine autoinjector, antihistamines (such as diphenhydramine known most commonly as its brand name Benadryl) and corticosteroids. Of the patients examined, 80 percent were children aged 1 to 17 years.

Continue Reading

DOT Warns American Airlines: Food Allergy Family’s Rights Were Violated

Heaven forbid that a family pre-board a flight before an airline thinks they are supposed to! The MacKenzie family of Washington state has a daughter with multiple food allergies, and they simply wanted to wipe down the seating area before two American Airlines flights. The airline refused, but the Department of Transportation sided with the family, stating that food allergies should be considered a disability under the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA). American has since updated its policy, but only for those with tree and peanut allergies.

DOT Warns American Airlines: Food Allergy Family’s Rights Were Violated

Nicole and Paul MacKenzie and children
Nicole and Paul MacKenzie and their children.

By Gwen Smith
June 7, 2019

The U.S. Department of Transportation has found American Airlines in violation of the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) for failing to allow the family of a girl with multiple food allergies the right to pre-board two flights. It has issued a warning to the airline about this violation.

DOT found that the refusal to allow the Washington state family to pre-board flights to and from Portland to Charlotte, NC (via Dallas), was a violation of ACAA’s provision that allows pre-boarding for disabilities. Nicole MacKenzie had phoned the airline asking that she and her family be allowed to pre-board their September 2016 flights, so that they could wipe down the seating area before general boarding.

The mother said her daughter Isla, then 7 years old, has severe allergies to tree nuts, peanuts and sesame. Wiping the area was meant to reduce the chance the girl would be exposed to residue from her allergens. At that time, MacKenzie was told this was against the policy of American Airlines (AA), which specifically denied pre-boarding for food allergies.

Continue Reading

Food Allergy Sufferers often Served a Side of Skepticism Alongside their Struggle

There is a big difference between a food “intolerance” and a food allergy, and overuse of the word allergy can cause many to not take the threat seriously. Here’s a story of one teenager who had to stand up in front of her entire middle school and explain the dangers of her peanut allergy. She has learned to advocate for her own safety, and encourages all skeptics to take people living with severe allergies very seriously. Even today there are those in the medical community and the media who believe that the fear around allergies is alarmist and can be driven by profit-seeking and other motives. They should “walk in another man’s moccasins” for a day and then see what it is like to live with a life-threatening allergy.

Fresh veggies, meats, crackers and dip

Food Allergy Sufferers often Served a Side of Skepticism Alongside their Struggle

By Lavanya Ramanathan The Washington Post
Apr 23, 2019

Patricia “Trece” Hopp rose and took a deep breath at the start of middle school with something to say. She’d need her classmates’ understanding, she nervously explained, and perhaps their help.

Being near a peanut-butter sandwich might pock her skin with hives. A whiff of dust from nuts could hinder her breathing. Touching a peanut could send her into anaphylactic shock. And if she ate one, she could die.

Thereafter, “I was the girl with the peanut allergy,” says Trece, now 17. “It’s my identity. It’s part of me.” A part she has to not only remind people about but also repeatedly explain.

Continue Reading

Study Favoring Avoidance Over Food Allergy OIT Ignites Controversy

Just as our excitement was building for peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT), a recent study cautions that there may be more harm than good, with an increase of severe allergic reaction three times greater than if a person simply continued to practice avoidance. Some parents of children who have had success with OIT strongly disagree with these findings, and hope the FDA continues with its approval process. They say any reactions are happening more in a controlled environment at home rather than in a public place such as a restaurant in an emergency situation.

Study Favoring Avoidance Over Food Allergy OIT Ignites Controversy

Dr. Derek Chu
Dr. Derek Chu photo: McMaster U.

By: Gwen Smith
April 28, 2019

A systematic review of peanut oral immunotherapy that compared 12 controlled studies has brought a longstanding “pro or con” debate over whether OIT is ready for widespread use spilling out into the news media.

The analysis, published April 25 in The Lancet, has generated discussion, “more harm than good?” headlines as well as controversy in the food allergy community. It lands at a time when an increasing number of allergists’ offices are starting to offer the therapy, growing numbers of food allergy families are expressing interest in treatment – and just as the FDA is about to consider approval for a standardized peanut allergy OIT biologic drug.

The review, led by Canadian allergist Dr. Derek Chu, concluded that undergoing peanut OIT results in a risk of severe allergic reaction three times greater than if a person with peanut allergy simply continued to practice avoidance of the legume. The frequency of anaphylaxis rose from 7.1% among those who were on placebo or avoidance in the dozen studies to 22.2% for those on peanut treatment.

Continue Reading

Editorial: The Coming Healthcare Apocalypse for the Food Allergy Community

Editorial: The Coming Healthcare Apocalypse for the Food Allergy Community

Dave Bloom, CEO of SnackSafely.com, is very concerned about the Trump Administration’s recent efforts to once again try to strike down the Affordable Care Act without any concrete proposals to replace it. While Republicans wisely decided to hold off until after the November elections, many people are worried because food allergies would be considered a preexisting condition.

DoctorsNote: I'm Sorry

By Dave Bloom
March 27, 2019

Earlier this week, the Trump Administration told a federal appeals court that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) — commonly known as “Obamacare” — should be struck down in its entirety. This contrasts its previous assertion that “only” the provisions protecting those with preexisting conditions should be struck down while preserving the rest of the law including the expansion of Medicare.

Some 20 million Americans receive their health insurance under provisions of the ACA and another 100+ million are protected by the ACA’s provisions covering those with preexisting conditions.

It doesn’t much matter if you are a red-state Republican or a blue-state Democrat, if you suffer from food allergies, you have a preexisting condition. Your healthcare coverage could be discontinued in its entirety, your policy could be amended to exclude expenses arising from your preexisting conditions, or your premiums could skyrocket, making your insurance too expensive to afford.

Continue Reading

The information provided on this site is in no way intended to be a substitute for medical advice,
diagnosis, or treatment with a licensed physician.
The Allergy Advocacy Association is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, tax-exempt organization.
Copyright 2019 © Allergy Advocacy Association, Inc. All rights reserved.  Terms & Conditions