Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I read somewhere that it may have something to do with the use of pesticides. According to the article, peanuts are used as a legume crop on land that grew cotton. Lots of pesticides are used in the growing of cotton, which in turn are then found in the peanuts. The body wants to reject the chemicals, so it rejects the peanuts which contain the pesticides.
They may be right. If the pesticide link is not correct then there must be a valid reason as to why this is happening. Our world is quite different, plus we do know more about this type of thing than we did in the past. I doubt "wussification" of people is the cause of an increase in peanut allergies.
I read somewhere that it may have something to do with the use of pesticides. According to the article, peanuts are used as a legume crop on land that grew cotton. Lots of pesticides are used in the growing of cotton, which in turn are then found in the peanuts. The body wants to reject the chemicals, so it rejects the peanuts which contain the pesticides.
They may be right. If the pesticide link is not correct then there must be a valid reason as to why this is happening. Our world is quite different, plus we do know more about this type of thing than we did in the past. I doubt "wussification" of people is the cause of an increase in peanut allergies.
It could be pesticides, it could be all the junk food kids eat today. It probably weakens the immune system to have to deal with all the junk that's in food today.
It's not GMO because there were food allergies before that. It's not wussification because there were food allergies before that too. It is also not "fashionable" to have allergies--no one would want to have allergies and when medical tests show that a person has an allergy, they have an allergy. Why would they make it up?
I do agree that "you have to eat a lot of muck before you die"--meaning you have to be exposed to germs in order to fight germs. Kids have to be out playing, getting dirty and being exposed to the world. They also have to be eating decent food, real food, not fake fast food that will wear them down instead of building them up.
In the past most babies were breast fed exclusively for many months, if not a year. I wonder if that made a difference in allergies?
I breastfed my kids but my mothers generation (for the most part) did not. I think we understand the benefits of breastfeeding much more now than in the past.
There were always people with peanut allergies. They just took responsibility for what they ate and didn't expect the entire world to be responsible for their safety.
Good heavens. Even ALLERGIES are now a libertarian complaint? Are first-graders supposed to ask to see the ingredients list in their school lunches every day because you even want to frame helping a suffering child as a political issue?
Good heavens. Even ALLERGIES are now a libertarian complaint? Are first-graders supposed to ask to see the ingredients list in their school lunches every day because you even want to frame helping a suffering child as a political issue?
Thanks for that. I get so tired of people with agendas injecting them into every thread, no matter what the subject.
The increase in peanut allergies is still a baffling medical issue with no clear answers yet. Here's an interesting link about the curious but widely observed fact that kids from well-to-do households are suffering far more allergies today than kids from lower income homes...
Quote:
Findings from earlier studies also have suggested that socioeconomic factors appear to play a role in immune system development. Allergies of all kinds and autoimmune diseases are less common among those of low socioeconomic status. This has been observed in parts of England, Northern Ireland and the Canadian province of Manitoba. In Germany, asthma rates are higher among residents of (the former) West Germany, which is more developed than areas of (the former) East Germany. In addition, some evidence shows that the more exposure kids get to other children, including their older siblings or at day care centers, the lower is their risk of asthma. The same goes for kids who grow up with a cat or dog at home; they too have lower rates of asthma and allergies.
Allergies of ALL kinds are more prevalent now. I heard a fascinating report on NPR that explained one possibility: all autoimmune problems -- including allergies, MS, Crohn's disease, and type I diabetes -- went from rare to very common dating from the time the public health service made recommendations that eradicated hookworm from the American population. Living in a world full of minor parasites apparently gives the immune system something concrete to work on; without that challenge, they are likely to turn on the body's own cells or something else harmless -- like peanuts. They haven't proven the parasites/allergies link but I hope it's being seriously looked into.
Sorry, but I'll take the risk of peanut allergies over hookworms ANY DAY. Internal parasites are no laughing matter and have serious consequences of their own - including inducing runaway life-threatening immune reactions.
In the past most babies were breast fed exclusively for many months, if not a year. I wonder if that made a difference in allergies?
People keep bringing up the breastfeeding thing, but I was born in the 60s, when breastfeeding was unfashionable in middle class suburbia. Most people I know in my generation never touched a breast, and were on formula from day one. But us 40-somethings aren't the big population claiming to have all these food allergies.
It is also not "fashionable" to have allergies--no one would want to have allergies and when medical tests show that a person has an allergy, they have an allergy. Why would they make it up?
Hmmm...
Attention?
Convincing people they're special?
Having the satisfaction of getting other people and institutions change procedures just for them?
It sounds cooler than saying "I just don't like that food."
Look at the so-called "gluten allergies." Very, very few people have an actual allergy or adverse reaction to gluten, as defined by medical tests. Most are self-diagnosed, internet-diagnosed, or diagnosed by weary doctor just to quiet an annoying patient.
You might not think it's fashionable, because as a sane reasonable person, you would probably think it's ridiculous to "adopt" a medical condition because it's fashionable. I agree with you. But lots of people are not as reasonable as you & I are. If someone has a medical condition and they quietly live with it, and maybe only discuss it with people very close to them and their medical provider, that's one thing. But if someone talks on and on about a medical condition to all kinds of people, even strangers and casual acquaintances, and pushes an agenda to get others to change behavior because of their supposed medical condition, then yes, you can pretty much conclude that it's very likely a condition that's been adopted because it's fashionable, or it's about manipulating others, or both.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Peanut Allergies
