The Pros And Cons Of The Food Intolerance Testing

[Claire]

THE PROS ANC CONS OF THE FOOD INTOLERANCE TESTING

Open Original Shared Link

Note: this article is British which explains the statement " All of our supermarkets have aisles, which are dedicated to wheat free, gluten free and dairy free and are stocked with organic, non-GM biscuits to cream cakes."

I don't know if the blood test mentioned- Lame Advertisement- is available in the U.S.

Needless to say the elimination diet is chosen by many who cannot afford the high cost of these tests. Some insurances will cover, many will not. Medicare will not. Claire

[jerseyangel]

Claire--Definately going to read this latter--this is a subject I'm very interested in

[plantime]

This is precisely the test I have been looking for! What's even better, I can order without my doctor's permission! Thank you!

[Nevadan]

While doing some web searching for "Lame Advertisement", I ran across several sites critiqing various food intolerance testing. The following link is one example which does not mention Lame Advertisement but does discuss ELISA, so I thought that just for the sake of seeing different views I would post the link here. I have no idea of the validity of the link's info or what axe they may be grinding, but here it is:

Open Original Shared Link

It's also a UK site, and they do discuss some new promising tests in development.

Aetna has another perspective on allergy/intolerance testing which is interesting (be sure to scroll down the page to get to the discussion of various tests. Being an insurance company they would clearly have a bias; however, they may have some valid experience as well: Open Original Shared Link

I have had the ELISA testing by York and seemed to end up more confused with the results than before I was tested due to several apparent "False Positives". Maybe some "False Negatives" too, but who knows? I believe I recall Claire having some similar experiences. It would be great if there were a foolproof food intolerance test, but I'm still looking. I'm not sure Lame Advertisement is the answer either. I have emailed the Lame Advertisement site requesting a detailed explanation of how they differ from ELISA. I'll post any response I get. If anyone has experience with this test, please post your comments.

George

[trents]

Nevadan,

That article you site does indeed mention the Lame Advertisement Test, aka Bryan's Test, the leukocytotoxic test, the Nutron test. Apparently, it has been around since the 1950's an good studies have shown it to be bogus.

The Leucocytotoxic Test (Bryan’s Test)

Bryan’s Leukocytotoxic test was originally developed in 1956 by a Dr Black, and further elucidated by Bryan in 1960. The basis of the test is that if the patient’s white blood cells are mixed with the offending allergen, they swell. The test then measures any swelling of the Leukocytes (white blood Cells) and if a certain threshold of swelling is measured, using a celiac3270 Counter – a Positive result is recorded. Studies to date have shown poor correlation between this test and clinical allergy. The marketers, who rely on anecdotal evidence of efficacy, do not mention these disappointing clinical studies. A large number of allergens are tested for and patients are usually positive to a number of foods, additives and other agents. Katelaris in Australia and Steinman in South Africa both conducted studies on the Lame Advertisement test and found no diagnostic accuracy. At present the test is marketed in the UK under the name "Nutron". Despite claims to the contrary, no large studies have ever shown the test to be accurate despite it being available for 50 years!

The original protagonists of the Lame Advertisement test (which includes the Leucocytotoxic test and Nutron Test) could only site a few non-peer reviewed congress abstracts as evidence that it worked. While the antagonists (some of the leading opinion leaders in the field of food allergy including Bindslev-Jensen, Potter and Katelaris) have substantial data on record to show a poor diagnostic accuracy. The lack of mainstream acceptance of these tests, is often blamed on a conspiracy by the larger multinational diagnostic companies to try and remove the "smaller" opposition from the market. This perception is not a true reflection of the situation. Open Original Shared Link

[Nevadan]

Nevadan,

That article you site does indeed mention the Lame Advertisement Test, aka Bryan's Test, the leukocytotoxic test, the Nutron test. Apparently, it has been around since the 1950's an good studies have shown it to be bogus.

Trents,

Thanks. I missed the reference to Lame Advertisement when I skimmed thru the website.

George

[Nevadan]

Here is the response I received from Cell Science Systems Ltd at Lame Advertisement.com regarding the difference between Lame Advertisement and ELISA testing. It's pretty sparse on specific references and detailed explanations. It does mention double blind studies by gives no link to detailed summaries of them. On the plus side, their response to my inquiry was prompt (~12 hrs); I've yet to get any email response to questions I've presented to York Lab even though I'm a paying customer for their ELISA testing ("price includes one year phone and/or email consultation") and their phone response is usually just a voice mailbox. Here's the Lame Advertisement response:

"

The Lame Advertisement Test differs from other food allergy or intolerance tests as it

accurately and objectively measures leukocyte cellular reactivity in whole

blood, which is a final common pathway of all mechanisms. The test utilizes

electronic, state of the art, hematological instrumentation.

Standard allergy tests, such as skin testing or RAST are not accurate for

delayed type reactions to foods and chemicals. They measure only a single

mechanism, such as the effect of mast cell release of histamine or the

presence of allergen specific IgE molecules. Delayed reactions to foods

and chemicals are NOT IgE mediated.

The Lame Advertisement Test also differs from standard IgG tests such as ELISA in that

they rely exclusively on one immune pathway, serum levels of immunoglobulin

G (IgG). In fact, high food specific IgG titers are indicative only of

exposure, not necessarily intolerance.

The Lame Advertisement Test reproducibly measures the final common pathway of all

pathogenic mechanism; whether immune, non-immune, or toxic; hence, it is the

only test shown to correlate with clinical symptoms by double blind oral

challenges, the gold standard.

Please let me know if you have any other questions,

Lee Rolnick

Cell Science Systems Ltd.

1239 E. Newport Center Drive, Suite 101

Deerfield Beach, FL 33442

(800) US Lame Advertisement (872-5228)

(954) 426-2304

(954) 428-8676 FAX

www.Lame Advertisement.com

"

[trents]

Had the skin testing done several years ago, even before I was diagnosed with Celiac disease. It showed mild allergic reaction to only one inhalent (cattle dander) but mild to moderate reaction to a number of common foods such as rice, corn, peanuts, filberts, yeast, coffee and milk fat. Cost about $1100 to have it done. Interestingly (or not so interestingly, since Celiac disease is not an allergy) wheat, barley and rye were not amonng them. I've often wondered what that same test would turn up now that I've been gluten-free, i.e. since there has been, presumably, healing of the mucosa and, again, presumably, some improvement in the leaky gut problem. That is to say, were some of those allergic reactions when I had the skin test done due to antibodies produced by excessively large molecules getting into the blood stream and ultimately into the tissues? Would this be different now?

One thing has remained unchanged, however, and that is that my eosinophyl (sp?) count has been high before and after Celiac diagnosis. That would indicate to me that there is still some food sensitivity reaction occuring. By the way, I had my gluten antibodies checked the other day and they were quite low so it pleased me that I had proof I have been able to be compliant.

[Ursa Major]

What if you react badly to rice or pork or pear or peas and your symptoms never go away?

Very true, I do react badly to rice, and I believe to pork also.

I have no idea which tests are accurate. Somehow what it says on this one does make sense. I was tested for allergies and intolerances before, but most of the worst ones never showed up, because they cause delayed reactions.

My allergy test says that I am allergic to tobacco smoke, cats, dogs, plantain weed, pollen from maple and birch trees, dust, dust mites, mold. Those are definitely true. My intolerance test showed that the nightshades were a huge problem, as well as the combination of grain and fruit, msg, coffee, black tea. All true as well. But just the tip of the iceberg.

[Nevadan]

More regarding the Lame Advertisement test. I emailed Cell Science Systems Ltd at Lame Advertisement.com again asking for the details of the double blind testing evaluation mentioned in their previous email. Their prompt reply included a paper, "Lame Advertisement, A New Test for Food Induced Problems in Medicine?" by Drs Fell, Brostof, O'Donnell, O'Connor, Charig. The paper is available on the Lame Advertisement.com website at Open Original Shared Link . From their home page click "Research" then click at the top of the page "Click here for various studies..." This article is the 4th from the bottom of the menu listed as, "New Test for Food Induced Problems in Medicine". Several of the other articles in their list look interesting. One caveat is that this article was presented to a conference in 1988 - it would be interesting to see more recent papers, particularly given the controversey regarding the validity of the Lame Advertisement testing. Several other articles under their "Research" button were also from the 1990 timeframe.

George

[plantime]

So maybe it is the ELISA Test that I want? It is a blood test that I want, but my allergist refused to do it, he only does scratch tests on the skin. A friend of mine had a blood test done years ago that helped him immensely, but I don't remember the name of it! I will have to keep looking!

[jthomas88]

My 17 yr old just had the ImmunoLab test, BloodPrint1, done. It's an ELISA test, and tests 115 foods. It's got a high degree of reliability. The test costs between $500-$600, and I don't know yet if it will be covered by my insurance. (It was worth it to us, though, because it quickly identified 16 problem foods that we wouldn't have figured out on our own for quite some time - and when my daughter has a reaction, she misses two weeks of school.)

[trents]

My 17 yr old just had the ImmunoLab test, BloodPrint1, done. It's an ELISA test, and tests 115 foods. It's got a high degree of reliability. The test costs between $500-$600, and I don't know yet if it will be covered by my insurance. (It was worth it to us, though, because it quickly identified 16 problem foods that we wouldn't have figured out on our own for quite some time - and when my daughter has a reaction, she misses two weeks of school.)

Assuming it proves to be accurate in real life, yes. Keep us posted. So where are you going from here? Are you going to start by eliminating all 16 of those foods? What if there were false negatives that prove to be the real culprit rather than the 16 positives you are working from? It has a high degree of reliability according to who? According to what I've been able to learn from my own research, that's begging the question. But, I hope you are right. Let us know how it pans out.

[Claire]

Recommended by NDs and Chiropractor/Nutritionists and, of course, their clients/ I once had a writeup on them from a Health Magazine but couldn't put my hand on that now.

I had 30 foods on my list the first time I tested. Some I knew to be accurate the moment I saw them. Yes you do an elimination process but you have a place to start - in many cases with things you never thought of. The first thing I tested was wheat - I gave up bread. In a matter of days I had put and end to years of misery. That alone was worth the price of the test. I chose bread fist because yeast was also on my list - so was barley, rye and corn. Gluten wasn't on the horizon at that time. It didn't take long to figure out that anything with flour in it was a no no. There were a few false positives and then maybe not. These may have been below the threshold of a recognizable reaction. The lab assigns numerals to each reactive food. All my so called false positives were 1 or 1+. Their continued support was excellent and I understand that it still is. I had a doctor to talk to who walked me through some specific problems and provided a protocol for me to follow. Claire