Jump to content
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Allergy Testing


SGWhiskers

Recommended Posts

SGWhiskers Collaborator

I'm CONFUSED! I need your collective knowledge and experiences.

5 years ago, tested positive through blood tests for tree, milk, and egg allergies

1.5 years ago, tested positive for celiac

Today, skin scratch test says trees, weeds, cat allergies. The allergist says if I don't have hives, swelling, difficulty breathing, I don't have milk/egg allergies. (But I could still have intolerances and definately have celiac).

So, which kind of testing is the trump card? Blood over skin, skin over blood, or blood and skin added together?

And then allergy shots were given as an option for 3-5 years. I don't even know where to begin thinking about that.

Please share knowledge, reputable resources, personal experiences about allergy testing and allergy treatment.


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



missy'smom Collaborator

I went through some of the same feelings a year ago with kiddo and I when we were tested through a run of the mill allergist. By the grace of God, I came across a different allergist who has helped(and is helping) sort this all out alot. Old allergist didn't believe in dietary changes unless an anaphalactic reaction presented. New allergist is up on celiac disease, runs gene tests through Prometheus labs, does skin testing but with different protocol, runs comprehensive food panels and orders a form of elimination diet followed by reintroduction for those that show skin reaction. I think he would disagree with your allergist about the eggs and milk. The old allergist put everything on at once with skin testing. I passed out and they wiped it all off so we never knew what I reacted to. New allergist routinely puddles first, then pricks for those of concern, also starts with a few at a time or certain groups and waiting and watching before proceeding. Takes longer but is better. I highly recommend finding someone like this. Hope that gives you some direction and ideas for questions to ask. Kiddo has such a big environmental allergy load and strong reaction to some things that we have gone ahead with shots. We tried environmental control and nasal rinsing but it didn't make enough of a difference. Environmental control and nasal rinsing as well as being CF gives me alot of relief from nasal irritation(not enough but I'm still a work in progress)I trust our new allergist. We're on the same page so hopeful the shots will help kiddo. In the meantime, he is on meds as well. Poor kid said his food tastes so much better now! I had tests for milk last year-blood(egg-milk subfraction) and skin-neg. but this skin test this year was pos. for casein. I know I have problems with milk-just didn't know if it was an immune reaction for sure. I don't know if all skin tests are equal and I'm sure there are different blood tests for the foods.

SGWhiskers Collaborator

Thank you for sharing your experiences. I would love to hear from others. I don't like the hours that the allergist has for receiving shots, so I may be looking for someone else if I want to persue shots. I've eaten eggs twice now. I'm still reserving judgement on my reaction. Yum yum though. I hope your son is doing well with the shots. They don't sound like fun.

I really would love to hear from some other people about their expiences. I love getting multiple perspectives.

burdee Enthusiast

Skin tests only show how our skin reacts in contact with certain substances. Skin tests cannot diagnosed food allergies, because we do NOT put food under our skin when we eat. Only blood tests, which show whether our blood reacts to the presence of food proteins by producing antibodies, can diagnose food allergies. When we eat, we digest the food in our gastrointestinal system. Food allergies can be caused by IgE, IgG or IgA antibodies. The IgE antibodies usually cause immediate and sometimes life threatening reactions, like hives, swelling and difficulty breathing. Your second allergist may believe that all allergies are IgE or immediate reaction allergies. IgG and IgA mediated allergies are usually delayed, non-life threatening reactions to foods.

When I took the Enterolab tests for gluten intolerance, casein and soy allergy, I did a stool test, which looks for IgA antibodies to certain foods. That test diagnosed my dairy and soy allergies as well as gluten intolerance. Those test results matched my experience of excruciating intestinal cramps after eating any of those 3 foods.

2 years later I took the ELISA (enzyme linked immunosorbent assay) blood test for over 100 different foods. That blood test looked for IgG and IgE antibodies. The ELISA test diagnosed my egg and cane sugar allergies which matched my negative experiences with eggs and cane sugar. A year later (after I continued to have symptoms) I took the ELISA herb and spice test which diagnosed my allergies to vanilla and nutmeg. Those results also matched my experience of gastrointestinal pain after consuming those spices.

SUE

I'm CONFUSED! I need your collective knowledge and experiences.

5 years ago, tested positive through blood tests for tree, milk, and egg allergies

1.5 years ago, tested positive for celiac

Today, skin scratch test says trees, weeds, cat allergies. The allergist says if I don't have hives, swelling, difficulty breathing, I don't have milk/egg allergies. (But I could still have intolerances and definately have celiac).

So, which kind of testing is the trump card? Blood over skin, skin over blood, or blood and skin added together?

And then allergy shots were given as an option for 3-5 years. I don't even know where to begin thinking about that.

Please share knowledge, reputable resources, personal experiences about allergy testing and allergy treatment.

VioletBlue Contributor

I don't have any faith in allergy tests. The results can be open to interpretation. For me the best test is what happens when I eat something. If there's a negative reaction under different circumstances more than 3 times to any food I pay attention. My body doesn't react the exact same way to all foods, but I've gotten to know what a negative reaction feels like. I tend to think we're better off trusting and listening to our bodies than relying on tests.

missy'smom Collaborator

I have found the particular skin testing I had this time around to be very helpful. My allergist probably would agree that it's not the be all end all. It has given us some direction. He combines it with a dietary elimination/trial. After testing for around 80 out of 100 foods, I reacted to 26. Eliminated all of them and felt a great, unexpected improvement in digestion. My tummy felt absolutely nothing after meals! So calm. It was hard to get used to. Many people have noted that my color looks better, without knowing that I have made any changes. After keeping the reactors out for a good amount of time, we are re-introducing them one by one, one each week and noting what happens. I agree that we have to listen to and trust our bodies that's the bottom line but I'm also all for giving tests a try to give us direction so we don't have to figure everything out on our own all the time. I could never have figured out all those that I reacted to on my own and I may not have to keep all of them out but it may help me figure out which one or ones are the offenders and when I saw the list, I could see right away what was going on and it all made sense, so the overall picture wasn't just random, oddball results. All that being said, I have found it a challenge to nail down a DX for my issues with eggs(which I suspect) and dairy(which there's no question that I have, it's just a matter of why/what DX). I tried several types of tests for dairy and finally this recent skin test was the first one that was positive.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      131,685
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    tdouglas2901
    Newest Member
    tdouglas2901
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.4k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):




  • Who's Online (See full list)


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • Scott Adams
      I'd go with a vodka tonic, but that's just me😉
    • Rejoicephd
      That and my nutritionist also said that drinking cider is one of the worst drink choices for me, given that I have candida overgrowth.  She said the combination of the alcohol and sugar would be very likely to worsen my candida problem.  She suggested that if I drink, I go for clear vodka, either neat or with a splash of cranberry.   So in summary, I am giving ciders a rest.  Whether it's a gluten risk or sugars and yeast overgrowth, its just not worth it.
    • Inkie
      Thank you for the information ill will definitely bring it into practice .
    • Scott Adams
      While plain, pure tea leaves (black, green, or white) are naturally gluten-free, the issue often lies not with the tea itself but with other ingredients or processing. Many flavored teas use barley malt or other gluten-containing grains as a flavoring agent, which would be clearly listed on the ingredient label. Cross-contamination is another possibility, either in the facility where the tea is processed or, surprisingly, from the tea bag material itself—some tea bags are sealed with a wheat-based glue. Furthermore, it's important to consider that your reaction could be to other substances in tea, such as high levels of tannins, which can be hard on the stomach, or to natural histamines or other compounds that can cause a non-celiac immune response. The best way to investigate is to carefully read labels for hidden ingredients, try switching to a certified gluten-free tea brand that uses whole leaf or pyramid-style bags, and see if the reaction persists.
    • Scott Adams
      This is a challenging and confusing situation. The combination of a positive EMA—which is a highly specific marker rarely yielding false positives—alongside strongly elevated TTG on two separate occasions, years apart, is profoundly suggestive of celiac disease, even in the absence of biopsy damage. This pattern strongly aligns with what is known as "potential celiac disease," where the immune system is clearly activated, but intestinal damage has not yet become visible under the microscope. Your concern about the long-term risk of continued gluten consumption is valid, especially given your family's experience with the consequences of delayed diagnosis. Since your daughter is now at an age where her buy-in is essential for a gluten-free lifestyle, obtaining a definitive answer is crucial for her long-term adherence and health. Given that she is asymptomatic yet serologically positive, a third biopsy now, after a proper 12-week challenge, offers the best chance to capture any microscopic damage that may have developed, providing the concrete evidence needed to justify the dietary change. This isn't about wanting her to have celiac; it's about wanting to prevent the insidious damage that can occur while waiting for symptoms to appear, and ultimately giving her the unambiguous "why" she needs to accept and commit to the necessary treatment. This article might be helpful. It breaks down each type of test, and what a positive results means in terms of the probability that you might have celiac disease. One test that always needs to be done is the IgA Levels/Deficiency Test (often called "Total IGA") because some people are naturally IGA deficient, and if this is the case, then certain blood tests for celiac disease might be false-negative, and other types of tests need to be done to make an accurate diagnosis. The article includes the "Mayo Clinic Protocol," which is the best overall protocol for results to be ~98% accurate.    
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

NOTICE: This site places This site places cookies on your device (Cookie settings). on your device. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.