It’s rare to read something written by a doctor who understands both the medical and psychological aspects of helping children with multiple food allergies. That is why I recommend this article by Dr. Philip E. Putnam.
You can read the whole article, but here are some excerpts that I especially could relate to:
It is clear that the perception that ‘‘if your skin tests are negative then you’re not allergic to it’’ needs either to be abandoned or the terminology changed.
Our son has negative food allergy tests to every food we’ve tried except egg, but reacts when he eats the food. This is very frustrating because it means we are shooting in the dark when we try new foods. When talking to people about our food allergy testing, it’s common to get a reaction like, “Well that’s great that he’s not allergic to all of those foods.” We have to remind them that we want positive tests, so that we can narrow down the list of potential foods to try. Just because someone tests negative does not mean he is not allergic.
In the absence of perfect testing, double-blind placebocontrolled food challenges (DBPCFC) are necessary for confirmation of a relationship between the symptom and ingestion of the food. For delayed reactions, DBPCFC are reliable when clearly positive or negative, but when the symptoms are non-specific (sleep disturbance in a toddler, for example) they are fraught with the vagaries of the subjectivity beast. Because they are time-consuming and produce illness when a reaction develops, the challenge for us is to develop accurate, reproducible, noninvasive means for identifying the offending foods.
I’ve come to understand that doctors don’t take “non-specific” symptoms very seriously. If a kid eats a food and breaks out in hives, it’s pretty easy to see that there was a reaction. But sometimes telling a doctor that you’re kid is more irritable and is not sleeping well doesn’t get you very far. We’ve had numerous people, including doctor’s tell us that these things are just normal for a two year old, or they must just be sick or something. That sounds reasonable, until we tell them that the degree to which this happens is NOT normal, and happens predictably during each food trial. But my point isn’t to rant. My point is to agree with this article that tracking delayed non-specific reactions is difficult. I highly recommend keeping a journal of some kind and record what kind of symptoms are occurring. I keep a spreadsheet (complete with graphs), but I’m weird that way.:)
At the same time, it is not surprising that these families fail to successfully navigate the subspecialty labyrinth. The gastroenterologist did the endoscopy and didn’t see much, the biopsy results were underwhelming to the pathologist, and the allergist said the child wasn’t allergic because the skin tests were negative. Random elimination of foods didn’t help. The child is still sick. Now what? Of course, there is no simple solution.
We consider ourselves pretty attentive parents, and we are fortunate to have good health insurance. I often wonder what people in our situation do who do not have the resources and knowledge to navigate the health care system. I imagine that most of them end up undiagnosed. Our son would never have been diagnosed at all had we not been so persistent about getting to the bottom of his excessive reflux during his first year of life, while being told many times that his reflux would just go away and we shouldn’t worry about it. I feel for the children who don’t have an effective advocate.
Continuing food challenges in the face of repeated failure is emotionally taxing and, if not carefully done, commits the child to perpetual illness during the failed search for something to eat. It is essential to recognize these cases and suspend food challenges until such time as optimal health is restored, and until the child and parent are ready to give it another go.
This is a constant battle we have with our well-intentioned doctors. They want to keep trying more and more foods, one after the other. We see our child constantly sick. I agree with the article that there comes a time where a break from food trials is a good thing. Currently we are trying zucchini (initial results don’t look good), and after that we will probably take a break for a while.
The cost of elemental formulas is prohibitive for most families. The constant battle to obtain insurance compensation over insipid arguments posed by companies prepared only to preserve their fiscal security has forced families to engage media attention or legal representation, and has pushed many state legislatures to compel coverage. As evidence for the increasing problem of food protein hypersensitivity is published, perhaps the mainstream insurance community will withdraw its head from its bottom (line), formally recognize the importance of these conditions, and remove the barriers to immediate coverage.
We have been fortunate (so far) that our insurance has covered our son’s elemental formula, but we have to re-authorize it every month and live in the constant fear that it might stop being covered, resulting in an expense almost as big as our mortgage payment. We’ve been trying to save up in case that happens. We also know people who have stopped the elemental formula and resumed normal foods (even though their kids are allergic) because they could not afford the formula. I understand the insurance company’s argument (“We don’t pay for food”), but considering that this “food” is medically necessary (there is no alternative), and very expensive, certainly some balance needs to be struck to help families who are struggling with illness.
Posted by Mike
Posted by Mike 
Posted by Mike
My son was diagnosed with