IS A PRICK TEST CONSIDERED AN EXPOSURE?

Hi,
I asked a similar question under the thread "Dr wants skin test...what now?". You may want to read some of those answers there.
LJ

just mu opinion here...I do scratch tests, it may be an exposure to the skin, but it's not the same as something being consumed(IMO). I live in Denver and was thinking of calling for the milk and egg allergy study at National Jewish....
But this question will be answered from both sides, really I would consider the allergist's opinion before making a decision. Not all exposures make the allergy worse, I have my own son who has had multiple reactions and his numbers have gone down(from a 50 to a 31)....so this would be a very personal decision that you should work with your doctor to finalize your answer. Good luck!
------------------
Chanda(mother of 4)
Sidney-8 (beef and chocolate, grasses, molds, weeds, guinea pig & asthma)
Jake-6 (peanut, all tree nuts, eggs, trees, grasses, weeds, molds, cats, dogs, guinea pig & eczema & asthma)
Carson-3 1/2 (milk, soy, egg, beef and pork, cats, dog, guinea pig and EE)
Savannah-1 (milk and egg)

My dd was sensitized by a skin test. She was skin tested for egg and was negative. Three days later I gave her two tiny bites of scrambled egg and she went into anaphylaxis. The skin test sensitized her and was her first exposure.

Hmm...
Is a SPT an 'exposure'.
To me, the answer is yes.
But really, what's it matter...
Can you react to the SPT? I've heard yes. I've heard no.
Can you react severely to the NEXT exposure of allergen? Sure.
But are you looking at 'My child MIGHT be allergic, and I want to SPT, but I dont want THAT one to be the 'sensitization', when the NEXT time would be severe'.
Look at it as: Child is allergic. Avoid. If you want, a RAST is drawing lbood, no chance of reaction, or sensitization...
Jason
------------------
[b]* Beyond Obsessed * [/b]

When my son had his skin test at age 5 he had a 4 +++ reaction. A long red streak went up his arm also. The allergist gave him Benadryl and told us his next skin test (if ever) would cause a systemic reaction. He said NO MORE skin tests for my son. We kept to that.
Peg

I just called my dr. about this. He said that this test is NOT considered an exposure. Only if the food is eaten is it considered an exposure

I`d be curious how he would explain a negative skin test followed by an anaphylactic reaction the first time something is eaten if the skin test is not an exposure.

Personally? I don't think this is as simple a question as it might seem.
For [i]some[/i] people, a SPT is probably an 'exposure.'
BUT-- for those same people, sensitization and exposures are probably inevitable anyway. Outside of life in a bubble.
I mean, clearly this must be the case if SPTs can result in systemic reactions in some individuals. And they can. And do.
But for others, it is also clear that they are totally benign.
Problem is that you never really know (and neither does a physician) which group of people you belong to, at least not [i]a priori.[/i]
So I think that allergists who claim "it isn't an 'exposure'..." are really just saying that they don't think it is one that is large enough to 'count.' At least not for MOST people.
So my question has always been--
Is my DD [i]most[/i] people?? [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

Interesting...but for my dd if the real world sensitized her (not in a bubble), then the skin test would have come out positive. But since the skin test was negative, it would seem that the skin test was her first exposure. All those non-bubble experiences did not sensitize her; it was the skin test that did. So it would be hard to say that the skin test was not an exposure.

The predictive value of a negative SPT is 95% that the allergy is not present. There's also a 5% chance that a negative skin test is a false one. So just because a person had a negative skin test does not mean anything, there's is still a 5% chance that he/she will indeeed react when exposed to the allergen. People do not get anaphilatic after just being exposed to such a minute amount the first time they where ever exposed to it. There must have been a sensitization to the antigen that was not recognized by the SPT. (Sometimes allergen xtracts lose potency with time if not stored correctly, the technique used didnt put enough pressure in puncturing the skin is afactor, the type of device used to puncture the skin is another one, certain ones tend to give more positive results than others. However the golden standardto confirm a food allergy is a food challange. If a person reacts when ingesting the food, it does not really matter that the test say, it can say negative but if there's clinical reactivity that is all that it counts.