journal of allergy and clincial immunology-july issue

Try these links.
Overview of the studies:
[url="http://www.aaaai.org/media/news_releases/2003/07/071003.stm"]http://www.aaaai.org/media/news_releases/2003/07/071003.stm[/url]
Excellent PA overview:
[url="http://www.aaaai.org/patients/topicofthemonth/0703/"]http://www.aaaai.org/patients/topicofthemonth/0703/[/url]

I was just able to read (my company has a subscription)all of the articles mentioned in this journal and referenced last week by CNN. The link listed above does give a pretty fair overview of the studies leaving out some important details. There are two things I wanted to communicate to everyone.
With regards to "Relevance of casual contact with PB": The study number was small, only 30 children. None of the children had any reaction to a 10 minute inhalation exposure. Only 10 of the children had a local reaction to skin contact with "a pea-sized amount of PB for 1 minute." Again, there were no systemic/generalized reactions. The authors admit that it was a very small sample number, they did NOT test effects of airborne dust, and they did not increase the amounts of PB for any of the challenges. One concern mentioned was an entire classroom using PB for a craft project. At any rate, here is how the authors concluded their article: "...these results should not be misconstrued to mean that caution is not needed. The very same amount of PB that causes only a local reaction could cause anaphylaxsis if unintentionally transfered to the mouth...we would not recommend changing any school policies that protect children with peanut allergy."
With regards to the use of activated charcoal: This study determined that 200 mg of charcoal was required to fully absorb 1 mg of peanut protein. That's right, you need 200-fold more charcoal than peanut. That might work for trace amounts of peanuts only. As others have mentioned, activated charcoal also binds many helpful medications like Benadryl. The largest problem I have with this study was it was all done in the lab, in vitro. The peanuts and charcoal were mixed together in a buffer at two different pH levels under ideal conditions for binding. This usually does not represent what really ocurrs in our body. Therefore, it is quite possible that in actual clinical use far more activated charcoal may be required for the desired effects. The authors stated this study SUGGESTS that activated charcoal MAY slow or prevent further peanut absorption. They have no clinical data as yet.
I won't even comment about the survey study showing that 50% of PA children will outgrow the allergy. In my opinion, this study was extremely flawed for statistical reasons, sampling reasons, and the short time frame studied. Another case of bad science by MD's [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img] (personal bias here)!
Those are a few of my thoughts and examples of the important details that the lay-press leaves out. These things are very important and the public will never hear about them! That makes me want to tear out the rest of the hair I have left!
Troy

Thanks for your input Troy. I wish you could publish your rebuttals so the general public could hear them!
Amy

Hi Troy,
Thanks for your rebuttals.
Could you give us a couple points of your objections to the 50% will outgrow article? I'm sure I'll hear about this from some folks I know.
T.

Austin2001 and Markextra, thanks for bringing these articles to our attention. I have already heard comments from family and friends about them.
Troy - Thanks so much for the critique. I really appreciate all your input on the board.

Raising for Claire.

Tando,
Please see my comments in Research - "Outgrow peanut allergy?"