Food allergy with special reference to corn and refined corn derivatives.
Excerpt At a hearing on "Bread Standards," held during the summer of 1949 before the Federal Security Administrator, consideration was given to the possible allergenic ingredients of bread, includi...
Importance of foods in patients as determined by skin testing and intentional feeding.
The value of food tests in the management of allergic patients is being questioned by many leading allergists. It is not a question merely of the method of testing, the interpretation of results or the quality of the testing material. It involves the basic principle of the diagnosis of the specific etiological agent. If skin tests with food extracts are not reliable in the diagnosis of the etiological factor, then the procedure is questionable. Indeed, Randolph 1 has stated that he no longer tests his patients with foods. Waldbott, Shea and Harrington, 2 in a group of patients who were undernourished as the result of prolonged food elimination according to skin tests, successfully treated 88 per cent of these with a diet that completely ignored results of these tests. Tuft 3 suggested that it is difficult to interpret the results of food tests because positive reactions may indicate past, present
CHEMO-IMMUNOLOGICAL STUDIES ON CONJUGATED CARBOHYDRATE-PROTEINS III. ACTIVE AND PASSIVE ANAPHYLAXIS WITH SYNTHETIC SUGAR-PROTEINS
1. Guinea pigs passively sensitized with the serum of rabbits immunized with an artificially prepared sugar-protein (gluco-globulin) exhibit typical anaphylactic shock when subsequently inoculated with gluco-albumin; the serum of rabbits immunized with a second synthetic sugar-protein (galacto-globulin) similarly sensitizes guinea pigs to galacto-albumin. The reactions, in each instance, are specific and depend for their specificity on the carbohydrate component, and not on the protein fraction of the synthesized sugar-protein. 2. Guinea pigs actively sensitized with gluco-globulin or galacto-globulin are similarly subject to anaphylactic shock, when injected, after 21 days, with sugar-proteins containing carbohydrate identical with that present in the sensitizing antigen, regardless of the kind of protein with which it is combined. 3. The unconjugated glucosides, although themselves not capable of inducing shock, inhibit the anaphylactic reaction when injected immediately prior to the introduction of the toxigenic sugar-protein. The protective action of the glucosides disappears within two hours after injection. In order to elicit the phenomenon, the carbohydrate must be the same as that combined in the sugar-protein complex. 4. Anaphylactic shock may be induced by uncombined globulin in guinea pigs passively sensitized with either antigluco-globulin serum or antigalacto-globulin serum; globulin is similarly effective in animals actively sensitized with gluco-globulin or galacto-globulin. The reactions elicited by globulin alone are dependent upon the common protein present in the antigens, and exhibit only species specificity.