I'm 58 years old. It seems to me that almost everyone now is allergic to something. Way back when I was a kid in the 1950s and 1960s, it was an exception if you met someone who was allergic to something that is a "norm" for people. Things like hay-fever, fruits, certain vegetables...that type of thing. Now, and for the last 20 years it seems, it's now 180 degrees out from what was to what is. It seems now that only one person of maybe 100 *isn't* allergic to a bunch of things. Essentially, most items haven't changed. A squash is still the same squash it was 100 years ago. A tomato is still a tomato like it was 100 years ago. Yes, I know some crop science has made hybrids, but chemically, the substances are still the same. Only their growth characteristics have been modified, not their chemical makeup. As I said, I'm 58. I haven't a single allergy to anything. Am I a freak of nature? Why are so many people so sickly now? I was at a dinner the other night and the subject of allergies came up. With the exception of only me, every single person at the table of 12, ranging from 16 to 58, (me), every person at that table professed an allergy to at least one thing. What the hell? Is everyone really that sickly now? Are there no people like me who are just healthy with no allergies to anything?
With a lot of allergies, people accept them and spend their life avoiding them. I think it's that 50-100 years ago, people weren't checking everyone for every allergy and telling them to change there life because of it. More like "deal with it", and people learnt to physically tolerate the food. I am/was allergic to tomatoes and peanuts, (I was tested a lot as a kid because I had bad eczema, tomatoes give me rashes and peanuts make me vomit) but over the years I slowly introduced them more and more into my diet, and now I can tolerate both without worrying. My partner is lactose intolerant, but now drinks around a litre of milk a day, he did the same thing I did and eased into it over the years. I've also seen this happen in reverse, I worked in a health food store for a while, and one of my friends became a health nut recently. She says that since she's stopped eating all meat/chicken/certain types of grain she can no longer tolerate some of this food, her body reacts badly and she's gets sick if she eats certain things now. This is a girl that I've known since I was 10, she never had allergies before.
all humans are intolerant to lactose to a certain degree. allergy to meat is psychological. Im "allergic" to dust/tiny airborne particles and artificial fragrances, because i allow myself to be sensitive to that. before i used to use fragrances and scented crap.
Yes, all humans are lactose intolerant to a certain degree. But we don't all walk around saying we're lactose intolerant, unless you actually get sick. And I'm sure it is psychological to some people, but I've seen my close friend eat food that she was told was vegetarian, and get really sick, only to find out LATER that there was some meat in it. With her, it's a similar concept to that of eating food overseas, if you ingest bacteria and food in general that is unfamiliar to your body, you can react physically pretty badly. If you continue eating it your body begins to tolerate the new food. And who ISN'T allergic to dust, airborne particles, dustmites etc.? Of course those things irritate us, or we wouldn't have things like nostril hairs to keep them out. I didn't mention that both my partner and I are very allergic to cats (technically cat saliva, lots of people are), my eyes get red and puffy and swollen, and if I get a cat scratch the wound raises and gets puffy. I have 2 cats despite this, and my daily exposure to them prevents me from getting continual allergic reactions to them. If I'm away from my cats for a week and pat them again I'm full blown allergic for a while till it settles. This also makes me think that we're really more sensitive than we need to be about allergies, and if we exposed ourselves more to them we'd develop some immunity to them.
I have celiac and I did not develop symptoms until I was around 17. I do avoid gluten. If I eat it then I do get sick and the degree of symptoms depends on how much was ingested. Celiac is technically a gluten intolerance because the symptoms are not as severe as food allergies. I know a couple people with celiac and a few other people with allergies. My friend in high school was allergic to peanuts and died within 12 minutes after accidentally ingesting something cooked in peanut oil. So food allergies can be fatal and should be taken seriously. You should not feel like a freak because you don't have allergies. Trust me when I have to travel and eat at restaurants I feel like a freak because I can barely eat anything. Just be happy that you don't have to worry about those things
sometimes when i wear my granddads old wool hat my eyes itch. other than that, no allergies that i know of. but a lot of my friends are allergic to cats
Milk is not naturally or evolutionarily apart of our diet. We didnt milk wild animals, we ate them. Absolutely, adeline. Vegetarians make themselves not eat meat (pure folly practice) so naturally there is an uncomfortable reintroduction to the sustainer of our life(carne!). The only allergies I have are nose allergies, but as I mentioned these also can be psycho-somatic. I was never allergic to febreeze, but if I smell it now it bothers my lungs and nostrel. Does that "cut it" as an allergy? What exactly is an allergy? We know all plants contain toxins that in small doses boost immunity and survival (hormesis) so is an allergy just a faulty autoimmune response to a forign body or (phyto)chemical? Interesting about cats. How allergies subside as duration of exposure raises. Dr Andrew Weil(not really much of a doctor) said he cured his cat allergies mentally. With the help of LSD. Allergies are likely a psycho-somatic, rather then a purely physiological phenomenon.
I have celiac Do you eat other non-gluten grains? And youre vegan...did you know all grains are toxic because we didnt evolve eating them? That meat and animal fat has comprised over 90-95%(other being ruffage, tree and plant-not fruit or starches) of our food intake since our species began? gluten intolerance doesnt surprise folks who realize ALL grain is foriegn to our digestive systems and has been for millenia.
I do on occasion eat other grains but I not everyday. I like rice and quinoa. I usually just eat fruits and veggies. Sometimes for like holidays I will bake gluten free too.
sounds like much of your diet is carbohydrate. do you think your ancestors, or any of ours, ate that way? all carbs are sugar, and sugar leads to cancer growth.
im not allergic to anything but i get that annoying extremely slight runny nose when i smoke pot in heavy dosages
Hell no. I've spent the majority of my life living around my biggest allergens, and I blew my only chance at immunotherapy back in the day because it was so far out of my way. If I could go back and make all those appointments I would. I don't know how long it will be until I can take care of it but it's something I want to do. One should not have to live breathing through the mouth, fearing hives and breathing problems around animals, and using more chap stick than anyone else on the planet. Some day I won't have these problems but right now I'm allergic to about everything.
Nuts were/are exceedingly rare in nature; no wonder people have allergies to foods we don't normally eat. Wonder why no one is physiologically allergic to meat...
Simple answer; they are. Your information is not correct. Meat Allergies in general, are fairly uncommon. However reactions can range from anaphylactic to digestive issues. A study just reported at a meeting of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, in New Orleans, suggests allergic reaction to meat may be more common than believed. Here's a summary of the report, in a release from the academy. Conducted by researchers at the University of Virginia, the University of Tennessee and the John James Medical Center in Australia, it looked at 60 cases of recurring cases of unexplained anaphylaxis and found that 25 of those patients had IgE antibodies (the type of antibodies that are responsible for allergies) in their blood that reacted to alpha-gal (or alpha-galactose for long), a carbohydrate in meat. Here's a story from Reuters. It notes that because the reaction can occur hours after the meat was eaten, the cause can be hard to trace. The article quotes study co-author Dr. Scott Commins of the University of Virginia as saying, "The typical scenario has been if you don't react to food within two hours, then it's not the food. In this case that doesn't seem to be true." For more about food allergies, visit the website forthe Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network. (Looks like meat allergies aren't listed there -- I couldn't find them, at least -- presumably because they've been considered so rare?) And here'san earlier paper by Commins and colleagues. It mentions that most mammalian meat contains this sugar, but primate flesh -- including ours -- does not. (Not that we're advocating going that route to avoid having to give up eating steaks, of course.) This same carbohydrate -- called Galactose-α(1,3)Galactose, for extra long -- appears to be one of the reasons that transplanting organs from other species is a problem, by the way. To get around that, scientists have created pigs in which the enzyme responsible for creating alpha-gal has been knocked out of commission. Finally, here's a Washington Post story from last year that features a man who turned out to have a meat allergy."
An antibody response was present in 25 of 60 participants who had allergic reactions. Thats not even half! Therefore, the other 35 folks who had reactions reacted without the antibody response. This can confound results because obviously not all participants had the antibody reaction, yet all 60 claimed to have adverse reactions. This means all 60 likely had something in common; allergy to meat was not it. An antibody response occurs does not imply an actual allergic reaction occured. Our bodies antibody system is too complex to understand, so trivially and cut'n'dry as that. It's also interesting that this sugar IS a sugar. Sugar is extremely rare in nature and our old diets, but not our diet now. What else had participants eaten? Too many confounding variables, not enough contolling in the study. This sugar or carb found in extremely small amounts in meat(meat has 0g carbs/serving, INCLUDING alpha-galactoside), is being called the culprit though less then half sufferers (not a random selection) even had the antibody response. Twenty-five tested positive for alpha-galactose and no other patterns were found that would have otherwise explained the cause of their anaphylaxis, the researchers said. Wowsa, anaphylaxis...hypertension...very vague. How, then, does this poor study conclude that humans have allergic reaction to our ancient source of fuel? It doesn't. Practically junk science, a leap of faith and less than half sufferers had a response. They basically found nothing; healthy controls could also have the antibody. Oh noes we're allergic to meat because of a measureable IgG response. Extremely improbable my friend. Please, refute me.
I also want to point out anomalies, outliers, one in a billion folks who get "sick" or feel "bad" after eating meat does not mean that even .01% of the human population suffers from or that there even exists an allergy to either mammal fat or protien(or rediculously insignificant amounts of alpha-galactoside, for that matter!).
Science already has. You're arguing pointlessly. You said meat allergies are psychological. They are proven to not be. You find something in science, not your own imagination, that proves that there are no allergies to meat. You made the claim. Now back it up with facts. Quoted facts. Don't post a run-on 200 page study and try to tell me its in there. Post conclusive information with quotes that say specifically that there are no such things as allergies to meat. You can't because there are. No offence man, but you're talking out of your ass.