Histamine intolerance powerpoint

mbeezie · Post by **mbeezie** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 10:06 pm

Gloria,

I've suspected the same thing about you for a long time. I remember your chest pain and going to the ER and finding nothing. I had that experience as well. With my recent flare I felt some minor chest pains and now I know what it is. As oon as I got back on the histamone restricted diet, my symptoms cleared.

Mary Beth

ant · Post by **ant** » Fri Feb 04, 2011 11:27 pm

Dear Mary Beth

Thanks for the interesting PowerPoint. Slides 6 and 7 raise a question in my mind.....

Food Allergy and Food Intolerance:
What is the Difference?

Definitions:
Food Allergy:
– A response of the immune system involving
antigen consisting of protein or a molecule
linked to a protein

Food Intolerance
– A non-immunologically mediated event,
usually triggered by small molecular weight
chemical substances, and biologically active
components of foods

Characteristics of Food Allergy
and Food Intolerance

Food allergy:
– Requires a “sensitizing event” that primes the
immune system for future response
– Reaction is not dose-dependent
– Allergic potential is an inherited characteristic (is idiosyncratic)

Food Intolerance
– Does not require “priming”
– Event is dose-dependent
– Reaction is not always idiosyncratic

I had thought that (i) "Food Allergy" referred to a fast response involving antigens and (ii) "Food Intolerance" referred to the slower response, also involving antigens (e.g. Celiac and most MC responses) and (iii) "Food Irritant" referred to foods not causing antigen responses such as fiber. However, in the slides set of definitions the author is putting (i) and (ii) in the same definition, which would mean I have "Food Allergies" not "Food Intolerances".

Is it just me or is anyone else confused?

Best, ant

mbeezie · Post by **mbeezie** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 3:40 am

Ant,

It's complicated and I'm sure she condensed this for a powerpoint slide. Here is a brief explanation that I just read from a colleague's website that describes the difference between allergy, intolerance and sensitivity http://www.leapintowellness.com/foods.php

Hypersensitivity reactions are broken down even further into subtypes. Here are some articles that explain different types of reactions
http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchi ... pg10.shtml
http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchi ... pg10.shtml

The words allergy, intolerance and sensitivty are often used incorrectly.

Mary Beth

Gloria · Post by **Gloria** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 10:35 am

Mary Beth,

It's interesting that I haven't had any chest pains since a year ago at Christmas. I hadn't realized it until recently. I can't help but wonder if it's got anything to do with my MC being under control now. I have been doing great for the past several months.

Gloria

mbeezie · Post by **mbeezie** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 10:59 am

Let's hope so!!

Mary Beth

Post by **tex** » Sat Feb 05, 2011 1:21 pm

Ant,

Well, since you brought it up, FWIW, you're not the only one who disagrees with those definitions. I always get the impression that those who list food sensitivities under the broad heading of food allergies, don't trully understand the immune system, nor do they understand the definition of allergy.

When I first saw the slides that you listed, they left me shaking my head, because I knew the author was confused. While the definition of a food allergy is correct, the definition of food intolerance, for example, is incorrect, IMO:

Food Intolerance
– A non-immunologically mediated event,
usually triggered by small molecular weight
chemical substances, and biologically active
components of foods

That may be true, but it is not an exclusive definition. The type of food intolerance we have is obviously not caused only by "small molecular weight chemical substances", (unless for some weird reason that's intended to include peptides - but that's contradictory, because peptides are proteins), it is caused by proteins in the form of partial amino acid chains, (peptides). The description "small molecular weight chemical substances" is rather vague and arbitrary, to say the least, but it would not apply to fiber, either, so the definition is obviously incorrect. Terminology of this type strikes me as an attempted "snow job", wherein an author thinks that no one in the audience is smart enough to recognize that he or she is simply attempting to pull off a smoke and mirrors routine, in lieu of actually knowing what he or she is talking about.

Obviously, the author was confused by the fact that the correct definition would not help to distinguish between the two different categories, so she felt obligated to change it.

There are additional errors in those slides, also. For example, the claim for food allergies:

– Reaction is not dose-dependent

That's simply not true. All reactions are dose-dependent - some just have an extremely small threshold, but a threshold still exists. If that were not true, then it would be impossible to develop a program for desensitizing someone, and we know that desensitizing can be done, by administering increasingly larger, (but still tiny), doses of the allergen, and allowing the immune system to adapt to it, over a period of time.

Also, the claim about food intolerances,

– Does not require “priming”

is only a half truth. It is not true if a particular allergen has not been ingested in a very long time. When that is the case, it takes some time for the body to produce a sufficient antibody level to trigger a reaction. Remember, this is an IgA reaction, not an IgE reaction, so it takes time to develop.

Also, I'm skeptical of this claim:

– Allergic potential is an inherited characteristic (is idiosyncratic)

I have a hunch that is an obsolete viewpoint. Epigenetics completely changes the possibilities, so that allergies do not necessarily have to be an inherited trait

Other than those slides, the author did pretty well, for the most part.

Lest someone accuse me of being unduly critical with my analysis here, I'd like to point out that I hold anyone who attaches the suffix "PhD" or "MD", to their name, to a higher standard of accuracy, than anyone else, since they are officially and legally designated as "experts", and they are paid for their professional advice. Therefore, they, of all people, should get it right. Right?

Also, please remember that I didn't bring this up - Ant did. All I am doing is explaining why I feel that he is correct, so please don't shoot the messenger, (again).

Tex

faithberry · Post by **faithberry** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 1:13 am

Mary Beth,

Thanks for this link. I'm always interested in information about histamine intolerance since I've had both the elevated serum tryptase and elevated plasma histamine even when on a low histamine diet. I look forward to reading this.

All the best, Faith

TooManyHats · Post by **TooManyHats** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 8:58 am

Wouldn't our reactions to food be considered a type IV hypersensitivity? Similar to Celiac disease?

Delayed hypersensitivity reactions are inflammatory reactions initiated by mononuclear leukocytes. The term delayed is used to differentiate a secondary cellular response, which appears 48-72 hours after antigen exposure, from an immediate hypersensitivity response, which generally appears within 12 minutes of an antigen challenge. These reactions are mediated by T cells and monocytes/macrophages rather than by antibodies. They are also termed type IV hypersensitivity reactions.

If T-cell function is abnormal, the patient presents with opportunistic infections, including infection with mycobacteria, fungi, parasites, and, often, mucocutaneous candidiasis. Undesirable consequences of delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) reactions include illness such as contact dermatitis and allograft rejection. Examples of DTH reactions are contact dermatitis (eg, poison ivy rash), tuberculin skin test reactions, granulomatous inflammation (eg, sarcoidosis, Crohn disease), allograft rejection, graft versus host disease, and autoimmune hypersensitivity reactions. Of note, the Rhus genus of plants, which includes poison ivy, poison oak, and poison sumac, all cause identical rashes.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/136118-overview

Post by **tex** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:42 am

Arlene,

While MC is indeed a T-cell based reaction, reaction onset timing can vary greatly, (by the individual), anywhere from about 10 minutes, to several days. Typically, though, the most common reaction time, (after ingesting a food sensitivity), seems to be in the 3 to 6 hour range. However, IMO, the problem is not so much an oversupply of killer T-cells, as a deficiency of regulatory T-cells, (aka suppressor T-cells). IOW, the immune system is deficient, rather than overactive.

Tex

ant · Post by **ant** » Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:43 am

Dear Tex

not so much an oversupply of killer T-cells, as a deficiency of regulatory T-cells, (aka suppressor T-cells). IOW, the immune system is deficient, rather than overactive.

I tend to agree. So the big question is what actions can be taken to increase the suppressor T-cells?

Best, ant

Post by **tex** » Fri Feb 11, 2011 11:29 am

I wish I knew. That would probably be the key to resolving all so-called autoimmune diseases.

Tex

faithberry · Post by **faithberry** » Mon Feb 14, 2011 12:38 am

That's really interesting way to look at it as a deficiency in the immune system. Apart from MC, which is theoretically in remission, I "feel" like my immune system is over-reactive to food, chemicals, molds, etc. It appears that it could be experienced that way, but actually be a deficiency. I'm curious how these T-cell reactions connect with delayed IgG hypersensitivity reactions.

Post by **tex** » Mon Feb 14, 2011 9:39 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypersensitivity

See type IV

http://pathmicro.med.sc.edu/ghaffar/hyper00.htm

Tex