FAAN Responds to Slate Article by Meredith Broussard
In an Aug. 31, 2009, article entitled “Nuts to That – The People Profiting From Food Allergies,” published in the online magazine Slate, writer Meredith Broussard questions and attacks the scientific work in the area of food allergies.
The article contains inaccuracies and minimizes the challenges that millions face in managing life-threatening food allergies.
Ms. Broussard, who has written similar negative stories about food allergies for other publications, (1) uses a seafood allergy prevalence study published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in 2004 in an attempt to illustrate what she says is “problematic” statistical work, (2) claims there is a conflict of interest between the funding of studies and their results, (3) accuses FAAN of exaggerating food allergy statistics, and (4) downplays the significance of food allergy deaths.
Seafood Allergy Study
A key allegation in the article is that a 2004 seafood allergy prevalence study was funded by the Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network (FAAN) and the Food Allergy Initiative (FAI) and that the authors have conflicts of interest with those organizations. It is highly appropriate for consumer organizations, such as FAAN and FAI, to fund research in their areas of interest. Other examples of organizations that fund research in their areas of interest include March of Dimes and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International.
Organizations that fund research almost always contribute funding for compensation of research scientists. Research takes time and costs money. The compensation is not tied in any way to the outcome of the studies.
The seafood allergy prevalence study was published in a peer-reviewed medical journal and found that 2.3% of the general population had a physician-diagnosed or convincing seafood allergy. All studies have limitations, and this study acknowledged its limitations in regard to telephone surveys and the self-reported diagnosis of allergy. Given these limitations, the study’s authors presented conservative prevalence estimates, extrapolated from their findings.
Research about the prevalence of food allergies is important, and allows the food allergy community to better advocate for government research funding, not to hype the problem as the article suggests.
Research Funding
Research on food allergies has been conducted by scientists worldwide, and is supported through various sources. The importance of such research – that is ultimately charting a path to a cure for food allergies – is diminished when it is suggested that the work is instead being done for someone else’s financial gain.
While the pool of individuals who continue to work tirelessly on behalf of the millions of people with food allergy may be small, they have made substantial contributions to science. It is our hope that more medical professionals will enter the field so that more physicians are engaged in food allergy research that will one day lead to a cure.
Until then, the food allergy community must continue to advocate protecting the lives of those with food allergies. This includes the proposed legislation known as the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Management Act (FAAMA). If FAAMA passes, school districts – not FAAN – will receive funds to educate teachers, school nurses, parents, and students about food allergies. Serious allergic reactions could be avoided. To say that any “pockets will be lined” is offensive.
Food Allergy Statistics
The article accuses FAAN of exaggerating food allergy statistics. In fact, statistics that FAAN disseminates are rooted in science and are thoroughly vetted by its Medical Advisory Board. When members of the media write about food allergies responsibly, the heightened awareness is a positive outcome. When publications skew the facts and insert bias, the result is confusion and lack of trust in the information, such as the article from Ms. Broussard
Saving a Life
Saving a life of someone who has food allergies is every bit as important as saving the life of someone afflicted with another condition or disease. Food allergy deaths are preventable. Concerted efforts by lay organizations and the medical profession to improve education of food-allergic patients and their families should help in this prevention.
Together We Can Make a Difference
There is no “spin” here; no scare tactics, as Ms. Broussard erroneously suggests. We at FAAN have always held the belief that education is the key and that with planning and practice, allergic reactions can be avoided, and in doing so lives can be saved.
We will continue to advocate for individuals with food allergies. It’s time to focus on finding a cure, raising awareness, and educating others. We would welcome Mrs. Broussard’s effort to raise additional independent funding for research about food allergy prevalence.
FAAN Medical Advisory Board Members
Hugh Sampson, M.D., Director
Allan Bock, M.D.
Wesley Burks, M.D.
Clifton Furukawa, M.D.
John James, M.D.
Stacie Jones, M.D.
Todd A. Mahr, M.D.
Scott Sicherer, M.D.
F. Estelle R. Simons, M.D.
Steve Taylor, Ph.D.
Robert Wood, M.D.
John Yunginger, M.D.
Robert Zeiger, M.D., Ph.D.
|
