I'm going to say something unpopular. In my opinion Dr. Sicherer misses the point on interpreting emotions. Emotion is more of an affect whereas this is clearly a cognitive risk-benefit where risk is clearly on the table. We've had our very well qualified allergist be flat out wrong, and right before the challenge I had to sign a waiver about a mile long about the serious risks including death before the allergist would begin the challenge.
When I voiced concern about starting dose I was met with a dismissive attitude that I was 'worried' rather than had concerns about eliciting dose. What I did not need is to be dismissed, but still sign a ridiculous risk waiver, then anaphylaxis after initial dose met with a "Whoops, I was wrong," from the allergist.
So until this conversation starts to include interpretation of pass-fail, the complete lack of consistent protocol for dose of progression, developmental appropriateness per patient based on both age and ability to endure something high risk and exhausting for clean data, plus EXPENSE not from the challenge alone if successful but if a spectacular failure. Not everyone has Cadillac insurance plans or the ability to take the day off from work required and put other children in suitable child care.
They keep playing the emotions card. Start with a ground up self-evaluation of how challenges are conducted and what the true cost of one includes.
Topic: Allergic Living (Read 3400 times)
