A decade after a landmark study proved that feeding peanut products to young babies could prevent development of life-threatening allergies, new research finds the change has made a big difference in the real world.

Peanut allergies began to decline in the U.S. after guidance first issued in 2015 upended medical practice by recommending introducing the allergen to infants starting as early as 4 months. The rate of peanut allergies in children ages 0 to 3 fell by more than 27% after guidance for high-risk kids was first issued in 2015, and by more than 40% after the recommendations were expanded in 2017.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    Why would there be a concern?

    They don’t even do allergen test till like 2 years…

    Besides, the substance you’re allergic to doesn’t kill, your body’s erroronous response to it is what kills you

    Exposure when young with a weak immune system, is very very unlikely to cause an extreme immune system response, which isnt a bug, it’s a feature. Literally how the immune system learns what to freak about, without causing a deadly reaction. An infant is supposed to heavily rely on antibodies from their mothers milk for actual responses.

    and given that infants have significantly higher mortality than older children or adults who experience a severe allergic reaction

    No idea where you pulled that from, but it’s likely per allergic reaction, and as I’ve just explained, I fanta really shouldn’t be having any immune system reaction.

    The exceptions are almost entirely related to exposure to herbacide/pesticide while the mother is pregnant. Which comes along with a host of other issues drastically increasing child mortality…

    But like I said initially, some people are going to be surprised, because theyre just ignorant of these things

    For fucks same, what did you think doctors a decade ago thought would happen when they started recommending this?

    Did you think they just wanted to kill all the infants off?

    Or do you think science works by proving a hypothesis and the vast majority of the time no one is surprised when science proves it right, except people who don’t know about it?

    • protist@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      For fucks same, what did you think doctors a decade ago thought would happen when they started recommending this?

      Did you think they just wanted to kill all the infants off?

      Or do you think science works by proving a hypothesis and the vast majority of the time no one is surprised when science proves it right, except people who don’t know about it?

      What in the ever-loving fuck are you talking about? They issued this guidance 10 years ago after rigorous study. Which was my entire point. Why do you argue with literally everything

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        In 2015, a decade ago, doctors started recommending this method…

        Do you think they’re shocked now?

        Or do you think they only recommended it once they were confident it wouldn’t just kill off a bunch of infants before they grew into children with peanut allergies?

        Because to me, it seems like we knew what would happen

        And the only people surprised it worked, were ignorant up until now about what doctors have been recommending for a decade?

        • protist@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Can you point to these “shocked” people? Are these “surprised” people in the room with you now?

          The 2015 study was only even possible because the guidelines had changed in 2008. The guidelines were changed in 2008 only after significant research was conducted. You think these guidelines should have been changed on a whim without doing any research about them? Ok, RFK Jr.

          The study this post is about? Literally no one except you is “shocked” that scientists would want to measure the effect this guidance has had on mortality and morbidity. Please stop forcefully pretending like you understand science.

          • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            You think these guidelines should have been changed on a whim without doing any research about them?

            I only see mention of NIAID guidelines published in 2010 that rightly indicated insufficient evidence for earlier guidelines in the US & UK. The only research conducted there was to observe a lack of supporting research.

            The earlier guidelines weren’t evidence-based: they should never have been issued & should have been retracted as lacking evidence. Explanation.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            22 hours ago

            So…

            You agree with me that the only people surprised, were ignorant of stuff that had been widely discussed for over a decade…

            What exactly is your issue here?

            You’re mad I said something you agreed with?

            • protist@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              20 hours ago

              Your initial statement was pompous and dismissive of the thousands of physicians who have contributed to this medical guidance. It’s also dismissive of the reality that there are still infants who develop severe peanut allergies and for whom this method does not work, which is why high risk individuals should still only do this under medical supervision.

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                12 hours ago

                Your initial statement was pompous and dismissive of the thousands of physicians who have contributed to this medical guidance

                Why would you think they’re ignorant of this if they worked on it?

                Like, I’m starting to think all of this is because you don’t know what “ignorant” means and think it’s an insult and not literally the natural state…

                No one knows everything, and everyone’s ignorant of some stuff.

                That’s just life bro.

                But I’m glad I figured it out

                You were just ignorant of what ignorance means…

                Which is honestly pretty funny