Chris Kresser says food allergy tests are EXTREMELY inaccurate in this podcast:
Food Allergy Testing, Tricks for Flu Season and Exclusive Book Bonuses
Also: Testing for SIBO, Graves Disease, and all about AnemiaOriginally Posted by Chris KresserThatís a great question, and Iím continuously reevaluating that question because there are all these new tests becoming available and new options for clinicians, but each time I look at the research Iím continually disappointed by the lack of evidence supporting any of the food allergy testing. I think Cyrex Labs probably has the best available food allergy testing thatís out there, but theyíre only really looking at cross-reactive proteins that are related to gluten intolerance, and even then, Iím still not 100% sold that itís accurate. I think food allergy testing, though, can be used as a springboard or as a basis for experimentation, a jumping-off point, if you will. What that means is you do a food allergy test, you get it back, and it says youíre allergic to strawberries, celery, and egg whites. Rather than just take that at face value and completely eliminate those foods from your diet forever, you could try a period of a couple weeks or three weeks where you donít eat that those foods at all and then add them back in and see if they are a problem for you. If you look at the research, the elimination/provocation protocol, which I just mentioned Ė you know, taking foods out of your diet and adding them back in Ė is still the gold standard for food allergy testing. And if you go to a top-flight food allergist, thatís what theyíll do. They may use some of the testing in the way that I described as a way of figuring out how to structure the elimination diet, but really I think you still have to do that kind of testing and thereís no reason to avoid a healthy food like celery or strawberries just on the basis of these test results without doing your own personal testing.
Originally Posted by Chris KresserAnd then there are also tests for food intolerance and tests for leaky gut, though I think those are less useful... As far as food intolerance testing goes, weíve either talked about it on the show or Iíve written about it or both, but I donít consider food intolerance testing to be very useful for a couple different reasons. Number one, and Iím pretty sure Iíve mentioned this on the show, there have been some kind of blinded trials done anecdotally by clinicians, where theyíve drawn their own blood and put it two vials, you know, on the same day, same blood draw, and labeled the two vials with different names and sent them into the same lab and come back with completely different results for the two different vials of blood that came from the same person on the same day. So thatís a little suspect. And then number two, even if the test was completely reliable, the question is still whatís causing those food intolerances? I mean, food intolerance is a symptom; itís not a disease. Thereís an underlying disease or pathology thatís causing those food intolerances, and that would usually be SIBO or intestinal permeability or a parasite or a fungal infection or some other gut problem, maybe a gut-brain axis issue or maybe gluten exposure, undiagnosed gluten intolerance. Those are mechanisms. Those are problems that lead to symptoms. So if you just remove the foods that the food intolerance testing shows that youíre sensitive to, certainly that will help with the symptoms, and thereís nothing wrong with that, but assuming you want to be able to eat some of those foods again, addressing the underlying problem is a much better approach. So I donít put a lot of stock into food intolerance testing for those reasons.