Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval • Hacker News Board

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#51

Post by tstactplsignore » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 1:57 AM UTC

adsfqwop wrote: post #26

SQL2219 wrote: post #10

I never knew that peanut oil was used as a vaccine adjuvant. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2130368/pdf/jhy...

Bingo.

Going to respond to your comment too just in case you don't check replies to the parent: This is wrong. There is no peanut oil in modern vaccines. Even if there were, peanut oil is usually safe because it contains no peanut allergens. Even if it was in small concentrations, it would be used in such small quantities in vaccine doses that it would be diluted past nothing. Even if all of this were true, the proposed effect would have to be proven, and there is zero evidence for this hypothesis. But none of these things are true, and instead we are left only with propaganda.

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#52

Post by mrfusion » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 2:10 AM UTC

It's funny it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to test putting peanut flour on people.

Going by first principles it's probably under $100.

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#53

Post by cynicalbastard » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 2:37 AM UTC

RijilV wrote: post #9

Last year I learned that 20% of adults who were diagnosed with a peanut allergy outgrow it after childhood. It is worth getting tested again if you grew up with a peanut allergy. I had signed up for a trial of one of these drugs. Having grown up in the 80s with a severe peanut allergy that required the use of the epipen more than a few times I was keen for anything that could help, even just something that would less…

so, i have to ask: do you like the taste of peanuts/peanut butter now?

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#54

Post by soperj » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 4:34 AM UTC

stevetodd wrote: post #13

raverbashing wrote: post #12

And the best prevention is giving small kids peanut based foods But since some genius thought the best course of action was not exposing kids to it, we have the present situation (especially in the US)

According to my pediatrician, research shows that exposing children to peanuts earlier decreases the likelihood of a child developing a peanut allergy.

If you read the research on that one. It seems pretty badly done in my opinion.

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#55

Post by soperj » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 4:37 AM UTC

theprop wrote: post #49

1. $400+ million to turn peanut fragments into a treatment. What?!?!?! 2. I think this treatment could potentially be a lot more deadly than the problem. It's a case of unintended side effects...in this case over-confidence vs. a strict no peanuts ever policy. Imagine a kid has had the treatment and can eat 3 or 4 peanuts without a problem...a year or two later, maybe older & wanting to show off or over-confident, th…

"3. Antibiotic use in infants and toddlers have been linked to a higher risk of allergies (maybe peanut allergies though I don't know if that's been studied & maybe that's why peanut allergies are a big problem in the US but not in India where most people don't take a lot of medicines)...try to avoid them if possible in small children though please listen to your doctor's advice. Antibiotics have some side effects which aren't great but on the whole have saved an incalculable number of lives. "

Gonna have to back that up with a whole heap of citations there.

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#56

Post by ekianjo » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 7:39 AM UTC

marktangotango wrote: post #27

RijilV wrote: post #9

Last year I learned that 20% of adults who were diagnosed with a peanut allergy outgrow it after childhood. It is worth getting tested again if you grew up with a peanut allergy. I had signed up for a trial of one of these drugs. Having grown up in the 80s with a severe peanut allergy that required the use of the epipen more than a few times I was keen for anything that could help, even just something that would less…

More anecdata; a friends father never had a peanut allergy, then almost died. Friend said peanuts weren't part of his fathers diet for years, his father decided to have a pbnj, bam, almost died. I had never heard of adult onset peanut allergy before. My son has a peanut allergy, I can only hope he outgrows it as well.

Sounds more like anaphylactic shock than allergy from how your describe it...

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#57

Post by stijnstijn » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 9:15 AM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #56

marktangotango wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More anecdata; a friends father never had a peanut allergy, then almost died. Friend said peanuts weren't part of his fathers diet for years, his father decided to have a pbnj, bam, almost died. I had never heard of adult onset peanut allergy before. My son has a peanut allergy, I can only hope he outgrows it as well.

Sounds more like anaphylactic shock than allergy from how your describe it...

Anaphylactic shock can be an allergic reaction, it's not an either/or distinction.

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#58

Post by pbhjpbhj » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 9:54 AM UTC

pacaro wrote: post #14

nostromo wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I appreciate your concern and caution, I feel like the medical community has worked the public into a bit of hysteria over peanut allergies. So few people die from peanut allergies each year it's hard to actually get good numbers on the phenomenon. And yet I have several friends who report having someone deathly allergic to peanuts in their family. It seems incongruent.

I understand your position. But (there's always a "but") I have a friend whose kid is severely allergic, their daycare didn't take it particularly seriously(!), for reasons similar to yours. So of course one day there is a PBJ near the kid, he has a crazy reaction, the staff call the parents "we're afraid to use the epipen" at which point the mom hangs up and calls 911 herself, invoke FMLA and has to hightail to the…

"The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) is a United States federal law requiring covered employers to provide employees with job-protected and unpaid leave for qualified medical and family reasons." (Wikipedia via Google)

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#59

Post by pbhjpbhj » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 10:00 AM UTC

zzleeper wrote: post #45

marktangotango wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I gave my son a bite of the peanut butter cookie I was eating, when he was six months old, nearly killed him. So this "expose them early and it's not a problem" maybe true part of the time for some allergens, but certainly not all the time for all allergens. Edit: Down voters care to comment?

Do you think peanut butter might be the problem? As in most Americans don't eat raw peanuts but processed versions which might be more concentrated and exacerbate the allergies?

Peanut butter though is just peanuts, same concentration of everything as a peeled peanut. Large companies put lots of salt and sugar in too, I can't stand the sweet ones.

Maybe there's greater availability of some protein, or something, because of the processing?

Re: Two new peanut allergy treatments are on the verge of approval

#60

Post by pbhjpbhj » Sun, Jun 04, 2017, 10:10 AM UTC

Clanan wrote: post #33

majewsky wrote: post #22

Money quotes: > Big Pharma was unmoved, believing it would be impossible to patent a medicine that was essentially a ground-up peanut. > [One of the companies working on the issue] has ties to the food industry, which has a vested interest in finding treatments for allergies. Make of this what you will.

1. Companies investing hundreds of millions want to ensure a return 2. Food companies want customers to eat (and not die from) their products. Groundbreaking, I know.

It's pretty unexpected that the motivation to work on a medical treatment is not altruism (nor even direct gain from selling the treatment) but is to enable the controlling capitalist(s) to make more money selling food that otherwise the untreated could not consume.

Isn't that a very real example of the lives of millions only being improved because their current hardship is losing capital holders a sales opportunity.