The information was mostly expected, but still very good. They had the research head of Thermo Fisher (the parent company) as well as a clinician who had implemented the testing in her practice with a great deal of success.
However, what struck me most were the questions once the initial presentation was over. The very first question asked was regarding Ara h 6. The inquirer didn't come right out and say he had heard the test wasn't reliable...but the question was clearly underneath. A couple questions later, we heard:
If my child is negative to Ara h 2 today, that doesn't mean he won't become allergic down the road, right? There's no guarantee?The doctor with the clinical practice laughed a little when she heard the question. And then, she went through the reassurance tap dance that I'm sure she's done hundreds of times in her practice: yes, allergies can develop at any time but a passed peanut challenge generally means the child can eat peanuts. The test indicates the challenge will be low-risk. They'll take every precaution. They've never had a serious problem.
I was struck by the wide gulf between what the doctors and scientists were trying to communicate, and what the parents on the other end were willing and able to hear. As I've talked about in other blog posts, some parents do not really want to know if their child is allergic. Perhaps precautions are too ingrained. Perhaps "food allergies" have become a convenient repository for other anxieties. Perhaps no guarantee will ever be enough of a guarantee.
While I listened to rest of the presentation, I thought about this gulf between science and emotion. It also led to thoughts of the gulf between a provable allergy (science) and what we ask from society (emotion) as a result of an allergy. I thought about the social ramifications of this test.
Right now, the test is being marketed to parents who presumably want it. But if they really don't want to know...but still want that 504 with all its jump-through hoops...who else might have an investment in the outcome of this test?
Schools. Lawyers. Even other parents who are angry about peanut-free-only treats.
Think about it. A couple of years from now, the "my child needs a 504" conversation may be countered with "have you pursued component testing?"
I have mixed feelings about all of this. There are some allergic reactions that will probably happen as a result of atypical molecular allergy patterns. That's unfortunate. On the other hand, those children will firmly know they have an allergy.
No offense, but I would like nothing better than to say good-bye to this blog and all of you as the result of my child passing a test like this. Unfortunately, one of the first questions I asked was "if a child has had an in-office challenge and failed, is there any point to the test?" The answer was "no, no clinical reason." However, if proving his allergy and thereby having people take it more seriously was a social outcome, I would spend the money in a heartbeat.
I don't know how this will all play out. I don't know much about 504 law and whether schools can require medical test results in exchange for accommodations. But my guess is, even if they cannot legally do so, there will be social pressures to pony up results before other parents are willing to place restriction on their own children.
I am uncomfortably aware that the "show me your papers" portion of the Arizona immigration law was deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court this week. Can "show me your allergy papers" really be that far behind?
Follow me on Facebook or Twitter