At 13:33 +1000 23/2/1999, C. Loon wrote:

>When a very reputable allergenist and MD tested me for allergies, I
>tested positive for lamb, but negative for fish, poultry, and beef.

Dear Cheyenne,

My MD wanted to run a suite of allergy tests, but it turned out that the
best tests available to him were only 60% accurate. That's only 10% better
than tossing a coin!

What is the accuracy of the test your allergenist performed?

I suggest looking into the possibility that the positive on lamb was an
erroneous result.

The conventional way to test for an allergy to a food, which I have never
been able to discipline myself to do, is this. Strictly limit your food
intake to foods you are sure you are not allergic to (this can be a real
problem at the start of testing, because there are no foods known to be
OK). Keep to this diet for several days, then over the course of a day,
eat a lot of the food you wish to test.

If you get any reaction to the food (such as rashes, itchness, hot/cold
flushes, swollen glands, mucous generation, headaches etc), you can mark
that food as being likely to cause problems. The process may need to be
repeated several times, to eliminate external influences on the test.

Be careful not to eat so much of the food to be tested that it might be
dangerous if you actually are highly allergic to the food.

Yours sincerely,
Richard Archer.