He said he felt duped, and went on to assert that the use of cheap, so-called “filler” oils in expensive EVOO could also be dangerous to those with nut allergies. He suggested that nut oils are among the oils used to stretch out the real stuff. “If you’re allergic to nuts,” he said, “and they used a nut oil that they added with your olive oil to cut it, to make it differently and save money, that’s a big issue for a lot of folks.”

Dr. Oz’s statement caused a stir among some members of the food allergy community, both online and in e-mails to Allergic Living. Was the good doctor correct on the allergy point of the EVOO controversy? Allergic Living decided to do a reality check with Professor Dan Flynn, executive director of the University of California Davis Olive Center and one of the experts on the episode, whom Dr. Oz calls “the definitive expert on olive oil.”

Flynn noted that his center tested 207 olive oils for purity over the past three years, and that 65 percent of the imported brands on grocery shelves in the United States didn’t meet the standard for EVOO, despite being labeled as such.

But in our interview, Flynn did not agree with Dr. Oz’s suggestion that some of these altered EVOO oils would include nut oils or that they would cause reactions. In fact, he thinks this is highly unlikely.

The professor says that in the olive center’s testing to date of counterfeit EVOO brands, it appears only refined oils have been used. The process of refining an oil destroys or removes the proteins that trigger allergic reactions. While the extra virgin olive oil claim appears to be false on many oils, “if the oils were adulterated, it was probably with refined olive oil,” Flynn explains.

Click here to see Allergic Living‘s coverage of the 2013 AAAAI allergists conference.

He notes that unrefined oils also tend to be more aromatic, and it would probably be easier for the average consumer to detect that something is afoul. One caution, however. Flynn says it is theoretically possible that an unrefined nut oil could be used to doctor an EVOO oil – but this wasn’t the case in the many samples the UC Davis center tested.

Still, if you’re dealing with a nut allergy and are concerned about an EVOO (or other oil) that you are using, in addition to checking the label, Allergic Living suggests contacting the manufacturer to inquire specifically about whether a product could include nut oils.

One thing Dr. Oz certainly certainly didn’t exaggerate was that many EVOO brands were tainted with lesser oils. The UC Davis center’s trained testers also did a taste test. On the Dr. Oz show, Flynn noted that their descriptions of the fake EVOO oils included: “musty, waste pond, baby diaper, waxy, crayons, the kind of things you don’t want to get near your salad bowl.”

And as Dr. Oz summed up, “bad or rancid olive oil loses much of the anti-oxidant benefit, loses the anti-inflammatory benefit that I brag about all the time.”

To see the Dr. Oz episode, click here.

To read the UC Davis Olive Center’s 2011 report, click here.

New research out of Australia holds great promise. A study team announced in December, 2010 that they had discovered fragments of peanut protein that may be the key component to a peanut vaccine that could be given by injection.

Allergic Living’s Lisa Ferlaino spoke with Dr. Robyn O’Hehir, the team’s leader and a professor of allergy and immunology at Monash University in Australia, about the discovery and what it means.

Why the focus on immunotherapy as a treatment for peanut allergy?

“Allergen immunotherapy is the only treatment that can actually change the natural course of allergic diseases. We know from the aero-allergens such as house dust mites and grass pollens, and even from bee and wasp venom, that allergy shots make a big difference in people’s lives. That’s what we’re striving for.

We also know that peanut allergy is becoming more common worldwide, and that people find traces of peanut in unexpected foods. That’s one of the reasons avoidance isn’t really sufficient.”

Peanuts have long been viewed as too risky for immunotherapy, too likely to provoke anaphylaxis. How do you address that?

“By studying the white blood cells of patients with peanut allergy, we’ve been able to narrow down the core epitopes – the critical fragments of peanut protein that drive the allergic response in people with peanut allergy – and we’ve identified ones that are too small to cause anaphylaxis. They won’t bind to IgE [allergy antibodies], but they’re big enough to kickstart the immune system to develop tolerance.”

Are these fragments parts of peanut’s infamous Ara h 1 and Ara h 2 proteins?

“Yes. We’ve identified the critical peptides [protein fragments] in Ara h 2, the major peanut allergen. That’s the one most associated with anaphylaxis. Ara h 1 is also important, and we’re well on the way to identifying the critical peptides in it, too.”

There are a few peanut therapies in the works. Is your research unique?

“There’s a lot of research in animal models [using mice], but our research looks at human white blood cells. That’s important, because peanut allergy is not a natural condition for mice.”

Next Page: More questions on the vaccine

Peanut

• Tennis player Serena Williams
• NHL player Tom Poti, defenceman for the Washington Capitals
• Singer Alex Kapranos, Franz Ferdinand
• Freestyle aerials champion Steve Omischl

Tree Nut

• Singer Clay Aiken
• NHL player Tom Poti

When Lucas was about 3, I had him enrolled two afternoons a week in this cute little neighbourhood program. On account of his allergies, the kind people in charge declared the space peanut- and nut-free, directly informing each parent (or nanny) to send only nut-free snacks for their little ones.

Not such a remarkable scenario today, but four years ago this type of directive was new to some.

So, there I was on the third day getting ready to exit when this mom came in with her tot, to whom Lucas had taken a shine. She’d looked up at the NO NUTS sign on the wall and, obviously unaware that I was the cause, made some remark about how ridiculous that was. Her son loved nuts and shouldn’t be told what he can or can’t eat. Without taking a breath, she went on to say that he is also lactose intolerant and that she has a mind to ask the program director to ban dairy products.

“So ridiculous,” she kept repeating. When her rant seemed to be coming to a close, I softly responded with feigned ignorance. “Could it hurt your son if someone else was eating dairy products in his presence?”

“No,” she said, “but he’s effectively allergic to it .… Anyway, I would never make it anyone else’s problem.”

A Name and Face to Allergy

“Ya, I wouldn’t either,” I say. “In fact, my son is allergic to egg, shellfish, mustard, kiwi and poppy seed, and I would never expect other parents not to send their kids with those ingredients. I mean, he’s only affected by those allergens if he eats them, so why make it other people’s problem, right?”

“Absolutely!” We’re like instant BFFs, united by our agreement over what’s right and good vis-à-vis those “ridiculous,” over-advocating, nut-allergic parents.

“But here’s the thing,” I said. “He’s also allergic to peanuts and tree nuts. These allergies are life-threatening and can be triggered by trace contact with his allergens. So it actually really matters what other people are eating, especially in his presence, which is why I ask for other parents’ courtesy on the peanut and tree nut matter, and why I don’t dwell on the other stuff.”

“Riiiight,” she says, while our two boys are playing dinosaurs on the carpet across the room. “I didn’t realize it was Lucas.”

Somehow putting a name and face to the meaning of the sign, and hearing my story while her daggers were down, transformed this naysayer pretty quickly. It also made her realize that different allergies (and in her case, intolerances) mean different things to different people.

Through past responses to this column, through the Toronto allergy group I run, and most recently from online feedback to an explosive allergy-denial article published in Chatelaine, I’ve come across a lot of dissenting views: non-allergic parents feeling put out and off by the needs of a few allergic kids, others who simply don’t understand or believe the severity of anaphylaxis, and many who’d like to dismiss we parents of allergic kids as hysterical freaks. But the most disturbing sentiment comes from the divide within our own allergic community.

Community Divide

Some parents whose children face other serious allergies aside from peanuts or nuts – like milk or egg – seem to be sour grapes about the strides made in accommodating peanut and nut allergies over the past five years.

Indeed, school anaphylaxis measures are not all about “the peanut”. This is why Ontario’s ground-breakingSabrina’s Law, for example, doesn’t call for school-wide bans but rather requires that principals develop school-specific strategies to reduce the risk of exposure to anaphylactic triggers (whatever they may be), communication of such strategies with the school community and staff training for allergy emergencies.

My younger son Judah was severely allergic to dairy until he was 2 years old and Lucas has a laundry list of allergies. So I get it. But what I also get is the strength of our allergic community when united – as illustrated by the numerous petitions that led to Sabrina’s Law or the lobbying begun on the Allergic Living forum that ultimately led to the education minister’s anaphylaxis directive in British Columbia or more recent local demonstrations such as the Walk to Axe Anaphylaxis and the hundreds of effective responses to Chatelaine’snegative article. The changes we’re able to bring about hinge on us working together as a food allergy community, toward the same goals. It isn’t about being for or against accommodations for one allergy or another, it’s about making school life safe and rewarding and normal – for all our allergic kids.

We can’t make our kids’ worlds allergen-free – in most cases it’s not optimal to institute large-scale bans of peanuts, milk or anything else – but it is possible to inspire policies and attitudes of tolerance, sensitivity and vigilance. If your anaphylactic child has a food allergy that isn’t being accommodated in his or her specific classroom, in several provinces and states you can make the case that this must be addressed. You now have a legal or at least government framework to draw upon in discussions with your principal or school board.

Let’s face it: we all want to rip the eyeballs out of anyone who threatens to put our children in harm’s way, and it can be hard to keep your calm when you feel somebody’s child’s needs are being given more respect than yours. But the most positive changes are made when we use tolerance, sensitivity and vigilance ourselves. A diplomatic approach to education and awareness is our honey. Everything else is for the bees.

Allergy in the News: Air Canada Ordered to Offer Nut-free Zones.