Growing up in the 80s in Eastern Europe culinary allergies and the likes were virtually unheard of. Or autism and ADHD.
Right now everyone has some kind of intolerance. I think for the majority it is reverse placebo effect. For the others - people spend so much time trying to be sterile and pop antibiotics like tic-tac that their immune system lacks any form of calibration and measurable response.
> Right now everyone has some kind of intolerance. I think for the majority it is reverse placebo effect.
Did you just call autism a fake condition? Have you ever met anyone with severe autism before? Some of these people need near constant supervision for their entire adult lives, and you think they're just, what? Faking it? For the funzies?
Sorry but that's a new level of dumb. Autism has gone by many names but it has been written about since at least the year 1566. The only thing that is relatively new is its name, and that might change a few more times as "autism" seems to contain at least three different distinct conditions.
They said it was extremely rare. It was extremely rare - in terms of being diagnosed - in the 1980s in Europe.
Today a diagnosis of ADHD is far more rare in Europe than in the US.
Like hell they didn't. If we reform the sentence:
> Growing up in the 80s in Eastern Europe [autism] and the likes were virtually unheard of. Right now everyone has some kind of intolerance. I think for the majority it is [.] placebo effect.
In this context a "reverse placebo" and a placebo mean the same thing (since technically a reverse placebo is a real condition, making what they said before it contradict what they had just said, so we can only assume they meant to say "a placebo by a different route" rather than a "reverse placebo" which makes no sense in the context).
> You're being hyper reactive, and calling them dumb for something they plainly did not say.
There's no way you can explain away that post without it coming across dumb. They just took three conditions and called them placebos.
> It was extremely rare - in terms of being diagnosed - in the 1980s in Europe.
Sorry, no, that is not what they said. The term "diagnosed" never appeared in that post, and reading it back when you get to the part about popping antibiotics like tick-tacks the implication is CLEARLY about us creating fictitious conditions today or treating conditions which "rarely" exist.
You cannot just re-write their post and then claim the criticism of what they actually wrote originally is wrong.
The autism was just a side mention.
Way before that my dads first wife had this in the late 50s in the UK - the doctors thought she had leukemia. They had basically given up on her (as there was no treatment for leukemia at the time) and she went home to her parents - there she met a student doctor who wondered if it could be wheat. Within a week she was up again after nearly a year bed ridden.
I think years ago these people just wouldn't survive childhood, or if it occurred in adulthood (as it did for my wife and my father's first wife(, then it would have been misdiagnosed as something else. Those truly affected by this aren't subscribing to some fad, they really are ill, life-threateningly so.
On the flip side - I had no allergy, but I feel a lot better if I cut out simple carbs, in particular bread and pasta. If I eat a sandwich at lunch I am usually dopey for the rest of the afternoon - if I eat a protein rich lunch, then I feel great. I don't blame that on the gluten - but cutting it out has done me no harm.
[1] Less 'claimed' than postulated. Their follow-up study showed that the symptoms were mostly showing up in relation the presence of FODMAPs in the diet.
Just because people suffered silently with poorly understood conditions (autism, ADHD) or didn't discuss their food issues doesn't mean those conditions didn't exist.
My uncle has always had celiac disease and he grew up in the 1960's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifestyle_disease
As countries become more industrialised, their population acquires new diseases. One hypothesis I've heard for explaining peanut allergies is that the much greater number of caesarean births is to blame. Apparently being shoved headfirst through a vagina full of germs is a great way to boost your immune system:
Why would this only explain peanut allergies?
Growing up I never even heard of it, and if it's something that can cause deadly reactions so easily, you'd think it would have come up.
Given our rapidly evolving understanding of these disorders in the past few decades, I don't see how anyone can claim a working knowledge of ASD or ADHD in the 1980s (especially in the bleak, grayscale zone of Europe).
Seeing as the article makes no mention of either disorder, you seem to be lost also to its content.
Romanian orphanages are not the places we want to get health care advice from.
http://www.theguardian.com/slideshow/page/0,,1985460,00.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/romanian-orphans-subject...
http://www.npr.org/2012/08/19/158924764/for-romanias-orphans...
Watch Sicko. So can we boldly say that all US medical knowledge is void?
Growing up in the 80s in Eastern Europe [..] were virtually unheard of. Or
autism [..]
I've known people born with diabetes who probably wouldnt have made it very far in life a 100 years ago or so.
How many of the people have a medically substantiated intolerance that is beyond normal human intolerances? Chilis, for example, give some of us heartburn. This is well within normal variance. Some of us truly cannot eat certain foods - wheat, peanuts, onions... and so on - this is outside of normal. Medical tests can prove this. From what I can tell, however, is that most people are treating this like a fad diet and positive results can easily be attributed to other things (watching what you eat, less fatty foods, more vegetables, and so on).
The comment about antibiotics is a rather different one. People couldn't just pop antibiotics if doctors didn't prescribe them (and/or if they aren't readily available otherwise). I agree on the over-sterility and so far, science is backing this up with a general message of: Be clean, but not too clean.
And bipolar disorder was often misdiagnosed as schizophrenia, and people were generally just considered "eccentric" instead of having a disorder.
That doesn't mean the disorders didn't exist :)
Also back then Eastern Europeans were eating way less meat and sugary foods. Also self grown food was very popular (due to lack of food in centralized stores)
No.
Israel, a first world country, has the world's lowest incidence of peanut allergy. It has been shown that this is not genetic, but environmental.
It is postulated that this is because peanut products are introduced early into the diet of virtually all Israeli kids - usually before 1 year - through a popular snack called "Bamba" [0].
You may find this surprising, but the ubiquitous advice to delay introducing allergen into children's diets is NOT based on any study, and actually contradicts some known findings.
The reason nut allergies are unheard of is almost surely note because kids die very quickly.
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamba_%28snack%29#Peanut_allerg...
And why the overreaction to their mentioning anyway?
Even today, living between the UK & France, it seems like every restaurant in London has nuts/gluten-free options or at least menu info, whereas in Paris hardly anyone cares. Raw milk cheese is also more or less being banned in the US. In both cases, I haven't seen any data suggesting a health disaster in the more traditional country.
Besides, your being downvoted, snarkily shown links of Romanian orphanages, and generally being taught nutrition lessons by Americans, would be highly amusing if it wasn't for the blatant racism.