Global perceptions of food allergy thresholds in 16 countries

Poor understanding of allergen labelling by allergic and non-allergic consumers

Background

Understanding consumers’ interpretation of allergy information is crucial for effective food safety policies. We evaluated consumer understanding of allergy information on foods in controlled, experimental studies.

Method

Using 18 packaged foods, we evaluated consumer understanding of information about allergens in two experiments: First, a comparison of foods with no stated allergen versus allergen as a stated ingredient versus a precautionary allergen label (PAL); second, a comparison of three common variants of PAL. In each experiment, consumers with and without self‐reported food allergy were asked to estimate the risk of allergic reaction and to rate the comprehensibility of the allergen information. In the second experiment, consumers were also asked which form of PAL they preferred.

Results

Risk of reaction was assessed as high and low for foods with the allergen stated as ingredient, or without any mention of allergen. However, risk assessment for PAL varied and was judged as higher by non‐allergic than allergic participants (82% vs. 58%, p < .001). Understanding of risk associated with PAL also varied by health literacy (p < .001). Both allergic and non‐allergic consumers judged all forms of allergy information to be unclear, especially products with no allergy information for non‐allergic consumers. Products with a ‘Produced in a Factory’ PAL were perceived as less risky than ‘May contain’ or ‘Traces of’ PALs (p < .001), less than 40% of participants judged PAL information to be comprehensible, and participants preferred ‘May contain’ over the other PALs.

Conclusion

Both allergic and non‐allergic consumers find allergen information difficult to interpret on packaged foods and misunderstand PAL, incorrectly distinguishing different risk levels for different PAL wording. Clearer allergy information guidelines are called for, and the use of only one PAL wording is recommended.

Managing Food Allergy When the Patient Is Not Highly Allergic

Few patients with food allergy are "highly allergic," meaning they always have severe reactions and always react to very small amounts of allergen. Standard medical approaches for allergy management have focused on the safety and lifestyle modifications this group truly needs, but consequently families with food allergy are typically advised to strictly avoid any exposure to their implicated allergens. Most food-allergic subjects are actually not reactive to very low doses, and many never experience severe reactions. There are also notable conditions where a different care plan is already commonly offered: patients with pollen-related food allergy syndrome, with food-associated exercise-induced anaphylaxis, and with resolving or mild milk or egg allergy might be advised to ingest the allergens in specific circumstances with detailed instructions. Because oral immunotherapy and allergy prevention by early exposure have emphasized alternatives to strict avoidance, there is increasing interest in prospects to forego strict avoidance in those with food allergy. For patients with a high threshold of reactivity (low-dose tolerant, high-dose mildly reactive), there may be options such as allowing the ingestion of products with precautionary allergen labels, allowing dietary indiscretions with small amounts of the allergen, or even encouraging ingestion of subthreshold amounts with therapeutic intent. These practices have not been extensively studied and could be considered controversial. If these approaches are considered, shared decision making is needed in discussing them with patients and families. This review considers the potential approaches to those who are "not highly allergic": the risks, benefits, shared decision making, and research needs.

Selected Instrumental Techniques Applied in Food and Feed: Quality, Safety and Adulteration Analysis

This review presents an overall glance at selected instrumental analytical techniques and methods used in food analysis, focusing on their primary food science research applications. The methods described represent approaches that have already been developed or are currently being implemented in our laboratories. Some techniques are widespread and well known and hence we will focus only in very specific examples, whilst the relatively less common techniques applied in food science are covered in a wider fashion. We made a particular emphasis on the works published on this topic in the last five years. When appropriate, we referred the reader to specialized reports highlighting each technique's principle and focused on said technologies' applications in the food analysis field. Each example forwarded will consider the advantages and limitations of the application. Certain study cases will typify that several of the techniques mentioned are used simultaneously to resolve an issue, support novel data, or gather further information from the food sample.

Evidence-based approaches to the application of precautionary allergen labelling: Report from two iFAAM workshops

Food allergy is a major public health concern with avoidance of the trigger food(s) being central to management by the patient. Food information legislation mandates the declaration of allergenic ingredients; however, the labelling of the unintentional presence of allergens is less defined. Precautionary allergen labelling (PAL) was introduced by the food industry to help manage and communicate the risk of reaction from the unintended presence of allergens in foods. In its current form, PAL is counterproductive for consumers with food allergies as there is no standardized approach to applying PAL. Foods with a PAL often do not contain the identified food allergen while some products without a PAL contain quantities of common food allergens that are capable of inducing an allergic reaction. Integrated Approaches to Food Allergen and Allergy Risk Management (iFAAM) was an EU-funded project that aimed to improve the management of food allergens by the food industry for the benefit of people with food allergies. Within iFAAM, a clinically validated tiered risk assessment approach for food allergens was developed. Two cross-stakeholder iFAAM workshops were held on 13-14 December 2016 and 19-20 April 2018. One of the objectives of these workshops was to develop a proposal to make PAL effective for consumers. This paper describes the outcomes from these workshops. This provides the basis for the development of more informative and transparent labelling that will ultimately improve management and well-being in consumers with food allergy.

Simultaneous detection of fruit allergen-coding genes in tomato, apple, peach and kiwi through multiplex PCR

Fruit allergies have become more common in recent years, and are now a serious health problem. In this study, a multiplex PCR assay was used to detect potential fruit allergens causing food allergy labeling in Korea. For the detection of these allergens, specific primer pairs were designed to amplify the allergen-coding genes Cyclophilin (tomato), Mdtl 1 (apple), Pru p 2.01A (peach) and Pectin methylesterase inhibitor (kiwi), and primer pair targeting the 18S ribosomal RNA gene was additionally used as an endogenous control. Primer specificity was assessed with 23 plant species. A mixture of DNA from the four fruits was serially diluted and used to determine the sensitivity of the multiplex PCR assay, which was approximately 0.08 ng. Eleven commercial fruit products were evaluated to verify the applicability of the multiplex PCR assay. This assay is expected to be a specific and efficient method for detecting fruit allergens in foods.

Addressing Complex Matrix Interference Improves Multiplex Food Allergen Detection by Targeted LC-MS/MS

The frequent use of precautionary food allergen labeling (PAL) such as "may contain" frustrates allergic individuals who rely on such labeling to determine whether a food is safe to consume. One technique to study whether foods contain allergens is targeted liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) employing scheduled multiple reaction monitoring (MRM). However, the applicability of a single MRM method to many commercial foods is unknown as complex and heterogeneous interferences derived from the unique composition of each food matrix can hinder quantification of trace amounts of allergen contamination. We developed a freely available, open source software package MAtrix-Dependent Interference Correction (MADIC) to identify interference and applied it with a method targeting 14 allergens. Among 84 unique food products, we found patterns of allergen contamination such as wheat in grains, milk in chocolate-containing products, and soy in breads and corn flours. We also found additional instances of contamination in products with and without PAL as well as highly variable soy content in foods containing only soybean oil and/or soy lecithin. These results demonstrate the feasibility of applying LC-MS/MS to a variety of food products with sensitive detection of multiple allergens in spite of variable matrix interference.

Economic Factors Impacting Food Allergen Management: Perspectives from the Food Industry

Food allergies affect up to 8% of children in the United States and may occasionally lead to severe life-threatening reactions. Because there is currently no cure for food allergies, strict avoidance of the allergen-containing foods is the only means of preventing an allergic reaction. Consumers rely on food manufacturers to reliably track and declare the presence of food allergens in products. Over the past 10 to 20 years, the food industry has increasingly adopted allergen control approaches in its processing facilities. However, the major industry costs related to food allergen management have not been fully described. The objective of this study was to characterize the factors that contribute to the economic impact of food allergen control practices on the food industry. A focus group (n = 100) was conducted with food industry professionals to identify key areas of cost for food allergen management. A survey based on the domains identified was then developed and disseminated to a convenience sample (n = 50) of quality control food industry specialists with knowledge of their company's food allergen management practices. Nearly all companies (92%) produced food products containing one or more of the top eight allergenic foods recognized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or sesame seeds. Cleaning procedures, employee training, and the potential for a recall due to allergen cross-contact were most frequently rated as the important factors in food allergen management. Recalls due to food allergen cross-contact, cleaning procedures, equipment and premises design, and employee training were ranked as the greatest allergen management expenses. Although 96% of companies had a food allergen control plan in place, nearly half (42%) had at least one food allergen-related recall within the past 5 years. The industry appears to endorse a willingness to unify precautionary allergen labeling to communicate a clear message more effectively to consumers.