When the kid first started on solid foods, we did the whole "test one grain cereal at a time to see if she's got a sensitivity to it" thing. And when she spouted a diaper rash the week she started oatmeal, we went back to just rice, and picked up again with the oatmeal a while later. All by the book.
Milk at a year, strawberries after that, peanuts not yet, even [we know we're probably overly cautious], and on and on. It seems like the entire solid food process is driven by hypersensitivity to food sensitivity. And yet, it seems like everywhere you turn, there are more kids with food allergies. It's enough to make me want to move to a mesa somewhere, eat maize and just wear hemp.
But then I read the results of this new study from the University of Portsmouth [uk], where they actually tested a 1,000 or so babies for food sensitivity. Turns out 54% of them were reported by their parents to have a sensitivity, but when they were double double secret blind tested, only 2-6% actually had identifiable sensitivities.
So...what, parents should be a bit more cavalier about what they feed their kids? So go ahead, make that kid a gluten, lactose, and peanut butter smoothie for his first birthday? I have a feeling there'll have to be another dozen or so studies like this and a few more revisions to the What to Expect books before parents back down on the allergy thing.