Consultation with the Specialist
Behavior and Allergy: Myth or Reality?
Richard B. Goldbloom MD
When it comes to much that has been written about the association between behavior and allergy, the term "scientific literature" may be one of the major oxymorons of the current era. Megatons of forest products have been consumed in examining and reexamining the possible associations between children's behavior and consumption of sugar, artificial sweeteners, food additives and colorings, and assorted specific foods. Generally speaking, conviction has taken precedence over scientific evidence. A review of publications on the subject yields a conglomeration of positive, negative, and inconclusive results (mostly the latter two). Evaluation of such studies is complicated by pervasive methodologic design errors, the major ones being lack of double-blinding in test situations and the assumption of guilt (ie, causality) by statistical association.
Beliefs
Both physician and parental belief in a linkage between food and behavior begins during the child's early infancy. Excessive crying ("colic") is the most common problem leading to formula change, which leads many parents and doctors to believe that the infant is allergic to cow milk, especially if the crying seems to decrease following the change, although such allergy rarely is proven. As Forsythe and colleagues 1 have noted, changing an infant's formula may not be an innocuous practice, especially if it leads to an erroneous belief that the infant has some intrinsic abnormality, thereby altering the parent's perceptions of the child's vulnerability.
