Food allergies...why is it so hard?

I have a bell pepper sensitivity. It's not a full-blown allergy and it's not that I dislike bell peppers. (In fact, I loved them until the day I stopped eating them.) But if I eat one, it causes gastric distress. And I leave it to your imagination to picture what that means.

Whenever I go to a restaurant, I make a point of mentioning my allergy to the server if there is any question that there might be a bell pepper in a dish. (Thank goodness the trend of throwing a handful of diced red, green & yellow peppers over every dish for "color" seems to be waning.) Chicago experiences within the last 8 months:

* At a group dinner at a popular Italian restaurant, I mentioned my sensitivity and they noted it on the ticket. And then every pizza we ordered appeared with peppers--even those where it wasn't mentioned it as an ingredient on the menu. Turns out the kitchen mis-read "no bell peppers" as "add bell peppers to everything." To their credit, they refired every dish, all while allowing the other 16 people at the table to continue to nibble on the pepper-laden pizzas.

* At neighborhoody Asian fusion place, I mentioned my allergy to the server who confirmed that the dishes several of us ordered to share contained no bell peppers, but she'd note it on the ticket to be sure. Three of the five dishes came out with peppers. The server didn't even bat an eye when she brought them to the table.

* At a new and popular Asian place with chef who's known for having strong opinions, my friend & I asked if the sauce--which contained bell peppers--could be left off of one of the fried chicken bites so I could simply try the dish, which has won some raves. The chef, I was told, refused my request because then "it would just be like eating a chicken McNugget." To that restaurant's credit, our server brought me a comped replacement appetizer while my friend at the pepper-covered McNuggets.

* At an (ahem) vegan place I was told that one of the dishes was served with a sauce containing bell peppers. I was then questioned about the extent of my sensitivity. Gee, discussing gastric distress with your server within earshot of people trying to eat is really pleasant, isn't it? The kitchen then apparently decided that since they wouldn't have to call an ambulance, my gastric distress was a small price to pay for enjoying the dish, so they sent it out sauced. I ate pieces that hadn't been touched by sauce and enjoyed it all the same. (To their credit, a drink containing bell pepper foam was modified so I could enjoy it.)

If I accidentally ingest some bell pepper, it's not the end of the world. I'll have an unpleasant 24 hours, but there's no chance I'll die. In my most recent experience (the second I mentioned), I was dining at the restaurant with a friend whose husband has deathly allergies to several types of nuts and seafoods. We were dining at this place because he was out of town, so she could eat peanuts and fish with abandon and not be in fear that if she kissed her husband he might be hospitalized. But if I encounter such difficulties getting a restaurant to understand and acknowledge my sensitivities, how do people with allergies do it? I can't even imagine. (The friend with the fish/nut allergies has developed close friendships with a few restaurateurs who go the extra mile whenever he and his wife are at the restaurant. And I'm sure it pays off for the restaurant, because my friends consequently patronize them a lot.)

I don't think Americans are very educated on the subject. Even health professionals can be alarmingly ignorant. I worked as a waitress briefly in Sweden and everyone knew about food allergies and intolerances, and we always accommodated them very well.

One thing that is important is that an allergy is not the same as an intolerance. You likely do not have an allergy, which is an acute inflammatory reaction (science speak: it involves IgE antibodies) that can lead to potentially deadly anaphylaxis. Wait staff do not like people to use this term lightly because people can die from allergies. We always cooked this food separately where I worked if someone had a food allergy. It's hard because it is hard- sometimes our operation had 300-person seated dinners, and we had to use separate cooking utensils, surfaces etc. to make food allergy safe dinners and as a server we had to really know that map of the food allergy people. And you really do know it when you understand that people can die if you mess up.

No one is going to die at the restaurant from celiac, but that was the other one we did separately since it causes actual damage to the sufferer's entire body. I dated someone with celiac and since American restaurants are really not that trustworthy, you should always call ahead with celiac or true allergies. I don't think it's that safe to eat at a regular restaurant even with that precaution with celiac. Thank goodness for places like Senza, which is fantastic and has a completely gluten-free kitchen.

Intolerances and sensitivities you have a lot more leeway. Intolerances typically cause gastric distress, flushing, and other comparatively mild, but still very disruptive symptoms. Lactose intolerance, fructose intolerance, polyols intolerance (might be the cause of your bell pepper issues), capsaicin sensitivity and other assorted food reactions fit this bill. Unless you want to cause alarm, I would not call these allergies. I have gastric distress from raw onions, but if I am served a dish that contains them, I can usually pick them off without an issue, but it's annoying. There are certain restaurants where I don't ask for modifications because they are composed a certain particular way (Momofuku comes to mind) and I either just don't order the dish if I knew it contains raw onions or I carry digestive enzymes (I use digest gold though I've experimented with a bunch )with me. If I am asked about the extent of my sensitivity I just say "they disagree with me."

I have dined with people who do not have allergies, they have intolerances, and they still tell waiters they have "allergies." I emphasize with the look of fear in the waiter's eye and usually try to convince people not to say that word unless they have an allergy. For my friends with allergies, I always make sure to call ahead.

mgmcewen wrote:One thing that is important is that an allergy is not the same as an intolerance. You likely do not have an allergy, which is an acute inflammatory reaction (science speak: it involves IgE antibodies) that can lead to potentially deadly anaphylaxis. Wait staff do not like people to use this term lightly because people can die from allergies. We always cooked this food separately where I worked if someone had a food allergy. It's hard because it is hard- sometimes our operation had 300-person seated dinners, and we had to use separate cooking utensils, surfaces etc. to make food allergy safe dinners and as a server we had to really know that map of the food allergy people. And you really do know it when you understand that people can die if you mess up.

Good point. Re-reading my original post, I realize I use the word "allergy" and "sensitivity" interchangeably. I do realize that mine is not an allergy, but--as you point out--an intolerance or sensitivity. I usually say, "I cannot eat bell peppers" when placing an order I do think the word "allergy" shouldn't be thrown around lightly, and because a restaurant does not need to go to completely segregate my food preparation. Also, I realize a lot of people claim to have "allergies" when they just don't like an ingredient. In my mind, that's crying wolf. Still I think we both agree that many restaurants in the US need better training for what it means when a guest has an allergy/intolerance/sensitivity. I'd rather have a restaurant ask questions than simply ignore my request or make a decision as to whether my request should be addressed.

I have gastric distress from raw onions, but if I am served a dish that contains them, I can usually pick them off without an issue, but it's annoying.

If I can pick out the raw bell peppers, I'm likely to be fine. Fortunately, they don't leave a bit of juice behind. I'm still trying to make my 82-year-old father understand that picking cooked bell peppers out of a dish doesn't me any good because the juice is still left behind.

Yes, chgoeditor, it is hard.

mgmcewen wrote:Thank goodness for places like Senza, which is fantastic and has a completely gluten-free kitchen.

Excellent recommendation, mgmcewen. Senza runs a highly competent kitchen. I love the food, since I would go there for a fine meal even if it weren't GF. No one dining there would miss the gluten. Even the pasta they make is (to me) indistinguishable from wheat pasta.

My daughter has gluten sensitivity, as well as sensitivity to nightshades. We have had no problems with restaurants that publicize themselves as truly GF, with separate cooking surfaces and fryers. Perhaps because the GF restaurants are aware of celiac issues they are more open and careful to problems with other ingredients. In fact, I recall being asked when I made a phone reservation at Senza whether there were any other food allergies or sensitivities in our party. This might be part of best practices to come!

(To find these GF places, sign up for Steve's Eating Gluten Free.)

My daughter has had problems communicating with staff about food sensitivities in many restaurants, but does better at high-end restaurants with well-trained chefs and staff. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I can speculate that food allergies and sensitivities may be better taught in recent culinary curricula than they were in the past. Also, people are more likely to have a friend or family member who has been diagnosed with celiac disease, in particular.

Also, in general, established vegetarian restaurants seem a bit more aware of food allergy/sensitivity issues. I see from your post, chgoeditor, that you had a bad experience in a vegan spot. We have had good luck at Green Zebra, but GZ falls in the category of fine dining/well-trained chef & staff. We have also had good luck at Blind Faith in Evanston, which, though not fine dining, is well-established.

It would be great if a reputable source like the U of C Celiac Disease center made some training materials available for download, so restaurants could train their people up on these issues more easily.

Still, I wonder if part of the issue is that components of dishes contain hidden allergens. As an example, vinegar and vanilla may contain gluten. Last night, I opened a can of "Diced Seasoned Tomatoes" to find that there were chunks of green pepper floating in the liquid. Who knew that green peppers are a "seasoning"?

Josephine wrote:Yes, chgoeditor, it is hard.

mgmcewen wrote:Thank goodness for places like Senza, which is fantastic and has a completely gluten-free kitchen.

Excellent recommendation, mgmcewen. Senza runs a highly competent kitchen. I love the food, since I would go there for a fine meal even if it weren't GF. No one dining there would miss the gluten. Even the pasta they make is (to me) indistinguishable from wheat pasta.

Yeah, they don't even allow gluten in the staff meals. If you work there and you want to eat a sandwich, you have to do it in the alley. So it's a true gluten-free kitchen.

I notice a lot of high end restaurant will ask about allergies/intolerances when they call to confirm the reservation, which is probably a good idea.

In terms of vegan restaurants, a lot of them are now good about food allergies, but Karyn's I have noticed has a lot of items that people might expect to be GF and aren't because she uses a fermented wheat berry concoction called rejuvelac.

Josephine wrote:Also, in general, established vegetarian restaurants seem a bit more aware of food allergy/sensitivity issues. I see from your post, chgoeditor, that you had a bad experience in a vegan spot.

Without naming names (because I didn't intend post to call out places where I had a bad experience, but it may have just been a once-off occurrence), wasn't so much a vegan spot as a spot that is temporarily vegan for four months, if you know what I mean. Next it will be something non-vegan.

I do agree with you that places which are truly vegetarian and vegan seem to be much more attuned to dealing with these issues. Although I don't eat at any of them regularly, I've never had a problem with Urban Vegan, Blind Faith, Chicago Diner and Green Zebra to be understanding and attentive. My friend who has the panoply of allergies raves about how well Vera and The Bristol accommodate his dietary restrictions.

I have this issue with mushrooms. For me it's an enzyme deficiency. I won't die, just be really unhappy for a while. But because if I try to explain it's an intolerance not an allergy, and so many times have had the wait staff say "oh, it's not an allergy then?" and then find mushrooms in the sauce, or stock, or whatever, I say it's an allergy.

I just want to know so I can order something without them. It's often just too difficult to leave it off. That's fine. Just let me know and I'll eat something else.

If it's an allergy, they know what to do, they have been trained. But if you say it's an intolerance, or sensitivity, then they think you just don't like it. Because a lot of people just don't like mushrooms, or onions, or green peppers.

And doesn't that un-named temporarily vegan restaurant say explicitly that they won't accommodate any changes because of what they are doing and how they are doing it?

leek wrote:And doesn't that un-named temporarily vegan restaurant say explicitly that they won't accommodate any changes because of what they are doing and how they are doing it?

Its website says they cannot accommodate mushroom, gluten or nut allergies. They asked the question, "Does anyone have any dietary restrictions?" when we arrived and I told them. If necessary, I was prepared to skip a course or accept a course that had been modified or accept a replacement course. I just thought it odd that they asked follow-up questions, which seemed to indicate that the dish would have been modified if they'd my reaction would have been severe, and then made a decision to serve them to me based on my response.

I actually do have allergies to both mushrooms and peanuts*, but both allergies are mild enough that I can eat them in small amounts and not have any sort of reaction. And, I think the huge variance in the severity of these sorts of things can be part of the problem. I don't want anyone to worry that I will die if I consume a peanut or a mushroom, so I try not to give that impression to waitstaff, but obviously there are other people who would die and so their conversation with the waitstaff about the allergy will be very different from mine. It's not at all surprising that pretty much everyone is confused and making mistakes.


*I assume they are allergies because it was an allergist that diagnosed them. I don't know what my reaction would be if I ate a bunch of mushrooms because I've never done it. I did once eat a whole bunch of peanuts at a baseball game and developed hives on my arms.

chgoeditor wrote: My friend who has the panoply of allergies raves about how well Vera and The Bristol accommodate his dietary restrictions.

Good to know about good experiences with Vera and the Bristol.

leek wrote:If it's an allergy, they know what to do, they have been trained. But if you say it's an intolerance, or sensitivity, then they think you just don't like it. Because a lot of people just don't like mushrooms, or onions, or green peppers.

So frustrating!

[RANT ALERT] And, leek, I'm sorry about the mushrooms. That is a tough one to communicate. I had not heard of it before, and I imagine awareness is low. FWIW, a dietician told my daughter that it is even possible to react badly to lettuce. That bit of info shocked me and let me in on how hard it is to manage this situation for some, as well as how hard it is to educate kitchens and FOH about the issues.

[Rant Alert] It's unfortunate that people who love food are so quick to identify those who state a need to avoid specific foods as "yuckers." That was my daughter's term for kids who would not try new foods. It's ironic that she - a kid who ate hot spicy dishes and odd vegetables from a very early age - now finds herself being treated as a demanding, over-indulged child when she tries to avoid dishes that make her ill. True, we all know kids who are raised on little but mac 'n cheese, pizza and chicken fingers, who have never eaten a beet. But it is infuriating when complete strangers assume this is the case for those who have food sensitivities!

Caveat emptor - yes, of course - as Sy Syms used to say, "An educated consumer is our best customer." He got it right. A person with allergies or sensitivities takes the responsibility to learn what foods/ingredients pose problems. That person's responsibility is to communicate with the restaurant. Sy Syms got the other part right, "The educated consumer is our best customer" [emphasis added]. Some establishments and individuals are better than others at maintaining respect for the customer who makes a special, yet critically necessary request. I imagine that those with sensitivities are experiencing a little bit of what vegetarians or vegans by choice have had to endure for years. That is perhaps why the veg restaurants are more respectful of the allergy/sensitivity predicament.

I wonder if the best practice would be for each restaurant to train one or two staff members as the go-to people for questions about food allergy and sensitivity. Seems like Kelly Cheng has filled this role at Sun Wah, at least regarding GF needs. We have not had trouble there, in spite of soy sauce being off-limits.

leek wrote:
If it's an allergy, they know what to do, they have been trained. But if you say it's an intolerance, or sensitivity, then they think you just don't like it. Because a lot of people just don't like mushrooms, or onions, or green peppers.

That's why I often just say that they "disagree with me," often making an ill-looking face while saying it. "Sensitivity" does sound a little twee.

I definitely would not attend un-named restaurant with rotating menu with anyone with food allergies, intolerances, or differing preferences. I don't think their level of knowledge or service is on the same level as other fine-dining. I'd have no problem taking them to Alinea.

chgoeditor wrote:

Josephine wrote:Also, in general, established vegetarian restaurants seem a bit more aware of food allergy/sensitivity issues. I see from your post, chgoeditor, that you had a bad experience in a vegan spot.

Without naming names (because I didn't intend post to call out places where I had a bad experience, but it may have just been a once-off occurrence), wasn't so much a vegan spot as a spot that is temporarily vegan for four months, if you know what I mean. Next it will be something non-vegan.

.

Cute but I got it the 1st time.

I am heartened to see that this time around (unlike the last time I remember the subject coming up here), no one is taking the position that "food allergies aren't real" or "people who claim to have food allergies are just fussy attention-seekers" or some such. I waded into this thread just now fully prepared to be infuriated by someone saying this.

Sometimes people realizing that it it not a joke causes changes. Many places I visit have posted warnings.

My example is that growing up my father was paranoid over my having visiting friends from my grade school. Before he passed away he told me why. When he was 7 years old a friend of his died at a birthday party. The mother hosting it apparently screamed at the kid that she "spent hours baking" for the party and he would try the peanut butter cookies.

I often volunteer to cook for Cub Scout troops so their parents can spend time with their kids having fun rather than dealing with the mundane. This is the first question I ask. Only once have I found a kid allergic. He asked to help in the kitchen since his parents did not let him near their kitchen "just in case". I had to meet up with his parents later because he was an awesome kid who was well aware of his issues and needed more freedom.

riddlemay wrote:I am heartened to see that this time around (unlike the last time I remember the subject coming up here), no one is taking the position that "food allergies aren't real" or "people who claim to have food allergies are just fussy attention-seekers" or some such. I waded into this thread just now fully prepared to be infuriated by someone saying this.

I know most food allergies are real, but all not are — there are cases of "attention-seeking." Would you really believe the person who said she (yes, in this case it was a she) had a terrible allergy to tap water, and could only drink bottled water?

nr706 wrote:

riddlemay wrote:I am heartened to see that this time around (unlike the last time I remember the subject coming up here), no one is taking the position that "food allergies aren't real" or "people who claim to have food allergies are just fussy attention-seekers" or some such. I waded into this thread just now fully prepared to be infuriated by someone saying this.

I know most food allergies are real, but all not are — there are cases of "attention-seeking." Would you really believe the person who said she (yes, in this case it was a she) had a terrible allergy to tap water, and could only drink bottled water?

Does she realize how many bottled waters are simply tap water with a fancy label?

In addition to attention seekers, there are also those picky people who express their preferences as "allergies." (A friend of mine has parents who both claim to have an allergy to the same two ingredients, neither of which is a common allergen. It must be a match made in heaven, I joke. What are the chances that two people who share the two same obscure allergies could meet, fall in love and get married?)

chgoeditor wrote:(A friend of mine has parents who both claim to have an allergy to the same two ingredients, neither of which is a common allergen. It must be a match made in heaven, I joke. What are the chances that two people who share the two same obscure allergies could meet, fall in love and get married?)

Sounds like some sort of Sandra Bullock movie!

=R=

How about six people allergic to lamb?

Regards,

nr706 wrote:Would you really believe the person who said she (yes, in this case it was a she) had a terrible allergy to tap water, and could only drink bottled water?

I concede this would trigger a mild degree of skepticism on my part.

I've been fortunate that everyone I've ever known has taken seriously my allergy to certain nuts. Friends and family, when they prepare food for me, are very solicitous of this allergy, and even look out for me in restaurants on occasions when I might be inclined to obliviousness. (Let's say when encountering a mixed salad on a buffet line, where I don't visually perceive the presence of these nuts, but they do.) When I read about other people who aren't so lucky--people who have "friends" who challenge their allergies, or signal that they believe the allergic person to be acting out a prima donna fantasy--I feel sad and angry. For every person who claims an allergy to tap water, there's at least one person somewhere who has a real allergy and isn't being believed.

Cathy2 wrote:How about six people allergic to lamb?

Regards,

After reading the thread you linked to, Cathy, it now appears that the Bouzaglos from Amy's Baking Company were in business in Buffalo Grove before moving to Phoenix. I guess they are lucky they had no Facebook page at the time. I wonder who called the police, though.

But on the serious side, (thinking about someone who claims allergy to tap water or lamb), people have very uncommon allergies at times. How six lamb allergic people ended up together is a question for scientific study, perhaps. Though genetic vulnerability to developing celiac, (an auto-immune disease) for instance, is well-established.

Unfortunately, there will always be some people who take advantage of accommodations made for the benefit of those who really need them. And there will always be obnoxious customers. Human nature. No news flash for restaurateurs.

Nevertheless, [Scold Alert!] we all need to develop compassion for food sensitivities and allergies, because it takes a very long time to identify such problems. What most people who do not have such health issues are unaware of is that one of the most difficult parts of a search for a diagnosis is that people have to go through a lot of skepticism and outright shaming, not to mention deprivation, while in search of answers. It is difficult, however, to have full awareness of uncommon conditions and dietary needs. I admit that it might be odd and time-consuming to be quizzed about the presence of certain fruits in a dish, (apple, pear, guava, honeydew melon, nashi fruit, pawpaw, papaya, quince, star fruit, watermelon, dried apple, currant, date, fig, pear, raisin, sultana; fortified wines and foods containing added sugars, such as agave nectar, some corn syrups, and fruit juice concentrates) and yet to find that someone accepts the following: apricot, nectarine, peach, plum blueberry, blackberry, boysenberry, cranberry, raspberry, strawberry, loganberry, kumquat, grapefruit, lemon, lime, mandarin, orange, tangelo, ripe banana, jackfruit, kiwi fruit, passion fruit, pineapple, rhubarb, tamarillo. This is the case for someone following a protocol to deal with fructose malabsorption.

Looking it another way, isn't it great that people with sensitivities continue to go about their culinary lives out in the world rather than eating exclusively at home? Isn't it just being responsible when they inform themselves and make their needs known? In my experience, most people who need to avoid certain foods are careful not to place demands on others in social situations, and even carry their own food to eliminate potential problems, including embarrassment for the generous host. I wonder what is the problem for a restaurant that is not comfortably able to accommodate a specific request? It has always been the case that if I want to substitute and "no substitutions" is written on the menu, then that is that. No harm, no foul. It seems that it is within the rights of a restaurant to acknowledge that it cannot accommodate a request. [End scold.]

Increased awareness about food allergies and sensitivities in the culinary community benefits everyone, restaurants included.

Josephine wrote:I admit that it might be odd and time-consuming to be quizzed about the presence of certain fruits in a dish, (apple, pear, guava, honeydew melon, nashi fruit, pawpaw, papaya, quince, star fruit, watermelon, dried apple, currant, date, fig, pear, raisin, sultana; fortified wines and foods containing added sugars, such as agave nectar, some corn syrups, and fruit juice concentrates) and yet to find that someone accepts the following: apricot, nectarine, peach, plum blueberry, blackberry, boysenberry, cranberry, raspberry, strawberry, loganberry, kumquat, grapefruit, lemon, lime, mandarin, orange, tangelo, ripe banana, jackfruit, kiwi fruit, passion fruit, pineapple, rhubarb, tamarillo. This is the case for someone following a protocol to deal with fructose malabsorption.

It does seem odd, but (as you know but some others might find questionable) that's the way it is. A variety of nuts pose no danger to me, including cashews, almonds, and pistachios, all of which I love and enjoy at every opportunity. Yet I'm imperiled by walnuts and brazil nuts.

riddlemay wrote:I am heartened to see that this time around (unlike the last time I remember the subject coming up here), no one is taking the position that "food allergies aren't real" or "people who claim to have food allergies are just fussy attention-seekers" or some such. I waded into this thread just now fully prepared to be infuriated by someone saying this.

Well, since you bring it up...

As a 'real' allergy sufferer, I tend to get really annoyed by people with 'fake' allergies because it diminishes the actual, life-threatening condition I suffer (when I was 14, I had to be rushed to the ER just before my trachea closed).

Likewise, food intolerance is a real issue that should be acknowledged (I give the benefit of the doubt to gluten-intolerance; it's apparently a lot more widespread than once believed, though I still think it's psychosomatic in most cases). But someone who says "I'm allergic to onions" just because they don't like onions annoys me to no end.

riddlemay wrote:A variety of nuts pose no danger to me, including cashews, almonds, and pistachios, all of which I love and enjoy at every opportunity. Yet I'm imperiled by walnuts and brazil nuts.

Of course, you probably know that cashews, almonds and pistachios are not actually nuts. They are fruits.

stevez wrote:

riddlemay wrote:A variety of nuts pose no danger to me, including cashews, almonds, and pistachios, all of which I love and enjoy at every opportunity. Yet I'm imperiled by walnuts and brazil nuts.

Of course, you probably know that cashews, almonds and pistachios are not actually nuts. They are fruits.

I did not know that, actually! So (assuming that walnuts and brazil nuts are nuts), at least there's some logic to why I'm allergic to them and not to their non-nut brethren.

riddlemay wrote:

stevez wrote:

riddlemay wrote:A variety of nuts pose no danger to me, including cashews, almonds, and pistachios, all of which I love and enjoy at every opportunity. Yet I'm imperiled by walnuts and brazil nuts.

Of course, you probably know that cashews, almonds and pistachios are not actually nuts. They are fruits.

I did not know that, actually! So (assuming that walnuts and brazil nuts are nuts), at least there's some logic to why I'm allergic to them and not to their non-nut brethren.

By definition, all nuts are actually fruits. It's a fact that cashews, almonds and pistachios aren't true nuts (they're drupes). But walnuts and Brazil nuts aren't true nuts either (the classification of walnuts is controversial). Yet all five are fruits (actually Brazil nuts are the seeds of a fruit, just to complicate matters). Have a look at the excellent webpage, Fruits Called Nuts for more than you probably want to know about fruits, nuts, drupes, drupaceous nuts, nutty drupes and even trymata. For what it's worth, a walnut is sometimes described as a tryma. There's almost certainly a botanical logic underlying your allergies but it's not quite as straightforward as stevez's explanation.

Our allergic friend says "I am allergic to tree nuts"

I never questioned which nuts (other than Peanuts) this is. We just avoid all nuts in food if we feed him.

Rene G wrote:By definition, all nuts are actually fruits. It's a fact that cashews, almonds and pistachios aren't true nuts (they're drupes). But walnuts and Brazil nuts aren't true nuts either (the classification of walnuts is controversial). Yet all five are fruits (actually Brazil nuts are the seeds of a fruit, just to complicate matters). Have a look at the excellent webpage, Fruits Called Nuts for more than you probably want to know about fruits, nuts, drupes, drupaceous nuts, nutty drupes and even trymata. For what it's worth, a walnut is sometimes described as a tryma. There's almost certainly a botanical logic underlying your allergies but it's not quite as straightforward as stevez's explanation.

Ah well. For a brief shining moment there the universe was making sense.

Maybe I will go to that website. Thanks for it. I have never heard the word drupe before.

I ran hospital kitchens for years and had a staff of registered dietitians who could pretty much deal with any food allergy that would come up over the course of the years. Let me tell you, some of the restrictions were far worse than any of those mentioned above, especially when you are dealing with patients with kidney, liver, and other related issues.

I do NOT think that it is completely realistic for someone to show up at any restaurant UNANNOUNCED and make demands that the personnel prepare a bunch of special dishes that will satisfy a diet that the kitchen staff may not be aware of. We had one patient that was allergic to a specific chemical and I had to literally check each container of each component to determine whether a dish could be served.

It is great to see that some operators are addressing some of the more common allergens. However, while the chef may be well versed in certain diets, I would not assume that the "second string" would have the same knowledge. In other words, you will always need to look a dish over to determine whether you can have it.

If you have a child who has several SERIOUS allergies to food, I would plan that all meals would be prepared at home. One of my co-workers has a 17 year old son with serious allergies (he carries an Epipen with him at all times). They prepare all their meals at home and bring nothing in the house that he cannot eat. She is working with the Iowa State University dietitians to develop a menu that he can eat when he goes away to school next September.

We have a joke:

"When is the correct time to mention your food allergy to the restaurant?"

A). When making your reservation,

B). When seated,

C). During ordering,

D). When the food hits the table,

Or E). When the check is dropped.

I venture to say that most of you would be shocked by how many times the answer is D or E. Sad but true.

Josephine wrote:

Cathy2 wrote:How about six people allergic to lamb?

But on the serious side, (thinking about someone who claims allergy to tap water or lamb), people have very uncommon allergies at times. How six lamb allergic people ended up together is a question for scientific study, perhaps.

WSJ: Ticks That Spread Red-Meat Allergy

WSJ wrote:If Lyme disease isn't reason enough to avoid ticks, here's another: the inability to enjoy a burger. Odd as it seems, researchers say that bites from the voracious lone star tick are making some people allergic to red meat—even if they've never had a problem eating it before. The allergic reactions range from vomiting and abdominal cramps to hives to anaphylaxis, which can lead to breathing difficulties and sometimes even death. Unlike most food allergies, the symptoms typically set in three to six hours after an affected person eats beef, pork or lamb—often in the middle of the night. The bite that seems to precipitate it may occur weeks or months before, often making it difficult for people to make the link.

WSJ wrote:Tony Piazza, a landscape designer in Southampton, N.Y., first woke up in the middle of the night gasping for breath and covered in hives six years ago. Emergency-room doctors at Southampton Hospital gave him intravenous antihistamines and said it was probably an allergy, but they couldn't determine the source. The same scene played out two or three times a year for the next few years, Mr. Piazza, 49, says.

"I was afraid that the next time, I wouldn't wake up," he says.

He noticed that the reaction occurred every time he ate lamb for dinner, even though he had never had food allergies before. Then it happened with steak and then hamburger. "I swore off red meat completely and the reactions stopped," says Mr. Piazza. When he heard about the tick connection, it made sense, given his work. "I get ticks all the time," he says.

WSJ wrote:Drs. Platts-Mills and Commins still haven't conclusively proven that tick bites trigger the creation of the antibodies. Nor do they know whether something in the natural saliva of all lone star ticks causes the reaction or whether the ticks are picking up a pathogen from other hosts and transferring it to humans.

But evidence of the connection is mounting. To date, the U. Va. researchers have collected blood samples of more than 1,000 people with antibodies to alpha-gal, from Texas to Massachusetts, who report the delayed allergic reaction to red meat. The doctors have presented their research at allergy conferences and in a half-dozen medical-journal articles.

More here: Red Meat Allergy Likely Caused by Tick Bites