Motivation

Peanuts, Bees, Trauma and Immunotherapy

Posted on by Athleticult Editorial Team

A treatment for those with severe allergies to bee stings is venom immunotherapy (VIT) or bee venom therapy.

How VIT works:

  1. Content: The treatment consists of small but gradually increasing doses of the venom to which a person is allergic. This venom is purified and diluted.
  2. Rationale: The basic principle behind VIT is similar to that of other forms of allergy immunotherapy: repeated, controlled exposure to the allergen (in this case, bee venom) helps the immune system become desensitized over time.
  3. Mechanism: Over the course of treatment, the body is trained to tolerate larger and larger amounts of the venom. This is done by changing the immune response from producing IgE antibodies (which mediate allergic reactions) to producing more IgG4, which are protective antibodies that can block the effects of venom.
  4. Procedure: Typically, a patient starts with a build-up phase where they receive increasing doses of the venom at frequent intervals (e.g., weekly). Once the maximum dose is reached and tolerated, the maintenance phase begins, in which the person receives the same maximum dose at longer intervals (e.g., every month) for several years.
  5. Effectiveness: VIT can be very effective in preventing systemic allergic reactions to bee stings. For individuals with a known, severe allergy to bee stings, this therapy can be life-saving. After completing VIT, most patients can tolerate a bee sting with little or no allergic reaction.
  6. Safety: Like any medical treatment, VIT carries risks. Some individuals might experience reactions to the injections, and there’s always a risk of a severe allergic reaction (anaphylaxis) from the treatment itself. However, when performed under controlled, medical supervision, the benefits often outweigh the risks for those with severe venom allergies.

 

Peanut Allergy Immunotherapy

  1. Peanut Oral Immunotherapy (OIT): One of the strategies for peanut allergies is oral immunotherapy. This involves giving allergic individuals small, increasing doses of peanut protein over time. Studies have shown that a majority of individuals undergoing OIT can tolerate a certain amount of peanut protein without reacting.
  2. Efficacy: In clinical trials, many participants undergoing peanut OIT could tolerate significantly larger amounts of peanut protein compared to a placebo group. The efficacy can vary, but some studies have shown around 67% of participants respond positively to OIT.
  3. Palforzia: This is a standardized peanut OIT product approved by the FDA. In studies, two-thirds of children and teenagers allergic to peanuts were able to eat the equivalent of two peanuts without any symptoms after undergoing treatment with Palforzia.
  4. Limitations: It’s worth noting that peanut OIT doesn’t cure the allergy. The goal is to reduce the risk of severe reactions from accidental exposure. Not everyone responds to the therapy, and there’s a risk of side effects, including anaphylaxis.

The “Bamba experiment”

The “Bamba experiment” refers to a landmark study officially known as the Learning Early About Peanut Allergy (LEAP) trial. The experiment investigated early peanut consumption and the risk of developing a peanut allergy in infants. Bamba, a peanut-containing snack popular in Israel, played a pivotal role in the study’s origins.

Jonathan Heidt explains about peanut allergies and “the Bamba experiment”

Here’s a breakdown of the study and its findings in the context of peanut allergy:

Origins

  1. Observation: Researchers noticed that the incidence of peanut allergies among Jewish children in the UK was 10 times higher than that of Jewish children in Israel. One of the significant dietary differences between these two groups was the early introduction of peanuts in Israel, primarily in the form of Bamba. While infants in the UK typically avoided peanut-containing products during their first year, those in Israel were regularly exposed to peanuts from an early age through Bamba.

The LEAP Trial

  1. Design: The trial was conducted at King’s College London and led by Professor Gideon Lack. The study involved over 600 infants aged 4-11 months who were at high risk of developing a peanut allergy (they already had severe eczema, egg allergy, or both). These infants were randomized into two groups:
    • One group consumed a peanut-containing snack (like Bamba) regularly.
    • The other group avoided peanuts entirely.
  2. Duration: The children were followed until they were five years old, at which point they were tested for peanut allergies.
  3. Results: The findings were quite significant. Only 3.2% of the children who had consumed peanut products developed a peanut allergy by age 5, compared to 17.2% of the children who had avoided peanuts. This marked an 81% reduction in peanut allergy incidence in the group introduced to peanuts early.

Implications

  1. Dietary Recommendations: The results of the LEAP study challenged the conventional wisdom of the time, which often suggested delaying the introduction of allergenic foods. As a result, many health organizations, including the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) in the U.S., revised their guidelines to recommend introducing peanut-containing foods into the diets of infants as early as 4-6 months to reduce the risk of peanut allergy, especially for those at high risk.
  2. Caution: Parents should always consult with their pediatrician or an allergist before introducing peanuts or other potential allergens to their infants, especially if there’s a known history of allergies or eczema.

The LEAP trial and the “Bamba observation” fundamentally changed our understanding of food allergies and how they might be prevented. It’s a prime example of how observational data can lead to groundbreaking clinical research and changes in medical recommendations.

 

Psychological Immunotherapy

The same approach aligns with existing psychological concepts and treatments, especially concerning exposure therapy and resilience training. Let’s explore these concepts and draw parallels with Venom Immunotherapy (VIT):

1. Exposure Therapy

Exposure therapy is a psychological treatment developed to help people confront their fears and anxieties. It’s primarily used for individuals with anxiety disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and phobias.

How it relates to VIT: Similar to how VIT exposes individuals to increasing doses of an allergen to build tolerance, exposure therapy involves systematic and controlled exposure to the feared object, situation, or traumatic memory, aiming to reduce the fear or distress associated with it.

Research & Efficacy: Numerous studies have demonstrated the efficacy of exposure therapy, especially for PTSD and specific phobias. For instance, a meta-analysis of exposure therapy for PTSD found it to be effective in reducing symptoms.

2. Resilience Training

Resilience training equips individuals with skills and coping mechanisms to face and adapt to adversities or traumatic events.

How it relates to VIT: Just as VIT “prepares” the immune system to react appropriately to venom, resilience training “prepares” the mind to handle unexpected or traumatic events more effectively.

Research & Efficacy: Various studies and interventions, especially in military settings or high-stress professions, have shown that resilience training can reduce the risk of developing PTSD and other stress-related disorders.

3. Cognitive Dissonance Theory

This theory, proposed by Leon Festinger, suggests that we have an inner drive to hold our beliefs and attitudes consistent. When there’s inconsistency (dissonance), it produces a feeling of discomfort, leading individuals to try and reduce this dissonance and achieve consistency.

How it relates to your hypothesis: The dissonance, or the gap you mentioned between one’s beliefs and reality, can be stressful and traumatic. Slow exposure to differing beliefs or realities can reduce the severity of this dissonance, much like VIT’s gradual exposure reduces allergic reactions.

4. Analogies

  • Muscle Strengthening: Just as muscles grow stronger and more resilient with regular exercise, facing smaller adversities or challenges can “strengthen” an individual’s psychological resilience over time.
  • Vaccination: In medicine, a vaccine introduces a weakened or inactivated form of a pathogen to “train” the immune system. Similarly, facing controlled challenges or undergoing exposure therapy can “train” the mind to handle more significant adversities.

5. Limitations & Considerations

  • Dosage Matters: Just as too much venom too quickly can be harmful in VIT, excessive or too-rapid exposure to traumatic stimuli without proper therapeutic guidance can be detrimental.
  • Individual Variability: Everyone’s threshold for trauma and stress is different. What might be a small challenge for one person could be traumatic for another, similar to how some people might have severe allergies while others have none.
  • Guidance is Key: VIT is conducted under strict medical supervision. Similarly, exposure to traumatic stimuli or events should be approached with caution and ideally under the guidance of a trained therapist.

In summary, while the mechanisms and biological underpinnings differ, there are conceptual parallels between VIT and therapies or interventions designed to increase human resilience to trauma. It’s essential to approach such comparisons with a nuanced understanding, acknowledging the differences and intricacies of both biological and psychological responses.