If I've had food allergy testing, is the reintroduction really necessary?

[HopefullyHopeful]

This may be a really dumb question, but one that I'm wondering about. I recently had some tests done to find out if I had any food allergies. Now I know which ones I'm 'sensitive' to (mushrooms, cranberries, pumpkin, radishes, black pepper, etc.), which one I'm highly allergic to (buckwheat), and what I'm not sensitive or allergic to (lactose, gluten, etc.). That said, is the reintroduction still necessary?

[MrsZimm13]

I too have had food sensitivity testing and would like to know the answer. Thanks for asking.

[ShannonM816]

I would say reintroduction would still be beneficial. Don't reintroduce a thing that you know you're highly allergic to, for sure, but for other things, you can react to a thing that you're not allergic to. For instance, a milk allergy is a different thing than being lactose intolerant -- the allergy may show up in testing that the lactose intolerance may not show up in.

 

There's also a psychological component to some foods that won't show up in testing, and that you'll only see when you actually consume the foods. Some is obvious, like having sugar may make you crave more sugar, but some things can be a surprise for people, like for some people eating wheat causes anxiety or depression.

 

A further concern I have is that there are different types of food allergy testing, and some are more accurate than others. There's a brief overview of this from Chris Kresser here (you can either listen to the podcast, or scroll down and read the transcript).

[HopefullyHopeful]

Thanks for the answer, and for the link. My food allergy test was done via IG-G and IG-A, so it's more reliable according to Chris Kesser, but I understand the psychological component of the reintroduction. I appreciate your feedback.