Talk:Peanut allergy

message: This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Willwu22, MikeChristie94!, Nasztalos. Peer reviewers: Ben893, Bethany.ricker, Naveen Sivaranjan 8. 20:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

message: Can we find the actual CDC numbers, instead of leaving up a reference to someone talking about them on a tv show?  :-)  (the tv ref is also munged a bit) Asbruckman (talk) 02:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  new ref on death stats 

message: I think that the comment about eating peanuts causing your kids to have peanut allergies should be removed until a reference can by found for this. Tom Hubbard 22:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I

message: Article would benefit from a section discussing frequency of peanut allergy over time.  This of course will be unavailable data for much of the world, but whatever can be located should be.  Anecdotally it has been reported peanut allergy has increased a lot in the last ten years.  This would be a good place to debunk the notion or document it.  Tempshill 21:55, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone have any idea why peanut allergies are virtually unheard of outside the western world?  Exploding Boy 08:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article from Science News gives an indication of a likely reason: sensitivity is mediated by exposure while the immune system is still "programming" itself as to what is self vs other.  Combine that with the recent (last 10-20 years) advice against exposure until 3 or 4 in certain countries (that now have rising rates of peanut allergies), and you have a setup that's perfect for making the problem worse.  The mis-understanding may have been caused by some studies that (correctly, perhaps) indicated that heavily-at-risk children (genetic pre-disposition) benefit from avoiding it at a young age.  Unfortunately that doesn't necessarily mean that all children benefit from avoiding exposure.   jesup (talk) 01:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acceleration 

message: As the article is currently written, the inclusion of one 'famous death' that isn't really a peanut-related death
strikes me as misleading.  It sort of implies that deaths from peanut allergies are over-reported/don't happen.
It would be nice if we could put in some stats on how many people really do die from peanut allergy. Or failing that,
just take the famous deaths section out....  What do you all think? Asbruckman 17:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deaths Section Misleading 

message: There is published research that looked at fatalities involving food allergies which indicates that patients with both asthma and peanut allergies were at greater risk. published article
abstract of research I'm new to wiki ... Is this something we'd want to add? Allergy-mom 16:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Increased risk of death for patients with both asthma and peanut allergy? 

message: Someone was telling me that peanut allergies aren't found anywhere in the world other than North America. Is this true?
*This is not true.  Peanut allergy does, however, seem to be a side affect of "westernized" societies.--Shogun 220 05:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  ^ This is dangerous talk.  It may work for this person and their child but anyone affected by the allergy knows all too well that desensitation is not a viable option for many affected persons.  Of course this comment comes from someone who has never and will never experience the reaction.  This is not a "gut feeling" type of thing; Speak with your doctor.  My point is - DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME IF YOU CARE ABOUT YOUR CHILD. UselessToRemain (talk) 18:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  ^ This is a good question regarding the chemical compound.  Some scientific phenomena are not yet explained.  Where is it said that the epinephrine is prescribed to resolve a poison?  Epinephrine acts as a bronchodilator after a severe reaction, allowing the individual to regain the ability to breathe through the mouth.  If the airways to from both the mouth and nose to the lungs are closed off, death can occur(especially in older individuals).  Such a study might set a dangerous precedent.  UselessToRemain (talk) 18:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanut_allergy#Injected_peanut_desensitization < - This answers the question about the study better than I can.  UselessToRemain (talk) 18:52, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exclusive to North America? 

message: Today's [The Gazette (Cedar Rapids)|Cedar Rapids Gazette] has an article about peanut-butter alternatives for school lunches because many local schools have banned all peanut products the the point kids aren't even allowed to bring them for lunch.  Are there many peopel who are allergic to peanuts to the point where it would be dangerous to sit next to someone who was eating peanut butter? Ace of Sevens 15:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not sure about how many it is but this exists for sure.  The severity of the danger would depend on the individual, ranging from minor annoyance to breathing restriction.  When speaking of elementary age kids, it's probably best to use more caution than not.  UselessToRemain (talk) 23:52, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Severity 

message: How about switching the two around? (while leaving some details in this article)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by VTNC (talk • contribs) 07:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "Allergies" Section of the Peanut article is better than this article 

message: I came to this article after hearing one person explain to me that children who are exposed to peanuts through their mother while in the womb are more likely to contract a peanut allergy. This sounds fishy to me. I was hoping to find some research here on possible causes for the perceived increase in peanut allergy cases. Does anyone know if there is any credible research of that kind? --Thaddius (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Myth? 

message: I have had a peanut allergy since childhood and have also had much milder allergic reactions to peas.  My allergist told me at one point that this occured because both foods come from the legume family.  I would be curious to see data on rates of coincidence of the two.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.85.102 (talk) 05:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  comorbidity 

message: Meg Griffin's death by peanuts: She's a FICTIONAL character.  This should be notated somehow, or removed. Imogenne (talk) 16:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family Guy 

message: This article needs more information on what actually causes the allergy.  A peanut is just a peanut.  Which proteins or other substances are responsible for the reaction? -Rolypolyman (talk) 13:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs more information on mechanism 

message: From a discussion on my talk page  --Ronz (talk) 16:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible references

message: Hey, this article has gotten so much better!  Very nice! Can we move it from 'starter class' to something higher on the scale? Asbruckman (talk) 01:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Upgraded to C-class, although many of the refs are incomplete - lacking hyperlinks to the abstract at PubMed. Starting to repair. David notMD (talk) 18:11, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Much improved! 

message: This section should not turn into a "how-to" which might prompt people to try it on their own without medical supervision. See  for a recent summary of the research from CBS News. Edison (talk) 23:37, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent articles about cures of the allergy via desensitization

message: I think some information about common beliefs and empirically gathered data is needed regarding routes of exposure.  For example, there are those claim that systemic anaphylaxis can be triggered in allergic individuals by merely touching peanut products, smelling them, or being in the same vicinity.  There is a lot of social interest in such claims because in some areas such as schools it has resulted in facility-wide bans on all peanut products, and these have draw criticism as overreaction.Legitimus (talk) 02:16, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Routes of Exposure 

message: Recent TV show indicates peanut allergies were suspected as far back as the 1890s. AMCKen (talk) 01:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: As a person with a severe peanut allergy, I would like to see some information regarding the misconceptions held by society regarding peanut allergies, and the common mistake of grouping peanut allergies with nut allergies when they are so very different.  What percentage of people with peanut allergies also have nut allergies, or vice versa?   What items in the legume family have also been known to be allergens for people with peanut allergies?
Sandréna (talk) 14:40, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misconceptions about Peanut Allergies 

message: "Not to be confused with Peanut gallery." Hahaha, I mean, really?
No, but seriously.... really?! --Atommalac (talk) 15:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amusing 

message: I'm attempting to re-organize the introductory paragraphs for the article. Feel free to let me know if there are any issues with the information.  News Team Assemble![talk?] 02:57, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: I'm adding a section on "Sublingual immunotherapy desensitization" for review.  News Team Assemble![talk?] 11:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote a section on "Epicutaneous immunotherapy desensitization" for review. I also removed tone, citation, and essay notices. Should the "Peanut butter alternatives" be removed? I think this section gets off topic. Let me know what you think.  News Team Assemble![talk?] 03:56, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I removed the "Peanut butter alternatives" section. I think it goes off topic as a reader. Please let me know if you think it should be reinserted.  News Team Assemble![talk?] 04:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sublingual immunotherapy desensitization 

message: The paragraph before the section 'Prevalence' uses the term "nuts" instead of peanuts. As peanuts are not actually a type of nut this is unclear, does it refer to nuts or to peanuts? If not to peanuts why is it in this article? 86.128.240.4 (talk) 23:18, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nuts? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Peanut allergy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://christakis.med.harvard.edu/pdfs/BMJ_081213_Nuts.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:32, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Anyone else feel that the mention of creating hypoallergenic peanuts by enzyme treatment is premature?  There are no published clinical trials. There is one trial listed at www.clinicaltrials.gov as 'Completed' but does not show up as published. "Evaluation of Allergenicity of Hypoallergenic Peanut Product in Peanut Allergic Subjects" David notMD (talk) 01:33, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree and removed. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:10, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research section - premature mention of hypoallergenic peanuts? 

message: Hello, we are a group of medical students editing this page as part of our class assignment. We have compiled a list of suggestions to improve this article and would appreciate community feedback before we proceed with these edits. Here is a list of our suggestions:
1.	Society and culture: We propose that the following sentence is added “The high severity of peanut allergy reactions, as well as the increasing prevalence of peanut allergy in the Western world have led to widespread public attention. As a result, many school policies within North America have been implemented to completely ban the presence of all peanuts and tree-nuts in schools. However, it remains unclear whether the complete ban of peanuts and tree-nuts in schools is warranted, in comparison with the potential decrease in quality of life associated with food bans.  
:Suggest search for additional sources on this topic, MEDRS-quality if possible, but also global health or major media reports. --Zefr (talk) 18:47, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: @Zefr thank you for your feedback. I have added an additional source from the US Department of Health and Human Services. Willwu22 (talk) 18:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: While the CDC is often an excellent source, that long document seems unwieldy for the common online user to review (see WP:NOTJOURNAL #7-8), and seems not to discuss peanut allergy specifically. This is a briefer version and this NIH news release with its internal links may be helpful. Please remember to sign your comments with the pen icon above the edit box or 4 tildes. --Zefr (talk) 16:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

text: This seems inconsistent with some sources, e.g., this, Table 3, which indicate higher incidence among whites. Suggest a more thorough review of literature, then include and discuss disparate research findings. --Zefr (talk) 18:47, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: @Zefr, thank you for this additional source. You are correct, this information conflicts with the source I referenced here. Because this point would require a more thorough review of literature, I will refrain from implementing this edit at this time. Bethany.ricker (talk) 17:13, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

text: *This looks like it was a mistake in the PMID. I have alerted the group to revisit this. Thanks for noticing it JenOttawa (talk) 03:08, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: COMMENT: Now your #3 an #5 are the same citation. Fleischer is the first author on six or seven articles all with the same title (VERY ANNOYING), so if you mean to cite two different articles, make sure the PMIDs you use to create the citations are not identical. Otherwise, use the repeated use of a citation format. David notMD (talk) 20:48, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

text: COMMENT: Thanks for pointing out, it is supposed to be the same reference - we will make change! MikeChristie94! (talk) 23:36, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

text: Under Conclusions: this seems worth developing in discussion, " it cannot be determined how much of the increases in estimates are truly attributable to increases in clinical disease and how much are attributable to increased awareness by physicians, other health care providers, and parents" --Zefr (talk) 18:47, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  @Zefr, I am not sure we are speaking about the same topic.  My proposed addition was in relation to the natural history of peanut allergy, i.e. whether someone with peanut allergy will ever “outgrow” it, which is a topic that falls under “outcomes of the disease”.  There is evidence to suggest that allergies to soy, milk, egg, and wheat are more likely to resolve in childhood, whereas allergies to peanut resolve less often.  This influences decisions surrounding the frequency with which a physician would want to re-evaluate the patient’s allergy.  I was not referring to an increase in prevalence of peanut allergy, as I think you were suggesting.  Please correct me if I am misunderstanding you. Nasztalos (talk) 17:36, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: As the topic is about Treatment/Outcomes, it seems appropriate that misdiagnosis be ruled out and discussed in the article. In the Branum-Lucaks report I cited above, it is stated that "data are based on parental or proxy reports of food allergy rather than clinical diagnoses, which could potentially result in inflated estimates because it has been demonstrated that perceived food  allergy is often misunderstood and overestimated, compared with clinically diagnosed food allergy." Such information affects not only diagnosis and incidence rates, but long-term progress with the allergy and its associated outcomes. --Zefr (talk) 18:46, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that inflated/inaccurate prevalence and incidence rates (as well as long-term outcomes of the disease) could result from parental reporting of the allergies rather than reporting based on clinical diagnosis; however, I don't believe that this issue necessarily fits within "Prognosis" (see comments re section title below).  Perhaps this topic could be added to "Epidemiology" in the future. - Nasztalos (talk) 17:08, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The right placement for individuals becoming tolerant would be in a section titled Prognosis. See Egg allergy for example. David notMD (talk) 21:05, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.  I will include this addition in a section entitled "Prognosis", which will be placed underneath the "Treatment" section. -Nasztalos (talk) 16:50, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

text: *A referencing error? Please add correct PMID JenOttawa (talk) 03:08, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: COMMENT: Definitely a mixup on our end, reference changed! MikeChristie94! (talk) 23:36, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

text: COMMENT: Never heard of it. But a search on cutaneous exposure peanut allergy turned up several articles, including Brough HA 2015 PMID 25457149. If your proposed review ref adequately describes the nature of cutaneous exposure, specific to presence/consumption of peanut products in the house, go for it. David notMD (talk) 01:30, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

text: Preliminary feedback while your comments are reviewed and sources checked: 1) there's likely a better source for your statements under #3 and #5. Please review WP:MEDRS for a systematic review, meta-analysis, or association review similar to the one under #7 (URL now provided; preferred); 2) note WP:REFPUNCT, source comes after punctuation. Will review further and respond. --Zefr (talk) 19:25, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: COMMENTS: First, remember to sign your Talk content by typing four ~ after the end. Looks like the refs got messed up. #3 is 1989 cancer ref. As Z pointed out, you have a ref number between a period and a quotation mark. In my opinion premature to discuss processing (your item #6) so I recommend not adding that. And it was not clear from the abstract alone that it covers boiling versus roasting. I am ambivalent about your proposed item #7, as it seems general to all food allergy, not peanuts. And the mention of general risk of malnutrition feels like a digression. David notMD (talk) 19:29, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: DON'T DELETE TALK CONTENT To the students: Once you have added something in Talk and someone else has followed, do not go back and delete/add/change what you wrote, as this will turn the subsequent comments into nonsense. It is OK to add new content at the bottom. Style is to add one more : that the last comment so that your content is indented more. (If no one has commented after your content was added you have a window of opportunity to amend or delete it.) And remember to sign with four of ~ David notMD (talk) 00:04, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: COMMENTS: I was hoping you could elaborate on what you mean by premature. There seems to be a fair amount of literature on roasting and boiling impact on the allergenicity of peanuts. Do you think it would be more appropriate to include this section if we further supplemented this information with a deeper explanation? Furthermore, although the impacts of roasting and boiling are not discussed in the abstract the paper has sections dedicated to this topic.Naveen Sivaranjan 8 (talk) 17:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not have free access to the complete article. For that reason I mentioned that all I can see is the abstract. A search on peanut allergy boiling roasting yielded Zhang 2016, Prusak 2014, Maleki 2014, Blanc 2011, Mondoulet 2005, Maleki 2003 and Beyer 2001. However, none of those are clinical trials, which if any existed, would still be considered primary research. For medical articles Wikipedia strongly prefers secondary literature (reviews, etc.). Unless you can add that level of literature, I stand by premature. In comparison, Immunotherapy is described in the Research section, but the basis for inclusion is multiple clinical trials and subsequent reviews. David notMD (talk) 20:01, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

text: RE:#7 The source used (PMID 24497783) falls into the category of “authoritative review articles, in statements and practice guidelines issued by major professional medical or scientific societies” since it originates from the Canadian Pediatric Society and Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. And while systematic reviews and meta-analyses are preferred I thought it could be a strength of the Wikipedia article to include some summarized information from those Societies to help make those recommendations a bit more accessible. With regards to the generality of the proposed sentences, the source article’s content is meant to cover peanut allergy as one of many allergies discussed in the guidelines, so I thought it would still be relevant. If the second proposed sentence is too much of a diversion then it could be removed. Ben893 (talk) 17:53, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I took umbrage at the second sentence. David notMD (talk) 20:01, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I will limit the addition to the first sentence proposed: “The Canadian Pediatric Society and Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology issued a joint statement in 2013, reaffirmed in 2016, in which they acknowledged there is conflicting evidence on whether maternal diet during pregnancy has any effect on development of allergies due to a lack of good studies.” Thank you for the feedback. Ben893 (talk) 17:57, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

text: Now refs 3 and 8 (Wood 2016) are identical. David notMD (talk) 03:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, I have changed the reference format accordingly!Bethany.ricker (talk) 17:09, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Edits 

message: Anyone else not happy with the Christakis statement and citation (from 2008) in the Society and culture section?  It got huge amounts of press back in 2008-09 (do a Google search on Christakis peanut allergy), but there does not appear to be follow up in the scientific literature, either by Christakis or anyone else. Just saying. David notMD (talk)
:What is the objection to the statement, which seems true to the author and to reasoning? The LEAP project and NIAID recommendations are consistent with Christakis. --Zefr (talk) 17:55, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Are we looking at the same content in the article? My read is that Christakis (2008) is saying that the hullaboo over peanut allergy is unwarranted. "Sociologist Nicholas Christakis has said that measures taken (especially in schools) to ensure allergic children are not exposed to peanut allergens are disproportional to the actual risk of such exposure. Christakis has also said that popular responses to the danger of peanut allergies 'bear many of the hallmarks of mass psychogenic illness.'" I do not agree that it is unwarranted, as according to Togias 2017 (PMID 28065802) "Peanut allergy is the leading cause of death related to food-induced anaphylaxis in the United States." The fact that the topic of peanut allergy in children is research-worthy, and that early & frequent exposure is being looked at as a means of promoting tolerance, does not justify Chritakis's dismissal of concern as hysteria. David notMD (talk) 20:03, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I took the statement as the quote and cited BMJ source as it is. We could add a counterpoint review or an advisory qualifier to it in social/cultural context, but I am unaware of such a source. The NIAID panel report is a worthwhile reference, but it's more relevant under Diagnosis and Prevention, and seems off-topic to the main Christaki point that allergy fear is "disproportional to the actual risk of such exposure." --Zefr (talk) 20:24, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The Christakis content feels like an orphan. This may need searching the literature on how an allergy known to trigger anaphylaxis has affected quality of life in the people with the allergy plus their family, and reactions by businesses (food companies, schools, airlines, restaurants, etc.) to avoid legal liability. Elaboration would address the charge of disproportionality. David notMD (talk) 20:53, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Although the Cristakis content does bring up an important (and potentially valid) point, I don't think that a direct quote from a single primary source is suitable for Wikipedia standards. My proposed edit (#1 in the "Proposed Edits" heading above) may be a good replacement to the Cristakis statement: “The high severity of peanut allergy reactions, as well as the increasing prevalence of peanut allergy in the Western world have led to widespread public attention. As a result, many school policies within North America have been implemented to completely ban the presence of all peanuts and tree-nuts in schools. However, it remains unclear whether the complete ban of peanuts and tree-nuts in schools is warranted, in comparison with the potential decrease in quality of life associated with food bans." (with appropriate sourcing as shown in "Proposed Edits") --Willwu22 (talk) 17:15, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

text: A fair point, I have condensed my proposed edit to address solely the fact that food allergies are perceived to be more prevalent than they actually are: "The high severity of peanut allergy reactions, as well as the increasing prevalence of peanut allergy in the Western world have led to widespread public attention. However, the perceived prevalence of food allergies in the public view is substantially higher than the actual prevalence of food allergies." [ref was added to article]
This would be to replace the Cristakis statement. @DavidnotMD feel free to add a statement on decreased quality of life from the egg allergy article after this, as I do believe that would be helpful in rounding out the Society and Culture section of this article.  --Willwu22 (talk) 00:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

text: I will hold off adding the QOL material from egg allergy until after your course assignment is graded. Have not yet decided on removing the Cristakis content or not. David notMD (talk) 13:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted Christakis. Added the Quality of Life content. "Mass psychogenic illness" (Christakis) is about groups caught up in imaginary illness events. Over-reacting to a real health risk is not that, nor like that. David notMD (talk) 22:05, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Christakis statement in Society and culture section 

message: In my opinion the addition of a protein structure image does not add to the value of the article. None of the other common food allergies have protein structures (please don't change that), and ara h 3 is only one of the many peanut proteins implicated in peanut allergy. Not even a major one (ara h 2, ara h 6). Just sayin'. I left a note at the inserter's Talk to see if willing to revert own addition. David notMD (talk) 12:17, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed image. David notMD (talk) 12:14, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why have image of ara h 3 protein? 

message: I just wanted to sort of add that the "Causes" launches into some very technical stuff about proteins, immuno response, pathways, etc. which is sort of hard to understand. It also jumps back and talks about the developing world having little peanut allergy. I found the "Causes" section confusing Cdiesh (talk) 11:04, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Unreferenced statements are not appropriate for medicine and health articles. That is why what you added was reverted. I agree the Cause section jumps between identifying the specific proteins - very technical - and softer information on differences in prevalence in different parts of the world. Needs to be improved.  David notMD (talk) 12:58, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Why reverted?

message: I added some stuff into the infobox of Peanut allergy, and I would like some feedback as to how well I had added in such content. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 23:18, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox sufficience? 

message: There is a recent BBC news article reporting a study for peanut allegies being much reduced if peanut (butter) introduced to babies. 
https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/peanut-allergies-could-plummet
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-69068815
The Yeti (talk) 07:06, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC News Article