Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two cases of patients with food and exercise-induced anaphylaxis (FEIA) with confirmed allergies to oral allergy syndrome are herein presented. Patient A had food anaphylaxis to fresh coriander and tomato and Patient B to fresh celery. These food allergens have structural antigenic similarity to that of birch and/or grass. Both patients’ allergies were confirmed by fresh prick-to-prick tests. In both cases, strenuous exercise before the reaction was the only cofactor and the patients had absolutely no symptoms with the offending foods outside of exercise. The exercise had likely lowered the threshold for their reactions. The current literature propose that in FEIA, there is increased GI permeability, leading to enhanced allergen absorption [1]. However, van Nieuvenhoven et al found that intestinal permeability actually decreases with exercise [2]. In fact, Bi and Triadafilopoulos noted in their review that strenuous exercise delays gastric emptying of liquids and solids and inhibits gastric acid production [3]. These studies have led us to propose of a novel paradigm for the mechanism of FEIA. The general inhibitory effects of exercise on the GI tract decrease the digestion of oral allergens, thus leaving the allergens more structurally intact and thereby allowing continued systemic absorption of the allergen. This mechanism is supported by Untersmayr and Jensen-Jarolim’s findings on the increased risk of labile food allergy induction with the use of antacid medications [4]. We propose the decrease in gastric acid in exercise as a more biologically plausible hypothesis of the mechanism of FEIA to oral allergens foods.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".