Fatal anaphylaxis due to peanut exposure from oral intercourse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intimacy-related allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, are under-reported due to social stigma, lack of awareness, and misdiagnosis. The differential diagnosis for intimacy-related anaphylaxis is extensive and includes systemic human seminal plasma allergy, exercise-induced anaphylaxis, asthma exacerbation, latex allergy, and transference of food or drug allergens through saliva or seminal fluid. CASE PRESENTATION: Two adolescents met on a popular dating phone application. One individual had a long-standing history of asthma and peanut allergy. Although they never kissed, the male with peanut allergy received fellatio, while the other male had eaten peanut butter before they met. During fellatio, the peanut allergic male developed respiratory symptoms, used his bronchodilator, and collapsed. He remained unconscious despite aggressive interventions by emergency personnel called to the site. The clinical history and autopsy results suggested anaphylaxis to peanut allergen exposure from the intimate exposure as the cause of death. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: To date, nearly all reported cases of intimacy-related anaphylaxis involve symptomatic women. This is the first report of intimacy-related anaphylaxis involving men who have sex with men and the first report of potential allergen transfer from oral mucosa to a patient receiving fellatio. Based on the paucity of published cases, death from intimacy-related anaphylaxis is exceedingly rare. Post-mortem analysis is inherently difficult, as an elevated tryptase level has myriad potential causes; nevertheless, the authors suggest that intimacy-related anaphylaxis due to peanut allergy is the most likely diagnosis. With increasing popularity of relationship applications, especially amongst stigmatized populations, this case highlights the importance of allergy awareness and patient education to decrease risk, particularly in the adolescent population, who are already at increased risk of severe anaphylaxis. Especially amongst those participating in intimate activities, disclosure of one's allergies warrants discussion, as the outcome can be fatal. Our case demonstrates the crucial need for increased advocacy in food allergy, education around intimacy-related anaphylaxis, and the importance of allergy awareness and prevention across all populations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".