For some, food represents pleasure, enjoyment and satisfaction. For others, the thought of some foods merely represents pain - bloating, nausea and diarrhoea.
Millions of people are convinced that everyday foods are doing them harm - and for a few, their suspected food intolerance is genuine. But what if someone thinks they have a food intolerance when, in fact, they don't? And what if that's because some of the tests they've undergone simply aren't reliable?
(Do you have something to say about this story? Tell us what you think by emailing us here. Don't forget to include 'Food intolerance' in the subject line. Watchdog will publish a selection of viewers' comments underneath each story, both throughout and after the programme is on air. Please remember to include your name as you would like to see it published).
Catherine Collins is a leading dietician at St George's Hospital in London. She's witnessed the growth of quick-fix food intolerance testing in recent years.
However, according to Catherine, there just aren't any definitive diagnostic tests out there. For Catherine, the only reliable way to find out which foods might be offending you is to attempt the exclusion diet, which has been given the thumbs up by experts in the field.
This 'gold standard' diet involves keeping a record of everything you eat and drink for a week and recording all the symptoms that you get and the severity of them.
Catherine says a dietician would merge those two sets of information together and identify the common triggers that might be causing those symptoms.
The idea of the exclusion diet is to exclude those foods, see if symptoms improve and then gradually reintroduce the offending foods.
Sound a bit too much like hard work? No wonder some people opt for a shortcut - in the form of tests you can buy and carry out in the comfort your home. The Food Detective Test, for example, is a £55 kit that promises initial results in less than an hour.
Intrepid Watchdog reporter Becca Wilcox decided to put the Food Detective kit - and her own blood - to the test. The Food Detective is a DIY test which involves pricking your finger and testing your blood. According to the booklet the resulting blue dots indicate the types of food your body reacts to.
The darkest dots identify the foods which someone might have to avoid for at least 3 months. In Becca's case, there appeared to be plenty of those.
Her first results from the Food Detective test suggested there were around seven foods she had to avoid - including cows milk and whole egg, as well as wheat.
Concerned about the prospects for her stomach, Becca sought a second opinion from Catherine, whose take on the results was somewhat different. According to her, the results don't all point to food intolerances; they only demonstrate that Becca had exposure to those foods at some time in the week preceding the test. For Catherine, the test results mainly reflected what Becca had been eating.
As Becca points out, fifty quid is a lot of money to fork out just to find out what you've eaten. Why, then, might people feel it's worth shelling out? Could it have anything to do with the sticker on the Food Detective box which says, 'Working with Allergy UK' featuring their logo? In other words, a sticker suggesting an association with the country's leading medical charity dealing with food intolerances, allergies and chemical sensitivities?
What's more, Allergy UK's website also carries an advert banner for the Food Detective Test.
Another expert who's critical of this apparent association between the Food Detective and Allergy UK is Dr Rubaiyat Haque, Consultant in Allergy at Guy's hospital in London. He expresses surprise and some disappointment at the fact Allergy UK feature this advert on their website and have their logo sticker on the Food Detective box, particularly since there's a lack of a evidence that IGG testing is a reliable indicator of food intolerance.
Intolerance testing can be purchased on the high street as well as online. One of the most well known is available at Holland and Barrett. For around £42, a practitioner from The Health Partnership will perform a procedure known as The Vega Test.
Armed with complaints of bloating, Becca encountered the Vega machine - which involves holding a metal rod in one hand while the practitioner rubs another metal rod onto your finger, at the same time putting little vials of food essences into the machine. The machine makes noises which apparently indicate which foods are problematic.
After undergoing the Vega test, Becca was told she had an imbalance and should avoid cheese, mushroom, yeast and sugar for a month.
However, the Vega Test has attracted widespread criticism from doctors and dieticians and Allergy UK says it has no rational or scientific basis. So what are we supposed to make of this test?
Well, according to Catherine Collins, even the Vega machine's inventor, Doctor Helmut Schimmel admitted we're not quite sure how the base of Vega tests works. And that was fifty years ago - fifty years on, we know it doesn't work!
To try and be sure, Becca underwent two more Vega tests - and got different results each time.
The testers all told Becca they combined three techniques to determine intolerance - a detailed questionnaire, a food guide and the Vega machine.
Becca answered the questionnaire in exactly the same way every time - the only variable in each case was the Vega machine.
Some of what the testers had to say about the machine itself can only be described as a load of completely fabricated science. We checked the statements they made during the tests, such as 'water has memory; liquid has memory so like your brain is made up of 80% water - hence you are able to retain memories' with some scientists who gave us the real facts.
While it's easy to laugh at the more humorous side of these tests, there is a serious side - some doctors believe such tests can do more harm than good - possibly misdiagnosing people who are perfectly healthy or suffering from something more serious.
That's something no-one should have to tolerate.
Statement on Food Detective
We believe that the Food Detective™ is a remarkable product and genuinely affords help to the majority of its users who have symptoms of food intolerance, often where the established NHS support has failed them. We have case studies on file and on our website which support this statement.
The Food Detective™ kit is based on an established diagnostic test technology platform, namely "immunoassay". The same technology is used routinely in most hospital clinical laboratories. We have applied this technology to detect food specific IgG when a client uses the kit.
It is important that the test is used when the client has symptoms of food intolerance. It is the combination of symptoms and test results which may help the client. The test indicates which food(s) could be causing the symptoms. It is not "definitive", in fact very few clinical diagnostic tests are definitive, and in most cases the results have to be considered along with the patient's symptoms. This is also true for the "gold" standard elimination diet based on the patient's food diary.
We agree it is very important that any major changes to diet should not be undertaken without the advice of a healthcare professional. This is made clear in the dietary support guide supplied with the kit and on our website. We also employ qualified nutritionists who do give free advice on changes to diet whilst maintaining a balanced and healthy overall diet.
It is simply untrue that there is no evidence for the value of our test. Over the past five years there have been published increasing numbers of independent reports and clinical research papers linking the role of IgG to food intolerance in conditions such as Crohn's disease, migraine, IBS and obesity. Having said this, we accept that more independent work needs to be done before the link between IgG and the symptoms of food intolerance gains more acceptance. We are working on some specific studies in this area.
We are pleased to be associated with Allergy UK. This charity has worked hard to raise awareness of food intolerance in an often sceptical climate.
We disassociate ourselves from other types of test based on dubious technology and whilst this has been an opportunity to put forward our case it is a pity that we have been associated with these products.
Geoff Gower
Managing Director, Cambridge Nutritional Sciences
The UK Health Partnership said:
"The UK Health Partnership offers food sensitivity tests at Holland & Barrett stores amongst other venues. The testing involves a consultation to understand the client's symptoms, reference to our own guide of foods most commonly associated with symptoms and finally an indication of clients reactions to homeopathic preparations of food substances using a Vega machine. By correlation of all three results we can advise on potential foods to be avoided. Many clients, over a 20 year period have reported benefits from our testing.
Holland & Barrett said:
"In response to customer demand, we have for several years allowed The UK Health Partnership to undertake food intolerance testing at a selected number of our stores. Many of our customers have found great benefit from these tests and have gone onto successfully manage their food intolerance. In light of this report, however, we have instructed The UK Health Partnership to investigate the findings and review their current training practices."
Allergy UK's Response to Watchdog regarding Food Intolerance Tests
a) Allergy UK DOES NOT 'endorse' any food intolerance test.
b) Our driving force here, as with many aspects of the Charity, has been patient feedback and as a patient organisation, our aim is to guide patients but also offer them the information they need to make their own informed decisions.
c) Yes, we work' in partnership' with certain companies who offer testing, the reason for this is that we wish to ensure that sound sensible advice is given to people who are experiencing symptoms connected to food but is clearly NOT an allergy. We provide this advice.
d) We clearly state that the gold standard is to keep a food diary for three weeks, not the one week stated in the report, as this is not sufficient time to give an accurate reflection of someone's normal diet . Keeping a food diary is demanding and if there is nothing that is very obvious then the individual is still at a loss as to the triggers for their symptoms. Getting professional advice on the NHS is generally in the realms of impossible. In all of our communications with members of the public we clearly state that IgG testing is not clinically proven but if people still wish to go ahead with a test then we would rather they went to the companies that we have carefully examined for their customer care and support.
e) In an ideal world people would be able to see a dietician who could advise on the foods that need to be eliminated/rotated. Sadly dieticians working in the field of food intolerance are few and far between, if Watchdog really wants to make a contribution to safeguarding those with food problems they should try obtaining an NHS referral to a dietician, now that would make for an interesting programme! It would also give them an understanding of why people turn to commercial tests.
f) IgG testing has been clinically trialled for use by IBS sufferers by Professor Peter Whorwell at Manchester Hospital and found to be of benefit.*
g) Vega testing was investigated by Dr. George Lewith of Southampton Hospital and was found to not be of benefit.
h) For the reasons given in f & g, we advise against vega testing plus the fact that there is no on-going consumer support given to those who undertake these tests.
i)There is confusion in this report regarding the difference between food allergy and intolerance. If there was not confusion why have they gone to allergy specialists for comment? Most people with food intolerance have IBS and migraine symptoms there is absolutely no point in them seeing an allergy specialist or in allergy specialists commenting on food intolerance when they do not deal with intolerance sufferers and often turn patients away from their allergy clinics as inappropriate referrals, which of course they are. It is Intolerance not allergy.
j) We believe there has to be further investigation into food intolerance testing before anyone can positively state it does or does not work.
k) Watchdog has obviously not gone through the entire process with Food Detective, if they had they would know that the information we provide as a follow up to the consumer significantly reduces the chance of anyone cutting out a foodstuff for any length of time and having an unbalanced diet.
*Atkinson W, Sheldon T, Shaath N, Whorwell PJ. (2004). Food elimination based on IgG antibodies in irritable bowel syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Gut, 53( 10), 1459-64.
A test that will give you food for thought...
Millions of people are convinced that everyday foods are doing them harm - and for a few, their suspected food intolerance is genuine. But what if someone thinks they have a food intolerance when, in fact, they don't? And what if that's because some of the tests they've undergone simply aren't reliable?
(Do you have something to say about this story? Tell us what you think by emailing us here. Don't forget to include 'Food intolerance' in the subject line. Watchdog will publish a selection of viewers' comments underneath each story, both throughout and after the programme is on air. Please remember to include your name as you would like to see it published).
Catherine Collins is a leading dietician at St George's Hospital in London. She's witnessed the growth of quick-fix food intolerance testing in recent years.
However, according to Catherine, there just aren't any definitive diagnostic tests out there. For Catherine, the only reliable way to find out which foods might be offending you is to attempt the exclusion diet, which has been given the thumbs up by experts in the field.
This 'gold standard' diet involves keeping a record of everything you eat and drink for a week and recording all the symptoms that you get and the severity of them.
Catherine says a dietician would merge those two sets of information together and identify the common triggers that might be causing those symptoms.
The idea of the exclusion diet is to exclude those foods, see if symptoms improve and then gradually reintroduce the offending foods.
Sound a bit too much like hard work? No wonder some people opt for a shortcut - in the form of tests you can buy and carry out in the comfort your home. The Food Detective Test, for example, is a £55 kit that promises initial results in less than an hour.
Intrepid Watchdog reporter Becca Wilcox decided to put the Food Detective kit - and her own blood - to the test. The Food Detective is a DIY test which involves pricking your finger and testing your blood. According to the booklet the resulting blue dots indicate the types of food your body reacts to.
The darkest dots identify the foods which someone might have to avoid for at least 3 months. In Becca's case, there appeared to be plenty of those.
Her first results from the Food Detective test suggested there were around seven foods she had to avoid - including cows milk and whole egg, as well as wheat.
Concerned about the prospects for her stomach, Becca sought a second opinion from Catherine, whose take on the results was somewhat different. According to her, the results don't all point to food intolerances; they only demonstrate that Becca had exposure to those foods at some time in the week preceding the test. For Catherine, the test results mainly reflected what Becca had been eating.
As Becca points out, fifty quid is a lot of money to fork out just to find out what you've eaten. Why, then, might people feel it's worth shelling out? Could it have anything to do with the sticker on the Food Detective box which says, 'Working with Allergy UK' featuring their logo? In other words, a sticker suggesting an association with the country's leading medical charity dealing with food intolerances, allergies and chemical sensitivities?
What's more, Allergy UK's website also carries an advert banner for the Food Detective Test.
Another expert who's critical of this apparent association between the Food Detective and Allergy UK is Dr Rubaiyat Haque, Consultant in Allergy at Guy's hospital in London. He expresses surprise and some disappointment at the fact Allergy UK feature this advert on their website and have their logo sticker on the Food Detective box, particularly since there's a lack of a evidence that IGG testing is a reliable indicator of food intolerance.
Intolerance testing can be purchased on the high street as well as online. One of the most well known is available at Holland and Barrett. For around £42, a practitioner from The Health Partnership will perform a procedure known as The Vega Test.
Armed with complaints of bloating, Becca encountered the Vega machine - which involves holding a metal rod in one hand while the practitioner rubs another metal rod onto your finger, at the same time putting little vials of food essences into the machine. The machine makes noises which apparently indicate which foods are problematic.
After undergoing the Vega test, Becca was told she had an imbalance and should avoid cheese, mushroom, yeast and sugar for a month.
However, the Vega Test has attracted widespread criticism from doctors and dieticians and Allergy UK says it has no rational or scientific basis. So what are we supposed to make of this test?
Well, according to Catherine Collins, even the Vega machine's inventor, Doctor Helmut Schimmel admitted we're not quite sure how the base of Vega tests works. And that was fifty years ago - fifty years on, we know it doesn't work!
To try and be sure, Becca underwent two more Vega tests - and got different results each time.
The testers all told Becca they combined three techniques to determine intolerance - a detailed questionnaire, a food guide and the Vega machine.
Becca answered the questionnaire in exactly the same way every time - the only variable in each case was the Vega machine.
Some of what the testers had to say about the machine itself can only be described as a load of completely fabricated science. We checked the statements they made during the tests, such as 'water has memory; liquid has memory so like your brain is made up of 80% water - hence you are able to retain memories' with some scientists who gave us the real facts.
While it's easy to laugh at the more humorous side of these tests, there is a serious side - some doctors believe such tests can do more harm than good - possibly misdiagnosing people who are perfectly healthy or suffering from something more serious.
That's something no-one should have to tolerate.
Statement on Food Detective
We believe that the Food Detective™ is a remarkable product and genuinely affords help to the majority of its users who have symptoms of food intolerance, often where the established NHS support has failed them. We have case studies on file and on our website which support this statement.
The Food Detective™ kit is based on an established diagnostic test technology platform, namely "immunoassay". The same technology is used routinely in most hospital clinical laboratories. We have applied this technology to detect food specific IgG when a client uses the kit.
It is important that the test is used when the client has symptoms of food intolerance. It is the combination of symptoms and test results which may help the client. The test indicates which food(s) could be causing the symptoms. It is not "definitive", in fact very few clinical diagnostic tests are definitive, and in most cases the results have to be considered along with the patient's symptoms. This is also true for the "gold" standard elimination diet based on the patient's food diary.
We agree it is very important that any major changes to diet should not be undertaken without the advice of a healthcare professional. This is made clear in the dietary support guide supplied with the kit and on our website. We also employ qualified nutritionists who do give free advice on changes to diet whilst maintaining a balanced and healthy overall diet.
It is simply untrue that there is no evidence for the value of our test. Over the past five years there have been published increasing numbers of independent reports and clinical research papers linking the role of IgG to food intolerance in conditions such as Crohn's disease, migraine, IBS and obesity. Having said this, we accept that more independent work needs to be done before the link between IgG and the symptoms of food intolerance gains more acceptance. We are working on some specific studies in this area.
We are pleased to be associated with Allergy UK. This charity has worked hard to raise awareness of food intolerance in an often sceptical climate.
We disassociate ourselves from other types of test based on dubious technology and whilst this has been an opportunity to put forward our case it is a pity that we have been associated with these products.
Geoff Gower
Managing Director, Cambridge Nutritional Sciences
The UK Health Partnership said:
"The UK Health Partnership offers food sensitivity tests at Holland & Barrett stores amongst other venues. The testing involves a consultation to understand the client's symptoms, reference to our own guide of foods most commonly associated with symptoms and finally an indication of clients reactions to homeopathic preparations of food substances using a Vega machine. By correlation of all three results we can advise on potential foods to be avoided. Many clients, over a 20 year period have reported benefits from our testing.
Holland & Barrett said:
"In response to customer demand, we have for several years allowed The UK Health Partnership to undertake food intolerance testing at a selected number of our stores. Many of our customers have found great benefit from these tests and have gone onto successfully manage their food intolerance. In light of this report, however, we have instructed The UK Health Partnership to investigate the findings and review their current training practices."
Allergy UK's Response to Watchdog regarding Food Intolerance Tests
a) Allergy UK DOES NOT 'endorse' any food intolerance test.
b) Our driving force here, as with many aspects of the Charity, has been patient feedback and as a patient organisation, our aim is to guide patients but also offer them the information they need to make their own informed decisions.
c) Yes, we work' in partnership' with certain companies who offer testing, the reason for this is that we wish to ensure that sound sensible advice is given to people who are experiencing symptoms connected to food but is clearly NOT an allergy. We provide this advice.
d) We clearly state that the gold standard is to keep a food diary for three weeks, not the one week stated in the report, as this is not sufficient time to give an accurate reflection of someone's normal diet . Keeping a food diary is demanding and if there is nothing that is very obvious then the individual is still at a loss as to the triggers for their symptoms. Getting professional advice on the NHS is generally in the realms of impossible. In all of our communications with members of the public we clearly state that IgG testing is not clinically proven but if people still wish to go ahead with a test then we would rather they went to the companies that we have carefully examined for their customer care and support.
e) In an ideal world people would be able to see a dietician who could advise on the foods that need to be eliminated/rotated. Sadly dieticians working in the field of food intolerance are few and far between, if Watchdog really wants to make a contribution to safeguarding those with food problems they should try obtaining an NHS referral to a dietician, now that would make for an interesting programme! It would also give them an understanding of why people turn to commercial tests.
f) IgG testing has been clinically trialled for use by IBS sufferers by Professor Peter Whorwell at Manchester Hospital and found to be of benefit.*
g) Vega testing was investigated by Dr. George Lewith of Southampton Hospital and was found to not be of benefit.
h) For the reasons given in f & g, we advise against vega testing plus the fact that there is no on-going consumer support given to those who undertake these tests.
i)There is confusion in this report regarding the difference between food allergy and intolerance. If there was not confusion why have they gone to allergy specialists for comment? Most people with food intolerance have IBS and migraine symptoms there is absolutely no point in them seeing an allergy specialist or in allergy specialists commenting on food intolerance when they do not deal with intolerance sufferers and often turn patients away from their allergy clinics as inappropriate referrals, which of course they are. It is Intolerance not allergy.
j) We believe there has to be further investigation into food intolerance testing before anyone can positively state it does or does not work.
k) Watchdog has obviously not gone through the entire process with Food Detective, if they had they would know that the information we provide as a follow up to the consumer significantly reduces the chance of anyone cutting out a foodstuff for any length of time and having an unbalanced diet.
*Atkinson W, Sheldon T, Shaath N, Whorwell PJ. (2004). Food elimination based on IgG antibodies in irritable bowel syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Gut, 53( 10), 1459-64.
A test that will give you food for thought...