|
Background:
The European Union
requires allergenic
food ingredients to
appear on labels in
order to protect
allergic consumers.
Objective: To
determine whether
traces of egg-,
milk-, and
fish-derived
processing aids used
in winemaking might
elicit clinical
reactions in
food-allergic
patients.
Methods: Five
German wines were
fined with a high
dose of egg albumin,
lysozyme, milk
casein, fish
gelatin, or
isinglass, and
filtered. Fourteen
adults with allergy
to egg (n=5), milk
(n=5), or fish (n=4)
were included. Skin
prick tests were
performed with
fining agents, and
fined and unfined
wines. All patients
underwent
double-blind
placebo-controlled
food challenges with
fined and unfined
wines.
Results: Skin
prick tests were
positive to hens
egg (n=5), ovalbumin
(n=5), lysozyme
(n=4), cows milk
(n=5), casein (n=4),
and cod (n=3), but
not to isinglass or
fish gelatin (n=0).
Positive skin prick
test results were
observed for wines
fined with albumin
(n=3), lysozyme
(n=2), casein (n=1),
gelatin (n=0), and
isinglass (n=3), and
for unfined wines
(n=1-2 in each
patient group), with
no significant
differences between
groups. Seventy-five
percent of skin
testpositive
patients had
specific
immunoglobulin E to
other allergens
present in wine (eg,
carbohydrates). The
provocation test
revealed no
reactions to fined
or unfined wines.
Conclusions:
Although
concentrated fining
agents containing
ovalbumin, lysozyme,
and casein were
allergenic in the
skin prick test, no
patient reacted
adversely in the
provocation test to
fined wine. Wines
treated with fining
agents at commercial
concentrations
appear not to
present a risk to
allergic individuals
when filtered.
Key words:
Food allergy.
Allergen labeling.
Wine. Processing
aids. Fining agent.
Albumin. Lysozyme.
Casein. Fish
gelatin. Isinglass.
|
