Buzz
'You are what you eat. What’s holding you back?' states the promotional page for EverlyWell’s food sensitivity tests, starting at $199. While it would be convenient if a simple test could identify and resolve any vague health complaints, the reality is far more complicated.
The first issue is that food 'sensitivities' may not even exist. As AC Shilton reports in Outside, the term was initially created for individuals without celiac disease who believed gluten made them feel unwell. Since then, other sensitivities have been suggested, but there’s no clear scientific definition or explanation of how they function.
In contrast, allergies are better understood. While the reasons why some people develop allergies and others don’t remain unclear, medical professionals and researchers can explain the biological processes behind an allergic reaction. A critical component involves antibodies, which identify foreign substances in your body. Allergies specifically involve IgE antibodies, a distinct type from others.
However, consumer tests like EverlyWell’s typically measure IgG antibodies, which are unrelated to allergies. Detecting IgG antibodies reacting to wheat proteins doesn’t indicate a wheat allergy—it simply means your body has encountered wheat before. Even IgE tests, while more relevant, aren’t precise enough to be the primary tool for allergists.
In 2008, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology issued an opinion stating that IgG4 tests should not be used to diagnose food sensitivities. The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology later released a statement fully supporting this view, emphasizing that no serum antibody test, including IgE tests that are occasionally useful, can definitively diagnose an allergy. They clearly state: 'The presence of antibodies does not equate to disease.' Additionally, an antibody that doesn’t appear on the test might simply be at undetectable levels, meaning you could still have an allergy to that food.
A few years later, the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology joined the conversation, specifically stating that direct-to-consumer tests are a waste of money. They were unequivocal in their assessment:
[P]ositive test results for food-specific IgG are common in healthy adults and children. Misusing these tests increases the risk of false diagnoses, leading to unnecessary dietary restrictions and a reduced quality of life.
These organizations aren’t just frustrated by the tests’ ineffectiveness. They highlight that the typical next step—eliminating foods flagged by the test—can leave individuals with an overly restrictive diet, potentially harming their health. Dr. Robert Wood, an allergist at Johns Hopkins Children’s Center, told STAT that IgG tests 'are entirely useless and cause significant harm.'
EverlyWell offers an optional DNA test alongside their blood test, which might seem like a bonus. However, their website suggests the additional tests focus on basic traits that don’t require specialized testing. For example, do you really need a test to determine if you’re genetically predisposed to lactose intolerance, caffeine sensitivity, or deficiencies in B12 or magnesium?
You likely already understand how your body responds to dairy and caffeine. If you suspect a vitamin or mineral deficiency, it’s more effective to test for the deficiency directly rather than a genetic tendency toward it.
So, what’s holding you back? I can’t say for sure, and I’m skeptical that the companies offering these tests have the answers either.
