College students with food allergy: From hypervigilance to disclosure fatigue

Schelly, David; Ohl, Alisha; Meramo, Heidi

doi:10.1016/j.pedn.2022.11.027

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The social aspects of managing food allergy risks have also been explored by Schelly et al in the context of U.S. college students' risk management practices. They have argued that the hypervigilance required to maintain food safety is often noticed by others and can lead to college students taking more risks to mitigate the social complexities of disclosure, leading to what they call ‘disclosure fatigue’ 62 . Contrary to Schelly et al 62 and some earlier biomedical research, 91–93 Stjerna et al's 59 adolescent research participants in Sweden had ‘high risk awareness'.…”

Section: Risk Uncertainty and Stigmamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They have argued that the hypervigilance required to maintain food safety is often noticed by others and can lead to college students taking more risks to mitigate the social complexities of disclosure, leading to what they call ‘disclosure fatigue’ 62 . Contrary to Schelly et al 62 and some earlier biomedical research, 91–93 Stjerna et al's 59 adolescent research participants in Sweden had ‘high risk awareness'. They concluded that when adolescents have anaphylaxis it is not necessarily due to being ‘irresponsible’, but that avoiding risk is very difficult.…”

Section: Risk Uncertainty and Stigmamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There have also been some explorations of epidemiology, the hygiene hypothesis and the rise in allergy attributed to changes in food production, 36–41 as well as the potential protective role of food taboos on human health 42 . Since the early 2000s, research in socio‐cultural anthropology and sociology on food allergy has primarily explored experiences of risk and stigma, 13,43–62 aspects of morality related to management, illness and parenting behaviour, 51,59,60,63–71 explorations of gender, 38,65,70 social class and income, 45,55,65,69 disability and justice, 51,54,72 race and ethnicity, 51,65 interactions with the physical and material environment, 38–40,43,44,46,47,57,73–75 sensory, affective and embodied aspects of food allergy experience, 47,74,76 food allergy as a governing project 77,78 and issues of ethics in food allergy treatments 64,79,80 . This review focuses primarily on the socio‐cultural anthropological and sociological research (Figure 2), with some final comments about clinical implications and what an anthropological perspective on food allergies can bring to the table for researchers and clinicians.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[30][31][32][33][34][35] There have also been some explorations of epidemiology, the hygiene hypothesis and the rise in allergy attributed to changes in food production, [36][37][38][39][40][41] as well as the potential protective role of food taboos on human health. 42 Since the early 2000s, research in socio-cultural anthropology and sociology on food allergy has primarily explored experiences of risk and stigma, 13,[43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62] aspects of morality related to management, illness and parenting behaviour, 51,59,60,[63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71] explorations of gender, 38,65,…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Anthropological and sociological perspectives on food allergy

Cook

2023

Clin Experimental Allergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review explores the anthropological and sociological literature on food allergy and identifies four primary areas of research to date. The first explores the relationality and management of risk, uncertainty and stigma among parents and sufferers of food allergies. The second analyses the influence of intersectionality, specifically the effects of class, gender, race/ethnicity and disability on experiences of food allergy. The third discusses diagnostic difficulties and the impact these have on legitimacy and believability, both in the context of clinician–patient relations and in managing food allergies in public spaces. The fourth explores the ethics and uncertainties in food allergy treatments and how scientific knowledge of emerging treatments is constructed. This body of research illustrates that although an individual disease, food allergy experiences are significantly affected by socio‐cultural structures, institutions, ideologies and discourses. The review concludes with four primary recommendations. First, there should be more incorporation of anthropological or sociological methodologies and perspectives into studies of food allergy. Second, studies are needed from more countries exploring lived experience of food allergy. Third, research on food allergy needs to incorporate an analysis of intersectional factors such as gender, class and race/ethnicity, and should explore the experiences of minority populations. Fourth, more research is needed on the interactions between biomedicine and local systems of knowledge, as well as the factors that shape what treatments become available, for whom it becomes available, experiences of treatment and aspects (including biases) that influence patient–clinician interactions.

show abstract