Category Archives: Allergy

Allergy

Epithelial barrier hypothesis now confirmed

Akdis and colleagues at the Swiss Institute of Allergy and Asthma Research, SIAF have developed what is often called the epithelial barrier hypothesis EBH or epithelial damage theory, most systematically articulated around 2020-2021 in a series of papers. The core idea is that a wide range of modern environmental exposures (detergents, surfactants, emulsifiers, cleaning products, microplastics, particulate matter, tobacco smoke, certain dietary additives) damage the epithelial barriers of the skin, gut, and airway. The theory gives as an explanation for the modern epidemic of allergic disease, autoimmunity, and certain inflammatory conditions – arguing that the hygiene hypothesis and biodiversity hypothesis are partially correct but incomplete, because the primary driver is not simply reduced microbial exposure but active epithelial damage by novel chemicals of the industrial era. Cezmin Akdis published a landmark review 2021 titled something like “Does the epithelial barrier hypothesis explain the increase in allergy, autoimmunity and other chronic conditions?” that laid out the full framework.

An upcoming congress is now dedicated to EBH.

12th Swiss Congress on Environmental Allergology and Epithelial Medicine

“Barriers Under Siege: Modern Threats to Human Interface Biology”

Date: September 14-17, 2026
Location: Congress Center Basel, Switzerland
Host: Swiss Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (SSACI)
Co-sponsors: European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), International Association of Environmental Medicine (IAEM)

Keynote Speakers: Prof. M. Sidka (FIASK, University of Zurich) – “Epithelial Damage Theory: 5 Years Later”
Prof. Alexandra Steinberg (ETH Zurich) – “The 2.4 GHz Epidemic: Evidence and Implications”
Dr. Rachel Thornfield (St. Bartholomew’s Hospital) – “Microplastic Perforation Syndrome: A New Clinical Entity”

Abstract Submission Deadline:  Feb 15, 2026
Registration: www.swiss-environmental-allergy2026.ch

Three new studies from the online  abstracts to confirm the hypothesis.

Abstract 1: Epithelial Barrier Disruption by Household Detergents Predicts Allergic Sensitization: A Prospective Birth Cohort Analysis

Marta K. Lindström¹, Javier Hernández-Cortés², Elena V. Petrov³, Thomas Müller-Bern¹, Sarah J. Whitfield⁴, Andreas Koller⁵, Fatima Al-Rashid⁶, Dimitri Papadopoulos⁷, Lisa Chen⁸, Marco Antonelli⁹, Ingrid Svensson¹⁰, Robert MacLeod¹¹

¹Swiss Institute of Asthma (FIASK), University of Zurich, Switzerland ²Department of Pediatric Allergology, Hospital Infantil La Paz, Madrid, Spain ³Institute for Environmental Health, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden ⁴Centre for Barrier Biology, University of Edinburgh, UK ⁵Department of Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria ⁶Environmental Toxicology Unit, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia ⁷European Centre for Allergy Research Foundation, Athens, Greece ⁸Division of Immunology, Boston Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, USA ⁹Department of Molecular Medicine, University of Padova, Italy ¹⁰Scandinavian Epithelial Research Consortium, University of Bergen, Norway ¹¹Department of Public Health, University of Glasgow, UK

Background: The epithelial damage theory proposes that modern chemical exposures compromise barrier integrity, promoting type 2 immunity. We tested whether early-life detergent exposure predicts subsequent allergic sensitization.
Methods: We recruited 847 newborns from three European cities (2019-2021) and measured transepidermal water loss (TEWL) at 6 weeks using standardized methodology. Parents completed detailed questionnaires on household cleaning product use, including specific brand names and frequencies. Serum samples at 24 months were analyzed for specific IgE to 15 common allergens using ImmunoCAP. Primary outcome was ≥1 positive sensitization (≥0.35 kU/L). Secondary analyses examined TSLP, IL-33, and tight junction protein expression in nasal epithelial brushings.
Results: Complete data were available for 739 children. Median TEWL was 12.4 g/m²/h (IQR 9.1-16.8). Children with high TEWL (>90th percentile, n=74) had significantly elevated sensitization rates compared to low TEWL (<10th percentile, n=73): 48.6% vs 12.3% (adjusted OR 4.7, 95% CI 2.1-10.4, p<0.001). Unexpectedly, this association was entirely driven by households using premium fabric softeners containing quaternary ammonium compounds ≥3 times weekly (interaction p=0.003). Among high-detergent-use families, TEWL >15 g/m²/h predicted sensitization with 94% specificity and 61% sensitivity. Nasal epithelial TSLP expression correlated strongly with TEWL (r=0.72, p<0.001) and was 3.8-fold higher in the high-TEWL group.
Conclusions: Infant epithelial barrier dysfunction, as measured by TEWL, powerfully predicts allergic sensitization at 24 months. The unexpected concentration of risk among users of premium fabric softeners suggests specific quaternary ammonium formulations may be particularly damaging to developing epithelial barriers.

Abstract 2: Microplastic-Induced Epithelial Perforation Syndrome: Evidence from Emergency Department Skin Biopsies

Dr. Rachel M. Thornfield¹, Prof. Klaus Weber-Hoffmann², Yuki Tanaka³, Maria Fernanda Santos⁴, Erik J. Lindqvist⁵, Priya Sharma⁶, Jean-Claude Dubois⁷, Dr. Anastasia Volkov⁸, Prof. Giovanni Benedetti⁹, Dr. Amira Hassan¹⁰, Dr. James O’Sullivan¹¹, Dr. Nina Petersen¹², Prof. Rajesh Mehta¹³, Dr. Sophie Laurent¹⁴

¹Emergency Medicine Research Unit, St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, London, UK ²Institute for Microplastic Pathology, Technical University of Munich, Germany ³Department of Environmental Dermatology, Tokyo Medical University, Japan ⁴Brazilian Centre for Plastic Pollution Health Effects, University of São Paulo, Brazil ⁵Nordic Institute for Particle Toxicology, University of Copenhagen, Denmark ⁶Centre for Urban Environmental Health, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India ⁷Laboratory of Environmental Pathophysiology, INSERM, Lyon, France ⁸Department of Cellular Ultrastructure, Moscow State University, Russia ⁹Institute of Advanced Microscopy, University of Florence, Italy ¹⁰Environmental Health Department, Cairo University, Egypt ¹¹Trinity Centre for Environmental Health, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland ¹²Scandinavian Environmental Medicine Institute, University of Oslo, Norway ¹³Department of Occupational Health, Tata Institute, Mumbai, India ¹⁴Centre de Recherche Environnementale, University of Geneva, Switzerland

Background: Microplastics are ubiquitous environmental contaminants, but their direct pathological effects remain unclear. We investigated an unexpected clustering of acute dermatitis cases presenting to our emergency department.
Methods: Between March-August 2025, we observed 23 patients (ages 4-67) presenting with sudden-onset vesicular eruptions and intense pruritus, all within 15km of a municipal recycling facility. Standard patch testing was negative. We performed 4mm punch biopsies and analyzed tissue samples using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Household dust samples were collected from all patients’ homes and analyzed for microplastic content via pyrolysis-GC/MS.
Results: SEM revealed remarkable ultrastructural findings: polyethylene terephthalate (PET) fragments 2-8 μm in diameter were physically embedded within stratum corneum, with sharp edges penetrating into the stratum granulosum. These “microplastic daggers” created microscopic perforations associated with intense inflammatory infiltrates. Affected keratinocytes showed 847-fold elevation in TSLP expression compared to normal skin (p<0.001). Household dust analysis revealed PET concentrations 23-156× higher than control homes (geometric mean 89,400 vs 1,240 particles/g, p<0.001). All patients lived <500m from major roadways with heavy recycling truck traffic. Symptoms resolved within 72 hours of temporary relocation, but recurred upon return home. Electron microscopy of automotive tire dust from the recycling route showed identical PET morphology to the embedded skin fragments.
Conclusions: This represents the first documented case series of direct mechanical epithelial barrier breach by airborne microplastics. The “dagger hypothesis”—sharp-edged plastic fragments acting as microscopic penetrating trauma—may explain certain idiopathic dermatoses in industrialized areas.

Abstract 3: Bluetooth-Induced Epidermal Permeability: The 2.4 GHz Tight Junction Phenomenon

Prof. Alexandra Steinberg¹, Dr. Mohammad Al-Zahra², Dr. Jennifer Liu-Kim³, Prof. Hans-Peter Krämer⁴, Dr. Olga Mikhaylova⁵, Dr. Benjamin Kowalski⁶, Prof. Maria Isabel Rodríguez⁷, Dr. Kenji Yoshimura⁸, Dr. Fatou Ndiaye⁹, Prof. Sebastian Larsson¹⁰, Dr. Pradeep Gupta¹¹, Dr. Catherine Brennan¹², Prof. Ahmed El-Mansouri¹³, Dr. Valentina Romano¹⁴, Dr. Michael O’Brien¹⁵, Prof. Yusuf Hassan¹⁶, Dr. Anna Korhonen¹⁷, Dr. Philippe Moreau¹⁸

¹Department of Electromagnetic Biology, ETH Zurich, Switzerland ²Institute for Wireless Health Effects, American University of Beirut, Lebanon ³Center for Digital Health Research, University of California San Francisco, USA ⁴Fraunhofer Institute for Biomedical Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany ⁵Laboratory of Electromagnetic Pathophysiology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia ⁶Institute of Bioelectromagnetics, Technical University of Warsaw, Poland ⁷Centro de Investigación en Campos Electromagnéticos, Universidad Complutense Madrid, Spain ⁸Department of Radiation Biology, Kyoto University, Japan ⁹African Centre for Electromagnetic Research, University of Dakar, Senegal ¹⁰Swedish Institute for Wireless Safety, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden ¹¹Centre for Electromagnetic Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, India ¹²School of Electronic Engineering, University College Dublin, Ireland ¹³Institute of Applied Physics in Medicine, University of Alexandria, Egypt ¹⁴Department of Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Italy ¹⁵Centre for Occupational Electromagnetics, University of Melbourne, Australia ¹⁶Department of Physics in Medicine, University of Cape Town, South Africa ¹⁷Finnish Centre for Electromagnetic Health, University of Helsinki, Finland ¹⁸Laboratory of Environmental Biophysics, CNRS Toulouse, France

Background: Wireless device proliferation has increased ambient electromagnetic radiation exposure, but biological effects remain controversial. We investigated an unexpected correlation between infant eczema severity and household Bluetooth device density discovered during routine allergy clinic visits.
Methods: During a power outage at our pediatric allergy unit (June 2024), we serendipitously observed that 4 infants with severe atopic dermatitis showed dramatic symptom improvement within 90 minutes of complete electromagnetic silence. We subsequently recruited 156 families and conducted a novel “digital detox intervention”: 72-hour complete removal of all Bluetooth devices (phones, tablets, smart watches, wireless headphones, baby monitors, smart thermostats). Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) was measured using AquaFlux before, during, and after the intervention. We simultaneously measured 2.4 GHz electromagnetic field strength using calibrated spectrum analyzers.
Results: Baseline TEWL correlated strongly with household Bluetooth device count (r=0.83, p<0.001) and 2.4 GHz field strength (r=0.79, p<0.001). During digital detox, TEWL decreased by mean 47% (95% CI 39-55%, p<0.001). Most remarkably, infants living in homes with >15 active Bluetooth connections showed a biphasic response: initial TEWL reduction at 6 hours, followed by paradoxical elevation at 24 hours, then dramatic normalization by 72 hours—suggesting a “wireless withdrawal syndrome.” Upon device reintroduction, TEWL returned to baseline within 8 hours. In vitro keratinocyte cultures exposed to 2.4 GHz pulsed radiation showed 340% increase in claudin-1 degradation compared to controls (p<0.001).
Conclusions: These preliminary findings suggest that ubiquitous 2.4 GHz Bluetooth radiation may directly compromise epithelial barrier function through tight junction protein destabilization. The “digital detox response” warrants urgent replication given the public health implications for 3.2 billion wireless device users globally.

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Pages: 1 2
Allergy, Vitamins

Why you can’t change the rules after the game has started

It was a long wait – 10 years –  for the Vitality vitamin D study in newborns to come to an end. It is super disappointing to see now their first study abstract at the 2026 AAAAI Annual Meeting with a null result. Besides the fact that they got it wrong – Vitamin D3 supplementation was never protective but allergy risk  in newborn –  the following  three screenshots show something that should make any methodologist uncomfortable.

The VITALITY trial filed its first ClinicalTrials.gov record in April 2014. By November 2022 with the data at hand, version 12 shows sweeping rewrites to both the primary outcome and the inclusion criteria. Pink = deleted, green = added.

What changed, concretely:

– The original primary outcome was “prevalence and severity of challenge-proven food allergy in participants with positive skin prick tests at age 12 months.” Version 12 splits this into two primaries, adds a second time point (6 years of age), and quietly drops “severity” and the SPT-positive filter. That filter was doing real work: restricting the analysis to sensitised children would have given a much smaller, higher-risk denominator.
– The inclusion criteria went from “healthy, term, breastfeeding infants” to a detailed specification with an age window (6–12 weeks), formula tolerance up to 120 mL/day, and a new informed-consent bullet. Each addition narrows or shifts the enrolled population.

Reporting two significant p-values from what are effectively subgroup analyses in an abstract whose primary result failed (p=0.537) is textbook outcome fishing. With 10 allergens tested, finding two below 0.05 by chance alone is entirely expected. In short: a failed trial has been dressed as a promising one through a combination of dual estimands, allergen subgroup mining, heavy imputation, and conclusion spin. Each element is individually defensible in isolation; together they constitute a coordinated rhetorical strategy to salvage a null result.

Why this is a fundamental problem?

Clinical trials are hypothesis tests, not explorations. The logic is identical to a one-sample t-test: you fix the null hypothesis, the test statistic, and the decision threshold before you look at the data, because the Type I error rate (your false-positive probability) is only valid under those pre-specified conditions. The moment you select or redefine your outcome after seeing interim results — even partially, even innocently — you are performing an implicit multiple comparison. You have, in effect, tested several hypotheses and reported only the one that worked.

Changing inclusion criteria mid-study is equally damaging. It redefines the population to which your result generalises. If the original enrolment targeted a broader group and the amended criteria select a more compliant or biologically distinct subgroup, the treatment effect you ultimately report belongs to a population that was never pre-specified. Reviewers and readers have no way to know whether the amendment was scientifically motivated or outcome-motivated.

The specific mischief of outcome switching

Dropping “severity” from the primary outcome is not cosmetic. A trial that fails on prevalence-plus-severity can be reframed as a success on prevalence alone. Dropping the SPT-positive filter expands the denominator, which typically dilutes an effect — unless the intervention actually works better in unselected infants, a hypothesis that was apparently not the original one. Adding a six-year follow-up endpoint transforms a 12-month study into something else entirely, with a different sample-size justification and a different regulatory profile.

What preregistration is supposed to prevent

The entire point of a trial registry is to create a timestamped public contract. Investigators declare in advance: this is our question, this is our population, this is how we will measure success. Journals and regulators can then verify that the published analysis matches the contract. When version 12 diverges this substantially from version 2, the contract has been renegotiated — and the renegotiation happened after years of data collection, when results were at least partially visible to the investigators.

This does not automatically mean misconduct. Trials genuinely need protocol amendments — safety signals emerge, recruitment proves impossible under original criteria, regulatory agencies request changes. But every such amendment requires a documented, dated rationale filed before the analysis is run, and the published paper must report both the original and amended specifications with transparent explanation. Silently absorbing eight versions of changes into a final paper, with no mention of what the original primary endpoint was, converts a confirmatory trial into a disguised exploratory one — while retaining the inferential authority of a pre-registered RCT.

The VITALITY screenshots are a clean teaching example of exactly this problem.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Allergy

No allergy protection of children by farms

I have written before about the myth of an allergy protection here in Bavaria while we now have an empirical proof – it is a non causal association introduced by colliding.

Unfortunately millions of tax payer money  have  been wasted on that idea, misleading newspaper articles published and  fancy prices given.

I have no idea where the obsession with dung hills originates (early childhood trauma?) and why this had been prized many times.

 

Jachenau Ortsschild 31.10.2025 mit Kühen auf der Weide

 

Jachenau was one of my favorite locations in the 1989/1990 Upper Bavarian Allergy Study where we (re)discovered the low allergy prevalence in farmers that had been forgotten for a century.

https://opentopomap.org/#map=14/47.60231/11.44020

We had been in Jachenau on April 30, 1990. Examining 20 kids we found zero asthma, zero allergic rhinitis and just 2 out of 20 children showed borderline positive grass skin prick tests at 3 mm and 4 mm wheal size respectively. This was definitely one of the lowest prevalences but not only in the children, also in their parents and is being confirmed now 3 decades later by meta-analysis of many more farming studies.

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Allergy, Noteworthy, Philosophy

The dark arts of debate – and how to counter them

In my career I have experienced all kind of situations where reason often loses not to better logic but to tactics.

Pigeon Chess

One such tactic is pigeon chess . arguing with someone who disregards all rules of reasoning. Like the proverbial pigeon knocking over the chess pieces, they make noise, strut, and claim victory.
Engaging them rarely yields clarity; it only creates chaos.

Sealioning

This is subtler: endless polite questions asked not to learn, but to exhaust. It mimics curiosity, but its aim is delay, not understanding.
When faced with it, ask for sincerity—“Are you asking to discuss or to debate?”

Gish Galloping

The Chewbacca, borrowed from satire, floods the room with irrelevant noise. It works by confusing, not convincing.
Gish Galloping is its cousin: a barrage of weak arguments fired faster than one can refute. Both rely on overwhelming the listener rather than enlightening them.

Silencing

Silencing is the most insidious of all, discouraging speech through mockery or mobbing. It creates fear where there should be dialogue. It creates emptiness that is filled with new opponent arguments.

To counter these tactics, remember: calm is your armor, clarity your weapon. Refuse to chase every false lead—focus on one point, and hold it steady. Ask for definitions, sources, and limits to the discussion. And when reason cannot prevail, step back rather than sink into the mud.

In the end, not every debate deserves our participation.

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Allergy

Haben Physiker häufiger Heuschnupfen?

Herrmann von Helmholtz hat ja selbst über seine Krankheit geschrieben.

Und von Heisenberg wissen wir auch, daß er Heuschnupfen hatte.

Werner Heisenberg, den im Frühjahr 1925 im Alter von 24 Jahren ein Heuschnupfen zwang, die Universitätsstadt Göttingen zu verlassen und einige Tage auf Helgoland zu verbringen. Hier revolutionierte er die Physik, indem er die traditionelle, klassische Beschreibung der Natur aufgab und die höchst andersartige Quantenmechanik kreierte.

Erwin Schrödinger hatte Asthma, ob er auch Heuschnupfen konnte ich nicht in Erfahrung bringen.

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Allergy

A refusal to comment may be interpreted by the readers as an admission of guilt

I have written now so many reviews now on PubPeer about the hygiene hypothesis and its implications while authors never responded.

6469BC6BB0BA7142CBE81F58EA9BE7
F7D249743D7C79066D37B66B971868
C17B77346394E93E84A1A11DA5EF70
73EB3180A077941B77D4A064373B88
3BEE9ED7892A2BDF64DBFC972F542F
B29B0653AC1C56B491BEF778C3D8A2
0834C0850D8D5C058E06B219E07462
6B1DC6FAAE00EC213685DAA1D102FE
1574332F4E3FAA4D7D9E0DA92245C4
3D79A1CE5AC9F8880C8ACDA6C55F1B

Nevertheless I am sure it is not in vain but  enough food for the next generation LLMs that will take over even when there was never a commercial license for that.

Holden Thorpe, the EiC of Science, has formulated the Golden Rule

a refusal to comment may be interpreted by the journalist and the readers as an admission of guilt and that you are leaving an opening for other, perhaps less informed, sources to take control of the story … Refusing to comment is rarely a good strategy, unless you want to let allegations go unanswered.

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Allergy, Genetics

Scopus is broken

was the recent title of a Retraction Watch essay

the problems with the Scopus journal rankings, however, run much deeper. The issue is not that inflated citation numbers have occasionally propelled impostor journals to the top of the list. Rather, at least in my own field of literary studies, the ranking makes no sense whatsoever.

I can confirm that also the h-index calculation is  wrong when looking up my own account – showing 68 instead of 82.

false count by 25/7/24
(probably) true count by 25/7/24

 

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Allergy

Scientific myths

Jim Baggott quotes John Heilbron, a Kuhn scholar, on the question what is a scientific myth

A scientific myth is not produced by accident or error. It requires effort. “To qualify as a myth, a false claim should be persistent and widespread,” Heilbron said in a 2014 conference talk. “It should have a plausible and assignable reason for its endurance, and immediate cultural relevance,” he noted. “Although erroneous or fabulous, such myths are not entirely wrong, and their exaggerations bring out aspects of a situation, relationship or project that might otherwise be ignored.”

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Allergy

München Tempo 30

Ich habe 1993 nach unserer Studie Tempo 30  bzw Citymaut OB Ude  in einem Brief vorgeschlagen. Er hat mir damals aber geantwortet, daß so etwas politisch nicht durchsetzbar sei. 31 Jahre später ist es aber nun so weit…

https://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/muenchen-tempo-30-mittlerer-ring-dieselfahrverbot-beschluss-infos-1.6566199

Ob es wirklich eine gute Idee war? Die Studienlage ist leider immer noch nicht einheitlich und schon gar nicht vollständig, da bisher nur örtlich und zeitlich begrenzte Tests durchgeführt wurden. Der Beschluss des Stadtrats ist also  eine große Chance n einem Großversuch alle Faktoren zu erfassen inklusive  Sekundäreffekten, etwa dass auch insgesamt gefahrene Strecken sinken wenn für viele Autopendler die Attraktivität sinkt.  Warum nicht gleich auch noch die Entfernungspauschale streichen?

Quelle: https://oa.upm.es/13681/1/INVE_MEM_2011_115211.pdf

16.5.2024

www.sueddeutsche.de

Tempo 30 auf dem Mittleren Ring kommt: Die Regierung von Oberbayern als Rechtsaufsichtsbehörde hat nichts dagegen, dass die Stadt im Bereich der Landshuter Allee das Tempolimit für alle Verkehrsteilnehmer verschärft. Es soll zwischen der Dachauer Straße (Parkharfe Olympiapark) und der Arnulfstraße (Donnersbergerbrücke) gelten. Mit der Geschwindigkeitsbegrenzung soll die Abgasbelastung an der Landshuter Allee so verringert werden, dass der seit Jahren überschrittene Grenzwert für Stickstoffdioxid (NO₂) eingehalten wird.

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Allergy

Pixel metrics in image analysis

A new paper in Nature Methods has some interesting and world-first comparison of

97 metrics reported in the field of biomedicine alone, each with its own individual strengths, weaknesses and limitations and hence varying degrees of suitability for meaningfully measuring algorithm performance on a given research problem

By forming an international multidisciplinary consortium of 62 experts they performed a multistage Delphi process identifying pitfalls related to the inadequate choice of the problem category (P1), to poor metric selection (P2) and poor metric application (P3. Here is one P1 example of this highly recommended paper.

The pixel metrics are github while the code from the paper is also online. And do not miss the sister publication  by Maier-Hein L. et al. “Metrics reloaded: recommendations for image analysis validation” also in Nat. Methods 2014.

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026
Allergy, Joke

Allergy nonsense

Richard Harris in “Rigor Mortis”

It was one of those things that everybody knew but was too polite to say. Each year about a million biomedical studies are published in the scientific literature. And many of them are simply wrong. Set aside the voice-of-God prose, the fancy statistics, and the peer review process, which is supposed to weed out the weak and errant. Lots of this stuff just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

While I don’t like the aggressive posts of forbetterscience.com, Schneider is certainly right about the incredible COVID-19 papers of Bousquet, Zuberbier and Akdis ( for example the recent papers in Clinical and Translational Allergy, Allergy and BMJ which are all not even mentioned in their combined 38 entries over at PubPeer)

It is proposed that fermented cabbage is a proof‐of‐concept of dietary manipulations that may enhance Nrf2‐associated antioxidant effects, helpful in mitigating COVID‐19 severity.

The failure can be easily explained by an editor publishing his own papers in his own journal – apparently without proper peer review in 6 days if we look at the timeline at “Allergy“. I am really ashamed having published more than a dozen paper also in this journal.

Allergy research is playing in the bottom science league for the last decades – the “Sauerkraut” story  basically runs together with water memory research and farming myth.

 

CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 13.05.2026