Summary. Mainstream allergy diagnosis and treatment is based on classical allergy testing which involves wellvalidated diagnostic methods and proven methods of treatment. By contrast, a number of unproven tests have been proposed for evaluating allergic patients including cytotoxic food testing, ALCAT test, bioresonance, electrodermal
testing (electroacupuncture), reflexology, applied kinesiology a.o. There is little or no scientific rationale for these methods.
Results are not reproducible when subject to rigorous testing and do not correlate with clinical evidence of allergy.
Although some papers suggest a possible pathogenetic role of IgG, IgG4 antibody, no correlation was found between the outcome of DBPCFC and the levels of either food-specific IgG or IgG4, nor was any difference seen between patients and controls. The levels of these and other food-specific immunoglobulins of non-IgE isotype
reflect the intake of food in the individual and may thus be a normal and harmless finding. The so-called “Food Allergy Profile” with simultaneous IgE and IgG determination against more than 100 foodstuffs is neither economical nor useful for diagnosis. DBPCFC must be the reference standard for food hypersensitivity and any new test must be validated by it. As a result, all these unproven techniques may lead to misleading advice or treatments, and their use is not advised.

Key words: allergy diagnosis, unproven methods, applied kinesiology, electroacupunture, bioresonance, cytotoxic testing, ALCAT test, food allergy profile, food-specific IgG.