Component
Chamomile tea in the 1989 allergy case
Chamomile tea in the 1989 allergy case
1 recorded relationships. Experimental role, claim status and evidence remain attached to each record.
How nutrients influence it
Every nutrient with a recorded effect on this component, credited to the nutrient that acted rather than the chapter that recorded it. Open a nutrient to see the findings and the conditions they were measured under.
Other things that act on it
Enzymes, hormones, genes, and other components with a recorded effect. These are not nutrients, so they do not count toward the arrows above. Each finding names the chapter that recorded it.
How nutrients reach it in more than one step
Chains of two or more recorded steps that end here, grouped by the nutrient they start from. Each step is a separate finding, so a chain is a route a mechanism could take, not proof that it does.
Tracing routes…
What it does
Every recorded relationship this component is part of, grouped by its role. Plain wording comes first; the technical statement follows.
What it acts on
The report described anaphylaxis after chamomile tea in an atopic child, with IgE cross-reactivity involving plant/pollen preparations.
Experimental context and source evidence
- evidence_access
- Indexed primary abstract/metadata only; unextracted doses, figures and methods remain unknown.
- experimental_model
- Eight-year-old boy; case report and allergy testing.
- interpretation_status
- Recorded from source with stated access limits; ungraded, not independent replication.
- limitations
- Limited to the recorded preparation, model, exposure and endpoint. Does not establish a human dietary deficiency, clinical benefit or unique molecular mediation.
- nutrient_topic
- Apigenin collection; exact intervention and molecular form govern interpretation. · Apigenin
- plain_language
- The report described anaphylaxis after chamomile tea in an atopic child, with IgE cross-reactivity involving plant/pollen preparations.
- primary_references
- Anaphylactic reaction after the ingestion of chamomile tea: a study of cross-reactivity with other composite pollens. | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2674263/ | https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-6749(89)90420-x
- source_locator
- Reviewed reference api-chamomile-allergy; This does not identify purified apigenin as the allergen; the preparation remains the actor.
Apigenin: detailed mechanisms of action (reviewed 10 October 2026) · lines 944–950
AI-assisted original curation of primary studies; claim-local access and experimental limitations stated. Includes original-draft correction history. No independent replication claimed. · supports · Eight-year-old boy; case report and allergy testing. · Recorded from source · Recorded from source
### api-chamomile-allergy The report described anaphylaxis after chamomile tea in an atopic child, with IgE cross-reactivity involving plant/pollen preparations. This does not identify purified apigenin as the allergen; the preparation remains the actor. Model and exposure: Eight-year-old boy; case report and allergy testing. Limitations: Limited to the recorded preparation, model, exposure and endpoint. Does not establish a human dietary deficiency, clinical benefit or unique molecular mediation. Reference: Anaphylactic reaction after the ingestion of chamomile tea: a study of cross-reactivity with other composite pollens. | 1989 | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2674263/ | https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-6749(89)90420-x | Access: Indexed primary abstract/metadata only; unextracted doses, figures and methods remain unknown.
Complete structured claim and evidence
The events it takes part in
A mechanism often involves more than two components. These are the full events, with every participant and its role.
Situations it appears in
Low-supply and faulty-machinery situations recorded in the chapters where this component plays a part.
In the sources
Preserved passages that mention this component, quoted exactly. Open one to read it in context.
Open hypotheses
Proposed ideas that involve this component. They are labeled as hypotheses and do not change any recorded statement.
This is a research prototype built from draft material. It is not medical advice, and its statements still await verification against the original studies.