It's extremely unlikely--make that just about impossible--that LW #4 has a life-threatening chocolate allergy. It seems that allergies to chocolate itself--as opposed to various ingredients found in some (not all) chocolate--are so rare as to be "virtually nonexistent in medical literature," in the words of one of the sites I found. We may have a drama queen here, folks.

Her prospective in-laws are still assholes, however.

Even if it's not life threatening, it still might make her feel icky or get all puffy. I don't think I'd call someone who would want to avoid that a drama queen.

My nut allergies:

life threatening symptoms: walnuts & pistachios swells up my tongue & my throat within minutes. Cashews takes about 10 minutes.

non-life threatening: pecans causes bumps on my tongue & throat & makes my stomach start cramping & uncontrolled throwing up non-stop for about 20 minutes. Brazilian nuts cause a burning rash on my lips & around my mouth

Even though the LW doesn't have a life threatening allergy, any type of allergy is not fun to deal with, especially on her wedding day.

I'm allergic to honey dew and cantaloupe. It's not life threatening. It's just painful. That doesn't make me a drama queen when I order my fruit salad sans the pretty green and orange fruits. If someone else is ordering the fruit I just won't eat it. But if I'M ordering it I order it the way I can eat it pain free.

I can't believe the groom isn't standing up for her. Does he want his wife feeling poorly on their wedding night?

He is...he even told them what would happen should she ingest it. If he, the bride, AND the wedding party can't convince them, what else is he supposed to do?

I wonder if she is exaggerating her condition to justify her position - that's interesting. If that's the case, I think it's totally unnecessary. I think if she and her hubby want a vomit flavored cake, just because they like it, they should have it and anybody that doesn't like should just not eat it.

Yes, that's what I gather is likely from the web sites I looked at. And if that is the case, they indicated that an antihistamine would avoid the problem. Which is why I suggest drama queen.

I do agree, though, that even if she had no reason other than a whim, it would still be her right to decide what kind of cake she wanted at her own wedding.

"It seems that allergies to chocolate itself--as opposed to various ingredients found in some (not all) chocolate--are so rare as to be "virtually nonexistent in medical literature," "

Hmmm...but does it really matter if the allergy is to chocolate itself or to some other ingredient commonly found in chocolate? The end result is still some major reaction at her wedding; depending on how well she's been able to investigate what the source is, she may not be able to reliably ensure that the wrong type of chocolate isn't in the cake. I can see why she would just refer to it as an allergy to chocolate for the sake of ease, rather than having to work everyone through the ingredient list.

If she's exaggerating her symptoms, that is drama-queen-ish, I agree. But, I still wouldn't want to be on an anti-histamine at my wedding (aren't they the ones that tend to cause drowsiness etc?). She needs to just put her foot down and be honest, I think.

I'd like to see your link. I looked up "chocolate allergy symptoms" and the first several said essentially the same thing:

There are a number of symptoms experienced by people that have an allergy to chocolate or chocolate ingredients. These symptoms may be caused by the chemicals in chocolate or by the other ingredients. Reactions to chocolate may include:

• Headache
• Heartburn
• Rectal itching
• Hives
• Confusion
• Breathing problems

In severely allergic people, chocolate allergies may trigger anaphylaxis – an allergic reaction involving two or more body systems that can lead to the potentially life-threatening anaphylactic shock. Symptoms of anaphylaxis may include:

• Shortness of breath
• Wheezing
• Dizziness or lightheadedness
• Chest pain or tightness
• Confusion
• Severe drop in blood pressure
• Heart palpitations
• Nausea and vomiting
• Diarrhea or stomach cramps
• Loss of consciousness

I can understand wanting to avoid that on one's wedding day.

IncogNeato:

I'd like to see your link. I looked up "chocolate allergy symptoms" and the first several said essentially the same thing:

There are a number of symptoms experienced by people that have an allergy to chocolate or chocolate ingredients. These symptoms may be caused by the chemicals in chocolate or by the other ingredients. Reactions to chocolate may include:

• Headache
• Heartburn
• Rectal itching
• Hives
• Confusion
• Breathing problems

In severely allergic people, chocolate allergies may trigger anaphylaxis – an allergic reaction involving two or more body systems that can lead to the potentially life-threatening anaphylactic shock. Symptoms of anaphylaxis may include:

• Shortness of breath
• Wheezing
• Dizziness or lightheadedness
• Chest pain or tightness
• Confusion
• Severe drop in blood pressure
• Heart palpitations
• Nausea and vomiting
• Diarrhea or stomach cramps
• Loss of consciousness

I can understand wanting to avoid that on one's wedding day.

Especially the rectal itching...imagine the bride trying to reach her itching rectum through the wedding dress at the altar or the wedding dance!...Qucik, someone run and buy Prep H! lol

I can understand wanting to avoid that ANY day. LMAO! I don't get why the bride is being called a drama queen for not taking an antihistamine? If you know chocolate makes you sick wouldn't it be smarter to just not eat it? Who wants to be on meds when they're hosting the most important ceremony of their life? I suggest that the bride and groom order the cake and quit worrying about it.

I agree. Why should the bride be forced to medicate herself to please 2 people and their desire for chocolate? No bride is going to want hives or any symptom during a hectic day.

In today's customs, it is hard for the bride not to eat at least a sliver of cake as part of cutting the cake.

I'm required (doctor's order, not my idea) to take antihistamines 24/7 for psoriasis, and luckily there are nondrowsy varieties. Antihistamines need not have any effect on anything but the allergy.

The link Incog asked for:

<link>

As for what's the harm?--

True allergies can be deadly. But it's amazingly common for people who've never met an allergist in their lives to *claim* allergies when what they have are intolerances, sensitivities, or just simple aversions. And the more the general public encounters those who cry wolf, the more lax or skeptical it becomes of the allergy claim. THAT is extremely dangerous for the people who have real allergies.

Spinning a Yarn:

But it's amazingly common for people who've never met an allergist in their lives to *claim* allergies when what they have are intolerances, sensitivities, or just simple aversions. And the more the general public encounters those who cry wolf, the more lax or skeptical it becomes of the allergy claim. THAT is extremely dangerous for the people who have real allergies.

Absolutely. So many people claim they are "allergic" to anything they think tastes bad. (My sister is that way about dozens of things, and taught her kids to be teh same way.) So a lot of other people will sneak that into their food to "prove" to them that it really tastes good. Maybe not so bad when it's just a phobia or a distaste, but life threatening if it really is an allergy.

Spinning a Yarn:

True allergies can be deadly. But it's amazingly common for people who've never met an allergist in their lives to *claim* allergies when what they have are intolerances, sensitivities, or just simple aversions. And the more the general public encounters those who cry wolf, the more lax or skeptical it becomes of the allergy claim. THAT is extremely dangerous for the people who have real allergies.

Not only that, but it sometimes makes it difficult for doctors trying to prescribe medication.

In my line of work, I have to prescribe various types of antibiotics for complicated infections and as part of that I end up getting a more in-depth allergy history than most. I generally can't simply go by a patient's list of allergies that the nurse puts in the chart--very often when I ask a patient about a penicillin allergy, for example, I get "My mother was allergic to it so she told me never to take it" or "It gives me a yeast infection." Not true allergies! On many occasions if I'm treating something where a penicillin is the drug of choice, I'll have an allergist come in and do a skin test if there's any doubt.

If I were able to design my own PSA's for TV, I'd do a campaign to get people to find out what their allergies REALLY are, with penicillin at the very least. In certain infections, that group is considerably more effective.