[hammerzeit]

I have a young child at home. He eats bamba, peanut butter, and a worrying amount of New York City dirt.

That said, this is such a dangerous article, and I'm honestly surprised the NYT published it. It's written by a non-scientist making a "common sense" claim, and it even closes with a paragraph-long variation on the "how much can we really trust science anyways?" claim.

My understanding is that there has been a single study, done among a largely homogenous population, that has indicated Bamba's benefit. Maybe Bamba does help inoculate against peanut allergies -- I think it's plausible, even likely. But it's certainly not anything approaching scientific consensus, the author is not a scientist of any variety, and I think this article has a real danger to mislead.

[dragonwriter]

I don't think its particularly dangerous. While its less detailed and formal, its not particularly out of line from common medical guidance on the issue. [0] Certainly, major publications -- including the Times -- frequently print pop-health advice that is more at odds with medical science than this piece.

[0] E.g., this, from the American Academy of Pediatrics, https://www.healthychildren.org/English/health-issues/condit...