GLOSSARY

Non-IgE-Mediated Food Allergy involves immune food reactions not primarily mediated by immunoglobulin E, with the clinical condition determining assessment.

Food allergy involves immune mechanisms and differs from food intolerance. Some reactions can progress rapidly to anaphylaxis, which requires emergency treatment according to the person's medical plan rather than dietary experimentation. Allergen avoidance includes labels, preparation and cross-contact; removing a visible ingredient may be insufficient. Reintroduction or a diagnostic food challenge can require specialist supervision. An elimination diet should maintain suitable nutrient replacements and should not be based solely on unvalidated commercial sensitivity testing.

Celiac disease requires a sustained gluten-free diet after appropriate diagnosis, including attention to cross-contact and nutritional adequacy. Gluten occurs in wheat, barley and rye; lactose is a different substance found in relevant dairy foods. Lactose intolerance concerns digestion rather than an immune-mediated milk allergy. Improvement after removing a food does not independently establish the diagnosis. Starting gluten avoidance before testing can interfere with celiac evaluation, so diagnostic planning should be discussed with the clinician first.

For example, an athlete with a confirmed food allergy needs reliable food preparation and an established emergency plan when traveling with a team. Removing a visible ingredient is insufficient if cross-contact remains possible. A supervised diagnostic challenge differs from casually testing a suspected allergen before training or competition.

An adequate diet provides sufficient energy and essential nutrients while fitting health needs. A high score for variety or a healthy food label cannot independently demonstrate adequacy. Review what is actually eaten, including foods excluded and suitable replacements. Athletes can consume many vegetables yet still lack enough energy or carbohydrate for training. Assess the overall pattern, distribution and relevant nutrient risks rather than assuming that a single food or supplement makes the entire diet balanced.

Clinical nutrition translates assessment into an individualized intervention and evaluates the response. A disease name alone cannot define the prescription: disease stage, medication, symptoms, laboratory findings, intake and functional goals matter. Screening identifies possible risk, whereas a full assessment supports a nutrition diagnosis and care plan. A sports context adds training demands but does not remove clinical requirements. Coordinate care when medical and performance objectives interact instead of applying a standard athlete menu to every patient.

A nutrition prescription specifies an individualized plan that can include energy, protein, other nutrients, fluid, food texture or route of delivery. The chosen body-weight reference, clinical condition and practical implementation must be clear when quantities are used. It should be monitored and revised as intake, treatment or health changes. In a clinical athlete, reconcile medical requirements with training rather than placing two incompatible prescriptions side by side and expecting the person to decide which one to follow.

Nutrition follow-up compares intended goals with actual intake, symptoms, function, relevant measurements and the person's experience. Specify the time frame and what would justify adjustment, continuation or referral. A treatment response can be beneficial, absent or adverse, and adherence alone does not prove effectiveness. Retain enough documentation to understand what changed. For an athlete, consider health and training quality alongside body mass or laboratory results so that apparent progress in one measure does not hide deterioration elsewhere.