Food “Intolerance” IgG Panels
Last reviewed 25 August 2026 · Evidence-graded review — see Methodology
A large panel — typically 100 to 200 foods — reporting IgG antibodies against each one, sold as a way to find the foods behind bloating, fatigue or brain fog. It is one of the very few tests on this site that professional bodies have not merely declined to endorse but have explicitly recommended against. Food-specific IgG is a normal immune response to having eaten a food, not evidence of a reaction to it.
Stapel SO, Asero R, et al. “Testing for IgG4 against foods is not recommended as a diagnostic tool: EAACI Task Force Report.” Allergy 2008;63:793–796 concluded that food-specific IgG4 reflects exposure and tolerance rather than an adverse reaction, and that positive results in healthy people are the expected finding rather than an abnormality. Because nearly everyone tests positive to whatever they eat regularly, the panel reliably produces a long list of “problem” foods; any improvement from cutting them is indistinguishable from that of an ordinary elimination diet, minus the cost.
Stapel SO, et al. Allergy. 2008. PubMed: PMID 18489614
Singapore guidance
Not covered in the current review
Singapore’s national screening committee has not reviewed this test in the current volume of its report, which covers nine conditions. That is not a verdict either way.
Source: Screening Test Review Committee report 2026, Volume 1 (Academy of Medicine Singapore and Ministry of Health, February 2026). The full national list · How this is used.
What you would actually pay
- Healthier SG
- Not subsidised
- MediSave
- Not among the screenings named for outpatient claims
Source: Healthier SG Screening (HealthHub) and MediSave outpatient care (Ministry of Health). Absence from either list is not a statement that the test is discouraged — only that no subsidy or claim applies. Gross prices compared.
What it costs when it is wrong
- Basis
- No published harm criterion found
- Severity
- Not documented
Not covered in the current volume of the committee’s report, so no harm criterion was found either way.
An empty finding, not a clean bill of health: this means nothing documented was found for this test. It is not a claim that the test is safe.
Screening harm is not only a laboratory question: the committee’s own criteria advise against a test when “the screening test, or follow-up tests arising from a positive screen, are associated with significant medical risks”. Sources on overdiagnosis → · How this is graded.
FAQ
Is the Food “Intolerance” IgG Panels worth doing in Singapore?
The evidence behind Food “Intolerance” IgG Panels is graded weak for screening an asymptomatic adult. It is most appropriate for nobody, for this purpose. Suspected true food allergy needs IgE testing and a clinical history; coeliac disease needs its own serology. It typically costs S$300–800 in Singapore. It is not recommended.
Weighing this against something else? Compare it with two other tests → · Price it inside a panel →