There continues to be an erroneous belief that allergens (especially food allergens) are more resistant to gastrointestinal digestion than non-allergens. Government regulations based on this erroneous belief may result in technology developers altering the amino acid sequences of digestively stable native proteins to create digestively unstable modified versions for expression in genetically engineered crops. However, an investigation where a known stable allergen was modified to make it more digestible eliminated the protein’s ability to tolerize against allergy in a mouse model, which is consistent with the dual allergen exposure hypothesis. Thus, the false belief that digestive stability increases the allergenic risk of novel food proteins (e.g., such as expressed in genetically engineered crops) could, in some cases, lead to introduction of digestively unstable modified protein versions with greater sensitization risk. However, it is noteworthy that developers have historically been very effective at preventing allergens from being introduced into crops based on the other components of the weight-of-evidence assessment of allergenic risk such that no newly expressed protein in any commercialized genetically engineered crop has ever been documented to cause allergy in anyone.

人们仍然错误地认为过敏原（尤其是食物过敏原）比非过敏原更能抵抗胃肠消化。基于这种错误信念的政府法规可能会导致技术开发人员改变消化稳定天然蛋白质的氨基酸序列，以创建消化不稳定的修饰版本，用于在基因工程作物中表达。然而，一项研究修改了已知的稳定过敏原以使其更易消化，从而消除了该蛋白质在小鼠模型中耐受过敏的能力，这与双重过敏原暴露假设一致。因此，在某些情况下，认为消化稳定性会增加新食物蛋白质（例如，在转基因作物中表达）的过敏风险的错误信念可能会导致 导致引入具有更大致敏风险的消化不稳定的修饰蛋白版本。然而，值得注意的是，根据过敏原风险证据权重评估的其他组成部分，开发人员历来非常有效地防止过敏原被引入作物，因此任何商业化基因工程作物中都没有新表达的蛋白质。被记录在任何人身上都会引起过敏。