The Tolerance Induction Program, in plain terms
Proprietary does not mean mysterious. Here is what the program actually does, where it sits relative to standard immunotherapy, and what remains unpublished.
TIP is Food Allergy Institute’s proprietary in-clinic protocol — normally a combination of sublingual and oral immunotherapy, distinctive in that it begins with structurally similar, non-allergenic proteins rather than the allergen itself, escalating toward the allergen over a 2.5-to-4-year course with frequent supervised food challenges. Its stated endpoint, “food freedom”, means unrestricted eating plus lifelong maintenance dosing. What it is not: a published, independently replicated method — the protocol is proprietary, the supporting study is small and retrospective, and critics ask why the method is not shared for study. Both the ambition and the opacity are real. Curex competes with FAI.
Medically reviewed by Dr. Chet Tharpe, M.D. · Last reviewed September 2026
Mechanics
What the program does
All allergy immunotherapy works the same way at bottom: retraining the immune system to tolerate an allergen through carefully graduated exposure. It is the only disease-modifying treatment for allergies — everything else manages symptoms.
TIP’s distinctive claims: it starts with structurally similar, non-allergenic proteins before approaching the allergen; it personalises dosing from an extensive diagnostic workup; and it runs as a combination of sublingual and oral immunotherapy under frequent in-person supervision, over a published 2.5-to-4-year course, toward an endpoint it calls food freedom.
Curex competes in this market — we run the only fully at-home food allergy program — so read this page as a competitor’s honest summary of the public record, check every claim against the sources, and ask each provider your own questions.
Side by side
TIP against the other routes
| TIP (FAI) | Standard clinic OIT | At-home food SLIT (Curex) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starting material | Similar proteins first, then allergen | The allergen, from the start | The allergen, in very small sublingual doses |
| Delivery | Combination of SLIT and OIT, in clinic | Swallowed doses, in clinic build-up | Drops under the tongue, at home |
| Supervision | Frequent in-person visits and challenges | In-person build-up and challenges | Telemedicine, with in-clinic food challenges when needed |
| Pace | Aggressive, personalised | Aggressive | Gentler, generally somewhat slower |
| Evidence base | Proprietary; small retrospective publication | Broad published literature | Published SLIT literature; gentler effect, higher adherence |
Food SLIT works through the sublingual mucosa — swallowed, the same dose would be ineffective. SLIT and OIT are not interchangeable in dose or supervision.
The evidence question
What is not published
The protocol is proprietary: it has not been shared for independent study, the main publication is a 51-patient retrospective without controls, and the advertised 99% success figure is self-reported and refers to program completers. A 2021 patient petition asked for fuller published data.
The fair reading: thousands of families report real results, and the published evidence is thinner than the claims. Both can be true at once. If published evidence is what you weight most, ask the clinic what has changed since 2021 — and apply the same standard to every provider, including us: Curex has published no food-allergy outcome data of its own either, and says so.
Fit
Who this program is for
The honest trade is speed versus gentleness. Under direct supervision, clinicians can treat more aggressively — in-clinic programs normally use OIT and accelerated protocols, sometimes adding a biologic such as Xolair so the patient can safely tolerate a significant dose of allergen. The biologic protects the patient during treatment; it is the immunotherapy that modifies the disease. At-home SLIT is gentler, safer, more convenient, and more affordable. Faster is not better for every patient; neither is gentler.
If that speed matters to your family and the clinic is reachable, TIP is a serious option. If it is not reachable or not fundable, the treatment landscape after Palforzia covers what else exists.
❓Frequently Asked Questions
Standard oral immunotherapy escalates doses of the allergen itself from the start. TIP begins with proteins that are structurally similar to the allergen but less likely to trigger a reaction, and works toward the allergen — with dosing personalised from the clinic’s diagnostic workup. Whether that sequencing produces better outcomes than well-run standard OIT has not been tested head-to-head in published research, which is the honest limit of what anyone outside the clinic can say.
That phrase appears often in public threads, and it is half-fair. TIP is immunotherapy — the same underlying mechanism of retraining the immune system through graduated exposure that all AIT uses, delivered as a combination of SLIT and OIT. The clinic’s claim is that its sequencing, diagnostics and personalisation produce better outcomes. That claim is proprietary and self-reported rather than independently verified, so believing it is a judgment call, not a settled fact — in either direction.
Unrestricted eating of the treated allergens, plus lifelong maintenance — patients describe ongoing requirements like a daily peanut quota or weekly servings of tree nuts, and several report an annual program fee continuing after remission. Lifelong maintenance is standard across food immunotherapy, ours included; the fee structure attached to it is the part to confirm before enrolling.
The main supporting publication reported on 51 patients, retrospectively, without a control group, in an open-access journal — and journalists reported the paper had been declined by larger journals. The advertised 99% figure is self-reported and refers to those completing the program. A 2021 patient petition asked the clinic to publish fuller safety and outcome data. None of this proves the program does not work; it means the published evidence is thinner than the marketing.
In-clinic programs sometimes add a biologic such as omalizumab (Xolair) alongside immunotherapy so a patient can safely tolerate significant doses during treatment. The biologic protects the patient during treatment — it is the immunotherapy that modifies the disease. Ask the clinic what their protocol includes for your specific case.
If you experience sudden difficulty breathing, throat swelling, or other signs of anaphylaxis, call 911. A prescribed epinephrine auto-injector is the first-line treatment — not antihistamines.
This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always consult a qualified healthcare provider with questions about a medical condition. Content reviewed by board-certified allergists at Curex.
Keep reading
- Is Curex legit?The company, the evidence, and the concerns worth knowing — including full context on the 2025 FDA warning letter.Read
- How Curex worksThe treatment process end to end, from at-home testing to daily drops.Read
- Curex reviewsWhat patients actually report — both clusters, including the complaints.Read
- Is Curex worth the money?Plan pricing against allergy-shot costs, and who it is not worth it for.Read
- Evidence & guidelinesWhat the FDA approved, what the AAAAI/ACAAI practice parameter does and does not endorse, and what has been added since.Read
- Providers comparedCurex, Wyndly and Nectar on published prices, guarantees and evidence — including where a competitor is ahead.Read