TIP versus standard OIT
The most common question families ask about Food Allergy Institute — and one where the honest answer is mostly about what has not been published.
Both are allergy immunotherapy: graduated exposure that retrains the immune system — the only approach that modifies the disease itself. Standard OIT escalates the allergen from day one and has a broad published literature. TIP, Food Allergy Institute’s proprietary combination of SLIT and OIT, starts from structurally similar proteins and personalises dosing — the clinic reports far fewer reactions and near-universal success among completers, but the protocol is unpublished and the comparison with well-run standard OIT has never been tested head-to-head. Choosing between them is a judgment about evidence versus reported results, cost, and reachability. Curex competes in this market with a third option: gentler at-home SLIT.
Medically reviewed by Dr. Chet Tharpe, M.D. · Last reviewed September 2026
Common ground
Both are immunotherapy — that part is settled
Allergy immunotherapy is the only disease-modifying treatment for allergies: it retrains the immune system rather than managing symptoms, has over 100 years of clinical use, and typically takes years of graduated exposure. TIP and standard OIT are both implementations of it.
So the comparison is not “does TIP work at all” — graduated exposure works. It is whether TIP’s proprietary sequencing and diagnostics outperform a well-run standard protocol by enough to justify its cost and its single-network availability.
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.
The actual differences
Where the two roads diverge
- The allergen from day oneEscalating swallowed doses of the real allergen, built up under in-clinic supervision.
- Published, replicableBroad peer-reviewed literature; offered off-label at specialist centres in most states.
- Known reaction burdenEffective, with meaningful published rates of reactions and GI side effects, and dropout driven by both.
- Similar proteins firstBegins below the allergen’s trigger threshold and escalates toward it, personalised per patient.
- Proprietary, one networkUnpublished protocol available only at FAI clinics — Long Beach and, from September 2026, New Jersey.
- Reported, not verifiedClinic reports <1% reactions and 99% success among completers; independent confirmation does not exist.
The third road
And the option neither of them is
Food SLIT uses much smaller, more precise doses administered under the tongue. The effect comes through the sublingual mucosa — swallowed, the same dose would be ineffective. Because the dose is smaller, food SLIT is generally safer, with fewer side effects: more gentle and gradual than OIT, sometimes slower, and easier to stay on.
Curex is the only fully at-home food allergy program. Testing is done through local labs, at-home phlebotomy, or self-collection kits; doctors see patients via video visit or text message; and Allergychoices pharmacy ships the prescription treatment directly to the patient. The treatment is more gentle and generally a bit slower, but it has a much higher graduation rate because patients don’t drop out from negative side effects — and patients can generally save more than $10,000 over the course of treatment.
Read the full provider comparison for the three side by side.
❓Frequently Asked Questions
Nobody outside the clinic can honestly say. FAI reports a sub-1% reaction rate and 99% success among completers; standard OIT’s published literature shows strong desensitisation with a meaningful reaction burden. But no head-to-head published comparison exists, TIP’s protocol is proprietary, and its headline figures are self-reported. “Unproven against the alternative” cuts both ways — it neither validates the premium nor disproves the program.
The clinic’s reported reaction rate is dramatically lower than published OIT rates, which would be a real advantage if independently confirmed. The sequencing logic — starting below the allergen’s trigger threshold — is plausible. Independent confirmation does not exist yet, and patients in public threads have reported reactions and eosinophilic esophagitis during treatment, a known risk across oral immunotherapy generally.
Because it is proprietary — the method has not been shared for other clinicians to study or replicate, which families in public threads regularly ask about. Standard OIT protocols, by contrast, are published and offered off-label at specialist centres across roughly 35 states. That difference — one clinic versus a replicable method — is itself part of the choice.
In-person food allergy programs can cost $10,000+ per year in either model. FAI publishes $979–$1,079 a month over 2.5–4 years. Standard OIT pricing varies by clinic; patients report program fees in the low thousands per year plus visits. Insurance treats both unevenly: office visits often covered, program fees frequently not.
It is the third road: much smaller doses under the tongue, working through the sublingual mucosa, taken at home under telemedicine supervision. Gentler and generally a bit slower than either clinic route, with a much higher graduation rate because patients don’t drop out from side effects — and generally more than $10,000 cheaper over a course. Different patients need different programs; anaphylaxis history or severe asthma should route to in-person care regardless.
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