I hate to say it, but that type of testing is completely unvalidated and, IMO, a total waste of money. Research has shown that it consistently fails to identify people with clinically diagnosed allergies. If it can't find those (which are relatively easy to pick up) how on earth is it meant to be accurate in detecting intolerances?
I can completely understand why you want to find the source of the problem, but cutting out all wheat and dairy (I'm not so bothered about the pork - you can cope just find without pork products) is quite restrictive and will have dietary implications. What source of calcium did the nutritionist recommend? Lots of micronutrients are consumed in wheat-based foods (you can of course make do without - I myself am coeliac, so know what I'm talking about
) so you do stand the risk of losing out on those, not to mention the increased cost of buying wheat-free products.
Any nutritionist worth their salt would never recommend that you cut out such a wide range of products all at once - how are you meant to know if you're sensitive to one particular food if you've cut out dozens? Far better to follow a proper elimination diet - cut out one food, i.e. pork. See if your symptoms improve. If they do, great. Then you reintroduce the food (a food challenge) and see if the symptoms come back. If they do, you know for certain that pork is the culprit and remove it from your diet. Repeat for wheat, then dairy (or whatever order you fancy). Never all at once. Unscientific, unhelpful to the patient and potential unnecessarily restrictive.
I'll get off my soap box now