Talk:Hyposensitization

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
B This page has been rated as B-Class on the quality assessment scale
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance assessment scale

Bold textcan u tell me the bad effects that are caused due to the excessive production of antibodies


"they bind to allergens and reduce the ability of IgA to detect the presence of the allergens" - shouldn't this be IgE?

Contents

[edit] are these the kind that are given for pet allergies?

I was wondering if "allergy shots" for pet allergies are done this way and if so, do they increase your risk of contracting other sicknesses. I was told be someone on yahooanswers that they lower your immune system's ability to function and make you get sick easier. Is this true? Thanks. Lizzysama 20:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm asking the same question as Lizzy, also, do allergy shots (for pet allergies) actually work? --MC 17:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Well don't listen to the people on Yahoo answers then, because that is absolutely wrong. I have been taking allergy shots for 3 years now and my immune system functions far better now than it ever did. And yes, they do really work. My allergies had me constantly catching a cold before, which really messed with my immune system. Now I only catch a cold once or twice a year. And amazingly I went I just went through spring without any problems, which was one of the worst springs for allergens in years. Cheers! Potatobread 05:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yes, these are the "kind that are given for pet allergies"

... and they definitely do not weaken the immunse system - do NOT listen to Yahoo Answers - it's full of quackery and people expressing uninformed opinions. Allergists will explain to you the side effects of allergy shots (usually some localized itching that disappears within a couple of days) and the potential adverse effects (anaphylactic shock, which is why shots are given at a doctor's office where this can be treated swiftly if it happens). Research is lacking on other potential complications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blagov (talk • contribs) 04:03, April 21, 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WARNING

i am taking allergy shots and through a series of accidents got put off my maintenence dose twice (2 months) unfortunatly, i have to resart my dosage from the begining, right back to the orriginal dose. hopefully this plan will accelerate as my immune system re-adjusts, but be warned!! if you take the shots, DONT GET OFF THEM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.137.172 (talk) 22:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lumping of sublingual and injection imunotherapy together - Needs help

The sentences: "Immunotherapy administered through cutaneous injections or sublingually has substantial empirical support. Numerous research articles and several meta-analytic studies support its clinical effectiveness. " seem to suggest that both sublingual and injection imunotherapy are equally well tried and tested. As far as I can see this is not the case.

The Cochrane reviews of "Allergen immunotherapy for asthma" http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab001186.html "Allergen injection immunotherapy for seasonal allergic rhinitis" (2007) http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab001936.html and Grazax (sublingual imunothereapy) http://www.npc.co.uk/MeReC_Extra/2007/no27_2007_suppl.htm (2007) Sublingual immunotherapy for allergic rhinitis http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab002893.html (2003) imply to my reading that the sublingual is far newer and less tried & tested and (though results are encouraging) is less well established as effective, but the dates of these studies differ by four years making a proper comparison is difficult. I am no expert but this article could do with someone who is expert to clarify this point. --Sam 15:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Needs help

This article is a good start, but it needs the help of experts to flesh out and make appropriate citations. For example, in the "Mechanism of Therapeutic Action" section, the mechanism of the hypersensitivity itself is described adequately, but therapeutic action is described thus: "the individual's immune system is essentially 'retrained' to tolerate exposure." This suggests that the immune system learns to recognize the allergen as something innocuous. Current study does not support that idea. Instead, it is believed that repeated (controlled) exposure to increasing doses of the allergen causes 'increasing' immune response from plasma- and memory-type B-Cells, which leads to widespread circulation of IgG (and memory cells to augment immune response on future exposures). When the immune system later encounters uncontrolled or large doses of the antigen, the "invader" becomes coated with IgG molecules, which proliferate in the bloodstream and extracellular matrix. This makes the antigen's binding sites unavailable (invisible) to the IgE molecules on granular leukocytes. The immune system doesn't learn to "tolerate" the antigen; instead, it becomes hypersensitive to it and clobbers the substance with IgG. The antigen/IgG complex is then consumed and broken down by phagocytes like neutrophils and macrophages. This keeps any significant amount of antigen from getting to the IgE on (and degranulating) mast cells, which accumulate in tissues like the endothelium, rather than circulating in the blood. 151.151.73.166 (talk) 22:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


removing silly image

there is an image of a girl in "anaphylactic shock". she is resting with her eyes closed and wearing an o2 mask. while she might be in mild anaphylactic shock, it must not be severe shock as she not even intubated. alternatively, she may just be sleeping with an oxygen mask on for any myriad of reasons. this image is not illustrative of a patient in true "shock" and adds nothing to the article overall. (shellac.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shellac (talk • contribs)

Actually, she is in the ER being treated for anaphylactic shock as a result of allergy shots. This image is even used in a biology book in a section about hyposensitization (allergy shots). I wouldn't say that it is "silly" by any means. There are different levels of anaphylactic shock. This patient's throat closed up, she was unable to breath, & she passed out. Please ask the author of the image before making broad assumptions. Thanks, нмŵוτнτ 02:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fatalaties from desensitization treatment

I have been keen to have this treatment for some time, but have not had it. However, two UK General Practisioners (Dr's) who I respect, have each recommended against bwecause they say sometimes it kills the patient. I am unsure what the true risk is and whether their view is based on anecdote or out of date information. It would be good to have a section covering the frequency of fatalaties from this treatment, both in the past and (if things have improved in the last 20 years then) as compared to nowadays.

Also this article need backing up with reference to double blind controlled studies and scientific articles. --Sam 17:49, 7 April 2008


I have found further information on this. It seems fatalaties can occur but the most common cause is breathing difficulty in Asthmatics and fatalaty is relatively rare - many articles on the web say 1 in 2 million injections. fatalaties can be reduced by bvarious medical procedures and precautions. Desensitisation injections are applied repeatedly so that increases the odds a bit but it is still relatively safe eg 1 person might have 150 or more injections. Non-fatal adverse reactions are more common.

The reticence to desensitisation treatment seems to be local to the UK. More on this here: Select Committee on Science and Technology Sixth Report http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200607/ldselect/ldsctech/166/16611.htm "witnesses forcefully told us that immunotherapy was not used to its full potential in the United Kingdom. The reason for this was partly historical; when early types of immunotherapy were administered by general practitioners, a number of patients had suffered anaphylactic shock. Professor Anthony Frew, President of the EAACI, told us that "between 1952 and 1986 there were about 27" associated fatalities (Q 195) and the EAACI felt that the limited use of immunotherapy in the United Kingdom "reflects concerns about safety""

The Cochrane review has useful information on "Allergen immunotherapy for asthma" http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab001186.html and regards it as relatively safe. "Deaths due to allergen immunotherapy were extremely rare, with estimates ranging from one per one million to one per two million injections. " --Sam 14:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)