Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site rruxe.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!bellcore!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxv!rruxa!rruxe!debbiem From: debbiem@rruxe.UUCP (D. McBurnett) Newsgroups: net.kids Subject: Re: Allergies Message-ID: <255@rruxe.UUCP> Date: Mon, 20-May-85 14:37:41 EDT Article-I.D.: rruxe.255 Posted: Mon May 20 14:37:41 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 24-May-85 20:13:33 EDT References: <211@unc.UUCP>, <239@tektools.UUCP> Organization: Bell Communications Research, Piscataway N.J. Lines: 164 >In article yrdbrd@bmcg.UUCP (Larry J. Huntley) writes: >> >>1. Is anyone familiar with an example of an allergic person who has >> used hyposensitization therapy and has actually improved? Do you >> know anyone who has been told (by their allergist) "Well, I guess >> we can stop with the injections now"? >> >>2. Is the long-term usage of antihistamine preparations known to be >> free of unwanted side-effects or is there some nastiness here I >> should be aware of? Larry Huntley has gotten some excellent answers on this, and I'll try not to be redundant, but I there are some aspects that I haven't seen covered which I'd like to address, and this is a subject near and dear to me. I developed allergies and asthma when I was nine years old (or let's say we figured out that was my problem at that age) and it was pretty severe. Like other people, I started out on a heavy immuno- therapy schedule (4 shots a week) and took the shots for nine years (at which point I was getting one shot every two months). When I was eighteen my allergist pronounced those magic words "Well, I guess we can stop with the injections now" because, he said, while I wasn't "cured" (actually, nobody ever really is), I wouldn't get any better with the shots, and I wouldn't get any worse without them. (I suspect, however, that all allergists may not be this candid.) During these nine years I also took pretty strong anti- histamines, rotating to another when the effectiveness of one wore off, like everybody else. I continued taking milder antihistamines from the time I was 18 until age 23, seasonally as needed. When I was 23 I moved to Michigan and my allergies started acting up again, so I went back to the immunotherapy (different parts of the country have different allergens, and being "cured" in one place doesn't guarantee that you will be problem-free somewhere else). From that point until I was 30 I received two shots once a week, and while I showed significant symptomatic improvement, this doctor did not reduce the schedule or give any indication that I might not need the shots in the foreseeable future. (I think he was greedy and didn't want to let go of me as a patient.) Since I have moved back to New Jersey, I have been much improved, and have not needed immunotherapy, though I still do seasonally use antihistamines. Last fall I became pregnant, and as with puberty, this really can mess up your system. (When I went through puberty, my asthma virtually disappeared and my hay fever got better, but I developed excruciating eczema instead, which literally lasted without respite for over three years -- try to imagine having poison ivy for three years straight and you've pretty much got the picture.) With the pregnancy, my allergies overnight became as bad as they have ever been, including a return of the asthma which had been in abeyance for 15 years. My consultation with my new allergist was extremely enlightening. First of all, according to him, although asthma is not NECESSARILY a result of allergy, it can be; and once you have asthma, you NEVER TRULY OUTGROW IT. In recent years some really good new drugs have been developed for symptomatic treatment of asthma and allergic rhinitis (basically, "hay fever"), that do not use cortisone or adrenaline or epinephrine (which are used even in the over-the-counter asthma sprays and other preparations). He informed me that these were particularly useful in treatment of allergy during pregnancy because since they do not contain these ingredients, THEY DO NOT ALSO AFFECT THE HEART AND VASCULAR SYSTEM AS ADRENALINE AND THE OTHERS DO. I hadn't been aware that adrenaline et al had those kinds of side effects. Also, the new nasal sprays in this new group of drugs don't have the rebound effect that decongestant sprays do, and you therefore don't have problems with their long-term use. By the way, my new allergist has said that there's no point in considering immunotherapy while I'm pregnant, because my symptoms may disappear again after I have my baby. His view is that if I think I still need treatment afterwards, we can talk about it then. So here's an example of an allergist NOT recommending immunotherapy under the circumstances, and not even pushing for it later on. The only long-term effects I've noticed from routine use of anti- histamines are that: 1) "sleeping pills" don't work for me (they were developed from antihistamines, and when you build up a tolerance to antihistamines, you build up a tolerance for sleeping preparations); 2) drugs like Darvon, which are basically amphetamines (while antihistamines are barbiturates), send me flying higher than a kite, to the point where I can't function, because my system is accustomed to being slightly depressed; and 3) in surgery, I take longer to "go under" and take less time to "come back out of" anesthesia. These are not really what I consider serious problems, as I don't need sleeping pills (I only know they don't work for me because I've had them prior to surgery and NOTHING happens), I have only very rarely needed anything like Darvon, and surgery is an extremely unusual situation. It might also be worth mentioning that I have hypoglycemia, and some doctors/scientists believe there is a correlation between allergy and hypoglycemia. All I can say about it is that I notice that when I keep my hypoglycemia under control, I have fewer problems with my allergies, and during the worst of my allergy seasons, I have more trouble with my hypoglycemia. It's also somewhat noteworthy that both conditions have hereditary aspects, and in my family, with only one exception, everyone who has allergies also has doctor-diagnosed hypoglycemia (in all cases the allergies preceded the hypoglycemia by 20-30 years). Because I am plagued with these twin problems, I do a lot of reading about them. Several studies have shown that the B-vitamins can have a positive effect on both allergies and hypoglycemia. I'm not a vitamin-freak, but I'm inclined to believe it. As I said, my allergies came back in force when I became pregnant; my hypo- glycemia simultaneously got much worse after years of being under control. I suffered from November to March, at which point I started taking B-supplements. Both conditions improved dramatically almost right away, and though I still have some trouble with the allergies, I'm no longer absent from work 40% of the time because of the problems. There's a strong indication that it's not only the avoidance of food allergens that's important in the treatment of allergies, but so also is the general level of nutrition that the allergic person gets. Finally, regarding the efficacy of immunotherapy, it's true that it doesn't work for everyone, but what is perhaps more accurate is that it works better against some kinds of allergens than others. Some allergies, like those to cats, have a much higher "cure" rate with immunotherapy than allergies to molds or foods. With foods, most allergists counsel simple avoidance rather than immunotherapy. With allergies to inhalants like molds or pollens, immunotherapy already is behind the eight-ball because they are so pervasive (at least with cat allergy, you can avoid cats while taking immunotherapy, which does help its effectiveness). I would like to echo what Liz Vaughn said about the importance of treating allergy. In retrospect, there's little doubt that I had allergy problems before they were diagnosed, and that in my case my allergic condition led to the development of asthma. For years as a child any exertion brought on asthma attacks, as well as exposure to high pollen levels, furry animals, molds, and certain foods like corn. I couldn't take gym classes and had to have an extremely restricted diet. The misery I endured during those early years, until the improvement built up, was something I would go a long way to avoid having again, for myself or for my kids. At the beginning of my treatment, the asthma was so severe that my allergist was concerned that he wouldn't be able to improve me fast enough to keep me from developing emphysema, which is non-reversible and ultimately lethal. Because of the severity of my symptoms, I have always been more prone to respiratory illnesses like bronchitis, even today. All I have to do is think of what I would have been like WITHOUT the treatment that improved my condition to the point where (until this last pregnancy) I could live a relatively normal life, and there's absolutely no question in my mind that the treatment is worth every penny. Also, every allergist I have had has emphasized that the earlier the problem is detected and treated, the more promising the prognosis, both long-term and short-term. Because of this, I keep an eagle eye on my son's health, since he has a higher chance of developing allergies because of heredity in the first place. Now that he is four, we have been able to have some intradermal skin tests done (most allergists agree that testing is pretty worthless at earlier ages) when he seemed to have a lot of sniffling and coughing that unfelicitously coincided with the tree-pollination period this past spring. Encouragingly, he tested negative, but I would much rather be safe than sorry. A child's health, both physical and mental, can be at stake, and they are too precious to take chances with, not to mention the permanent repercussions that can result from the failure to treat the problem. If Mr. Huntley lives in Northern or Central New Jersey, I can recommend two excellent allergists if he wishes. Debbie McBurnett rruxe!debbiem