Talk:Urticaria

message: Pressure also
The layout of this section confuses two orthogonal issues.  Urticaria can be acute or chronic.  By the definition I'm working from, an acute case is one with a duration less than 6 weeks, and a chronic case is longer than that.  Separate from duration, the symptoms can be differentiated based on cause (e.g. physical, contact, infections, etc.). --Ipsuid 01:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types 

message: "The most recently proposed allergen is long-term accumulation of laundry detergent residues in the skin." This sounds kind of quack-ish... is there any evidence of it?
:Mwah. It's possible. JFW | T@lk 20:31, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I spent a few minutes researching in medical journals, and couldn't come up with any studies showing this. I might not have looked hard enough. There is a class of Urticaria that is caused by contact with substances (Contact Urticaria), so it is conceivable that a procedure like this may provide relief for some.  But I think that this paragraph may need to be reworked a bit. --Ipsuid 01:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, I put it there now. Hopefully someone has some sources for all this stuff. (And just for the record, the laundry detergent bit does sound quack-ish.) --Dirk Gently 15:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatments 

message: How about getting a picture that complies with the description? I don't see any red in the current one. Twilight Realm 01:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... do you think this picture (http://www.ceruleantown.com/albums/album32/DSCN1287.jpg) is any better?  It is a pic I took, I could upload it here... Emmyceru 14:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh, and forgot to mention, that was induced by an antibiotic, similar to the picture that is already in the article. Emmyceru 14:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: There is a lot of medical information and claims about treatment that should be cited. - Victah 10:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: How is "urticaria" pronounced?
:Assuming my doctor had it right (and that I can remember it from about a decade back), "er-ti-CARE-ear". First syllable as in the word "earth". Second as in "tick", third as in the verb to care, fourth as in the things on the side of your head you hear with. BigHaz 03:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've always heard it to be pretty much the same, but ending in a two-syllable "ia", like it's spelled. Could be regional, though. --Dirk Gently 20:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Found this chunk in another atricle (Contact dermatitis):
"Contact urticaria is another form of allergic reaction. Its mechanism is classified as Type I allergy, and is different in nature to ACD in the toxins responsible, the toxicolgical mechanism and, more importantly, the time scale overwhich the reaction occurs. As mentioned previously, ACD requires both sensitisation and elicitation, whereas Type I reactions only require a single exposure to the allergen. Contact urticaria manifests itself as small itching wheals (ESCD 2006) which disappear soon after appearing. It has been shown that natural rubber along with other animal proteins trigger this form of contact dermatitis. The molecules associated with this condition are large molecular weight antigens and must therefore usually be aided by some form of previous skin irritation or damage to traverse the skin barrier.
As with other forms of contact dermatitis, the reactions occur at the site of contact with the chemical, and in this way differentiate themselves from other forms of eczema. However, unlike with some other forms of contact dermatitis, urticaria appears to have a genetic aspect to it, with atopic individuals being more susceptible due to their raised allergen-specific IgE plasma levels."
V medical a bit hard to read but could do with more flow and adding whats relevant to the article.  
whaddya think? relevant anybody?    Knowsitallnot 06:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  add this somewhere somehow 

message: it would be helpful for first time sufferers and first time users of ur website to know the time span within which the hives / welts / edema must appear, under each condition, to more or less confirm that type of urticaria. Docs do help but a little more knowledge goes a long way in prevention. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.78.166.11 (talk) 10:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: symptoms

message: Just as  was reading through, I thought this was very confusing:
Chronic urticaria refers to hives that persists for 6 weeks or more. There are no visual differences between acute and chronic urticaria. Some of the more severe chronic cases have lasted more than 20 years. A survey indicated that chronic urticaria lasted a year or more in more than 50% of sufferers and 20 years or more in 20% of them. Of course this does mean that in almost half the people it clears up within a year and in 80% it clears up within 20 years or less (Champion and others, British Journal of Dermatology 1969). (If my head was in the mood, I would do the math and fix it up...) So I suggest that someone rewrites it a bit to get rid of "Of course this does mean" and rearrange a few of the percentages maybe?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.186.54.55 (talk) 03:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this is confusing, but so is the immune system.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.156.24.108 (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing 

message: The following reference seems redundant to the other reference discussing treatment.  It doesn't clarify the relationship between CUV1647, and melatonan (or whatever), which would be good to link the two.  Also, given the Australian company not having a wikipedia page, mentioning the name of the company doesn't really add anything to the page.  
WLU (talk) 14:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant reference 

message: I have also having problems with itchy skin, and only notice the change with the change in laundry degentent.
Currently decided to change the degentent, so as to determine the change in myself, can only confirm at a later stage when the change is made.
thanks for all your coments, very informative.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.15.199.123 (talk) 08:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  HIVES 

message: There's a strange contradiction here. This article says "Less common causes of hives include friction, pressure, temperature extremes, exercise, and sunlight." while Dermatographic urticaria says "Dermatographic urticaria [...] is one of the most common types of urticaria". What gives? Is friction/pressure one of the most common causes or one of the least common ones? 145.99.155.53 (talk) 20:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As an additional and related contradiction, the page for Dermatographic urticaria says that DU is one of the LEAST common forms of urticaria, but here it's listed as one of the MOST common forms. Which of these pages is correct? Metheglyn (talk) 08:19, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: I have no idea how to edit on here, but I noticed a mistake right away when reading this entry and someone needs to fix it.  In the dietary section a study is mentioned that used food additive "E102" and it has been mistakenly referred to as Thorazine.  Thorazine is an old school antipsychotic that was used to treat schizophrenic and bipolar patients.  The name of food additive E102 is actually Tartrazine.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.7.189 (talk) 21:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That text was removed.  -- Scray (talk) 16:39, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tartrazine, not thorazine 

message: take out that silly picture of someone who scratched wikipedia into their skin. Its just childish, and unprofessional.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.184.30.134 (talk) 14:15, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  Though I have no connection to the image, I think it demonstrates in a clever way that this is not a random phenomenon.  -- Scray (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia Picture is stupid

message: Hives alone, or when associated with stomach problems like ulcers and gastritis is very likely caused by H. Pylori, why is H. Pylori down-played in this article by using the words "less likely"?  
H. Pylori is common in 50% of the world population and in 70% of children.  Most people do not have symptoms or adverse reactions, but if all in a family unit are not treated, then the family member who is suffering can be easily re-infected through oral/oral or fecal/oral contamination.  The association of hives and H. Pylori should not be down-played and maybe should even have it's own section so that people can be well informed. 
The test for H. Pylori is quite non-invasive and inexpensive with a simple breath test.  After two days, you know the result and usually a 14 day cycle of two (2) anti-biotics are prescribed.
source:  Wikipedia
Nanmwls (talk) 16:59, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have a change to make to the article based on reliable sources, then please suggest that change or, if you prefer, edit the article. A suggestion here (with references) would be ideal. Note that we cannot use Wikipedia as a source (though you may find useful sources here). -- Scray (talk) 18:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hives and H. Pylori 

message: Food additives may be implicated in some cases of urticaria  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.209.231.169 (talk) 06:06, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update: additive-induced urticaria