Talk:Hay fever

message: Someone else wrote: Page describes loratadine high class 'Bold text'as a "short-acting" anti-histamine (and contrasts it with fexofenadine), but the loratadine page itself says it has a "long-lasting effect."  Which is it?
:I'm no medical expert but I too have doubts about what is written in this article. Loratadine is a one per day medication and is marketed as being non-drowsy. Cetirizine on the other hand cautions that it may cause drowsiness. I'm just going by what I read on the box. The article though gives the impression loratadine is more likely to cause drowsiness that Cetirizine, which is obviously not the case. Can a medical/pharmaceutical expert clarify this article? Suitsyou 09:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loratadine / Cetirizine 

message: I removed the "prescription" part, since that is not true everywhere - here in the UK these sprays are over the counter medicines. I've also added another one (Beclomethasone Dipropionate BP which is markerted as Beconase) and added that fluticasone is also marketed as Flixonase 10:07, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We should unlink the brand names. They just redirect to the fluticasone etc. pages. JFW | T@lk 21:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nasal Sprays 

message: It is "common knowledge" among Japanese people that pollinosis only occurs in Japan. Why is this so commonly thought to be true?
:Now that is a very interesting question which, to my knowledge, can only be tenuously answered. The Japanese seem given over to a variety of odd beliefs regarding their uniqueness; I have run across claims that the Japanese process language in their right hemisphere, instead of their left, and that the Japanese government refuses to allow drugs into circulation unless they have been specifically tested on Japanese subjects (that is, medical results from Chinese, American, or any other non-Japanese subjects are ignored). I don't know whether any of this is true, but it seems to corroborate your own claims of their general attitude toward pollinosis. 
:But all of that need not be blamed entirely on Japanese ethnocentrism. In many ways, Japan is unique, or at least unusual; the results of value surveys published by Hofstede find that Japan is the most "Masculine," work-oriented society in the world, while psychometric surveys published by Allik find Japan at the extreme end of a cluster of trais related to anxiety; the high anxiety of Japan in corroborated by Richard Lynn's research. Additionally, IQ studies published by Richard Lynn show that Japan has one of the highest IQs in the world, and other unrelated studies discussed by Jensen show allergies and asthma as modest correlates of intelligence. Perhaps the Japanese claim to be uniquely susceptible to pollinosis because they are inuitively aware of this relationship? If so, there is no research demonstrating that! Harkenbane 00:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know anything about Japan, but isn't one aspect of the culture oriented around cleanliness? Maybe that could relate to the 'hygene hypothesis' for allergies. Peoplesunionpro 02:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Kafunsho" 花粉症　pollinosis in Japan 

message: If hay fever is, as the article says, more prevalent during when it’s hot, dry, and windy, then why is it that I only get it during cold, humid, rainy days, when pollen and dust aren’t supposed to be floating around in the air? Does this have something to do with me living in the tropics? Right now it’s the rainy season, and it’s usually this time of the year when I—and lots of other people—get hay fever.
:Are you sure you have hay fever and not some kind of mold allergy?  128.135.192.75 16:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hay fever in humid conditions

message: Is this prevalent in all countries around the world? I am curious because, I'm from South Asia, and don't recall people sufferring from Hay fever back there, as much as they do in the US. So, what's the reason? --Ragib 00:30, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. Check out  Peoplesunionpro 02:11, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: might have something to do with the fact that south east asia lies on the equator, and thus the flora/ grasses haven't evolved to pollinate during any particular season, and that the pollen levels will be more or less constant through out the year, rather than occurring in a short burst at the onset of spring--WuIzMe (talk) 07:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worldwide distribution 

message: We are an allergy company that provides an allergy learning centre, allergy product ratings and reviews. Our site is recommended by top practitioners in the field. We would like to know whether our site (allergymatters.com)is qualified. so that more allergy sufferers can benefit from this valuable resource. SOrry if we put our message in the wrong place. Thank you very much217.36.223.45 10:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the polite request on this and other pages (thus following WP:SPAM guideline re not directly inserting external links to website one is directly involved with), but no not appropriate. Wikipedia is not a directories listings and a commericial site is therefore not an appropriate external link (see WP:EL for policy). As your site introduces itself "Allergymatters is a unique One Stop Allergy Shop selling...". Please do stay though and improve our articles (if you sign up, it will be easier to direct you to relevant help & policy pages). Yours David Ruben  Talk  13:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Request external link allergymatters.com

message: I have removed or toned-down various bold statements of doubtful accuracy.  It's possible some of these have been added by commercial interests, as the claims seem out-of-place, although I have no evidence of this.  Any of these statements can be re-added, if they are rewritten to conform to NPOV and have a proper citation.
"A very small amount of Vicks VapoRub(TM)cream around the eyes will effectively reduce the itching (however: vapors will cause a cold sensation and watery eyes)": This is not a preventative.  It also needs a citation.  This sort of claim may not even be appropriate for this article, even if true.
This be removed - this is a request to the person who inserted it.  If a child wipes their eyes, the effects will be unpleasant.  If the producer of Vicks cites this as a use then let it remain but cite the documentation...
"Grazax treats the underlying cause of hay fever as well as reducing the symptoms.": This may well be true, but statements such as these are not acceptable unless they are specific and cited.  Presently, this item reads somewhat like an advertisement.  I've toned done the Grazax section.
"It may be helpful to humidify the room you are in to help clean the allergens out of the air, perhaps by using a humidifier, leaving a bowl of water around or leaving a wet towel in the room.": Any such notion of cleaning allergens from the air by raising humidity is dubious, and needs to have significant support if its going to appear here.
"It has been established in controlled trials[1] that acupuncture is more effective than antihistamine drugs in treatment of hay fever. Acupuncture's lack of side-effects is a distinct advantage in treating this condition.  Despite all the clinical evidence, some physicians seem to be in denial and suggest that these claims lack a scientific basis and warn that the efficacy of such treatments is only supported by anecdotal evidence.":  This is obviously garbage.  Nothing of this sort should be allowed in the article by anyone until it is properly qualified.  That is, it needs to be made clear that evidence-based medicine has completely and unanimously rejected acupuncture a long time ago.
If acupuncture (or any of the various other non-evidence-based remedies) are to have a place in this article, it is in a separate section that catalogs all of the various non-evidence-based remedies, with a statement that the reason they are there is that noone outside of a group of 'beleivers' is able to replicate these results.  In no case should any statement be allowed to return that asserts that physicians or scientists are 'in denial.' AaronWL 16:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Various dubious statements 

message: quote from article: "It has been established in controlled trials[4] that acupuncture is no more effective than antihistamine drugs in treatment of hay fever" - in other words, then: acupuncture is no less effective than antihistamine drugs in treatment of hay fever, surely.
Add to that, from same article, "drowsiness and other side effects of antihistamine drugs", and the question arises why the article implies that using acupuncture in treatment of hay fever is not recommended as a valid therapy.  If effectiveness is comparable, but acupuncture has no side effects... I don't understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.37.187 (talk • contribs) 22:13, 24 April 2007
:Article cites one report, for which unfortunately no online link given that we might explore its conclusions in detail. "no more effective" does not necessarily mean "no less effective" - if a method had zero effect, then indeed it would be "no more effective" and also true that less effective - without seeing original paper we can't be sure of precise values/interpretation. Other papers found on search of PubMed include PMID 15154290 which concludes "No differences in clinical symptoms were seen between active versus sham acupuncture", PMID 15291903 found variable results depending on the assessment tool used and that "No differences between the two groups could be detected with the Allergic Rhinitis Symptom Questionnaire".David Ruben  Talk  22:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Acupuncture/alternative therapies

message: Consider the following page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirulina_(dietary_supplement)
Note that at the very bottom there is a mention of its use to prevent hayfever. There is a reference as well for the claim.
I can provide journal article(s) that show activity for hyperactive genes can be altered by dietary intake. I add this only to point out that dietary effects are not to be ruled out by... zealous individuals. The mechanism for spirulina preventing hayfever may not be known, but it may be a phenotopic effect due to gene expression suppression or activation.
A section for dietary considerations should be added.
On a different point, pollen _can_ be removed indoors, not by humidifying (which may work for some types of pollen, causing aggregation... but this is doubtful except at higher concentrations), but instead by acquiring a small machine which produces ozone. It should be mentioned as well that ozone is only beneficial very high in the atmosphere and is a toxin that we should not breathe. It is important to have the ozone generator adjusted properly. (Fresh scent is good, electric storm scent is bad) 64.114.135.26 00:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't you mean an ioniser? Ionisers aim to produce charged molecules, which may stick to pollen and cause precipitation on surfaces. Ionised air may have other direct effects on the body too, but ozone is dangerous and damages the lungs, a hazard from photocopiers that must be avoided. --86.135.182.210 21:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dietary Treatment 

message: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01620.x - this is, to speak with the late Saddam Hussein, "the mother of all reviews" into hay fever and its impact on asthma. In print it is 153 pages, and it has 2241 references. I'm sure it could be used as a background reference on this article... JFW | T@lk 15:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monstrous review 

message: "Avoid bicycling or walking - instead use a method of confined transportation such as a car."
Is this really such a good recommendation?  Although traveling inside a car will certainly reduce exposure to pollen, the physical exercise lost by avoiding bicycling and walking seems a lot more detrimental than exposure to pollen for all but the worst sufferers.  This sort of advice might lead even mild sufferers to find an "excuse" to avoid exercise, when a simple antihistamine would suffice.
Halon8 (talk) 22:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preventing exposure 

message: The current definition:
: Allergic rhinitis, known as hay fever, is caused by pollens of specific seasonal plants, airborne chemicals and dust particles in people who are allergic to these substances. It 
I wonder whether the cause by pollens is a condition necessary for the medical condition to qualify as allergic rhinitis. I would suppose that any allergen-caused reaction resembling common cold would qualify. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: Most people including those who claim to be experts, know next to nothing about hay fever. There is no known cure and there is absolutely nothing available which can alleviate it. Furthermore, nasal sprays do not alleviate hay fever. In fact they greatly aggravate it. The only remedy is to avoid the pollen altogether by staying indoors with doors and windows tightly closed and to travel in an air conditioned car with the windows closed, or better still, go and live in another part of the world. Apgeraint (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is no known cure for hay fever. 

message: I'm not sure of the usual policy on these things... But I find it odd that the time of year for the northern hemisphere is mentioned, but not the southern. That just stinks of the old "USA is the world" logic of many US born citizens (though in this case it may not have been a US citizen who did it). I don't know the normal time of year for southern hemisphere hayfever (I just get releived when it goes away), so I can't add it, but if someone does.... Supertin (talk) 23:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening section's time of year comment 

message: Even though this is the superior article, it should probably be moved/merged into rhinitis, since that's the more general subject and most of the information there is duplicated here. LSD (talk) 03:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved the bulk of this article to the newly expanded rhinitis page. All that's left out is the medications section, since the information was already present. LSD (talk) 23:25, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

text: My first reaction is that the non-allergic material should be expanded and that there is room for a whole family of articles.  But I'll abstain because I don't know enough about the medicine to say how awkward it would be to divide things up by cause in that way. Kingdon (talk) 17:30, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The non-allergic stuff should definitely be expanded, but allergic rhinitis is about more than hay fever, and belongs on the general rhinitis page. Plus, there's no point duplicating the treatment information (since all of the treatment for allergic rhinitis, save allergy meds, are the same as for every other form).LSD (talk) 23:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge