Talk:Urushiol-induced contact dermatitis

message: One remedy not mentioned is the homeopathic Rhus Tox, which is highly effective--stops the rash and removes the itch as if by magic. Perhaps someone can come up with figures and studies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.182.64 (talk • contribs) 
:Homeopathic medicine has not been proven to work. Mo-Al 18:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  For all practical purposes, homeopathy has been conclusively proven to NOT work. Homeopathy practitioners and manufacturers of homeopathic products have had many decades and endless chances to show that it works, and have consistently and systematically declined to do so. TooManyFingers (talk) 23:51, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  homeopathic Rhus Tox 

message: "Urinating on the affected areas has no effect." 
ROFL. What? I really don't understand the point of this. Is this some rumour in circulation? Is this really necessary to point out? It just seems really out of place, because there's not even anything leading up to the notion that something warm and acidic could help cure a poison ivy rash. In fact, previous statements already say what does. Why does this need to be here?
:Possibly proliferated by the Friends episode, The One with the Jellyfish, there is the pervasive belief that urine will alleviate the symptoms of jellyfish stings.  However, as the jellyfish article points out, peeing on the sting will actually make it worse.  Perhaps someone related this myth to poison ivy?  I still agree with its removal.  Hoof Hearted (talk) 18:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is This Necessary 

message: Nice article.  I just have a few comments on the plants.  When possible, the use of scientific plant names has a number of advantages, especially with rare plants where different authors invent different "common names" which are not common at all.  If we have an article for a plant, it is almost guaranteed to be accessible from the scientific name, while redirects from common names are less dependably present and less dependably correct.  I realize that chasing down the scientific names is not always convenient, and that we're all unpaid volunteers.  Thanks — Pekinensis 18:23, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Should more be mentioned that most (? all) of the folk remedies mentioned have little (or no) basis in medical fact - I remember coming across a reference somewhere which stated that jewelweed does not work (can't remember where, unfortunately) - MPF 23:49, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plants 

message: The article estimates that 20% - 40% of people are not allergic to urushiol. I thought I had read somewhere that there might be a population basis for this (as opposed to just being random)? For example, did Japanese lacquer workers (who used urushiol and presumably were exposed to a lot) insensitive? I know that mango and cashew harvesters routinely exhibit the dermatitis, so it wouldn't be an acquired immunity kind of thing. In fact, the opposite: doesn't it require an initial exposure, like other allergens? Jeff Worthington 20:57, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sensitivity by population? 

message: Could less US-POV terms for clothing be found, please? "Pants" to most people outside of the US means underwear, and the wording is nonsensical to anyone not familiar with its US meaning of trousers. The problem of usurhiol is far from unique to the USA - MPF 23:49, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Terms

message: I've already cleaned up the poison ivy and urushiol articles to take out their HOWTO-ness, but this one needs a lot of work.  BIG BOLD DISCLAIMERS AND WARNINGS are not encyclopedic.  Anaphylaxis isn't a perfect article, but I think it's a demonstration of how to give information on an important medical condition without resorting to step by step instructions.  We need to phrase this article in terms of facts, not "should"s. Night Gyr 06:15, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  howto 

message: I would suggest that the Disney World example be cut from the article. It doesn't fit, and it seems to be unsourced. Agreed? Mo-Al 18:27, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disney World example 

message: Can someone verify the "Treatment" description placed after "hot water" - nearly orgasmic feeling? Is this vandalism?
:Sounds like B.S. to me, but I'm not an expert. (Besides, I don't see how you could verify whether something feels "nearly orgasmic".) Mo-Al 18:51, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I suppose I could verify it (most any relief could be compared to orgasms when suffering from a serious case), but I don't think it's necessarily the best turn of phrase for this article. SB Johnny 19:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I rephrased it. Mo-Al 19:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

text: There is a certain amount of substance to that assertion.  Came to this Wiki because I contracted Poison Ivy while searching for a golf ball in the woods - wanted to know what I am dealing with. When its itchy, try running REALLY hot water over the affected area during a shower - its crazy.  71.97.75.83 01:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm familiar with this treatment and there's a basis for it -- something about heat triggering histamine release, so you essentially 'burn out' your ability to produce more for appx. 30 minutes.  Also, coincidentally enough, the New Yorker just had an article on the neurological basis for itching in the latest issue (~July 2008) and there's apparently some evidence that the brain regions involved are those of compulsion and reward, as for drug use, sex, etc, so (as someone familiar with the sensation, who can understand where the initial author must've been coming from) maybe it's more of an insight than a stretch. O_o  64.252.196.209 (talk) 08:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nearly Orgasmic Feeling?" ... ? 

message: Made some big changes to this article after developing a, ah, "personal interest" in poison ivy-related articles (draw your own conclusions). As noted earlier, a great deal of the article read more like advice from WebMD; while is was mostly accurate, it wasn't encyclopedic in tone and was sometimes excessive in content -- WP:NOT a health guide, after all. I condensed the last few sections, mostly concerning treatment, into one, trying to preserve what seemed appropriate for an article here. The list of common treatments were removed, as it was too heavy on the advice side. Should read a little bit cleaner now. Tijuana Brass¡Épa! 05:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 

message: Added a comment to the article wondering what "CPE" might mean in the "Mechanism" section. None of the articles on the CPE disambiguation page seem to fit. N6 16:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "CPE"? 

message: In the myths section, it's not made entirely clear that the statements listed are false. (that's why I reworded it; though it didn't sound nice it was more clear.) Maybe someone should reword it better. Mo-Al 07:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Myths

message: "Chemically, urushiol is harmless to humans, but when it bonds to skin cells it initiates a T-cell mediated immune response."
Isn't bonding and initiating reactions chemical? Harmless? Why not just: Urushiol will bond with skin cells resulting in a T-cell mediated immune response. I don't even know if that's true, so I hate to change anything.  You'll decide.
:I believe the meaning is that it is an allergic reaction: your own immune system identifies urushiol as an antigen and causes the inflammatory response.  This is not a simple chemical reaction, although of course many chemical reactions are involved in the biological immune response.  --Chinasaur 08:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mechanism 

message: It would be helpful to have more information about the pros and cons of treating a skin reaction site with steroid creams.-69.87.202.67 17:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  topical steroid 

message: This article needs a cross-section diagram of the skin, showing where the fluid accumulates to form a blister.  What are the best ways to drain the blister?  What are the pros and cons of doing this?-69.87.199.208 21:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no pros to draining the blisters. It will often create more irritation and itching, as well as permanent scarring. Further, it greatly increases the risk of infection. 173.75.251.214 (talk) 04:36, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blister fluid 

message: Zanfel Wash for Poison Ivy / Oak & Sumac, Dual-Action Formula
Ingredients: Polyethylene Granules , Sodium Lauroyl Sarcosinate , Nonoxynol-9 , C12-15 Pareth-9 , Disodium EDTA , Quaternium-15 , Carbomer 2% , Triethanolamine , Water 
US$40/1-oz tube, quite expensive!-69.87.204.208 01:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zanfel 

message: It seems like palms are less likely to get poison ivy than the back of the hand or other parts of the arm.  Why?-69.87.200.24 23:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Palm less sensitive 

message: The "Treatment" section ostensibly ends with a list of myths, but then actually presents a list of facts. (And FWIW, see previous comment from July 2006.) -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 17:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just made a slight re-wording. -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Myths, redux 

message: Ive heard Bleach to dry it, Fingernail polish to seal it, and of course Calamine lotion. R.L. Nieman 16:42, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bleach can be very bad for your skin, can easily weaken the skin and allow for infections, and can even enable the urushiol to move into your blood stream. Bleach is a terrible idea. I would suppose that fingernail polish is also bad for skin. Fingernail polish would also prevent the skin from staying dry and open to the air, and would prevent other soothing lotions from being applied, especially considering how difficult it would be to remove nail polish from the skin.173.75.251.214 (talk) 04:34, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some things.. 

message: Under Mechanism is "Since the skin reaction is an allergic one, people may develop an increasingly strong reactions after repeated exposures, or show no immune response on their first exposure, but show sensitivity on following exposures."
On page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxicodendron_diversilobum under Toxin, "Around 15%[1] to 30%[2] of people have no allergic response, but most if not all will become sensitized over time with repeated or more concentrated exposure to urushio."
This seems inconsistent.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.42.174 (talk) 03:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There doesn't seem to be any contradiction. More exposures leads to more sensitivity for both sentences you quote. 173.75.251.214 (talk) 04:39, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated Exposure 

message: Some of the treatment sections reads too much like an ad to me.  Also looks like it could use some sources.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevink707 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There appears to be an edit war regarding the inclusion of a product called ItchyFree.  I have removed the entire list (4 products in all), for two reasons: the article does not cite a reliable source about any of these products, and it is specific to the United States while Wikipedia is aimed at a worldwide readership.  If these products merit inclusion in this article, then we need to cite a reliable source about their mechanism, efficacy, etc. (An example of "reliable source," in this case, might be a Consumer Reports study, as opposed to the manufacturer's website or promotional literatue). Thank you. -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 22:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatment 

message: > No vaccine has been developed to counter urushiol symptoms
Hey! Urushiol is neither a bacteria nor a virus.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.53.16.148 (talk) 00:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  urushiol vaccine 

message: One section said that burning poison oak may not cause symptoms, while another section says it definitely does "these statements are TRUE".
What gives?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.233.38.65 (talk) 04:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Exposing yourself to the smoke is a very deadly experiment to try.  You might get lucky.  Or you might be promptly on your way to the hospital.  Just imagine the lining of your lungs reacting to direct contact...-69.87.200.106 (talk) 22:02, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: I've used hot water many times. I've read that it uses up all of the histamine in your skin. Works for me.
--64.179.113.48 (talk) 17:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the "uses up all the histamine in your skin" is correct at all. For some people, hot water does provide temporary relief from itching and pain. For others, it does the opposite. If you do use hot water, make sure it is not too hot, as you do not want to break the blisters and cause an infection. 173.75.251.214 (talk) 04:42, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hot Water 

message: What animals other than humans do or don't have this vulnerability?  It is said that there are two kinds of goats that especially love to eat up poison ivy!-69.87.200.106 (talk) 22:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  animals 

message: "According to Albert M. Kligman's classic paper on poison oak (1958), there is no evidence of racial immunity to poison oak urushiol, not even among full-blooded Indians; however, black skin is slightly less susceptible. Native Americans were much more "in tune" with nature and probably learned to recognize, respect and avoid the plant at an early age. There is some evidence suggesting that native-born Hawaiians and Asians may be less susceptible to poison oak possibly due to early exposure to mangoes and Japanese lacquer (Epstein and Claiborne, 1957). Eskimos also are thought to be relatively immune, but the genetics of poison oak/ivy susceptibility are very poorly understood on a population basis. On an individual basis, children of very sensitive parents are highly likely to become poison oak sufferers (Walker et al., 1989)."Herbalgram (American Botanical Council)
Volume 34: 36-42, 1995 by W.P. Armstrong and W.L. Epstein, M.D. cited in waynesword.palomar.edu/ww0802.htm
-69.87.199.228 (talk) 01:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  no evidence of racial immunity 

message: "In addition to using poison oak lacquer as a black dye, Pomo Indians reportedly used it to cure warts (Saunders, 1933). The wart was incised and then fresh resin was applied to the incision. Fresh resin was also used as a cure for ringworm and was applied to rattlesnake bites."Herbalgram (American Botanical Council)
Volume 34: 36-42, 1995 by W.P. Armstrong and W.L. Epstein, M.D. cited in waynesword.palomar.edu/ww0802.htm
-69.87.199.228 (talk) 01:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  potential positive uses? 

message: "The evolutionary significance of poison oak resin containing urushiol is difficult to explain. The resinous sap probably helps to seal wounds and may retard the growth of infectious fungal and bacterial spores. A chemical defense strategy against "predatory pressure" seems unlikely since the foliage and fruits are eaten by deer, goats, horses, cattle and a variety of birds. In fact, wood rats even use the branches to construct their nests. Only humans appear to have painful encounters with the plant, although laboratory studies indicate sensitivity on exposed skin of guinea pigs, rabbits, mice, sheep, dogs and rhesus monkeys.
In the case of humans, our well-developed immune system may be overreacting to a relatively innocuous plant resin on the skin. But there is a positive side to all of this--research on poison oak may lead to a better understanding of the human immune system and the treatment of renegade viruses and tumor cells. In the final analysis, poison oak may be a blessing in disguise."Herbalgram (American Botanical Council)
Volume 34: 36-42, 1995 by W.P. Armstrong and W.L. Epstein, M.D. cited in waynesword.palomar.edu/ww0802.htm
-69.87.199.228 (talk) 01:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  evolutionary significance 

message: Zanfel is very expensive; $40 for 1-oz tube (2008). CVS sells a much cheaper knock-off version, $15 for 1.5-oz.
'There is also interest in a proprietary product known as Zanfel Poison Ivy Wash. The company Web site states that this product is unique, being the only one able to remove urushiol from the skin "after bonding," through the formation of "an aggregated cluster."18 The Web site also claims the product relieves pain and itching, usually within 30 seconds. A thorough search of the manufacturer's Web site yields locations to buy the product, furnishes glowing testimonials from satisfied users, and answers several questions about it, but the ingredients contained in the product do not appear on any Web page. Knowledge of the ingredients is critical in ascertaining their efficacy and safety. A Web site selling the product lists them as polyethylene granules, sodium lauroyl sarcosinate, nonoxynol 9, C12-15 Pareth-9, disodium EDTA, quaternium 15, carbomer 2%, triethanolamine, and water.19 None of these ingredients is FDA approved to remove urushiols, and none possesses any proven local anesthetic effect that would relieve itching and pain. Since the product does not yet meet the standards of evidence-based medicine, it is unproven and should not be recommended.'
:Source: 4/17/2007; Poison Ivy: The Classic Contact Dermatitis; W. Steven Pray, PhD, DPh
-69.87.204.78 (talk) 21:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've had urushiol-induced contact dermatitis (or as most people simply call it, "poison ivy") many times, and I've tried just about everything there is to treat/cure it. Zanfel is extremely effective. It removes urushiol with some kind of proprietary formula that binds to the urushiol and renders it water soluble. It completely stops itching and seems to speed up healing. It's the only effective treatment for poison ivy. Unless you've got systemic urushiol poisoning (which causes outbreaks all over the body), I'd say Zanfel is more than a treatment - it's so effective that I'd almost call it a cure. I don't want to sound like I'm promoting the product... but it really is the only treatment that actually works. It's well worth the high price. As for the ingredients... I can't figure out what binds the urushiol, but I tend to believe that it does, somehow. The mechanism of action is elusive, but the product is undeniably effective.Fuzzform (talk) 02:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zanfel 

message: There seems to be inadequate research into the volatility of the toxin.  I have had a severe systemic reaction that went on expanding for weeks when I pruned poison oak with long handled clippers.  I never touched it at all and cleaned everything carefully afterward.  I know other people who have had severe systemic reactions from cutting into poison oak branches or roots.  I do not see any coverage of this on the authoritative sites. 
Wish someone would do some work on this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.102.101 (talk) 00:37, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Systemic poison oak reaction 

message: It's not clear in the article whether the allergic rash reaction on the skin is limited to the area in contact with the oil, or spreads further.  I'll confess I'm only asking because apparently a certain Z Efron has an all over rash per this article (oh the shame of it - mine that is, for checking out his story on WP)  ‒ Jaymax✍ 07:05, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is rash localised? 

message: I've had some notable anti-itch success using raw Aloe Vera juice/pulp (that I've got growing in my backyard).  It does sting for a short time (few minutes) after the Aloe Vera is applied to the affected area, but after that, no itch for a number of hours (well over 4 hours of anti-itch relief).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.140.4.71 (talk) 02:18, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aloe Vera as an anti-itch 

message: Reference 11 does not lead to a document titled as cited, but to the results of an Ovid search (https://ovidsp.tx.ovid.com/sp-3.8.1a/ovidweb.cgi?QS2=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), none of which corresponds to the cited title. Verteuil (talk) 21:14, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: In this film, "The Prince & Me 2: The Royal Wedding" 129.180.139.17 (talk) 02:44, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in the film Prince and Me 2 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Urushiol-induced contact dermatitis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120211161354/http://www.intelihealth.com:80/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/7945/8214/7770.html?d=dmtJHE%20 to http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/7945/8214/7770.html?d=dmtJHE%20
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Urushiol-induced contact dermatitis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100716055654/http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm049342.htm to http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm049342.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:49, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is now an over the counter product called Zanfel that will CURE dermatitis caused by urushiol. When used as directed, it draws the oil out of the skin and absorbs it, short-circuiting the reaction. I have used it myself and recommended it to several other people, and everyone has reported the same thing that I experienced. The itching stops almost immediately after applying the product, and the lesions dry up and start healing within 12 - 24 hours after applying the product. I think it would be informative and helpful to the public if someone could include this information on the page. Here is a link to the product: http://www.zanfel.com/help. 
Heike Ott (hott@cimtel.net)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.207.78.219 (talk) 23:24, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cure for Urushiol-induced contact dermatitis 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Urushiol-induced contact dermatitis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090721044257/http://globaltwitcher.auderis.se:80/artspec_information.asp?thingid=82914 to http://globaltwitcher.auderis.se/artspec_information.asp?thingid=82914
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified