|
|
Wouldn't a few years without the allergy be great?
With all due respect to Dr. Wood, here... his assessment that 38% of patients who experience "frequent and predictable" symptoms to milk consumption does NOT sound to me like people who are 'reluctant to consume the allergen' and are 'self-selecting avoidance.' That sounds (to me) like it's what he prefers to believe, given that the alternative is both confusing and deeply sobering.
[url]http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/779896[/url]
It's very troubling. I'm reassured that allergists are at least being TOLD some of this story, though. For too long, they've labeled families "neurotic" when we refuse to continue feeding an allergen after a theoretically passed food challenge.
lakeswimr,
If you had to do it over again, what would you do differently?
I think many of us are too hard on ourselves :grouphug:
Okay-- the upshot after talking with our allergist is that MOST research allergists still don't believe in "resensitization" after a passed challenge.
They just don't.
Okay-- the upshot after talking with our allergist is that MOST research allergists still don't believe in "resensitization" after a passed challenge.
They just don't.
You do have to look at it from their perspective. They think we're all crazy...overly cautious...avoidant... It's easy to look at it all and conclude these kids are throwing in the towel because of psychosomatic symptoms, or oral-only symptoms.
I don't know how researcher explain the anaphylaxis. Panic attacks mistaken for anaphylaxis?
It's tough. I learned during the clinical trial just how far a reaction has to go before visible symptoms appear. The last challenge, the doctor didn't call it until she could see the swelling and redness in my son's throat. By then, he was pretty sick. I would not normally wait that long to give him epinephrine. But it makes it hard to prove when initial symptoms can be so subjective.
(And thanks for the link, Ajas!)
Anyone who's been through at least one oral challenge knows you have limited input on the procedure itself because of established protocols, and it's the doctor's notes about the challenge that get recorded.
Welcome to the impossible world of "my food allergy doesn't fit your theory." :-/ )
DS passed an IOFC and ate the allergen at home a very short time and then had a more potent form of the allergen and failed at home (dr approved to do that at home) and it was as though that turned on a switch in him. He reacted to every form of the allergen and smaller and smaller amounts and I couldn't keep it in his diet.
This same allergist doesn't believe you can have contact ingestion ana like DS has had and insisted DS must have eaten something and lied to me. DS would not do that.
(And thanks for the link, Ajas!)
[url]http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/779896[/url]
We've worried that a patient may leave a study with a false sense of security.... Some of the more dramatic failures were kids that looked like absolute successes at the end of the study
As to FAHF-2, OIT, and Dr. Li, during the time I was establishing with her as a patient DH corresponded with her a bit. One of his direct questions he asked about the possibility of using FAHF-2 in conjunction with OIT in similar way to Boston's Xolair-milk studies: she declined to answer and we of course didn't push it.
OK, I guess you use the word background to mean ethnicity? I don't. Background to me is full context including profession.
Jinhui Dou, Ph.D.
Pharmacognosy and Pharmacology Reviewer
jinhui.dou@fda.hhs.gov
Phone: (301) 796-1062
Dr. Jin-Hui Dou joined the Botanical Review Team as the pharmacognosy reviewer in July 2002. Dr. Dou is uniquely qualified for this position having earned his B.Pharm, and M.S. at the Bejing University of Chinese Medicine and his Ph.D. at the University of Mississippi. In addition to his formal training, Dr. Dou has extensive practical experience in the areas of medicinal plant biology, pharmacology of herbal preparations, and clinical uses of botanical products.
The botanical prescription drug industry is in its infancy, but there are signs that it is trending upward. In 2006, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first new botanical drug under the FDA’s industry guidelines for botanical drug products. This approval has helped to stimulate more interest in the development of botanical products for therapeutic uses. Early-stage university research will be critical in advancing this technology. As this market matures, we can expect a greater interest in the procurement, management and licensing of patents covering botanical products derived from university-based research. However, commercialization of botanical products includes unique challenges. Unlike small molecule drugs, botanical drugs are typically plant extracts containing a mixture of components. At times, the active compounds in these plant extracts have not been identified or fully characterized. Panelists will discuss the intellectual property, regulatory, and licensing hurdles that university technology transfer offices may face in partnering with industry to commercialize botanical prescription drug innovations. Panelists will also discuss lessons learned from the licensing and launching of actual botanical dietary supplement products derived from university research.
Not you links, it's not you.
Any idea of which Henry Ehrlich this would be?
My son passed a food challenge and then reacted to small, not trace, amounts of the food and now has a lower threshold for the food. Very weird. His threshold level changed wildly in the past 7 years since he had ana to that food, went on the pass a challenge, reacted to tiny amounts, and now can eat more than the tiny amounts that cased that reaction. We have been told and tend to think that we either grow into or grow out of allergies but my son shows it isn't always a straight line or always that simple.