Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2003;327:1229 (22 November), doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7425.1229
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORDesensitisation for hay fever, using conventional high dose extracts, does work1 and does modify allergy, as reflected by long term remission of disease for at least three years after treatment, and data indicating reduced progression of hay fever to asthma in children.2 3 On the other hand, the negative results of the study by Radcliffe et al concerning enzyme-potentiated desensitisation using low dose extracts are convincing and seriously question the use of this alternative treatment.4
|
It is unfortunate that your journal cover banner heading did not distinguish the two forms of treatment, with the likely result that general practitioners will be discouraged from referring the small but significant proportion of patients with severe hay fever, unresponsive to nasal corticosteroids and antihistamines, to NHS allergy clinics for consideration of high dose desensitisation.
Equally upsetting was the depiction of a "stargazer," I presume a type of lily, as a cause of
Stephen R Durham, professor of allergy and respiratory medicine
Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals NHS Trust, London SW3 6NP s.durham@imperial.ac.uk