Jump to content

Talk:Allergen immunotherapy: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Shellac (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 19: Line 19:
==Needs help==
==Needs help==
This article is a good start, but it needs the help of experts to flesh out and make appropriate citations. For example, in the "Mechanism of Therapeutic Action" section, the mechanism of the hypersensitivity itself is described adequately, but therapeutic action is described thus: "the individual's immune system is essentially 'retrained' to tolerate exposure." This suggests that the immune system learns to recognize the allergen as something innocuous. Current study does not support that idea. Instead, it is believed that repeated (controlled) exposure to increasing doses of the allergen causes 'increasing' immune response from plasma- and memory-type [[B-Cells]], which leads to widespread circulation of IgG (and memory cells to augment immune response on future exposures). When the immune system later encounters uncontrolled or large doses of the antigen, the "invader" becomes coated with IgG molecules, which proliferate in the bloodstream and extracellular matrix. This makes the antigen's binding sites unavailable (invisible) to the IgE molecules on granular leukocytes. The immune system doesn't learn to "tolerate" the antigen; instead, it becomes hypersensitive to it and clobbers the substance with IgG. The antigen/IgG complex is then consumed and broken down by phagocytes like neutrophils and macrophages. This keeps any significant amount of antigen from getting to the IgE on (and degranulating) mast cells, which accumulate in tissues like the endothelium, rather than circulating in the blood. [[Special:Contributions/151.151.73.166|151.151.73.166]] ([[User talk:151.151.73.166|talk]]) 22:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
This article is a good start, but it needs the help of experts to flesh out and make appropriate citations. For example, in the "Mechanism of Therapeutic Action" section, the mechanism of the hypersensitivity itself is described adequately, but therapeutic action is described thus: "the individual's immune system is essentially 'retrained' to tolerate exposure." This suggests that the immune system learns to recognize the allergen as something innocuous. Current study does not support that idea. Instead, it is believed that repeated (controlled) exposure to increasing doses of the allergen causes 'increasing' immune response from plasma- and memory-type [[B-Cells]], which leads to widespread circulation of IgG (and memory cells to augment immune response on future exposures). When the immune system later encounters uncontrolled or large doses of the antigen, the "invader" becomes coated with IgG molecules, which proliferate in the bloodstream and extracellular matrix. This makes the antigen's binding sites unavailable (invisible) to the IgE molecules on granular leukocytes. The immune system doesn't learn to "tolerate" the antigen; instead, it becomes hypersensitive to it and clobbers the substance with IgG. The antigen/IgG complex is then consumed and broken down by phagocytes like neutrophils and macrophages. This keeps any significant amount of antigen from getting to the IgE on (and degranulating) mast cells, which accumulate in tissues like the endothelium, rather than circulating in the blood. [[Special:Contributions/151.151.73.166|151.151.73.166]] ([[User talk:151.151.73.166|talk]]) 22:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


'''Bold text'''removing silly image

there is an image of a girl in "anaphylactic shock". she is resting with her eyes closed and wearing an o2 mask. while she might be in mild anaphylactic shock, it must not be severe shock as she not even intubated. alternatively, she may just be sleeping with an oxygen mask on for any myriad of reasons. this image is not illustrative of a patient in true "shock" and adds nothing to the article overall. (shellac.)

Revision as of 01:41, 20 February 2008

WikiProject iconMedicine B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bold textcan u tell me the bad effects that are caused due to the excessive production of antibodies


"they bind to allergens and reduce the ability of IgA to detect the presence of the allergens" - shouldn't this be IgE?

are these the kind that are given for pet allergies?

I was wondering if "allergy shots" for pet allergies are done this way and if so, do they increase your risk of contracting other sicknesses. I was told be someone on yahooanswers that they lower your immune system's ability to function and make you get sick easier. Is this true? Thanks. Lizzysama 20:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm asking the same question as Lizzy, also, do allergy shots (for pet allergies) actually work? --MC 17:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well don't listen to the people on Yahoo answers then, because that is absolutely wrong. I have been taking allergy shots for 3 years now and my immune system functions far better now than it ever did. And yes, they do really work. My allergies had me constantly catching a cold before, which really messed with my immune system. Now I only catch a cold once or twice a year. And amazingly I went I just went through spring without any problems, which was one of the worst springs for allergens in years. Cheers! Potatobread 05:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WARNING

i am taking allergy shots and through a series of accidents got put off my maintenence dose twice (2 months) unfortunatly, i have to resart my dosage from the begining, right back to the orriginal dose. hopefully this plan will accelerate as my immune system re-adjusts, but be warned!! if you take the shots, DONT GET OFF THEM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.137.172 (talk) 22:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs help

This article is a good start, but it needs the help of experts to flesh out and make appropriate citations. For example, in the "Mechanism of Therapeutic Action" section, the mechanism of the hypersensitivity itself is described adequately, but therapeutic action is described thus: "the individual's immune system is essentially 'retrained' to tolerate exposure." This suggests that the immune system learns to recognize the allergen as something innocuous. Current study does not support that idea. Instead, it is believed that repeated (controlled) exposure to increasing doses of the allergen causes 'increasing' immune response from plasma- and memory-type B-Cells, which leads to widespread circulation of IgG (and memory cells to augment immune response on future exposures). When the immune system later encounters uncontrolled or large doses of the antigen, the "invader" becomes coated with IgG molecules, which proliferate in the bloodstream and extracellular matrix. This makes the antigen's binding sites unavailable (invisible) to the IgE molecules on granular leukocytes. The immune system doesn't learn to "tolerate" the antigen; instead, it becomes hypersensitive to it and clobbers the substance with IgG. The antigen/IgG complex is then consumed and broken down by phagocytes like neutrophils and macrophages. This keeps any significant amount of antigen from getting to the IgE on (and degranulating) mast cells, which accumulate in tissues like the endothelium, rather than circulating in the blood. 151.151.73.166 (talk) 22:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Bold textremoving silly image

there is an image of a girl in "anaphylactic shock". she is resting with her eyes closed and wearing an o2 mask. while she might be in mild anaphylactic shock, it must not be severe shock as she not even intubated. alternatively, she may just be sleeping with an oxygen mask on for any myriad of reasons. this image is not illustrative of a patient in true "shock" and adds nothing to the article overall. (shellac.)