On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:33:23 -0700, "pennyaline"
> scribbled
some thoughts:


>I'll piggyback onto dear "Barbtail":
>
>> Someone else (I forget who) wrote:
>> >That's ridiculous (not the someone part). It's common to react to an
>> >allergen on first exposure. Your advice could kill someone if they
>believed
>> >what you say.
>> >
>> >Scott.
>
>It's always good to know that my training stands in good stead.
>
>Scott, NO ONE has had an allergic reaction to something they have NEVER been
>exposed to before. It's a matter of how the immune system functions, and all
>of your lay misconceptions won't undo that
>
>Chemistry is such, though, that one can have a first exposure to a substance
>anywhere that it occurs in nature or science/manufacturing. But even in that
>case, the first, the very first exposure will not cause an allergic
>reaction. It can't!
>

What about a mother who has an allergy to lets say peanuts,
could it not be conceivable that it is passed on to her
child. Think in terms of AIDS, passed on from mother to
unborn child or a heroin addicted mother passes her
addiction on to her unborn child.

Could not the child then get an allergic reaction on first
exposure, especially now that almost everything causes an
allergic reaction to someone? Many advabces in medicine
have been made, but still the scientists are
discovering/creating now conditions all the time.

--

Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
| (©) (©)
Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
d(-_-)b | /// \\\