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!

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 | /// \\\

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 | /// \\\

"Andrew H. Carter" asked:
> 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.

A mother passes her antibodies to her fetus, but it's estimated that the
transmitted antibodies are effective for only the first six months or so and
then the child (with the help of a few vaccinations) produces its own. I
don't know if it's so that proteins created through allergen exposure are
passed along, so it's likely a good thing that an infant's diet is
remarkably different from that of an older child. It too raises the question
of how long the "allergy" would last.

As far as AIDS is concerned, the virus is passed from mother to child. The
effects of the virus are also passed along (think in terms of rubella).

An addicted mother passes the drug along to her baby, not her addiction. The
child goes through post-natal withdrawal, but not because of the combined
psychological/physical process commonly called "addiction."


> 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.

One of the latest things discovered about the immune system and
antigen-antibody responses is how truly short passive immunity from
vaccination is. This is MHO, of course, but since allergen-antibody
reactions operate the same way, this could actually be good news for allergy
sufferers who can avoid their allergens for a period of time.

"Andrew H. Carter" asked:
> 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.

A mother passes her antibodies to her fetus, but it's estimated that the
transmitted antibodies are effective for only the first six months or so and
then the child (with the help of a few vaccinations) produces its own. I
don't know if it's so that proteins created through allergen exposure are
passed along, so it's likely a good thing that an infant's diet is
remarkably different from that of an older child. It too raises the question
of how long the "allergy" would last.

As far as AIDS is concerned, the virus is passed from mother to child. The
effects of the virus are also passed along (think in terms of rubella).

An addicted mother passes the drug along to her baby, not her addiction. The
child goes through post-natal withdrawal, but not because of the combined
psychological/physical process commonly called "addiction."


> 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.

One of the latest things discovered about the immune system and
antigen-antibody responses is how truly short passive immunity from
vaccination is. This is MHO, of course, but since allergen-antibody
reactions operate the same way, this could actually be good news for allergy
sufferers who can avoid their allergens for a period of time.

"Andrew H. Carter" asked:
> 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.

A mother passes her antibodies to her fetus, but it's estimated that the
transmitted antibodies are effective for only the first six months or so and
then the child (with the help of a few vaccinations) produces its own. I
don't know if it's so that proteins created through allergen exposure are
passed along, so it's likely a good thing that an infant's diet is
remarkably different from that of an older child. It too raises the question
of how long the "allergy" would last.

As far as AIDS is concerned, the virus is passed from mother to child. The
effects of the virus are also passed along (think in terms of rubella).

An addicted mother passes the drug along to her baby, not her addiction. The
child goes through post-natal withdrawal, but not because of the combined
psychological/physical process commonly called "addiction."


> 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.

One of the latest things discovered about the immune system and
antigen-antibody responses is how truly short passive immunity from
vaccination is. This is MHO, of course, but since allergen-antibody
reactions operate the same way, this could actually be good news for allergy
sufferers who can avoid their allergens for a period of time.

Arri London wrote:

> Then we have the case of a colleague who *knew* she was allergic to crab
> (and other crustaceans) and ate some anyway at an office party!
> Developed hives, so she took an antihistamine and we drove her to
> Casualty.
> No idea why someone would do something so daft!


I have a few good guesses. For some people, the desire for special
attention is so great that they're willing to put their lives in danger
to get it. I have no way of knowing, but I'd be willing to wager that
your colleague is single, possibly newly single after being in a longish
relationship, in her late 30s or early 40s, pretty enough but not really
stunning, the sort who wears a bit too much make-up and keeps changing
her hairstyle, and someone who keeps getting interested in something new
and faddish without ever settling on the boring side of staying
interested in something. So she's into an exercise program for a while,
then an alternative medicine; she's a groupie for a particular type of
music, then a religion or a good charitable cause, followed by throwing
herself into making a particular sort of art or craft. In each case,
she gets into it a bit overmuch and talks about it constantly, then
doesn't find the sort of satisfaction that she expected and looks for
something else.


Is any part of my guess correct?


You wouldn't think it, but the office holiday party is a source of real
stress for a lot of people. All year you have one sort of relationship
with the people you work with, and all of a sudden, you're expected to
have an extra-social relationship with them. If you suspect your family
life is lacking somehow, if you like attention and are a bit of a drama
queen to start with and add alcohol to the mix, you end up with someone
who accidentally needs to take others away from an enjoyable party to be
driven off to the emergency room. That's a great way to get the
reassurance you need that people care about you at this lonely time of
year when it is so important for people to show they care.


By the way, I think you did the right thing by driving her to good
medical care. Even if you were manipulated, you did a good deed.


--Lia

Arri London wrote:

> Then we have the case of a colleague who *knew* she was allergic to crab
> (and other crustaceans) and ate some anyway at an office party!
> Developed hives, so she took an antihistamine and we drove her to
> Casualty.
> No idea why someone would do something so daft!


I have a few good guesses. For some people, the desire for special
attention is so great that they're willing to put their lives in danger
to get it. I have no way of knowing, but I'd be willing to wager that
your colleague is single, possibly newly single after being in a longish
relationship, in her late 30s or early 40s, pretty enough but not really
stunning, the sort who wears a bit too much make-up and keeps changing
her hairstyle, and someone who keeps getting interested in something new
and faddish without ever settling on the boring side of staying
interested in something. So she's into an exercise program for a while,
then an alternative medicine; she's a groupie for a particular type of
music, then a religion or a good charitable cause, followed by throwing
herself into making a particular sort of art or craft. In each case,
she gets into it a bit overmuch and talks about it constantly, then
doesn't find the sort of satisfaction that she expected and looks for
something else.


Is any part of my guess correct?


You wouldn't think it, but the office holiday party is a source of real
stress for a lot of people. All year you have one sort of relationship
with the people you work with, and all of a sudden, you're expected to
have an extra-social relationship with them. If you suspect your family
life is lacking somehow, if you like attention and are a bit of a drama
queen to start with and add alcohol to the mix, you end up with someone
who accidentally needs to take others away from an enjoyable party to be
driven off to the emergency room. That's a great way to get the
reassurance you need that people care about you at this lonely time of
year when it is so important for people to show they care.


By the way, I think you did the right thing by driving her to good
medical care. Even if you were manipulated, you did a good deed.


--Lia

Julia Altshuler wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
>
> > Then we have the case of a colleague who *knew* she was allergic to crab
> > (and other crustaceans) and ate some anyway at an office party!
> > Developed hives, so she took an antihistamine and we drove her to
> > Casualty.
> > No idea why someone would do something so daft!
>
> I have a few good guesses. For some people, the desire for special
> attention is so great that they're willing to put their lives in danger
> to get it. I have no way of knowing, but I'd be willing to wager that
> your colleague is single, possibly newly single after being in a longish
> relationship, in her late 30s or early 40s, pretty enough but not really
> stunning, the sort who wears a bit too much make-up and keeps changing
> her hairstyle, and someone who keeps getting interested in something new
> and faddish without ever settling on the boring side of staying
> interested in something. So she's into an exercise program for a while,
> then an alternative medicine; she's a groupie for a particular type of
> music, then a religion or a good charitable cause, followed by throwing
> herself into making a particular sort of art or craft. In each case,
> she gets into it a bit overmuch and talks about it constantly, then
> doesn't find the sort of satisfaction that she expected and looks for
> something else.
>
> Is any part of my guess correct?

Not a single item LOL. She is a happily married Filipina with children.
Don't think she's changed her hairstyle since she had the first child
and never wears makeup to work. My real guess is that she likes crab and
has never heard of anaphylaxis!

>
> You wouldn't think it, but the office holiday party is a source of real
> stress for a lot of people. All year you have one sort of relationship
> with the people you work with, and all of a sudden, you're expected to
> have an extra-social relationship with them. If you suspect your family
> life is lacking somehow, if you like attention and are a bit of a drama
> queen to start with and add alcohol to the mix, you end up with someone
> who accidentally needs to take others away from an enjoyable party to be
> driven off to the emergency room. That's a great way to get the
> reassurance you need that people care about you at this lonely time of
> year when it is so important for people to show they care.
>
> By the way, I think you did the right thing by driving her to good
> medical care. Even if you were manipulated, you did a good deed.
>
> --Lia

We weren't manipulated. She was just being greedy I think It was a
good bet that the antihistamine was all she needed, but no one was going
to take a chance.....

Julia Altshuler wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
>
> > Then we have the case of a colleague who *knew* she was allergic to crab
> > (and other crustaceans) and ate some anyway at an office party!
> > Developed hives, so she took an antihistamine and we drove her to
> > Casualty.
> > No idea why someone would do something so daft!
>
> I have a few good guesses. For some people, the desire for special
> attention is so great that they're willing to put their lives in danger
> to get it. I have no way of knowing, but I'd be willing to wager that
> your colleague is single, possibly newly single after being in a longish
> relationship, in her late 30s or early 40s, pretty enough but not really
> stunning, the sort who wears a bit too much make-up and keeps changing
> her hairstyle, and someone who keeps getting interested in something new
> and faddish without ever settling on the boring side of staying
> interested in something. So she's into an exercise program for a while,
> then an alternative medicine; she's a groupie for a particular type of
> music, then a religion or a good charitable cause, followed by throwing
> herself into making a particular sort of art or craft. In each case,
> she gets into it a bit overmuch and talks about it constantly, then
> doesn't find the sort of satisfaction that she expected and looks for
> something else.
>
> Is any part of my guess correct?

Not a single item LOL. She is a happily married Filipina with children.
Don't think she's changed her hairstyle since she had the first child
and never wears makeup to work. My real guess is that she likes crab and
has never heard of anaphylaxis!

>
> You wouldn't think it, but the office holiday party is a source of real
> stress for a lot of people. All year you have one sort of relationship
> with the people you work with, and all of a sudden, you're expected to
> have an extra-social relationship with them. If you suspect your family
> life is lacking somehow, if you like attention and are a bit of a drama
> queen to start with and add alcohol to the mix, you end up with someone
> who accidentally needs to take others away from an enjoyable party to be
> driven off to the emergency room. That's a great way to get the
> reassurance you need that people care about you at this lonely time of
> year when it is so important for people to show they care.
>
> By the way, I think you did the right thing by driving her to good
> medical care. Even if you were manipulated, you did a good deed.
>
> --Lia

We weren't manipulated. She was just being greedy I think It was a
good bet that the antihistamine was all she needed, but no one was going
to take a chance.....

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> 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?

Although allergies have genetic components, it's not a guarantee that
someone allergic to something will pass it on directly to offspring.
Allergies can run in families though.

AIDS is due to a virus, which of course can be passed on in various
ways. And the addicted mother is passing on the *heroin* (or other drug)
to the foetus, not her addictive behaviour.

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> 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?

Although allergies have genetic components, it's not a guarantee that
someone allergic to something will pass it on directly to offspring.
Allergies can run in families though.

AIDS is due to a virus, which of course can be passed on in various
ways. And the addicted mother is passing on the *heroin* (or other drug)
to the foetus, not her addictive behaviour.

Arri London wrote:

> Not a single item LOL. She is a happily married Filipina with children.
> Don't think she's changed her hairstyle since she had the first child
> and never wears makeup to work. My real guess is that she likes crab and
> has never heard of anaphylaxis!


> We weren't manipulated. She was just being greedy I think It was a
> good bet that the antihistamine was all she needed, but no one was going
> to take a chance.



Heh. Color me wrong. I'm glad you got back to me so I can expand my
thinking on the subject.


--Lia

>Allergies develop with multiple exposures, not from sudden one-time
use

Not an allergist...you just play one on message boards?. Food
allergies can strike at ANY time, and in the OP's case, I suspect the
tumeric. Tumeric is a salicylate. Major trigger in some people.

http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?F...0salic ylates

http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_...18_97/food.htm Read on
allergies on food.

"Arri London" > wrote in message
...

>
> Not a single item LOL. She is a happily married Filipina with children.
> Don't think she's changed her hairstyle since she had the first child
> and never wears makeup to work. My real guess is that she likes crab and
> has never heard of anaphylaxis!
>

That's my mother! :-) My mother is also a once happily married Filipina
(now widowed) with children. She hasn't changed her hairstyle since the
70's and wears very little make-up (foundation and sometimes lipstick). And
(here's the connection) she'll eat things she knows she's allergic to. She
loves shellfish but sometimes gets hives from eating it (it depends largely
on the freshness), loves peanuts but sometimes gets hives from eating them
(probably has something to do with preservatives), and loves tomatoes but is
allergic to nightshades, too. Why does she do it? Just because she loves
them, and she's not going to let a little thing like possible death keep her
from them. She keeps around antihistamines and has only had a very very bad
reaction once (about 20 years ago, and it was the first time she had ever
had a reaction to shellfish--prior to that she had no problems with them).

rona

--
***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!***

"[America] is filled with people who decided not to live in Europe. We had
people who really wanted to live in Europe, but didn't have the energy to go
back. We call them Canadians."
---Grover Norquist in Newsweek, November 22, 2004

"Arri London" > wrote in message
...

>
> Not a single item LOL. She is a happily married Filipina with children.
> Don't think she's changed her hairstyle since she had the first child
> and never wears makeup to work. My real guess is that she likes crab and
> has never heard of anaphylaxis!
>

That's my mother! :-) My mother is also a once happily married Filipina
(now widowed) with children. She hasn't changed her hairstyle since the
70's and wears very little make-up (foundation and sometimes lipstick). And
(here's the connection) she'll eat things she knows she's allergic to. She
loves shellfish but sometimes gets hives from eating it (it depends largely
on the freshness), loves peanuts but sometimes gets hives from eating them
(probably has something to do with preservatives), and loves tomatoes but is
allergic to nightshades, too. Why does she do it? Just because she loves
them, and she's not going to let a little thing like possible death keep her
from them. She keeps around antihistamines and has only had a very very bad
reaction once (about 20 years ago, and it was the first time she had ever
had a reaction to shellfish--prior to that she had no problems with them).

rona

--
***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!***

"[America] is filled with people who decided not to live in Europe. We had
people who really wanted to live in Europe, but didn't have the energy to go
back. We call them Canadians."
---Grover Norquist in Newsweek, November 22, 2004

"Arri London" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Katra wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > "pennyaline" > wrote:
> >
> > > "Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > If you haven't used those spices before, then you could be
> > > > allergic to them.

if your mother was allergic to a substance and she was exposed while you
were in the womb, the antigens/bodies/proteins passes to the fetus, and you
will be allergic to that substance - even though you did not eat it.
I have children who share their mother's allergies and many friends whose
children share some or all of their mother's allergies, some bottle-fed and
some where the mothers said they avoided allergies during nursing-- and some
children who have none where mom said she had carefully avoided her
allergies during pregnancy. But none have dad's allergies.

Rona Yuthasastrakosol wrote:
>
> "Arri London" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >
> > Not a single item LOL. She is a happily married Filipina with children.
> > Don't think she's changed her hairstyle since she had the first child
> > and never wears makeup to work. My real guess is that she likes crab and
> > has never heard of anaphylaxis!
> >
>
> That's my mother! :-) My mother is also a once happily married Filipina
> (now widowed) with children. She hasn't changed her hairstyle since the
> 70's and wears very little make-up (foundation and sometimes lipstick). And
> (here's the connection) she'll eat things she knows she's allergic to. She
> loves shellfish but sometimes gets hives from eating it (it depends largely
> on the freshness), loves peanuts but sometimes gets hives from eating them
> (probably has something to do with preservatives), and loves tomatoes but is
> allergic to nightshades, too. Why does she do it? Just because she loves
> them, and she's not going to let a little thing like possible death keep her
> from them. She keeps around antihistamines and has only had a very very bad
> reaction once (about 20 years ago, and it was the first time she had ever
> had a reaction to shellfish--prior to that she had no problems with them).
>


Thankfully I don't have any food allergies; just pollens which are
unavoidable.
Don't know if I'd eat something I was genuinely allergic to; all those
years spent studying and working in immunology have left their mark LOL.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:37:13 -0700, Arri London
> scribbled some thoughts:


>
>
>Rona Yuthasastrakosol wrote:
>>
>> "Arri London" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> >
>> > Not a single item LOL. She is a happily married Filipina with children.
>> > Don't think she's changed her hairstyle since she had the first child
>> > and never wears makeup to work. My real guess is that she likes crab and
>> > has never heard of anaphylaxis!
>> >
>>
>> That's my mother! :-) My mother is also a once happily married Filipina
>> (now widowed) with children. She hasn't changed her hairstyle since the
>> 70's and wears very little make-up (foundation and sometimes lipstick). And
>> (here's the connection) she'll eat things she knows she's allergic to. She
>> loves shellfish but sometimes gets hives from eating it (it depends largely
>> on the freshness), loves peanuts but sometimes gets hives from eating them
>> (probably has something to do with preservatives), and loves tomatoes but is
>> allergic to nightshades, too. Why does she do it? Just because she loves
>> them, and she's not going to let a little thing like possible death keep her
>> from them. She keeps around antihistamines and has only had a very very bad
>> reaction once (about 20 years ago, and it was the first time she had ever
>> had a reaction to shellfish--prior to that she had no problems with them).
>>
>
>
>Thankfully I don't have any food allergies; just pollens which are
>unavoidable.
>Don't know if I'd eat something I was genuinely allergic to; all those
>years spent studying and working in immunology have left their mark LOL.


Do you eat comb honey? It's said that that will help better
than just plain honey.

Isn't honey amazing. I just love bees.

--

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

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 19:51:30 +0900, "Rona Yuthasastrakosol"
>
>That's my mother! :-) My mother is also a once happily married Filipina
>(now widowed) with children. She hasn't changed her hairstyle since the
>70's and wears very little make-up (foundation and sometimes lipstick). And
>(here's the connection) she'll eat things she knows she's allergic to. She
>loves shellfish but sometimes gets hives from eating it (it depends largely
>on the freshness), loves peanuts but sometimes gets hives from eating them
>(probably has something to do with preservatives), and loves tomatoes but is
>allergic to nightshades, too. Why does she do it? Just because she loves
>them, and she's not going to let a little thing like possible death keep her
>from them. She keeps around antihistamines and has only had a very very bad
>reaction once (about 20 years ago, and it was the first time she had ever
>had a reaction to shellfish--prior to that she had no problems with them).
>
>rona

i remember a woman quoted as saying 'i'm not gonna let my stomach
dictate to me what i can eat.'

your pal,
blake

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:37:13 -0700, Arri London
> > scribbled some thoughts:
>
>
> >
> >
> >Rona Yuthasastrakosol wrote:
> >>
> >> "Arri London" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Not a single item LOL. She is a happily married Filipina with children.
> >> > Don't think she's changed her hairstyle since she had the first child
> >> > and never wears makeup to work. My real guess is that she likes crab and
> >> > has never heard of anaphylaxis!
> >> >
> >>
> >> That's my mother! :-) My mother is also a once happily married Filipina
> >> (now widowed) with children. She hasn't changed her hairstyle since the
> >> 70's and wears very little make-up (foundation and sometimes lipstick). And
> >> (here's the connection) she'll eat things she knows she's allergic to. She
> >> loves shellfish but sometimes gets hives from eating it (it depends largely
> >> on the freshness), loves peanuts but sometimes gets hives from eating them
> >> (probably has something to do with preservatives), and loves tomatoes but is
> >> allergic to nightshades, too. Why does she do it? Just because she loves
> >> them, and she's not going to let a little thing like possible death keep her
> >> from them. She keeps around antihistamines and has only had a very very bad
> >> reaction once (about 20 years ago, and it was the first time she had ever
> >> had a reaction to shellfish--prior to that she had no problems with them).
> >>
> >
> >
> >Thankfully I don't have any food allergies; just pollens which are
> >unavoidable.
> >Don't know if I'd eat something I was genuinely allergic to; all those
> >years spent studying and working in immunology have left their mark LOL.
>
> Do you eat comb honey? It's said that that will help better
> than just plain honey.
>
> Isn't honey amazing. I just love bees.
>

The only thing that has helped at all is inducing tolerance by not
treating the pollen allergies. Once I live in a place long enough, the
seasonal reaction starts to let up. This is **not** for someone who has
asthma however!!!

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:37:13 -0700, Arri London
> > scribbled some thoughts:
>
>
> >
> >
> >Rona Yuthasastrakosol wrote:
> >>
> >> "Arri London" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Not a single item LOL. She is a happily married Filipina with children.
> >> > Don't think she's changed her hairstyle since she had the first child
> >> > and never wears makeup to work. My real guess is that she likes crab and
> >> > has never heard of anaphylaxis!
> >> >
> >>
> >> That's my mother! :-) My mother is also a once happily married Filipina
> >> (now widowed) with children. She hasn't changed her hairstyle since the
> >> 70's and wears very little make-up (foundation and sometimes lipstick). And
> >> (here's the connection) she'll eat things she knows she's allergic to. She
> >> loves shellfish but sometimes gets hives from eating it (it depends largely
> >> on the freshness), loves peanuts but sometimes gets hives from eating them
> >> (probably has something to do with preservatives), and loves tomatoes but is
> >> allergic to nightshades, too. Why does she do it? Just because she loves
> >> them, and she's not going to let a little thing like possible death keep her
> >> from them. She keeps around antihistamines and has only had a very very bad
> >> reaction once (about 20 years ago, and it was the first time she had ever
> >> had a reaction to shellfish--prior to that she had no problems with them).
> >>
> >
> >
> >Thankfully I don't have any food allergies; just pollens which are
> >unavoidable.
> >Don't know if I'd eat something I was genuinely allergic to; all those
> >years spent studying and working in immunology have left their mark LOL.
>
> Do you eat comb honey? It's said that that will help better
> than just plain honey.
>
> Isn't honey amazing. I just love bees.
>

The only thing that has helped at all is inducing tolerance by not
treating the pollen allergies. Once I live in a place long enough, the
seasonal reaction starts to let up. This is **not** for someone who has
asthma however!!!

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote ...
(major snipping)

> If you haven't used those spices before, then you could be
> allergic to them. If you have, but not all together in one
> dish or at one time, then there could be a chemical reaction
> to their interaction. Or it could be coincidence and you
> just have a cold, it is that time of the year.

Heh, I had a situation like that during my partying and stupid youth! Had
what seemed like a hangover for days, so I finally called the doc. After
laughing at me, he said, "Did it ever occur to you that you just might have
the flu?"

Pam

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:00:41 GMT, "Ed Grabau and Pam Jacoby" <pjjehg
@frontiernet.net> scribbled some thoughts:


>
>"Andrew H. Carter" wrote ...
>(major snipping)
>
>> If you haven't used those spices before, then you could be
>> allergic to them. If you have, but not all together in one
>> dish or at one time, then there could be a chemical reaction
>> to their interaction. Or it could be coincidence and you
>> just have a cold, it is that time of the year.
>
>Heh, I had a situation like that during my partying and stupid youth! Had
>what seemed like a hangover for days, so I finally called the doc. After
>laughing at me, he said, "Did it ever occur to you that you just might have
>the flu?"
>
>Pam
>


Don't know if you put any merit in the Zodiac with respect to the
physiological makeup of an individual, but if the moon can influence the
tides, why can't it influence people. That aside, a Taurean, such as
myself (latter cusp) rakes quite some time to get over a
cold/bronchitis/pneumonia, usually twice the amount of time, or more.

--

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

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:00:41 GMT, "Ed Grabau and Pam Jacoby" <pjjehg
@frontiernet.net> scribbled some thoughts:


>
>"Andrew H. Carter" wrote ...
>(major snipping)
>
>> If you haven't used those spices before, then you could be
>> allergic to them. If you have, but not all together in one
>> dish or at one time, then there could be a chemical reaction
>> to their interaction. Or it could be coincidence and you
>> just have a cold, it is that time of the year.
>
>Heh, I had a situation like that during my partying and stupid youth! Had
>what seemed like a hangover for days, so I finally called the doc. After
>laughing at me, he said, "Did it ever occur to you that you just might have
>the flu?"
>
>Pam
>


Don't know if you put any merit in the Zodiac with respect to the
physiological makeup of an individual, but if the moon can influence the
tides, why can't it influence people. That aside, a Taurean, such as
myself (latter cusp) rakes quite some time to get over a
cold/bronchitis/pneumonia, usually twice the amount of time, or more.

--

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

"Andrew H. Carter" wrote...
> "Ed Grabau and Pam Jacoby"scribbled some thoughts:
>>"Andrew H. Carter" wrote ...
>>(major snipping)
>>
>>> If you haven't used those spices before, then you could be
>>> allergic to them. If you have, but not all together in one
>>> dish or at one time, then there could be a chemical reaction
>>> to their interaction. Or it could be coincidence and you
>>> just have a cold, it is that time of the year.
>>
>>Heh, I had a situation like that during my partying and stupid youth! Had
>>what seemed like a hangover for days, so I finally called the doc. After
>>laughing at me, he said, "Did it ever occur to you that you just might
>>have
>>the flu?"
>>
>>Pam

> Don't know if you put any merit in the Zodiac with respect to the
> physiological makeup of an individual, but if the moon can influence the
> tides, why can't it influence people. That aside, a Taurean, such as
> myself (latter cusp) rakes quite some time to get over a
> cold/bronchitis/pneumonia, usually twice the amount of time, or more.

Even though I know that I'm fairly bright, but I accept the fact of dim
days, and I'm open to new thoughts and horoscopes---

just what in the h-ll are you trying to say?

Pam

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:52:29 GMT, "Ed Grabau and Pam Jacoby" <pjjehg
@frontiernet.net> scribbled some thoughts:


>
>"Andrew H. Carter" wrote...
>> "Ed Grabau and Pam Jacoby"scribbled some thoughts:
>>>"Andrew H. Carter" wrote ...
>>>(major snipping)
>>>
>>>> If you haven't used those spices before, then you could be
>>>> allergic to them. If you have, but not all together in one
>>>> dish or at one time, then there could be a chemical reaction
>>>> to their interaction. Or it could be coincidence and you
>>>> just have a cold, it is that time of the year.
>>>
>>>Heh, I had a situation like that during my partying and stupid youth! Had
>>>what seemed like a hangover for days, so I finally called the doc. After
>>>laughing at me, he said, "Did it ever occur to you that you just might
>>>have
>>>the flu?"
>>>
>>>Pam
>
>> Don't know if you put any merit in the Zodiac with respect to the
>> physiological makeup of an individual, but if the moon can influence the
>> tides, why can't it influence people. That aside, a Taurean, such as
>> myself (latter cusp) rakes quite some time to get over a
>> cold/bronchitis/pneumonia, usually twice the amount of time, or more.
>
>Even though I know that I'm fairly bright, but I accept the fact of dim
>days, and I'm open to new thoughts and horoscopes---
>
>just what in the h-ll are you trying to say?
>

I don't believe in the day to day ruling of your life by the zodiac, but I
do believe such can influence one's make up.

Taureans are creatures , who may not be absorbed by money, they do like
possessions, at least to be comfortable, one's idea of possessions may be
entirely different than another, but they generally are earthy (farms or
mountain cabins would suit them).

http://www.psychicsconnect.com/astro...its_taurus.asp

Taurus Character Traits

The symbol for Taurus is the face and horns of the bull, which won't budge
an inch unless it's goaded. Then it will charge with all its might at its
tormentor.

'I HAVE' is the motto for Taurus. You are materialistic and set much store
by money and possessions. Security is very important to you: you like to
put down roots and build, whether it's a home or a business. You don't like
change and will hold out against it for as long as you can.

You have a very sensual side and are fond of the good things in life,
particularly good food and wine. You also appreciate beauty, whether it's a
melodious piece of music or a view of the garden from your kitchen window.

You're practical and resourceful and have your feet firmly on the ground.
You're also stable and reliable and make a staunch friend, although you
expect loyalty in return.

Your caution and resistance to change can make you seem stubborn and
unimaginative.

You are the nature-lovers of the zodiac.


--

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