Meeting the parents (help required!!)
Thanks. Strange as I see it here also in the "boonies" where kids should be more exposed to the stuff.. What grinds my teeth is how some people think they are "special" because of their "allergy". Of course, I know for many, an allergy is a real pain in the rear but then those people are often quite quiet about it.
They recently published a study where it was established that children that grow up on farms have less allergies than those that live in towns. Also the gene-pool also plays a factor in how allergies occur. Also the environment does have a role to play because you'll find that some people who move here also tend to develop allergies after a while. This is just not restricted to Finland btw, it's been studied elsewhere also. Sometimes people also diagnose themselves when they have a reaction to certain agents/foods. Sometimes it is normal to develop a reaction to certain things, but it is not necessarily an allergy. Allergies can also be slight or severe, so it's good that if someone tells you if they're allergic to something so as to avoid the consequences....
saving chimpanzees is a big hairy deal
This is just my opinion, but I also think the Finnish food industry has made it their specialty to cater to people with "special allergies" like intolerance to lactose, gluteen, sugar, etc. From the way they spin it and the number of brands they sell, you'd think the majority of Finns has some sort of allergy.
That's why, for instance, I was surprised to hear that something like only 15% of the Finnish population is lactose intolerant. While this is greater than the 5% estimated in Northern Europe and comparable to the 15% or more in central/southern European countries like Germany and Austria, it's in sharp contrast to parts of southern Europe (65% in southern France, 20–70% in Italy), Asia, South America and Africa, where more than 50% of the population are easily lactose intolerant.
So the incidence of allergies aside, perhaps due to some combination of industry and health-consciousness, Finns are also more open about discussing and addressing it. (In the US, where the incidence is about 10-17%, you see very little choice in milk products addressing this problem. People don't generally like to talk about it either.).
That's why, for instance, I was surprised to hear that something like only 15% of the Finnish population is lactose intolerant. While this is greater than the 5% estimated in Northern Europe and comparable to the 15% or more in central/southern European countries like Germany and Austria, it's in sharp contrast to parts of southern Europe (65% in southern France, 20–70% in Italy), Asia, South America and Africa, where more than 50% of the population are easily lactose intolerant.
So the incidence of allergies aside, perhaps due to some combination of industry and health-consciousness, Finns are also more open about discussing and addressing it. (In the US, where the incidence is about 10-17%, you see very little choice in milk products addressing this problem. People don't generally like to talk about it either.).
Last edited by acwan on Thu Jun 16, 2005 12:40 am, edited 4 times in total.
Also quite often people go and test for allergies here. Statistics won't show allergy occurences in places where they haven't been tested. And allergy testing won't be on high on the priority list in places where people are dying of malaria, AIDS, polio and TB for instance. Nor will industry be making products to cater for the 'few' allergic people in the community.
saving chimpanzees is a big hairy deal
But usually people don't go get tested for allergies unless they suspect they have allergies. And people are not exactly dying from malaria in developed countries like the US and Japan (where incidence of lactose intolerance is as high if not higher) so not getting allergy tested there is no excuse. Also, how do you explain companies like Valio making branded lactose free products when only 15% of the Finnish population requires such products (if they're not specializing in the products that is)?RA wrote:Also quite often people go and test for allergies here. Statistics won't show allergy occurences in places where they haven't been tested. And allergy testing won't be on high on the priority list in places where people are dying of malaria, AIDS, polio and TB for instance. Nor will industry be making products to cater for the 'few' allergic people in the community.
Last edited by acwan on Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
Hank W.
- The Motorhead
- Posts: 29973
- Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 10:00 pm
- Location: Mushroom Mountain
- Contact:
I've been sneezing my head off the past few days. Allergies seem to change through the years. I get itchy from almost anything raw stuff, like nuts or apples, but roasted nuts, apple pie, or 'processed' products I have no problems with. So no veggies unless they're cooked, say the nutrition people whatever.
Funny thingthough when I was in the USA and it was the season I didn't have any allergic reactions to the tree pollens there. That was quite weird.
Funny thingthough when I was in the USA and it was the season I didn't have any allergic reactions to the tree pollens there. That was quite weird.
Cheers, Hank W.
sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.
sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.
I've been wondering if I have an allergy to apples or not. There is this type of apple I like to eat raw but everytime I eat one, the inside of my throat gets all itchy, usually for about 10-20 minutes afterwards, and then it goes away. 
As for tree pollens, it may be a matter of acclimating. I used to get hay fever real bad in the States, but I didn't have an allergy to the birch trees my first year here. Got it the following year though and have had it ever since (albeit on and off)
As for tree pollens, it may be a matter of acclimating. I used to get hay fever real bad in the States, but I didn't have an allergy to the birch trees my first year here. Got it the following year though and have had it ever since (albeit on and off)
Yes, people will go get tested if they think they have an allergy, but it also comes up in connection to when they're getting treated for symptoms that won't go away. I mentioned malaria and the other diseases to make a point that for example in third world countries, where these do occur, it may seem that allergies don't occur but this isn't necessarily true. Also where it seems there isn't an allergy problem, then nothing is done about it -> industry doesn't make the products.acwan wrote: But usually people don't go get tested for allergies unless they suspect they have allergies. And people are not exactly dying from malaria in developed countries like the US and Japan so not getting allergy tested is no excuse. How do you explain companies like Valio making branded lactose free products when only 15% of the Finnish population requires such products?
Valio's catering to the needs of the population. They're meeting demand. And you'll find that even tho only 15% actually require such products the actual number that use those products may be higher. Like in a situation where one family member is lactose intolerant, the rest will also tend to use the hyla product as well. No point in buying hyla margarine for just one person now is there?acwan wrote:How do you explain companies like Valio making branded lactose free products when only 15% of the Finnish population requires such products?
You may not have the same allergic reactions because tree species may be different. It's also the case with lactose intolerance. My friend's son is lactose intolerant and uses hyla products in Finland but in the States is perfectly capable of using 'normal' milk. Something to do with the way milk is processed in different countries and also stuff like the feed they use on the cows!Hank W. wrote: Funny thingthough when I was in the USA and it was the season I didn't have any allergic reactions to the tree pollens there. That was quite weird.
saving chimpanzees is a big hairy deal
They say that people who have an allergy to birch pollen may also have an allergy to raw apples. I'm allergic to birch pollen but apples I can eat just fine.acwan wrote:I've been wondering if I have an allergy to apples or not. There is this type of apple I like to eat raw but everytime I eat one, the inside of my throat gets all itchy, usually for about 10-20 minutes afterwards, and then it goes away.
saving chimpanzees is a big hairy deal
-
Hank W.
- The Motorhead
- Posts: 29973
- Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 10:00 pm
- Location: Mushroom Mountain
- Contact:
Bingo! I get it from all sorts of stuff, and if its really bad even the insides of my ears itch. I also can get a rash, usually my lips, throat and under my beard. I get it real bad from cats as well - I think that the birch pollen gets everything agitated - someone mowing lawn makes me sneeze then. Also in the autumn one weed people in Finland are really allergic to is 'pujo' - artemisia vulgarisacwan wrote:type of apple I like to eat raw but everytime I eat one, the inside of my throat gets all itchy, usually for about 10-20 minutes afterwards, and then it goes away.
Cheers, Hank W.
sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.
sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.
Hmm I also have severe allergies to cats - to the point I cannot breathe when I'm around them.Hank W. wrote:Bingo! I get it from all sorts of stuff, and if its really bad even the insides of my ears itch. I also can get a rash, usually my lips, throat and under my beard. I get it real bad from cats as well - I think that the birch pollen gets everything agitated - someone mowing lawn makes me sneeze then. Also in the autumn one weed people in Finland are really allergic to is 'pujo' - artemisia vulgaris
Don't tell me you have asthma too? (I get it when I exercise too much - at least that's my excuse). Argh, someone tell me that having all these allergies are JUST coincidences and that they are not ALL connected! 
Fyi, hay fever is a common ailment in the South especially (US). I've never had problems living in L.A. though (Perhaps its the species or else the dry, arid climate helps. Not so apparently for me in Finland
).
Last edited by acwan on Thu Jun 16, 2005 12:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Hank W.
- The Motorhead
- Posts: 29973
- Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 10:00 pm
- Location: Mushroom Mountain
- Contact:
This explains my uninterest in sports as a kid. I wasn't diagnosed except in the army. My legs went after running a mile. I'm fine walking, but anything straining gets me. I've got two inhalers, but not used one in... err... years. Even I'm supposed to.acwan wrote: Don't tell me you have asthma too? (I get it from too much exercise - at least that's my excuse).
Actually, they are connected. Usually if you have A and C you are more than likely to have B and D as well.Argh, someone tell me that having all these allergies are JUST coincidences and that they are not ALL connected!
Cheers, Hank W.
sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.
sitting here like a lemon looking for a gin.
yes it is true, allergies and certain conditions are connected. I for example have quiet a few allergies (fur,nuts, pollen, etc) these allergies mean I have the skin condition eczema, the eczema+allergies have together given me asthma. Its tough at first but in time you learn to ignore it and it becomes routine. Like Hank said, after a while you even stop taking your inhalers.
luoto wrote
[/quote]What grinds my teeth is how some people think they are "special" because of their "allergy". Of course, I know for many, an allergy is a real pain in the rear but then those people are often quite quiet about it.
luoto wrote
[/quote]What grinds my teeth is how some people think they are "special" because of their "allergy". Of course, I know for many, an allergy is a real pain in the rear but then those people are often quite quiet about it.
No you don't understand. Its calculated within the income tax; thres government tax and municipal tax. Its not a separate payment.
And it is also true that people with allergies don't openly talk about them, it is for this reason that many foods in supermarkets have "allery advice" on the packets, to save sufferers the hassle of having to read through all the ingredients or asking around. From personal experience asking is quiet embarrassing
I would not want people to feel sorry for me or call me special because I have these problems, I am normal like everyone else and prefer to be treated that way. You are very right luoto.
hank wrote
oh Sh*t!
Dirty homes bug hygiene scientists
People 'misled' by theory of protection through exposure to germs
Sarah Boseley, health editor
Tuesday May 18, 2004
The Guardian
Source of Article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicine/stor ... 31,00.html
Scientists today launch a major demolition of the "hygiene hypothesis" which suggests that our clean, sterile modern homes could be a cause of rising allergies in the UK, and warn that tolerating dirt could lead to a rise in harmful bugs and infectious diseases.
Allergy and asthma rates have been soaring over the last few decades. Many different theories have been advanced, but the most popular for some time has been the hygiene hypothesis, suggested by the epidemiologist David Strachan in 1989.
He suggested that the rise in allergy could be linked to the decreasing exposure of children to microbes, partly because of cleaner homes and partly because of smaller families. In larger families, younger children were less likely to become allergic, he pointed out, suggesting that their immune systems were too busy fighting off minor infections brought home by older siblings.
As the hypothesis was developed, other scientists looked at different ways in which our contact with microbes has lessened, such as the move from farms to town living and the improvements in water supplies, sanitation and vaccines. But a key aspect of the hypothesis, say researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, is that too much cleanliness is not good for you.
Today the infectious diseases experts strike back, alarmed at the implications for disease. Their review, they say in a report published at the International Scientific Forum on Home Hygiene, finds "there is no justification for a relaxation in hygiene procedures aimed at preventing infection transmission in the home".
It is not possible to allow "a bit of beneficial dirt" back into our lives, say Ros Stanwell-Smith and Sally Bloomfield, honorary professor at the school's hygiene centre. "In practice, any attempt to provide 'controlled dirtiness' in the environment would inevitably raise the risk of invasive infection.
"'Controlled dirtiness' is not a feasible concept, raising questions such as: how often should people wash their hands or clean chopping boards; or how long washing should be delayed after exposure to dirty environments?" They cite the 1991 cholera outbreak in South America, which involved 350,000 cases, as an example of the authorities failing to take on board the risks of halting chlorination of the water supply.
Focusing on the link between increased allergies and decreased exposure to microbes "ignores the ongoing presence of infection as a cause of disease and tends to promote an impression that the infection battle is over," they write. "The hypothesis can thus too easily be viewed as a call for a retreat against the army of infection to allow some of it back."
Bugs have not been eliminated, they say. Their review looks at the evidence for the rise of MRSA infection - the so-called superbug - in hospitals as microbes become resistant to antibiotics. E coli 0157, which can cause severe illness and is transmitted from one person to another in the home, is also a cause for concern. Tuberculosis has increased in Europe and more virulent strains, resistant to antibiotics, are rising. In the former Soviet Union, diphtheria cases rose 50-fold between 1989 and 1995.
While hand-washing and other hygiene measures can prevent infections, the scientists say that there is no evidence that too much cleanliness in the home or personal hygiene contributes to allergies. There is evidence that exposure to microbes can protect children from allergies, but scrubbing the house and washing hands do not eliminate microbes in the environment. They can be inhaled or consumed with our food.
It is also not certain when exposure protects people - it may only be important immediately after birth or in infancy.
The researchers call for the hygiene hypothesis to be renamed in order not to deter people from cleaning their houses and protecting themselves from disease - they suggest microbial exposure hypothesis instead.
People 'misled' by theory of protection through exposure to germs
Sarah Boseley, health editor
Tuesday May 18, 2004
The Guardian
Source of Article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicine/stor ... 31,00.html
Scientists today launch a major demolition of the "hygiene hypothesis" which suggests that our clean, sterile modern homes could be a cause of rising allergies in the UK, and warn that tolerating dirt could lead to a rise in harmful bugs and infectious diseases.
Allergy and asthma rates have been soaring over the last few decades. Many different theories have been advanced, but the most popular for some time has been the hygiene hypothesis, suggested by the epidemiologist David Strachan in 1989.
He suggested that the rise in allergy could be linked to the decreasing exposure of children to microbes, partly because of cleaner homes and partly because of smaller families. In larger families, younger children were less likely to become allergic, he pointed out, suggesting that their immune systems were too busy fighting off minor infections brought home by older siblings.
As the hypothesis was developed, other scientists looked at different ways in which our contact with microbes has lessened, such as the move from farms to town living and the improvements in water supplies, sanitation and vaccines. But a key aspect of the hypothesis, say researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, is that too much cleanliness is not good for you.
Today the infectious diseases experts strike back, alarmed at the implications for disease. Their review, they say in a report published at the International Scientific Forum on Home Hygiene, finds "there is no justification for a relaxation in hygiene procedures aimed at preventing infection transmission in the home".
It is not possible to allow "a bit of beneficial dirt" back into our lives, say Ros Stanwell-Smith and Sally Bloomfield, honorary professor at the school's hygiene centre. "In practice, any attempt to provide 'controlled dirtiness' in the environment would inevitably raise the risk of invasive infection.
"'Controlled dirtiness' is not a feasible concept, raising questions such as: how often should people wash their hands or clean chopping boards; or how long washing should be delayed after exposure to dirty environments?" They cite the 1991 cholera outbreak in South America, which involved 350,000 cases, as an example of the authorities failing to take on board the risks of halting chlorination of the water supply.
Focusing on the link between increased allergies and decreased exposure to microbes "ignores the ongoing presence of infection as a cause of disease and tends to promote an impression that the infection battle is over," they write. "The hypothesis can thus too easily be viewed as a call for a retreat against the army of infection to allow some of it back."
Bugs have not been eliminated, they say. Their review looks at the evidence for the rise of MRSA infection - the so-called superbug - in hospitals as microbes become resistant to antibiotics. E coli 0157, which can cause severe illness and is transmitted from one person to another in the home, is also a cause for concern. Tuberculosis has increased in Europe and more virulent strains, resistant to antibiotics, are rising. In the former Soviet Union, diphtheria cases rose 50-fold between 1989 and 1995.
While hand-washing and other hygiene measures can prevent infections, the scientists say that there is no evidence that too much cleanliness in the home or personal hygiene contributes to allergies. There is evidence that exposure to microbes can protect children from allergies, but scrubbing the house and washing hands do not eliminate microbes in the environment. They can be inhaled or consumed with our food.
It is also not certain when exposure protects people - it may only be important immediately after birth or in infancy.
The researchers call for the hygiene hypothesis to be renamed in order not to deter people from cleaning their houses and protecting themselves from disease - they suggest microbial exposure hypothesis instead.
Last edited by acwan on Thu Jun 16, 2005 12:08 am, edited 3 times in total.
UK top of asthma league in Europe (with Finland not far behind)
23 Dec 2003
Asthma in the EU (% of population)
UK: 13.8
Finland: 11.0
Ireland: 10.5
Netherlands: 8.7
AVERAGE: 7.2
France: 6.9
Germany: 4.7
The UK has by far the highest rates of asthma in Europe, according to a survey carried out by the European Commission.
Rates of asthma in the UK are currently almost double the EU average, 13.8% of the population compared with 7.2%.
In Germany, only 4.7% of the population has been diagnosed with the disease, which can prove fatal in the most severe cases.
Here, asthma kills 1,500 people a year and costs the NHS an estimated £850 million to treat.
No-one is sure why the UK has such high rates of reported asthma.
Possible causes
Some scientists believe that diet, exposure to pollution and perhaps even far cleaner living conditions may be somehow to blame.
Even double glazing (windows with double layer of glass) and central heating have been suggested as a contributory factor, with some claiming that 'sealed' living conditions create a perfect environment for the development of allergic illnesses.
The rate among young people is six times higher than it was 25 years ago, and is accompanied by soaring rates of other allergic conditions such as eczema and hayfever.
A survey carried out in the UK revealed that almost a quarter of those diagnosed with asthma had 'significant restrictions' on their daily lives.
Treatment
Despite the high rate of diagnosed asthma, only 9% of UK people are receiving active long-term treatment for the condition.
And the overall rate of allergies is not the highest in Europe, at 19.1%, with rates into to mid-20s reported in Sweden, Finland and Denmark.
A spokesman for the National Asthma Campaign said that the causes of the illness were hard to pin down.
She said: 'It's true that we have some of the highest rates of asthma - the rates of wheeze among 13 to 14-year-olds may be the highest in the world.'
The EU report also showed the UK's rates of other chronic illnesses compared with our European neighbours.
Levels of diabetes and high blood pressure in the UK are fairly low compared with most other EU states, although the UK is close to the top of the EU league table for rheumatism and arthritis.
Overall, though, the Portuguese, Finns and Danes have the highest incidence of chronic disease in Europe.
23 Dec 2003
Asthma in the EU (% of population)
UK: 13.8
Finland: 11.0
Ireland: 10.5
Netherlands: 8.7
AVERAGE: 7.2
France: 6.9
Germany: 4.7
The UK has by far the highest rates of asthma in Europe, according to a survey carried out by the European Commission.
Rates of asthma in the UK are currently almost double the EU average, 13.8% of the population compared with 7.2%.
In Germany, only 4.7% of the population has been diagnosed with the disease, which can prove fatal in the most severe cases.
Here, asthma kills 1,500 people a year and costs the NHS an estimated £850 million to treat.
No-one is sure why the UK has such high rates of reported asthma.
Possible causes
Some scientists believe that diet, exposure to pollution and perhaps even far cleaner living conditions may be somehow to blame.
Even double glazing (windows with double layer of glass) and central heating have been suggested as a contributory factor, with some claiming that 'sealed' living conditions create a perfect environment for the development of allergic illnesses.
The rate among young people is six times higher than it was 25 years ago, and is accompanied by soaring rates of other allergic conditions such as eczema and hayfever.
A survey carried out in the UK revealed that almost a quarter of those diagnosed with asthma had 'significant restrictions' on their daily lives.
Treatment
Despite the high rate of diagnosed asthma, only 9% of UK people are receiving active long-term treatment for the condition.
And the overall rate of allergies is not the highest in Europe, at 19.1%, with rates into to mid-20s reported in Sweden, Finland and Denmark.
A spokesman for the National Asthma Campaign said that the causes of the illness were hard to pin down.
She said: 'It's true that we have some of the highest rates of asthma - the rates of wheeze among 13 to 14-year-olds may be the highest in the world.'
The EU report also showed the UK's rates of other chronic illnesses compared with our European neighbours.
Levels of diabetes and high blood pressure in the UK are fairly low compared with most other EU states, although the UK is close to the top of the EU league table for rheumatism and arthritis.
Overall, though, the Portuguese, Finns and Danes have the highest incidence of chronic disease in Europe.