|
Allergies and asthma
are generally triggered by irritants in the back
of the nose and they are frequently eliminated when a person
regularly helps their normal nasal cleaning. The first person with allergies to use this spray
was another relative—extended families help when you are trying something
new. Joe, a grandson, was allergic to grandmother’s cat and they were
planning a visit. My daughter called and asked what to do. I gave her all of
the normal things to do to try to avoid exposure: shampoo the carpets, keep
the cat outside, reserve a close motel room in case, and stock up on
antihistamines. And I sent her a bottle of the spray. She used it about
every four hours and Joe had no problems except when he first woke up after
a night’s rest and mom noticed some swelling around the eyes. This was gone
about 30 minutes after the first spray. Dad took the kids back for another
visit several months later and was there for about four hours when Joe's
face started swelling. He called my daughter and asked her to send the spray
by overnight mail. After a night elsewhere they were able to resume the
visit with regular use of the spray. This is a picture of
Joe.

Rethinking allergies
Allergens, the irritants that trigger allergies, and our
response to them are most of the time considered a bother and not important.
We seldom think twice about taking an antihistamine or using a nasal steroid. Margie Profet
is a biologist who thinks differently. She asks the evolutionary question,
Why did this symptom complex develop in the first place? She points out that
many allergens are structurally similar to toxins and that, as we repeatedly
point out in this site, the runny nose is a defense. More
about defenses is on the pages dealing with increases and helping, or on our
other page dealing with Common
Sense Medicine, but basically they are symptoms, like diarrhea, fever,
and a runny nose, that help our
bodies deal with environmental problems. A runny nose is our immune
system trying to wash out the toxin/allergen. While our food supply and
environment is likely safer and freer from toxins than it was for our
ancestors we still feel that honoring our body's defenses is the best
policy.
Allergens
also come in different sizes and shapes; some of them are smaller and
more soluble and are able to
get into our system faster. Others, like the cat dander that
gave Joe his problem,
are
less soluble. Joe was able to control his allergies by washing his nose every
four hours. My son, who is allergic to some grasses needs to carry his bottle
with him
when he is outside in the fields and spray his nose every hour. For
people like him who can't otherwise avoid their allergen, desensitization
is probably the best option. For parents with infants who are interested
in
preventing problems, early exposure to a farm environment is significantly
associated with less allergy and asthma. This idea is called the hygiene
hypothesis and is based on the consistent finding that people who have
been exposed to significant toxins in their childhood have fewer problems
with allergies
as adults. In the future we may possibly have easy and safe ways to
expose our children to these toxins that will avoid the allergy problems.
When these toxins are exposed to infants and children their immune system
has little trouble in focusing on the bad guy and realizing that the ragweed
or cedar are not really as bad as the other toxins. In the meantime we need
to honor what our immune system is trying to do.
Asthma
Asthma is closely related to allergy since most
people with asthma have some allergy. Becka was the first
person with asthma
to clean her nose
with this spray. She is Jerry’s cousin’s daughter. Becka’s mother heard
about Heather and wanted some of the spray for her son who had lots of ear
problems. When I described what it does she asked if it would help Becka
too. Becka didn't have allergies as much as she had chronic sinus problems,
which may have been allergy related. I knew it wouldn’t hurt. Becka
was on five different medications for her asthma, she was getting a shot
from her doctor weekly, and she was in the ER about every 6 weeks. Mom
sprayed her nose
regularly three times a day. About a week later Becka had an episode of
cleansing, like John Michael, where she got rid of all the mucus in her nose.
The next week she did not have any trouble with her asthma and a week later
mom took her off
all of her asthma medication. Six months later she was active playing
basketball and doing gymnastics without any trace of her asthma. A year and
a half later Becka had another asthma attack while she was visiting family
in Phoenix. She had stopped cleaning her nose regularly some time
before. I suspect that Becka will have to repeat her earlier experience
again and use it more regularly if she wants her nose to stay clean
and not trigger her asthma.

After
my experience with Becka I used it on other asthmatic patients. One of
the first was an 11-year
old boy, with no prior
history of asthma, who came to my office wheezing with a peak flow of 150.
Peak flow measures how much air a person can force
out and gives a rough
idea of the openness of the airway. 150 isn't very good, but it improved
with a breathing treatment with albuterol, so I
gave him a prescription for
an inhaler and a bottle of the spray and told him to clean his nose regularly
for a few days. He took the bottle to the school
nurse and every class break he would
spray his nose. He
did not get the albuterol inhaler. His peak flow on the next three days went
from the 150 to 250, to 350, and to 450, which was
normal for his size.
Cora
is my last example. Cora has had diabetes and asthma for about twenty
years, long enough for
her airway to get remodeled
so that it is always narrower than normal. Currently there is no way to treat this problem;
we just try to keep it from getting worse. She has been on multiple
medications for her asthma, including steroids that makes her diabetes
harder to manage. She began using the spray regularly about two years
ago. The only problem she has had with asthma since is when she goes to the
hospital and leaves her spray at home. She is not taking any of her previous
asthma medications. Her peak flow remained at 150 to 200 for about 6 months,
but was 350 after a year of regular use of the spray. This is
Cora.

What is asthma?
After
I saw what happened to these people I had to figure out why. What I saw
didn't fit into the
models we have of asthma.
Asthma is defined as reversible bronchoconstriction and chronic airway
inflammation and our questions and treatment are focused almost entirely
on what we can do to reverse the bronchoconstriction
or block the inflammatory response that triggers the constriction.
I was faced with evidence
that
cleaning the nose
eliminated asthma. What's the connection?
Researchers are getting around to answering this
question, but it is slow going. The "one airway hypothesis" is based on the
well demonstrated fact that nasal irritants trigger
a neurological response, termed by some the nasal-bronchial reflex,
that results in bronchospasm. People studying asthma have some difficulty
with the concept that the major triggers for asthma are in the nose. We don't
often ask
our asthmatic patients what it is that triggers their asthma attacks, but
if we did the answers would cluster around sinus conditions, allergies, and
viral upper respiratory infections. These problems all begin in the nose.
When
the nasal immune system identifies one of these irritants that it cannot
wash out, even though it
tries (as any person with allergic rhinitis can readily
attest), it must
focus on limiting the damage. If it cannot wash it out at least it can
prevent it from getting into the deeper parts of the body where it may cause
more serious problems. It does this by using the
nasal-bronchial reflex to close down the airway — by damming
up what it considers a polluted
stream. Reflexes are always defenses that protect
us. The gag reflex prevents us from aspirating food or drink,
the light reflex protects
our
eyes from bright light, and the nasal-bronchial reflex
protects our lungs from perceived pollutants in the upper airway—asthma is
a defense. We have been looking at the
wrong aspects of asthma for the last 50 years. That's not very flattering
to
all of our researchers who are not attracted to this idea. But I can't
explain the benefits I see any other way.
Just
the other day I got some more confirmation for this idea. One
of those letters came
that Doctors get from the drug companies telling of another warning about
their drug. This time the drug was salmeterol or
Serevent and Advair. This
drug is used as a long acting bronchodilator. It is not for use in acute
episodes because it doesn't work fast enough. A
study the drug company had
done showed that over 28 weeks asthmatics who received salmeterol in
addition to their other asthma medications died more frequently than if they
received a placebo. The number was not great, 13
out of 13,174 versus 4 out
of 13,179, but that is the kind of problems we see when we block a defense.
The trend was even greater for African-American patients.
Wendell Berry is a contemporary
American poet who is interested in the benefits of a more simple life. One
of the things he said was that if we are looking for answers don't go to the
temples. It's the desert or the wilderness that gives us the prophets, not
the temples. By the time temples are built the builders are more interested
in maintaining the status quo than in finding answers. While I don't claim
prophetic insight the point here is that Hale Center is far from any kind of
major center of higher learning or medical research.
A thought
provoking example of this concept is the results of studies done on observed drowning
victims by the Dade County
Coroners office in Miami. I emphasis observed because the most common
explanation of this anomaly is that the person was killed somewhere else
then dumped in the water. About 20% of these people had dry lungs. That
is,
they had such a profound response to water in their nose and throat that
their airway shut down—just like people with
asthma. There was no
water in their lungs. These people did not drown in the traditional
sense of water in the lungs—they suffocated, just
like people with asthma. Return to home
The function of
allergy: immunological defense against toxins.
Profet
M.
Division of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, University
of California, Berkely 94720.
This paper proposes that the mammalian
immune response known as "allergy" evolved as a last line of defense against
the extensive array of toxic substances that exist in the environment in
the
form of secondary plant compounds and venoms. Whereas nonimmunological
defenses typically can target only classes of toxins, the immune system is
uniquely capable of the fine-tuning required to target selectively the
specific molecular configurations of individual toxins. Toxic substances
are commonly allergenic. The pharmacological chemicals released by the body's
mast cells during an IgE antibody-mediated allergic response typically cause
vomiting diarrhea, coughing, tearing, sneezing, or scratching, which help
to
expel from the body the toxic substance that triggered the response;
individuals frequently develop aversions to substances that have triggered
such responses. A strong allergic response often includes a decrease in
blood pressure, which slows the rate at which toxins circulate to target
organs. The immune system identifies as toxic the following kinds of
substances: (1) those low-molecular-weight substances that bind covalently
to serum proteins (e.g., many plant toxins); (2) nontoxic proteins that act
as carriers of toxins with low molecular weights (e.g., plant proteins
associated with plant toxins); (3) specific substances of high molecular
weight that harmed individuals in ancestral mammalian populations for a
span
of time that was significant from the standpoint of natural selection (e.g.,
the toxic proteins of bee venom. Substances that bind covalently to serum
proteins generally are acutely toxic, and because many of these substances
also bind covalently to the DNA of target cells, they are potentially
mutagenic and carcinogenic as well. Thus, by protecting against acute
toxicity, allergy may also defend against mutagens and carcinogens. The
toxic hypothesis explains the main phenomena of allergy; why IgE-mediated
allergies usually occur within minutes of exposure to an allergen and why
they are often so severe; why the manifestations of allergy include
vomiting, diarrhea, coughing, sneezing, scratching, tearing, and a drop in
blood pressure; why covalent binding of low-molecular-weight substances to
serum proteins frequently causes allergy; why allergies occur to many foods,
pollens, venoms, metals, and drugs; why allergic cross-reactivity occurs
to
foods and pollen from unrelated botanical families; why allergy appears to
be so capricious and variable; and why allergy is more prevalent in
industrial societies than it is in foraging societies. This hypothesis also
has implications for the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of
allergy.
-
An assessment of lung
weights in drowning cases. The Metro Dade County experience from 1978 to
1982.
Copeland AR.
The lung weights in known
cases of drownings, both fresh and salt water, were studied in 220 cases
over the past 5 years. Statistical comparison was performed with both a
natural disease and a "normal" population. The frequency of "dry lungs" in
drowning was also noted.
-
- Do risk factors for childhood infections and malnutrition
protect against asthma? A study of Brazilian male
adolescents.
da Costa Lima R, Victora CG, Menezes AM,
Barros FC.
Post-Graduate Programme in Epidemiology, Universidade
Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil. roclima@terra.com.br
OBJECTIVES:
We studied the association between early life conditions and asthma in
adolescence. METHODS: We conducted a population-based birth cohort study
involving 2250 male 18-year-olds residing in Brazil. RESULTS: Approximately
18% of the adolescents reported having asthma. Several childhood factors were
found to be significantly associated with increased asthma risk: being of high
socioeconomic status, living in an uncrowded household, and children being
breastfed for 9 months or longer. CONCLUSIONS: The present results are
consistent with the "hygiene hypothesis," according to which early exposure to
infections provides protection against asthma. The policy implications of our
findings are unclear given that risk factors for asthma protect against
serious childhood diseases in developing countries.
-
| Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2003
Oct;3(5):325-9. |
|
Environmental exposure to endotoxin and
other microbial products and the decreased risk of childhood atopy: evaluating
developments since April 2002.
Braun-Fahrlander
C.
Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of
Basel, Switzerland. c.braun@unibas.ch
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The hygiene
hypothesis proposes an association between the change in exposure to microbes
and the increased incidence of atopic diseases in recent decades. Exposure to
microbes and childhood infections and their association with atopy has thus
attracted much scientific interest. This review focuses on new developments in
the field of epidemiology. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies in adults confirm that
exposure to orofaecal pathogens are associated with less asthma and allergies.
In seropositive individuals, no increase in allergy prevalence over time was
noted. Similarly, the generational increase in atopy and allergic rhinitis was
not observed in individuals who were exposed to a farming environment in
childhood. More than 20 studies have been published examining the effect of
exposure to a farm environment in children and adults. Most consistently, the
'protective' farm effect was related to livestock farming and thus to
microbial exposure. A dose-dependent inverse relationship between exposure to
endotoxin in the mattress dust of children and the occurrence of atopic
diseases was shown in rural environments in Europe. In addition, the blood
cells of farmers' children were shown to express higher amounts of innate
immunity receptors. Only a few farm studies have so far included an objective
measure of the microbial environment. The examined exposure to endotoxin might
partly be a surrogate measure of a much broader spectrum of immunomodulatory
microbial compounds present in a rural environment. SUMMARY: The 'hygiene
hypothesis' has gained much credibility, but the results should be balanced
against the benefits of established hygiene standards.
-
-
Airway smooth muscle cell hyperplasia: a
therapeutic target in airway remodeling in
asthma?
Ammit AJ, Panettieri RA
Jr.
Respiratory Research Group, Faculty of Pharmacy, University
of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
Severe asthma is characterized by
airway remodeling due, in part, to increases in airway smooth muscle (ASM)
mass. Regulation of ASM hyperplasia is considered an attractive therapeutic
target for the potential treatment of airway remodeling in asthma. In order
to develop anti-remodeling drugs, researchers have utilized cell culture
techniques to elucidate the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying ASM
cell proliferation and to identify the critical cell cycle events that
regulate ASM cell growth. Attractive lead compounds that have emerged from
in vitro studies can now be examined in new animal models of airway
remodeling, thus providing tools to design novel therapies to prevent or
abrogate airway remodeling.
The spray described in these pages is not a drug. This means that the people manufacturing this spray cannot advertise what the spray does to prevent disease and illness. The spray only helps to clean your nose. The benefits come from a clean nose. The only way people will learn about this practical and sensible way to help the immune system wash pollutants from the back of the nose is by interested people, like you, sharing this information.
If you have family or friends with any of these problems, they may benefit greatly from your sharing this information with them.
Links in the other sections, referring to a person or study, will take you to a Medline summary, from the National Library of Medicine, of the article in question.
This spray is protected by United States and international patents. While careful reading of these pages will tell you how to mix this spray yourself we request that you do not sell such spray on the open market. Such sales would be prohibited by the above mentioned patents.
Disclaimer: All material provided in this web site is provided for educational purposes in the hope of improving our general health. Access of this web site does not create a doctor-patient relationship nor should the information contained on this web site be considered specific medical advice with respect to a specific patient and/or a specific condition. Copy sections of this page and discuss them with your physician to see if they apply to your own symptoms or medical condition.
Dr. Jones specifically disclaims any liability, loss or risk, personal or otherwise, that is or may be incurred as a consequence, directly or indirectly, of use or application of any of the information provided on this web site.
A. H. 'Lon' Jones D.O.
812 West 8th St. Suite 2A
Plainview, Texas 79072
Phone (806) 291-0700
Fax (806) 293-8229
|