Talk:Rhinitis

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Singhuh.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Dead link

The second reference is a dead link. Wasn't sure whether it needs a `citation needed' or if the reference should simply be removed. So I decided to just bitch here. <ref>[http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/134825-overview|Rhinitis, Allergic]</ref> 90.152.13.216 (talk) 09:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Reference 3 quotation

I've been reading reference 3 and noticed that this wikipedia article quotes a sentence verbatim from it. Should that sentence not be in quotation marks?90.152.13.216 (talk) 09:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Is

Is this rhinitis? My questions refer to the part of this article that says rhinitis can affect the ears. I have what feels like congestion in my ears, and when my doctor looked in my ears, she said that I have allergies, and she saw "bubbles" in my ears. I have no other allergy or rhinitis symptoms. She recommended I find a natural allergy remedy to relieve the ear congestion. I tried pseudoephedrine, as well as herbal and homeopathic allergy remedies. None of the allergy treatments have helped, and my "plugged" sensations in my ears have continued unchanged from April through the present (late July). As I try to figure out how to help myself, and understand what's going on, I looked at the Wikipedia articles for Rhinitis, Ear Wax, Ear Canal, Nasal Cavity, and Sinuses. Maybe some discussion can help me understand this better.

I am further confused, because when I looked at the discussion of ear wax on Wikipedia (under the discussion of ear candles, connected to a comment claiming that ear candles don't work), someone stated that the ears have no connection to the sinuses. Is it true that the nasal cavity has no connection to the ears? How are the ears connected to the nose? If there is no connection, how come seasonal allegies can create, as their only symptom, congested ears? How come when my noes is plugged, and I swallow, my ears get plugged? How does one take care of congestion in their ears? Thank you for any ideas, suggestions or clarification.

hi im a sufferer of rhinitis and yes i get a clogged feeling in my ears as well as pain in my inner ear as the main symptom, i found that the best way to help this is to not have any dairy. i treat it as though im lactose intolerant and i find this works very well. even if you dont have rhinitis it might work to help your ears. hope it works!

Hi, just a quick note, I am a diver and when you decend you have to clear or "pop" your ears so that the pressure on the inside of your sinuses is equal to that on the outside. I have allergyies and so I take pseudoephedrine to clear me up. You pop the ears as they are the only thing exposed to the water around as your nose, eyes, and mouth are regulated by the mask. The sinues are connected to the nose and mouth but I can't really give you any medical informaiton as to how.

As far as I know the Eustachian tube links ear and nose. Check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eustachian 121.247.68.245 (talk) 11:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Someone clean this article up! I have suffered from rhinitis since I was about four and it escalated when I was ten or eleven, although it is now going down again and I looked here for information on my condition. I didn't find any that helped me, especially as, although I have sensitive nasal tissue, it concentrates mainly on rhinitis caused by allergens (more similar to the symptoms of hay fever). Any information on non-hay-fever-like rhinitis would be much appreciated. Maybe split into separate articles? Thanks.--78.86.26.236 (talk) 18:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Hay fever

Merged from Talk:Hay fever

Loratadine / Cetirizine

Someone else wrote: Page describes loratadine high class 'Bold text'as a "short-acting" anti-histamine (and contrasts it with fexofenadine), but the loratadine page itself says it has a "long-lasting effect." Which is it?

I'm no medical expert but I too have doubts about what is written in this article. Loratadine is a one per day medication and is marketed as being non-drowsy. Cetirizine on the other hand cautions that it may cause drowsiness. I'm just going by what I read on the box. The article though gives the impression loratadine is more likely to cause drowsiness that Cetirizine, which is obviously not the case. Can a medical/pharmaceutical expert clarify this article? Suitsyou 09:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Nasal Sprays

I removed the "prescription" part, since that is not true everywhere - here in the UK these sprays are over the counter medicines. I've also added another one (Beclomethasone Dipropionate BP which is markerted as Beconase) and added that fluticasone is also marketed as Flixonase 10:07, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

We should unlink the brand names. They just redirect to the fluticasone etc. pages. JFW | T@lk 21:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Kafunsho" 花粉症　pollinosis in Japan

It is "common knowledge" among Japanese people that pollinosis only occurs in Japan. Why is this so commonly thought to be true?

Now that is a very interesting question which, to my knowledge, can only be tenuously answered. The Japanese seem given over to a variety of odd beliefs regarding their uniqueness; I have run across claims that the Japanese process language in their right hemisphere, instead of their left, and that the Japanese government refuses to allow drugs into circulation unless they have been specifically tested on Japanese subjects (that is, medical results from Chinese, American, or any other non-Japanese subjects are ignored). I don't know whether any of this is true, but it seems to corroborate your own claims of their general attitude toward pollinosis.

But all of that need not be blamed entirely on Japanese ethnocentrism. In many ways, Japan is unique, or at least unusual; the results of value surveys published by Hofstede find that Japan is the most "Masculine," work-oriented society in the world, while psychometric surveys published by Allik find Japan at the extreme end of a cluster of trais related to anxiety; the high anxiety of Japan in corroborated by Richard Lynn's research. Additionally, IQ studies published by Richard Lynn show that Japan has one of the highest IQs in the world, and other unrelated studies discussed by Jensen show allergies and asthma as modest correlates of intelligence. Perhaps the Japanese claim to be uniquely susceptible to pollinosis because they are inuitively aware of this relationship? If so, there is no research demonstrating that! Harkenbane 00:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know anything about Japan, but isn't one aspect of the culture oriented around cleanliness? Maybe that could relate to the 'hygene hypothesis' for allergies. Peoplesunionpro 02:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Hay fever in humid conditions

If hay fever is, as the article says, more prevalent during when it’s hot, dry, and windy, then why is it that I only get it during cold, humid, rainy days, when pollen and dust aren’t supposed to be floating around in the air? Does this have something to do with me living in the tropics? Right now it’s the rainy season, and it’s usually this time of the year when I—and lots of other people—get hay fever.

Are you sure you have hay fever and not some kind of mold allergy? 128.135.192.75 16:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Worldwide distribution

Is this prevalent in all countries around the world? I am curious because, I'm from South Asia, and don't recall people sufferring from Hay fever back there, as much as they do in the US. So, what's the reason? --Ragib 00:30, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. Check out [1] Peoplesunionpro 02:11, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

might have something to do with the fact that south east asia lies on the equator, and thus the flora/ grasses haven't evolved to pollinate during any particular season, and that the pollen levels will be more or less constant through out the year, rather than occurring in a short burst at the onset of spring--WuIzMe (talk) 07:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Request external link allergymatters.com

We are an allergy company that provides an allergy learning centre, allergy product ratings and reviews. Our site is recommended by top practitioners in the field. We would like to know whether our site (allergymatters.com)is qualified. so that more allergy sufferers can benefit from this valuable resource. SOrry if we put our message in the wrong place. Thank you very much217.36.223.45 10:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the polite request on this and other pages (thus following WP:SPAM guideline re not directly inserting external links to website one is directly involved with), but no not appropriate. Wikipedia is not a directories listings and a commericial site is therefore not an appropriate external link (see WP:EL for policy). As your site introduces itself "Allergymatters is a unique One Stop Allergy Shop selling...". Please do stay though and improve our articles (if you sign up, it will be easier to direct you to relevant help & policy pages). Yours David Ruben ^Talk 13:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Various dubious statements

I have removed or toned-down various bold statements of doubtful accuracy. It's possible some of these have been added by commercial interests, as the claims seem out-of-place, although I have no evidence of this. Any of these statements can be re-added, if they are rewritten to conform to NPOV and have a proper citation.

"A very small amount of Vicks VapoRub(TM)cream around the eyes will effectively reduce the itching (however: vapors will cause a cold sensation and watery eyes)": This is not a preventative. It also needs a citation. This sort of claim may not even be appropriate for this article, even if true. This be removed - this is a request to the person who inserted it. If a child wipes their eyes, the effects will be unpleasant. If the producer of Vicks cites this as a use then let it remain but cite the documentation...

"Grazax treats the underlying cause of hay fever as well as reducing the symptoms.": This may well be true, but statements such as these are not acceptable unless they are specific and cited. Presently, this item reads somewhat like an advertisement. I've toned done the Grazax section.

"It may be helpful to humidify the room you are in to help clean the allergens out of the air, perhaps by using a humidifier, leaving a bowl of water around or leaving a wet towel in the room.": Any such notion of cleaning allergens from the air by raising humidity is dubious, and needs to have significant support if its going to appear here.

"It has been established in controlled trials[1] that acupuncture is more effective than antihistamine drugs in treatment of hay fever. Acupuncture's lack of side-effects is a distinct advantage in treating this condition. Despite all the clinical evidence, some physicians seem to be in denial and suggest that these claims lack a scientific basis and warn that the efficacy of such treatments is only supported by anecdotal evidence.": This is obviously garbage. Nothing of this sort should be allowed in the article by anyone until it is properly qualified. That is, it needs to be made clear that evidence-based medicine has completely and unanimously rejected acupuncture a long time ago.

If acupuncture (or any of the various other non-evidence-based remedies) are to have a place in this article, it is in a separate section that catalogs all of the various non-evidence-based remedies, with a statement that the reason they are there is that noone outside of a group of 'beleivers' is able to replicate these results. In no case should any statement be allowed to return that asserts that physicians or scientists are 'in denial.' AaronWL 16:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

It is surely inaccurate to say "Patients cannot have vasomotor rhinitis and allergic rhinitis simultaneously because vasomotor rhinitis is a diagnosis of exclusion reached after other conditions have been ruled out." The fact that we are only able to diagnose vasomotor rhinitis by exclusion does not mean the the condition cannot not exist simultaneously with allergic rhinitis! Patients who have seasonal allergies may well continue to have rhinitis in non-hayfever seasons. It is probably safe to say that they have both conditions simultaneously in pollen season. I won't presume to alter the main article though as I am not an expert- maybe someone who is can do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.87.16.4 (talk) 03:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Acupuncture/alternative therapies

quote from article: "It has been established in controlled trials[4] that acupuncture is no more effective than antihistamine drugs in treatment of hay fever" - in other words, then: acupuncture is no less effective than antihistamine drugs in treatment of hay fever, surely. Add to that, from same article, "drowsiness and other side effects of antihistamine drugs", and the question arises why the article implies that using acupuncture in treatment of hay fever is not recommended as a valid therapy. If effectiveness is comparable, but acupuncture has no side effects... I don't understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.37.187 (talk • contribs) 22:13, 24 April 2007

Article cites one report, for which unfortunately no online link given that we might explore its conclusions in detail. "no more effective" does not necessarily mean "no less effective" - if a method had zero effect, then indeed it would be "no more effective" and also true that less effective - without seeing original paper we can't be sure of precise values/interpretation. Other papers found on search of PubMed include PMID 15154290 which concludes "No differences in clinical symptoms were seen between active versus sham acupuncture", PMID 15291903 found variable results depending on the assessment tool used and that "No differences between the two groups could be detected with the Allergic Rhinitis Symptom Questionnaire".David Ruben ^Talk 22:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Dietary Treatment

Consider the following page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirulina_(dietary_supplement) Note that at the very bottom there is a mention of its use to prevent hayfever. There is a reference as well for the claim.

I can provide journal article(s) that show activity for hyperactive genes can be altered by dietary intake. I add this only to point out that dietary effects are not to be ruled out by... zealous individuals. The mechanism for spirulina preventing hayfever may not be known, but it may be a phenotopic effect due to gene expression suppression or activation.

A section for dietary considerations should be added.

On a different point, pollen _can_ be removed indoors, not by humidifying (which may work for some types of pollen, causing aggregation... but this is doubtful except at higher concentrations), but instead by acquiring a small machine which produces ozone. It should be mentioned as well that ozone is only beneficial very high in the atmosphere and is a toxin that we should not breathe. It is important to have the ozone generator adjusted properly. (Fresh scent is good, electric storm scent is bad) 64.114.135.26 00:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't you mean an ioniser? Ionisers aim to produce charged molecules, which may stick to pollen and cause precipitation on surfaces. Ionised air may have other direct effects on the body too, but ozone is dangerous and damages the lungs, a hazard from photocopiers that must be avoided. --86.135.182.210 21:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Monstrous review

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01620.x - this is, to speak with the late Saddam Hussein, "the mother of all reviews" into hay fever and its impact on asthma. In print it is 153 pages, and it has 2241 references. I'm sure it could be used as a background reference on this article... JFW | T@lk 15:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Preventing exposure

"Avoid bicycling or walking - instead use a method of confined transportation such as a car."

Is this really such a good recommendation? Although traveling inside a car will certainly reduce exposure to pollen, the physical exercise lost by avoiding bicycling and walking seems a lot more detrimental than exposure to pollen for all but the worst sufferers. This sort of advice might lead even mild sufferers to find an "excuse" to avoid exercise, when a simple antihistamine would suffice.

Halon8 (talk) 22:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC) I'm concerned about the lack of evidence supporting this statement - unless you're driving through open fields, is the pollen count really that different since pollen will enter your car anyway? I dont think this reflects conventional advice. Also it's important to note that travelling in cars actually exposes people to worse air pollution than cycling or walking, thus making any respiritory difficulties worse e.g.evidence and contradicting the earlier statement saying avoid air pollution. I'm going to attempt to rephrase the line.

I have removed the line about antihistamines under prevention. These are a form of treating the allergy as described in the following section. I have also reordered/rationalised this section and tried to make it less of a 'how to', though not sure this will be sufficient. Halon8 (talk) 16:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Definition

The current definition:

Allergic rhinitis, known as hay fever, is caused by pollens of specific seasonal plants, airborne chemicals and dust particles in people who are allergic to these substances. It

I wonder whether the cause by pollens is a condition necessary for the medical condition to qualify as allergic rhinitis. I would suppose that any allergen-caused reaction resembling common cold would qualify. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

There is no known cure for hay fever.

Most people including those who claim to be experts, know next to nothing about hay fever. There is no known cure and there is absolutely nothing available which can alleviate it. Furthermore, nasal sprays do not alleviate hay fever. In fact they greatly aggravate it. The only remedy is to avoid the pollen altogether by staying indoors with doors and windows tightly closed and to travel in an air conditioned car with the windows closed, or better still, go and live in another part of the world. Apgeraint (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Opening section's time of year comment

I'm not sure of the usual policy on these things... But I find it odd that the time of year for the northern hemisphere is mentioned, but not the southern. That just stinks of the old "USA is the world" logic of many US born citizens (though in this case it may not have been a US citizen who did it). I don't know the normal time of year for southern hemisphere hayfever (I just get releived when it goes away), so I can't add it, but if someone does.... Supertin (talk) 23:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Yea was gunna say the same thing...It's a bit 'world series' dont you think? It's really not appropriate to phrase it like that. Should just be during summer or whatever —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.243.224 (talk) 11:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Capsaicin as a treatment option for vasomotor rhinitis

I suffer from vasomotor rhinitis and have experienced that some Dutch doctors will treat it with hot pepper or capsaicin (nasal spray or more intensive nasal treatment with drained cloths and local anesthesia), while others oppose the treatment. The literature appears to be in favor of the treatment, but evidence seems weak. Since this is not my field of expertise, I do not wish to alter the wikipedia page, but I would appriciate a discussion about capsaicin treatment on the page. Would that be possible? Thanks a lot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.48.102 (talk) 11:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal

If Coryza#See also is correct that Rhinitis is a synonym for Coryza (and Dorland's seems to agree), then these articles should be merged. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

vasomotor rhinitis cites from U.S. National Institute of Health

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001648.htm

"Vasomotor rhinitis is a nonallergic condition that involves a constant runny nose, sneezing, and nasal congestion."

...

"Alternative Names

Rhinitis - nonallergic; Idiopathic rhinitis; Nonallergic rhinitis

References

Wallace DV, Dykewicz MS, Bernstein DI, Blessing-Moore J, Cox L, Khan DA, et al. The diagnosis and management of rhinitis: an updated practice parameter. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2008 Aug:122(2)."

Ocdcntx (talk)

Treatment of vasomotor rhinitis with intranasal beclomethasone dipropionate (Becotide).

PMID 782135

Löfkvist T, Svensson G.

Treatment of vasomotor rhinitis with intranasal beclomethasone dipropionate (Becotide). Results from a double-blind cross-over study.

Acta Allergol. 1976 Jun;31(3):227-38.

The effect of beclomethasone dipropionate (Becotide) intranasally in vasomotor rhinitis has been studied on 39 adult volunteers in a double-blind cross-over study during 9 weeks in February-April 1975. The dose of beclomethasone dipropionate was 300 mug/day. Twenty-five patients preferred the beclomethasone dipropionate period, 5 patients the placebo period, and 9 patients had no preference. About three-quarters (74 per cent) of the patients considered themselves free of symptoms or greatly improved after the treatment with beclomethasone dipropionate. Statistical calculation of the daily nasal symptoms score confirms the improvement. The speediest effect was registered for sneezing, followed by nasal catarrh, nasal itching, and blocking. No changes in the levels of cortisol occurred during the treatment. The bacteriological and mycological findings (analysed with regard to Candida albicans) were fairly constant.

Ocdcntx (talk) 14:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

AAFM nice thorough write-up of vasomotor rhinitis, provides authority for most of the current Vasomotor Rhinitis section

FULL TEXT: http://www.aafp.org/afp/2005/0915/p1057.html

---

Abstract: PMID 16190503

Wheeler PW, Wheeler SF.

Am Fam Physician. 2005 Sep 15;72(6):1057-62.

Vasomotor rhinitis.

Department of Family and Geriatric Medicine, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky 40218, USA.

Comment in:

• Am Fam Physician. 2006 May 1;73(9):1517.

Vasomotor rhinitis affects millions of Americans and results in significant symptomatology. Characterized by a combination of symptoms that includes nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea, vasomotor rhinitis is a diagnosis of exclusion reached after taking a careful history, performing a physical examination, and, in select cases, testing the patient with known allergens. According to a 2002 evidence report published by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), there is insufficient evidence to reliably differentiate between allergic and nonallergic rhinitis based on signs and symptoms alone. The minimum level of diagnostic testing needed to differentiate between the two types of rhinitis also has not been established. An algorithm is presented that is based on a targeted history and physical examination and a stepwise approach to management that reflects the AHRQ evidence report and U.S. Food and Drug Administration approvals. Specific approaches to the management of rhinitis in children, athletes, pregnant women, and older adults are discussed.

Ocdcntx (talk) 03:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Nice Vasomotor writeup by Allergist & Physician Dr. Vincent St. A. Crump MBBS (UWI), Dip Derm. (Univ Lond), FRCP (U.K.), FRACP

http://allergyclinic.co.nz/guides/50.html

Ocdcntx (talk) 03:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Nice pie chart of incidents of allergic, vasomotor, and mixed rhinitis (& other web material)

http://www.health-res.com/non-allergic-vasomotor-rhinitis/

Ocdcntx (talk) 13:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

World Health Organization on Vasomotor Rhinitis

Scarupa, Mark D.; Kaliner, Michael A.

Nonallergic Rhinitis, With a Focus on Vasomotor Rhinitis: Clinical Importance, Differential Diagnosis, and Effective Treatment Recommendations

World Allergy Organization Journal: March 2009 - Volume 2 - Issue 3 - pp 20-25 doi: 10.1097/WOX.0b013e3181990aac Review Article

Abstract

The term "rhinitis" denotes nasal inflammation causing a combination of rhinorrhea, sneezing, congestion, nasal itch, and/or postnasal drainage. Allergic rhinitis is the most prevalent and most frequently recognized form of rhinitis. However, nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) is also very common, affecting millions of people. By contrast, NAR is less well understood and less often diagnosed. Nonallergic rhinitis includes a heterogeneous group of conditions, involving various triggers and distinct pathophysiologies. Nonallergic vasomotor rhinitis is the most common form of NAR and will be the primary focus of this review. Understanding and recognizing the presence of NAR in a patient is essential for the correct selection of medications and for successful treatment outcomes.

© 2009 World Allergy Organization

Ocdcntx (talk) 14:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Vasomotor Rhinitis - a different approach

Changing weather, air pressure change, decompression sickness

along this line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.82.143.78 (talk) 02:28, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Nasal hyperreactivity in rhinitis rhinitis correlated with strong innervation pattern with sensory nerve fibers containing SP and CGRP demonstrated neurogenic inflammation PMID 18651116

Nasal hyperreactivity in allergic rhinitis and idiopathic rhinitis correlated with strong innervation pattern with sensory nerve fibers containing SP and CGRP demonstrated neurogenic inflammation, when compared to normal controls.

HNO. 2008 Aug;56(8):799-807. [Ultrastructural changes in allergic rhinitis vs. idiopathic rhinitis]

[Article in German]

Knipping S, Holzhausen HJ, Riederer A, Schrom T.

Universitätsklinik und Poliklinik für Hals-, Nasen- und Ohrenheilkunde, Kopf - und Halschirurgie, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Magdeburger Strasse 12, 06097 Halle/Saale. stephan.knipping@medizin.uni-halle.de Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nasal hyperreactivity is one of the most important underlying mechanisms in allergic rhinitis (AR) as well as idiopathic rhinitis (IR). The aim of the present study was to examine pathomorphological changes in nasal mucosa in these subgroups of rhinitis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Tissue samples of human inferior turbinates from 20 patients with AR and 16 patients with IR were taken during nasal surgery and preserved in glutaraldehyde or paraformaldehyde. Ultrathin sections of specimens from 15 patients without chronic inflammation of nasal mucosa were used as controls. Primary antibodies against substance P (SP), calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP), and endothelial nitric oxide synthase (NOS III) were applied, and the immunocomplexes were visualized by an immunocytochemical staining technique using gold-labeled antibodies. Immunostained structures were photodocumented using light and transmission electron microscopy.

RESULTS: The nasal mucosa of patients with AR and IR showed similarities on the ultrastructural level. A strong innervation pattern with sensory nerve fibers containing SP and CGRP demonstrated neurogenic inflammation. Extensive edema and cellular infiltrations were found in AR. A decreased presence of eosinophils and nitric oxide was observed in IR.

CONCLUSIONS: On the ultrastructural level, AR and IR showed many similarities but also some differences. Based on these findings, anti-inflammatory therapy could be recommended for both types of rhinitis.

PMID 18651116

Types

This section is not clear as "mic" appears: but is it " autonomic " cut short ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Degourdon (talk • contribs) 13:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I took out the few confusing words. Puffysphere (talk) 21:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Puffysphere

Allergic rhinitis without specific symptoms

Some people have atypical symptoms from allergic rhinitis, such as no or almost no symptoms other than fatigue and malaise. I've been looking for a reference that mentions this. It seems to be common knowledge among the allergists I've seen. I found a webpage http://thebigl.web.officelive.com/Interpreter/V2/Content/allergic_rhinitis.html which does talk about this. I'm trying to find the source for their info.

Can anyone come up with a good reference for allergic rhinitis with no or almost no specific symptoms?

If someone goes to a doctor with fatigue and malaise without other symptoms, allergic rhinitis is a possibility. And I'd like to see a good reference for that, too. Puffysphere (talk) 18:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)Puffysphere

rhinitis from food

People can get rhinitis from food also, that needs to be included. I don't know whether food rhinitis is allergic or nonallergic. Puffysphere (talk) 21:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Puffysphere

Allergic rhinitis, eye symptoms

I'm not sure whether the eye symptoms, like redness, watering, itching and puffiness around the eyes, are from the allergic reaction inside the nose, or directly because of allergens acting on the cornea and conjunctiva. I did find these eye symptoms mentioned as symptoms of allergic rhinitis in the references I cited. But I'm not sure if those symptoms are included only because, if an allergen is there to irritate your nose, it'll probably be able to irritate your eyes as well. Puffysphere (talk) 22:34, 11 January 2012 (UTC)Puffysphere

Azetaline

" The antihistamine azelastine has been shown to be effective for allergic, mixed, and vasomotor rhinitis.[14] "

There seems to be no particular evidence to single out azetaline amongst the other anti-histamines - it isn't even a third generation drug. Seems to be marketing

(Anthony F. Camilleri (talk) 23:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

There are only two antihistamines used in prescription nasal sprays so far as I know - azelastine and olopatadine. There is new evidence that olopatadine nasal spray also helps in vasomotor rhinitis.

I included a paragraph about local allergic rhinitis in the allergic rhinitis section. There's good evidence that people can have allergic reactions locally in their nose, when skin and blood tests are negative, and many people who have been diagnosed with nonallergic rhinitis actually have local allergic rhinitis.

Many of the people in these studies who supposedly just had vasomotor rhinitis, likely actually had local allergies in their nose. Which would explain why an antihistamine worked for them. I included a study on olopatadine in the article. Puffysphere (talk) 15:31, 19 January 2012 (UTC)Puffysphere

Management

It's highly unclear, do hyper doses of B12 cover non-allergic rhinitis or not. The text supposed to be the following:

The management of rhinitis depends on the underlying cause. For instance, if the cause is some kind of allergy, high-dose administration... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.250.7.120 (talk) 11:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I've removed the reference to high dose B12 for management. The references looked as if they were put in broken on purpose to reduce suspicion on the content. No other sources for high does B12 treatment of rhinitis could be found. In fact, if you google for the phrase "Vitamin B12 has been additionally validated to stimulate the activity of the body's TH1 suppressor T-Cells", you'll find the exact sentence spread across the web on sites pushing B12 injections for all sorts of things, including Autism. --CandleInTheDark (talk) 00:13, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Where languages?

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinitis https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rinitis https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinite

etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.62.117.11 (talk) 08:07, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation

So pronunciation has been moved to the infobox. But medical infoboxes usually contain only highly specialized scientific information, not pronunciation, although the template does provide a respective field. In fact people rarely look at medical infoboxes to find pronunciation. We also have a separate section "Pronunciation_and_etymology". In my opinion creating a separate section in this case is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. There are many readers who read only the first several sentences, even the infobox is too far for them, not to mention "Pronunciation_and_etymology". But, when pronunciation is not obvious, it is great to see it immediately. The word "coryza" is rather rare, but "rhinitis" certainly deserves a special kind of explanation available directly, like in Chlamydia_trachomatis, not like in Pneumonia. 85.193.240.37 (talk) 23:27, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

We are moving towards infoboxes such as you see at gout with less specialized information. As encyclopedia rather than a dictionary I am not convince pronunciation belongs in the first sentence. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. Thanks for your attention.85.193.240.37 (talk) 23:58, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

PS. "As [an] encyclopedia rather than a dictionary" you are strikingly similar to a human ;-). 85.193.240.37 (talk) 12:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Why thanks :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:13, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

BSACI guideline

doi:10.1111/cea.12953 JFW | T@lk 19:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)