Comparison of EPD With Conventional Escalating-dose Immunotherapy (hyposensitization)
By contrast uncontrolled use of conventional (escalating dose) immunotherapy (hyposensitization not EPD) for general allergic conditions was believed to be responsible for at least 29 deaths in the UK, and is now banned in the United Kingdom except in hospital under close observation. A working party of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology reviewed the role of conventional high dose specific allergen immunotherapy (not EPD) in the treatment of allergic disease and recommends high dose specific allergen immunotherapy for treating summer hay fever uncontrolled by conventional medication and for wasp and bee venom hypersensitivity. For the recommended indications the risk:benefit ratio was found to be acceptable for conventional immunotherapy provided patients are carefully selected; in particular, patients with asthma should be excluded and injections should be given only by allergists experienced in this form of treatment in a clinic where resuscitative facilities are available and patients remain symptom free for an observation period after injection which is sufficient to detect all serious adverse reactions.
Conventional escalating-dose immunotherapy (not EPD) has been used to treat tens of millions of people in the United States with appropriate medical supervision with a death rate of less than one in one million according to the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology.
Read more about this topic: Enzyme Potentiated Desensitization
Famous quotes containing the words comparison and/or conventional:
“In everyone’s youthful dreams, philosophy is still vaguely but inseparably, and with singular truth, associated with the East, nor do after years discover its local habitation in the Western world. In comparison with the philosophers of the East, we may say that modern Europe has yet given birth to none.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“First it must be known that only a spoken word or a conventional sign is an equivocal or univocal term; therefore a mental content or concept is, strictly speaking, neither equivocal nor univocal.”
—William of Occam (c. 1285–1349)