My otorhinolaryngologist is convinced that allergies contribute to my nasal problems and that avoidance of allergens and allergy shots should be part of my treatment. There is reason, however, to suspect that allergies have little if anything to do with nasal polyposis -- see the article Nasal Polyposis, Esoinophil Dominated Inflammation, and Allergy, Thorax 2000;55(Suppl 2):S79-S83 ( October ).
While I remain agnostic with respect to whether or not he is correct about this, I have taken several actions that follow from the belief that allergies contribute to my problems.
I have been tested for allergies and found to be allergic to cat hair, cotton, dust, grass, and two types of dust mites. I give myself an allergy shot, intended to desensitize myself to these allergens, once a week. Does it do any good? Frankly, I do not know.
Dust mites are probably the biggest indoor problem for me. I use a portable HEPA air filter (13520) in my bedroom and 3M Ultra Allergen filters in the furnace, both intended to remove dust mite remains and other allergens from the air. I keep my box springs, mattress, and pillows encased in mite-proof barriers, and I wash my bedding in HOT water every other week. I also treat the carpets in my house twice a year with disodium octaborate tetrahydrate, which is supposed to kill the damn mites. Does all of this do any good? Again, I am not sure, but hope it does. Something has worked for me, because I have my sense of smell back and I don't want to lose it again!
Air Filters
Lots of people have been buying air filters lately. If you are considering buying one, I strongly recommend that you do a little research on them first. I recommend reading Consumer Reports' (Feb. 2002 and October 2003) reviews of air cleaners before purchasing one -- do not rely on information in commercials. Consumer Reports has evaluated the best sellers, and they found clear differences in the effectiveness of the tested machines. The top rated machine was an electronic precipitator model, the Friedrich C-90A. The lowest rated machine was also an electronic precipitator, the Sharper Image Ionic Breeze. Referring to the Ionic Breeze, Consumer Reports said "we found almost no measurable reduction in airborn particles." I am still using an old, reasonably priced (about $100) Honeywell HEPA unit. It is rather noisy, so I run it only mostly when I am not in the room.
Sharper Image sued Consumer Reports for "product disparagement." They lost and were ordered to pay CR's legal fees, over half a million dollars.
In the May, 2005, issue of Consumer Reports we are told that the Sharper Image (and similar products by Brookstone and others) are not only ineffective but they also produce potentially dangerous levels of ozone. These devices are not subject to federal regulation, and the certifications that are advertised are apparently of little if any value. CR notes that the ozone generated by these products can deaden one's sense of smell, increase sensitivity to various allergens, aggravate asthma, decrease lung function, cause coughing, wheezing, and chest pain, and may cause permanent lung damage. CR also notes that the ozone produced by such products can react with other substances in one's household to produce ultrafine particles and additional toxic compounds -- for example, creating formaldehyde (carcinogenic) when reacting with substances commonly found in household cleaning products. Also noted was the fact that ozone, although toxic, has a sweet smell, which users of these products may mistake for the smell of clean, healthy air.
Be wary of Internet Reviews. Again, I recommend going to the original Consumer Reports articles, but if you must see them second hand, try these:
Contact Information for the Webmaster,
Dr. Karl L. Wuensch
This page most recently revised on
the 22nd of November, 2013.