What is cotton linters allergy

W1 Common Ragweed

W2 Western Ragweed

W3 Giant Ragweed

W4 Untrue Ragweed

W5 Wormwood

W6 Mugwort

W7 Ox-eye Daisy

W8 Dandelion

W9 Plantain

W10 Lamb’s Quarter

W11 Russian Thistle

W12 Golden Rod

W13 Cocklebur

W14 Rough Pigweed

W15 Scale

W16 Rough Marsh Elder

W17 Firebush

W18 Sorrel

W19 Wall Pellitory

W20 Nettle

W100 Sagebrush

W102 Yellow Dock

W104 Dog Fennel

W105 Clover

W106 Alfalfa

W111 Rabbitbush

W140 Careless Weed

W150 Saltbush

W160 Poverty Weed

TREES

T1Maple

T2 Alder

T3 Birch

T4 Hazelnut

T5 Beech

T6 Mountain Cedar

T7 Oak

T8 Elm

T9 Olive

T10 Walnut

T11 Sycamore

T12 Willow

T14 Cottonwood

T15 Ash

T16 Pine

T18 Eucalyptus

T19 Acacia

T20 Mesquite

T21 Melaleuca

T22 Pecan

T23 Cypress

T70 Mulberry

T71 Japanese Cedar

T73 Australian Pine

T100 Pepper

T101 Juniper

T102 Red Cedar

T103 Privet

T104 Palm

T105 Redwood

T106 Poplar

T107 Sweet Gum

T108 Mango

T109 Hickory

T110 Orange


Cotton uses

CONTRAINDICATIONS

Do not ister in the presence of diseases characterized by bleeding diathesis.

Individuals with autoimmune disease may be at risk of exacerbating symptoms of the underlying disease, possibly due to routine immunization. Patients who own experienced a recent myocardial infarction may not be tolerant of immunotherapy. Children with nephrotic syndrome probably should not get injections due to immunization causing exacerbation of nephrotic disease.

Cotton available forms, composition, doses:

Indications and Usages:

ATC codes:

ICD-10 codes:

OVERDOSAGE

Refer to “WARNINGS”, “PRECAUTIONS” and “ADVERSE REACTIONS” sections for signs and symptoms of an overdose.

If a systemic or anaphylactic reaction does happen, apply tourniquet above the site of allergenic extract injection and inject intramuscularly or subcutaneously 0.3 to 0.5 ml of 1:1000 Epinephrine-hydrochloride into the opposite arm or gluteal area.

Repeat dose in 5-10 minutes if necessary. Loosen tourniquet briefly at 5 minute intervals to prevent circulatory impairment. Discontinue use of the tourniquet after ½ hour.

The epinephrine HCL 1:1000 dose for infants to 2 years is 0.05 to 0.1 ml; for children 2 to 6 years it is 0.15 ml; for children 6 to 12 years it is 0.2 ml.

Symptoms of progressive anaphylaxis include airway obstruction and/or vascular collapse. After istration of epinephrine, profound shock and vasomotor collapse should be treated with intravenous fluids and possibly vasoactive drugs.

Monitor airways for obstruction. Oxygen should be given by mask if indicated.

Antihistamines, H2 antagonist, bronchodilators, steroids and theophylline may be used as indicated after providing adequate epinephrine and circulatory support.4

Patients who own been taking beta-blockers may be unresponsive to epinephrine. Epinephrine or beta-adrenergic drugs (Alupent) may be ineffective. These drugs should be istered even though a beta-blocker may own been taken.

The following treatment will be effective whether or not patient is taking a beta-blocker: Aminophylline IV, slow shove or drip, Atrovent (Ipratropium bromide) Inhaler, 3 inhalations repeated, Atropine, 0.4 mg/ml, 0.75 to 1.5 ml IM or IV, Solu-Cortef, 100-200 mg IM or IV, Solu-Medrol, 125 mg IM or IV, Glucagon, 0.5-1 mg IM or IV, Benadryl, 50 mg IM or IV, Cimetidine, 300 mg IM or IV, Oxygen via ambu bag.

advertisement

STORAGE

Store every stock concentrates and dilutions at 2-8° C.

Hold at this temperature during office use. The expiration date of the allergenic extracts is listed on the container label. Dilutions of the allergenic extracts containing less than 50% glycerine are less stable. If loss of potency is suspected, potency can be checked using side by side skin testing with freshly prepared dilutions of equal concentration on individuals with known sensitivity to the allergen.

REFERENCES

1. Bousquet, Jean: “In vivo methods for study of allergy: Skin tests” Third Edition, Allergy Principles and Practice, C.V.

What is cotton linters allergy

Mosby Co., Vol. I, Chap. 19, pp 419-436, 1988.

2. Endless, W.F., Taylor, R.J., Wagner, C.J., et al.: Skin test suppression by antihistamines and the development of subsensitivity, J. Allergy Clin. Immunol., pp. 76-113, 1985.

3. Holgate, S.T., Robinson, C., Church, Mike: Mediators of Immediate Hypersensitivity, Third Edition, Allergy Principles and Practice, C.V. Mosby Co., Vol. I and II, pp 135-163, 1988.

4.

Wasserman, S., Marquart, D.: Anaphylaxis, Third Edition, Allergy Principles and Practice, C.V. Mosby Co., Vol. 1, Chap. 58, pp. 1365-1376, 1988.

5. Reid, Michael J., Lockey, Richard F., Turkeltaub M.D., Paul C., Platts-Mills, Thomas. “Survey of Fatalities from Skin Testing and Immunotherapy 1985-1989”, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Vol. 92, No. 1, pp. 6-15, 1993.

6. Matthews, K., et al: Rhinitis, Asthma and Other Allergic Diseases. NIAID Task Force Report, U.S. Dept. HEW, NIH Publication No. 79-387, Chapter 4, pp. 213-217, May 1979.

7. Ishizaka, K.: Control of IgE Synthesis, Third Edition, Allergy Principles and Practices, Vol.

I, Chap. 4, p.

What is cotton linters allergy

52, edited by Middleton et al.

8. Nelson, H.S.: “The Effect of Preservatives and Dilution on the Deterioration of Russian Thistle (Salsola pestifer), a pollen extract.” The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Vol. 63, No. 6, pp. 417-425, June 1979.

9. Seebohm, P.M., et al: Panel on Review of Allergenic Extracts, Final Report, Food and Drug istration, March 13, 1981, pp. 84-86.

10. Rocklin, R.E., Sheffer, A.L., Grainader, D.K.

and Melmon, K.: “Generation of antigen-specific suppressor cells during allergy desensitization”, New England Journal of Medicine, 302, May 29, 1980, pp. 1213-1219.

11. Seebohm, P.M., et al: Panel on Review of Allergenic Extracts, Final Report, Food and Drug istration, March 13, 1981, pp 9-48.

12. Stevens, E.: Cutaneous Tests, Regulatory Control and Standardization of Allergenic Extracts, First International Paul-Ehrlich Seminar, May 20-22, 1979, Frankfurt, Germany, pp.

133-138.

13. Van Metre, T., Adkinson, N., Amodio, F., Lichtenstein, L., Mardinay, M., Norman, P., Rosenberg, G., Sobotka, A., Valentine, M.: “A Comparative Study of the Effectiveness of the Rinkel Method and the Current Standard Method of Immunology for Ragweed Pollen Hay Fever,“ The Journal of Clinical Allergy and Immunology, Vol. 66, No. 6, p. 511, December 1980.

14. Wasserman, S.: The Mast Cell and the Inflammatory Response. The Mast Cell-its role in Health and disease. Edited by J. Pepys & A.M. Edwards, Proceedings of an International Symposium, Davos, Switzerland, Pitman Medical Publishing Co., 1979, pp. 9-20.

15. Perelmutter, L.: IgE Regulation During Immunotherapy of Allergic Diseases.

Annals of Allergy, Vol. 57, August 1986.

16. Bullock, J., Frick, O.: Mite Sensitivity in Home Dust Allergic Children, Am. J. Dis. Child., pp. 123-222, 1972.

17. Willoughby, J.W.: Inhalant Allergy Immunotherapy with Standardized and Nonstandardized Allergenic Extracts, American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery: Instructional Courses, Vol. 1, Chapter 15, C.V. Mosby Co., St.

What is cotton linters allergy

Louis, Missouri, September 1988.

DOSAGE AND ISTRATION

Refer to “STORAGE” section for proper storage condition for allergenic extract. Parenteral drug products should be inspected visually for particulate matter and discoloration prior to istration, whenever solution and container permit. Some allergenic extracts naturally precipitate.

Physicians undertaking immunotherapy should be concerned with patient’s degree of sensitivity. The initial dilution of allergenic extract, starting dose, and progression of dosage must be carefully sure on the basis of the patient’s history and results of skin tests.

Strongly positive skin tests may be risk factors for systemic reactions. Less aggressive immunotherapy schedules may be indicated for such patients.

Precaution is necessary when using extract mixture for skin testing. The diluting effect of individual components within a mixture may cause untrue negative reactions. Patients extremely sensitive to a common allergen in several components of a mixture may be more likely to experience a systemic reaction than when skin tested individually for each component.9

PRICK-PUNCTURE TESTING: To identify highly sensitive individuals and as a safety precaution, it is recommended that a prick-puncture test using a drop of the extract concentrate be performed prior to initiating extremely dilute intradermal testing.

Prick-puncture testing is performed by placing a drop of extract concentrate on the skin and puncturing the skin through the drop with a little needle such as a bifurcated vaccinating needle. The most satisfactory sites on the back for skin testing are from the posterior axillary fold to 2.5 cm from the spinal column, and from the top of the scapula to the lower rib margins. The best areas on the arms are the volar surfaces from the axilla to 2.5 or 5 cm above the wrist, skipping the anticubital space. A positive reaction is approximately 10-15 mm erythema with 2.5 mm wheal. Smaller, less conclusive reactions may be considered positive in conjunction with a definitive history of symptoms on exposure to the allergen.

The more sensitive the patient the higher the probability that he/she will own symptoms related to the exposure of the offending allergen. Hence, the importance of a excellent patient history. Less sensitive individuals can be tested intradermally with an appropriately diluted extract.

A positive control using histamine phosphate identifies patients whose skin may not react due to medications, metabolic or other reasons. A negative control (50% glycerine for prick-puncture testing) would exclude false-positive reactions due to ingredients in diluent or patients who own dermatographism.

SINGLE DILUTION INTRADERMAL TESTING: The surface of the upper and lower arm is the usual location for skin testing.

It is significant that a new, sterile, disposable syringe and needle be used for each extract tested. Intracutaneous test dilutions, five-fold or ten-fold, may be prepared from stock concentrate using physiologic saline as a diluent. (1) Start testing with the most dilute allergenic extract concentration. (2) A volume of 0.02-0.05 ml should be injected slowly into the superficial skin layers making a little bleb (superficial wheal). (3) For patients without a history of extreme sensitivity, or a negative or weakly reactive prick-puncture test, the initial dilution for skin testing should be a dilution at least 1:12,500 w/v.

This initial dilution can be prepared by diluting 1:20 to 1:50 w/v (2%-5%) extracts five-fold to 5-4 or 1:10 w/v (10%) extracts to 5-5. See “Serial Dilutions Titration Test Dilutions” chart on the next sheet. Dilute 1:10 w/v (10%) extracts to 10-3 if using ten-fold dilutions. (4) Sensitive patients with a positive prick-puncture test require a further dilution to at least 1:312,500 w/v. This dilution can be prepared by diluting 1:20 to 1:50 w/v (2% — 5%) extracts to 5-6 or 1:10 w/v (10%) extracts to 5-7 (five-fold dilutions).

Ten-fold dilution to 10-6 of a 1:10 w/v (10%) extract would be a safe starting dilution. Size of reactions are quantitated based on size of wheal and erythema. For interpretation of skin reactions, refer to chart under. If after 20 minutes no skin reaction is observed, continue testing using increasing increments of the concentration until a reaction of 5-10 mm wheal and 11-30 mm erythema is obtained, or a concentration of 5-2 or 10-1 has been tested. A negative control, 50% glycerine diluted with diluent to 5-2 (1:25) or 10-1 (1:10) dilution and a positive control of histamine phosphate, should be tested and included in interpretation of skin reactions.1, 13

GRADE mm ERYTHEMA mm WHEAL
0 less than 5 less than 5
± 5-10 5-10
1+ 11-20 5-10
2+ 21-30 5-10
3+ 31-40 10-15 or with pseudopods
4+ greater than 40 greater than 15 or with numerous pseudopods

INTRADERMAL TESTING-SKIN ENDPOINT TITRATION: The allergenic extracts to which the patient is sensitive, the patient’s degree of sensitivity and the dose of allergen to be used in immunotherapy can be sure through the use of intracutaneous skin tests involving progressive five-fold dilutions of allergenic extracts.

Intracutaneously inject 0.01 to 0.02 ml of the test allergen to form a 4 mm diameter superficial skin wheal. For patients demonstrating a negative or weakly reactive prick-puncture skin test, an initial screening dilution of 1:12,500 w/v is safe. For patients demonstrating a positive prick-puncture skin test, an initial screening dilution of 1:312,500 w/v is safe.

What is cotton linters allergy

When a sequence of five-fold or ten-fold dilutions of an allergen are injected, the endpoint is sure by noting the dilution that first produces a wheal and erythema (15 minutes after injection) that is 2 mm larger than wheals with erythema produced by weaker, non-reacting dilutions (5 mm negative wheal). The endpoint dilution is used as a starting dose concentration for immunotherapy.

What is cotton linters allergy

An endpoint dose of 0.15 ml is a safe initial dose to be followed by escalation to the optimal maximum tolerated dose for each individual.

Injections should never be given intravenously. A 5/8 inch, 25 gauge needle on a sterile syringe will permit deep subcutaneous injection.

IMMUNOTHERAPY: If the first injection of the initial dilution of extract is tolerated without significant local reaction, increasing doses by 5-20% increments of that dilution may be istered.

The rate of increase in dosage in the early stages of treatment with highly diluted extracts is generally more rapid than the rate of increase possible with more concentrated extracts. This schedule is intended only as a guide and must be modified according to the reactivity of the individual patient. Needless to tell, the physician must proceed cautiously in the treatment of the highly sensitive patient who develops large local or systemic reactions.6

Some patients may tolerate larger doses of the allergenic extract depending on patient response.7 Because diluted extract tends to lose activity in storage, the first dose from a more concentrated vial should be the same, or less than, the previous dose.8, 12

Dosages progressively increase according to the tolerance of the patient at intervals of one to seven days until, (1) the patient achieves relief from symptoms, (2) induration at the site of injection is no larger than 50 mm in 36 to 48 hours, (3) a maintenance dose is reached (the largest dose tolerated by the patient that relieves symptoms without undesirable local or systemic reactions).

This maintenance dose may be continued at regular intervals perennially. It may be necessary to adjust the progression of dosage downward to avoid local and constitutional reactions.

The usual duration of treatment has not been established. A period of two or three years on immunotherapy constitutes an average minimum course of treatment.

Titration Number Dilution Exponent Weight / Volume Allergenic Extract Concentrate
1:50 (2%) 1:40 (2 1/2%) 1:33 1/3 (3%) 1:20 (5%) 1:10 (10%)
No.

1

5-1 1:5 1:250 1:200 1:167 1:100 1:50
No. 2 5-2 1:25 1:1,250 1:1,000 1:835 1:500 1:250
No. 3 5-3 1:125 1:6,250 1:5,000 1:4,175 1:2,500 1:1,250
No. 4 5-4 1:625 1:31,250 1:25,000 1:20,875 1:12,500 1:6,250
No. 5 5-5 1:3,125 1:156,250 1:125,000 1:104,375 1:62,500 1:31,250
No.

6

5-6 1:15,625 1:781,250 1:625,000 1:521,875 1:312,500 1:156,250
No. 7 5-7 1:78,125 1:3,906,250 1:3,125,000 1:2,609,375 1:1,562,500 1:781,250
No. 8 5-8 1:390,625 1:19,531,250 1:15,625,000 1:13,046,875 1:7,812,500 1:3,906,250
No. 9 5-9 1:1,953,125 1:97,656,250 1:78,125,000 1:65,234,375 1:39,062,500 1:19,531,250
No.

10

5-10 1:9,765,625 1:488,281,250 1:390,625,000 1:326,171,875 1:195,312,500 1:97,656,250
No. 11 5-11 1:48,828,125 1:2,441,406,250 1:1,953,125,000 1:1,630,859,375 1:976,562,500 1:488,281,250
No. 12 5-12 1:244,140,625 1:12,207,031,250 1:9,765,625,000 1:8,154,296,875 1:4,882,812,500 1:2,441,406,250

HOW SUPPLIED

Stock concentrates are available in concentrations of 2-10% or weight/volume (w/v) of 1:50, 1:33, 1:20 or 1:10.

Some juicy or liquid foods are available at 1:1 volume/volume (v/v) extraction ratio. Unused egg white extract is available at 1:9 v/v extraction ratio.

Antigen E content of ragweed mixtures ranges from 46-166 U/ml for Ragweed Mixture (Short/Giant/Western/Southern Ragweed), 47-239 U/ml for Short/Giant/Western Ragweed Mixture, and 106-256 U/ml for Short/Giant Ragweed Mixture. Refer to container label for actual Antigen E content.

Extract (stock concentrate) is supplied in 10, 30 and 50 ml containers. Extracts in 5 ml dropper bottles are available for prick-puncture testing.

To insure maximum potency for the entire dating period, every stock concentrates contain 50% glycerine v/v.

INDICATIONS AND USAGE

Allergenic extract is used for diagnostic testing and for the treatment (immunotherapy) of patients whose histories indicate that upon natural exposure to the allergen, they experience allergic symptoms. Confirmation is sure by skin testing. Diagnostic use of allergenic extracts generally begins with direct skin testing.

This product is not intended for treatment of patients who do not manifest immediate hypersensitivity reactions to the allergenic extract following skin testing.

WARNINGS

Refer to boxed “WARNINGS”, “PRECAUTIONS”, “ADVERSE REACTIONS” and “OVERDOSAGE” sections for additional information on serious adverse reactions and steps to be taken, if any occur.

Extreme caution is necessary when using diagnostic skin tests or injection treatment in highly sensitive patients who own experienced severe symptoms or anaphylaxis by natural exposure, or during previous skin testing or treatment. IN THESE CASES THE POTENCY FOR SKIN TESTS AND THE ESCALATION OF THE TREATMENT DOSE MUST BE ADJUSTED TO THE PATIENT’S SENSITIVITY AND TOLERANCE.

Benefit versus risk needs to be evaluated in steroid dependent asthmatics, patients with unstable asthma or patients with underlying cardiovascular disease.

Injections should never be given intravenously.

A 5/8 inch, 25 gauge needle on a sterile syringe allows deep subcutaneous injection. Withdraw plunger slightly after inserting needle to determine if a blood vessel has been entered.

Proper measurement of dose and caution in making injection will minimize reactions. Adverse reactions to allergenic extracts are generally apparent within 20-30 minutes following injection of immunotherapy.

Extract should be temporarily withheld or dosage reduced in case of any of the following conditions: 1) flu or other infection with fever; 2) exposure to excessive amounts of allergen prior to injection; 3) rhinitis and/or asthma exhibiting severe symptoms; 4) adverse reaction to previous injection until cause of reaction has been evaluated by physician supervising patient’s immunotherapy program.

advertisement

PRECAUTIONS

General:

Immunotherapy must be given under physician’s supervision.

Sterile solutions, vials, syringes, etc. must be used. Aseptic technique must be observed in making dilutions from stock concentrates. The usual precautions in istering allergenic extracts are necessary, refer to boxed WARNINGS and “WARNINGS” section. Sterile syringe and needle must be used for each individual patient to prevent transmission of serum hepatitis, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and other infectious agents.

Epinephrine 1:1000 should be available. Refer to “OVERDOSAGE” section for description of treatment for anaphylactic reactions.

Information for Patients:

Patient should remain under observation of a nurse, physician, or personnel trained in emergency measures for at least 20 minutes following immunotherapy injection.

Patient must be instructed to report any adverse reactions that happen within 24 hours after injection. Possible adverse reactions include unusual swelling and/or tenderness at injection site, rhinorrhea, sneezing, coughing, wheezing, shortness of breath, nausea, dizziness, or faintness. Immediate medical attention must be sought for reactions that happen during or after leaving physician’s office.

Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility:

Long term studies in animals own not been conducted with allergenic extract to determine their potential for carcinogenicity, mutagenicity or impairment of fertility.

Pregnancy Category C:

Animal reproduction studies own not been conducted with allergenic extracts.

It is not known whether allergenic extracts cause fetal harm during pregnancy or affect reproductive capacity. A systemic reaction to allergenic extract could cause uterine contractions leading to spontaneous abortion or premature labor. Allergenic extracts should be used during pregnancy only if potential benefit justifies potential risk to fetus.11

Nursing Mothers:

It is not known whether allergenic extracts are excreted in human milk.

Because numerous drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when allergenic extracts are istered to a nursing woman.

Pediatric Use:

Allergenic extracts own been used routinely in children, and no special safety problems or specific hazards own been found. Children can get the same dose as adults. Discomfort is minimized by dividing the dose in half and istering injection at two diverse sites.16, 17

Drug Interactions:

Antihistamines. Antihistamines inhibit the wheal and flare reaction.

The inhibitory effect of conventional antihistamines varies from 1 day up to 10 days, according to the drug and patient’s sensitivity. Endless acting antihistamines (e.g., astemizole) may inhibit the wheal and flare for up to forty days.1, 2

Imipramines, phenothiazines, and tranquilizers. Tricyclic antidepressants exert a potent and sustained decrease of skin reactions to histamine. This effect may final for a few weeks. Tranquilizers and antiemetic agents of the phenothiazine class own H1 antihistaminic activity and can block skin tests.1

Corticosteroids. Short-term (less than 1 week) istration of corticosteroids at the therapeutic doses used in asthmatic patients does not modify the cutaneous reactivity to histamine, compound 48/80, or allergen.

Long-term corticosteroid therapy modifies the skin texture and makes the interpretation of immediate skin tests more difficult.1

Theophylline. It appears that theophylline need not be stopped prior to skin testing.1

Beta-Blockers. Patients receiving beta-blockers may not be responsive to epinephrine or inhaled bronchodilators. The following are commonly prescribed beta-blockers: Levatol, Lopressor, Propanolol Intersol, Propanolol HCL, Blocadren, Propanolol, Inderal-LA, Visken, Corgard, Ipran, Tenormin, Timoptic. Ophthalmic beta-blockers: Betaxolol, Levobunolol, Timolol, Timoptic.

Chemicals that are beta-blockers and may be components of other drugs: Acebutolol, Atenolol, Esmolol, Metoprolol, Nadolol, Penbutolol, Pindolol, Propanolol, Timolol, Labetalol, Carteolol.1

Beta-adrenergic agents. Inhaled beta2 agonists in the usual doses used for the treatment of asthma do not generally inhibit allergen-induced skin tests. However, oral terbutaline and parenteral ephedrine were shown to decrease the allergen-induced wheal.1

Cromolyn. Cromolyn inhaled or injected prior to skin tests with allergens or degranulating agents does not alter skin whealing response.1

Other drugs. Other drugs own been shown to decrease skin test reactivity.

Among them, dopamine is the best-documented compound.1

Specific Immunotherapy. A decreased skin test reactivity has been observed in patients undergoing specific immunotherapy with pollen extracts, grass pollen allergoids, mites, hymenoptera venoms, or in professional beekeepers who are spontaneously desensitized. Finally, it was shown that specific immunotherapy in patients treated with ragweed pollen extract induced a decreased late-phase reaction.1

advertisement

Cotton destination | category:

advertisement

ADVERSE REACTIONS

Adverse reactions include, but are not limited to urticaria; itching; edema of extremities; respiratory wheezing or asthma; dyspnea; cyanosis; tachycardia; lacrimation; marked perspiration; flushing of face, neck or upper chest; mild persistent clearing of throat; hacking cough or persistent sneezing.

1) Local Reactions

A mild burning immediately after injection is expected; this generally subsides in 10-20 seconds. Prolonged pain or pain radiating up arm is generally the result of intramuscular injection, making this injection route undesirable. Subcutaneous injection is the recommended route.

Small amounts of erythema and swelling at the site of injection are common. Reactions should not be considered significant unless they persist for at least 24 hours or exceed 50 mm in diameter.

Larger local reactions are not only uncomfortable, but indicate the possibility of a severe systemic reaction if dosage is increased.

What is cotton linters allergy

In such cases dosage should be reduced to the final level not causing reaction and maintained for two or three treatments before cautiously increasing.

Large, persistent local reactions or minor exacerbations of the patient’s allergic symptoms may be treated by local freezing applications and/or use of oral antihistamines.

2) Systemic Reactions

Systemic reactions range from mild exaggeration of patient’s allergic symptoms to anaphylactic reactions.14 Extremely sensitive patients may show a rapid response. It cannot be overemphasized that, under certain unpredictable combinations of circumstances, anaphylactic shock is always a possibility.

Fatalities are rare but can occur.5 Other possible systemic reaction symptoms are fainting, pallor, bradycardia, hypotension, angioedema, cough, wheezing, conjunctivitis, rhinitis,and urticaria.13, 14

Careful attention to dosage and istration limit such reactions. Allergenic extracts are highly potent to sensitive individuals and OVERDOSE could result in anaphylactic symptoms. Therefore, it is imperative that physicians istering allergenic extracts understand and prepare for treatment of severe reactions.

Refer to “OVERDOSAGE” section.

advertisement

Drugs with same athletic ingredients (Pharmaceutical companies):


References

  • «Cotton». https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/su… (accessed August 28, 2018).
  • Dailymed.»COTTON INJECTION, SOLUTION COTTON LINTERS INJECTION, SOLUTION COTTON SEED INJECTION, SOLUTION FLAXSEED INJECTION, SOLUTION KAPOK INJECTION, SOLUTION OR». https://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailym… (accessed August 28, 2018).
  • «Cotton — DrugBank». http://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/DB1070… (accessed August 28, 2018).


Frequently asked Questions

Can i drive or operate heavy machine after consuming Cotton?

Depending on the reaction of the Cotton after taken, if you are feeling dizziness, drowsiness or any weakness as a reaction on your body, Then consider Cotton not safe to drive or operate heavy machine after consumption.

Meaning that, do not drive or operate heavy duty machines after taking the capsule if the capsule has a strange reaction on your body love dizziness, drowsiness. As prescribed by a pharmacist, it is dangerous to take alcohol while taking medicines as it exposed patients to drowsiness and health risk. Please take note of such effect most especially when taking Primosa capsule. It’s advisable to consult your doctor on time for a proper recommendation and medical consultations.

Is Cotton addictive or habit forming?

Medicines are not designed with the mind of creating an addiction or abuse on the health of the users. Addictive Medicine is categorically called Controlled substances by the government.

For instance, Schedule H or X in India and schedule II-V in the US are controlled substances.

Please consult the medicine instruction manual on how to use and ensure it is not a controlled substance.In conclusion, self medication is a killer to your health. Consult your doctor for a proper prescription, recommendation, and guidiance.

advertisement


GRASSES

G1 Sweet Vernal

G2 Bermuda

G3 Orchard

G4 Meadow Fescue

G5 Perennial Rye

G6 Timothy

G7 Common Reed

G8 June (Kentucky Blue)

G9 Red Top

G10 Johnson

G11 Brome

G12 Cultivated Rye

G13 Velvet

G14 Cultivated Oat

G15 Cultivated Wheat

G16 Meadow Foxtail

G17 Bahia

G70 Wild Rye

G71 Canary Grass

G101 Couch

G102 Sudan Grass

G104 Salt Grass

G105 Rice Pollen

INSECTS

I1 Honeybee

I3 Yellow Jacket

I4 Paper Wasp

I5 Yellow Hornet

I6 Cockroach

I100 Flea

I101 Deer Fly

I102 Black Ant

I103 Housefly

I104 Red Ant

I105 Mosquito

I106 Fire Ant

I107 Moth

I108 Horse Fly

EPIDERMALS

E1 Cat Dander

E2 Dog Dander

E3 Horse Dander

E4 Rabbit Dander

E70 Goose Feathers

E71 Mouse Epithelium

E73 Rat Epithelium

E85 Chicken Feathers

E86 Duck Feathers

E100 Sheep Wool

E101 Human Dander

E102 Mixed Feathers

«O:13:\»PanistOpenUrl\»:36:{s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000openUrl\»;N;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000idc\»;N;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000fmt\»;s:7:\»journal\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000doi\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pii\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000pmid\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000atitle\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000jtitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000stitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000date\»;s:4:\»1981\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000volume\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000issue\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000spage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000epage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000pages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000issn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000eissn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aulast\»;s:9:\»UCHIKOSHI\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000aufirst\»;s:1:\»S\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000auinit\»;N;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000auinitm\»;N;s:5:\»\u0000*\u0000au\»;a:6:{i:0;s:11:\»UCHIKOSHI S\»;i:1;s:8:\»NOMURA K\»;i:2;s:8:\»SAITOH S\»;i:3;s:9:\»KOMATSU N\»;i:4;s:7:\»CHIEN C\»;i:5;s:8:\»MIYAKE H\»;}s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aucorp\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000isbn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000coden\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000genre\»;s:7:\»article\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000part\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000btitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000title\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000place\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pub\»;s:0:\»\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000edition\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000tpages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000series\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000proxy\»;s:30:\»http:\/\/proxyout.inist.fr:8080\/\»;s:12:\»\u0000*\u0000integrite\»;b:1;}»

https://api.panist.fr/document/openurl?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.atitle=NASAL%20ALLERGY%20IN%20SPINNING%20MILL%20WORKERS%20AND%20THE%20POSSIBILITY%20OF%20ALLERGENICITY%20OF%20CHEMICAL%20FIBERS%20AND%20COTTON%20LINTERS&rft.date=1981&rft.aulast=UCHIKOSHI&rft.aufirst=S&fmt.au=%22%26rft.ut%3DUCHIKOSHI%20S%2C%20A%26rft.ua%3DNOMURA%20K%2C%20A%22&noredirect&sid=vibad

Panist access

«O:12:\»IstexOpenUrl\»:35:{s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000openUrl\»;N;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000fmt\»;s:7:\»journal\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000doi\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pii\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000pmid\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000atitle\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000jtitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000stitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000date\»;s:4:\»1981\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000volume\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000issue\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000spage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000epage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000pages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000issn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000eissn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aulast\»;s:9:\»UCHIKOSHI\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000aufirst\»;s:1:\»S\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000auinit\»;N;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000auinitm\»;N;s:5:\»\u0000*\u0000au\»;a:6:{i:0;s:11:\»UCHIKOSHI S\»;i:1;s:8:\»NOMURA K\»;i:2;s:8:\»SAITOH S\»;i:3;s:9:\»KOMATSU N\»;i:4;s:7:\»CHIEN C\»;i:5;s:8:\»MIYAKE H\»;}s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aucorp\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000isbn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000coden\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000genre\»;s:7:\»article\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000part\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000btitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000title\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000place\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pub\»;s:0:\»\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000edition\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000tpages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000series\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000proxy\»;s:30:\»http:\/\/proxyout.inist.fr:8080\/\»;s:12:\»\u0000*\u0000integrite\»;b:1;}»

Istex access

«O:10:\»HalOpenUrl\»:35:{s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000openUrl\»;N;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000fmt\»;s:7:\»journal\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000doi\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pii\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000pmid\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000atitle\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000jtitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000stitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000date\»;s:4:\»1981\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000volume\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000issue\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000spage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000epage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000pages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000issn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000eissn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aulast\»;s:9:\»UCHIKOSHI\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000aufirst\»;s:1:\»S\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000auinit\»;N;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000auinitm\»;N;s:5:\»\u0000*\u0000au\»;a:6:{i:0;s:11:\»UCHIKOSHI S\»;i:1;s:8:\»NOMURA K\»;i:2;s:8:\»SAITOH S\»;i:3;s:9:\»KOMATSU N\»;i:4;s:7:\»CHIEN C\»;i:5;s:8:\»MIYAKE H\»;}s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aucorp\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000isbn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000coden\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000genre\»;s:7:\»article\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000part\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000btitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000title\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000place\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pub\»;s:0:\»\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000edition\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000tpages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000series\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000proxy\»;s:30:\»http:\/\/proxyout.inist.fr:8080\/\»;s:12:\»\u0000*\u0000integrite\»;b:1;}»

Hal access

«O:16:\»EuropePMCOpenUrl\»:35:{s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000openUrl\»;N;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000fmt\»;s:7:\»journal\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000doi\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pii\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000pmid\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000atitle\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000jtitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000stitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000date\»;s:4:\»1981\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000volume\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000issue\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000spage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000epage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000pages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000issn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000eissn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aulast\»;s:9:\»UCHIKOSHI\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000aufirst\»;s:1:\»S\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000auinit\»;N;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000auinitm\»;N;s:5:\»\u0000*\u0000au\»;a:6:{i:0;s:11:\»UCHIKOSHI S\»;i:1;s:8:\»NOMURA K\»;i:2;s:8:\»SAITOH S\»;i:3;s:9:\»KOMATSU N\»;i:4;s:7:\»CHIEN C\»;i:5;s:8:\»MIYAKE H\»;}s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aucorp\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000isbn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000coden\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000genre\»;s:7:\»article\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000part\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000btitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000title\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000place\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pub\»;s:0:\»\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000edition\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000tpages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000series\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000proxy\»;s:30:\»http:\/\/proxyout.inist.fr:8080\/\»;s:12:\»\u0000*\u0000integrite\»;b:1;}»

Europe PubMed Central access

«O:11:\»BaseOpenUrl\»:35:{s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000openUrl\»;N;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000fmt\»;s:7:\»journal\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000doi\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pii\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000pmid\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000atitle\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000jtitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000stitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000date\»;s:4:\»1981\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000volume\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000issue\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000spage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000epage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000pages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000issn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000eissn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aulast\»;s:9:\»UCHIKOSHI\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000aufirst\»;s:1:\»S\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000auinit\»;N;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000auinitm\»;N;s:5:\»\u0000*\u0000au\»;a:6:{i:0;s:11:\»UCHIKOSHI S\»;i:1;s:8:\»NOMURA K\»;i:2;s:8:\»SAITOH S\»;i:3;s:9:\»KOMATSU N\»;i:4;s:7:\»CHIEN C\»;i:5;s:8:\»MIYAKE H\»;}s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aucorp\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000isbn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000coden\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000genre\»;s:7:\»article\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000part\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000btitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000title\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000place\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pub\»;s:0:\»\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000edition\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000tpages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000series\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000proxy\»;s:30:\»http:\/\/proxyout.inist.fr:8080\/\»;s:12:\»\u0000*\u0000integrite\»;b:1;}»

Base Search access

«O:12:\»ArXivOpenUrl\»:35:{s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000openUrl\»;N;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000fmt\»;s:7:\»journal\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000doi\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pii\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000pmid\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000atitle\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000jtitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000stitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000date\»;s:4:\»1981\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000volume\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000issue\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000spage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000epage\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000pages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000issn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000eissn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aulast\»;s:9:\»UCHIKOSHI\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000aufirst\»;s:1:\»S\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000auinit\»;N;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000auinitm\»;N;s:5:\»\u0000*\u0000au\»;a:6:{i:0;s:11:\»UCHIKOSHI S\»;i:1;s:8:\»NOMURA K\»;i:2;s:8:\»SAITOH S\»;i:3;s:9:\»KOMATSU N\»;i:4;s:7:\»CHIEN C\»;i:5;s:8:\»MIYAKE H\»;}s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000aucorp\»;s:0:\»\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000isbn\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000coden\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000genre\»;s:7:\»article\»;s:7:\»\u0000*\u0000part\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000btitle\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000title\»;s:113:\»NASAL ALLERGY IN SPINNING MILL WORKERS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ALLERGENICITY OF CHEMICAL FIBERS AND COTTON LINTERS\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000place\»;s:0:\»\»;s:6:\»\u0000*\u0000pub\»;s:0:\»\»;s:10:\»\u0000*\u0000edition\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000tpages\»;s:0:\»\»;s:9:\»\u0000*\u0000series\»;s:0:\»\»;s:8:\»\u0000*\u0000proxy\»;s:30:\»http:\/\/proxyout.inist.fr:8080\/\»;s:12:\»\u0000*\u0000integrite\»;b:1;}»

arXiv access

Searching the Web

Active ingredient: Cotton

advertisement

What do you feel about the cost of the medicine?

Is it expensive?


RELATED VIDEO: