5 Best Android Apps for Health and Fitness

it’s time to get outside and get in shape. Technology has been a great part of our lives and we should take advantage of it as much as possible. You can find a lot of phone applications today that you can use for tracking your calories and kilometers to stay in shape. As the Android is gaining popularity, here are ten popular health-related apps in the Android Market today that will help you get and stay in shape.

1. CardioTrainer + Racing

The CardioTrainer is a great Android application that challenges users to beat their own best times. It has features such as virtual race simulator and even a nifty voice that tells the user exactly how far behind or ahead he is. That's not all, for only $2.99 you will be able to enhance the free CardioTrainer app with a weight loss module.

2. Fast Food Calorie Counter

Its hard to resist the allure of fast food especially when you are trying to watch your weight. This application can help you mitigate the disastrous effects on your body of your favorite fast foods. You will find compiled data from 72 fast food restaurants. Those who are watching their diet and weight will surely love the data included in this app such as calories, fat grams, fiber, carbohydrates and protein. You can even try the free version of this app, Fast Food Calorie Counter Lite, if you are still undecided to purchase the full version.

3. CalorieQuick™

CalorieQuick will provide you with the help you need to track and control your calorie intake and exercise. Many people love how easy it is to set up and use, it is also designed for quick updating, and provides you with just the feedback you need to improve your health and appearance.

4. Endomondo Sports Tracker

Runners, cyclists, joggers and rollerskaters/rollerbladers will surely love this application. The Endomoohelps can help you track your time, distance, speed and altitude, and keeps a history of your workouts.

5. Calorie Counter by FatSecret

The Calorie Counter is a simple tool for those who would like to keep track of their calories and other nutrition facts. This app also figures the recommended daily intake for a user to achieve his or her fitness and weight goals. It even has a built-in bar code scanner to help you find healthy foods in a snap.

What Is Acid Reflux?

Acid reflux happens when the acids from your stomach "flow back" into your esophagus, causing discomfort and pain. The discomfort is also known as heartburn. The difference between acid reflux and heartburn is action and sensation. The flow of acid from your stomach to your esophagus is called acid reflux while heartburn is pain you are feeling when there is movement of acid into the esophagus from the stomach.

Common symptoms of acid reflux:
* Asthma
* Chest pain due to heartburn sensation
* Dental erosion
* Dysphagia
* Heartburn is the burning sensation brought by rising acid from the stomach towards the esophagus
* Hoarseness
* Regurgitation

Common causes of acid reflux:
* Large meals and eating habits
* Hiatus hernia (hiatal hernia)
* Peptic ulcers and insufficient digestive enzymes
* Smoking
* Alcohol

Medications

* Acid suppressant - these have been shown to be effective, such as histamine2-receptor antagonists (blockers). Histamines are good at reducing inflammation. An inflamed stomach produces more acid - blocking this extra production of acid helps prevent the acids from building up and seeping upwards.

* Propton pump inhibitors - these reduce the production of acid in the stomach. They act on cells in the stomach wall and produce stomach acids.

* Prokinetic agents - these promote the emptying of the stomach, stopping it from becoming overfull.

* Antiacids - commonly used to treat mild acid-related symptoms, such as heartburn or indigestion. They neutralize the acids in the stomach. These are not recommended for frequent heartburn.

Obama Hails Vote on Health Care as Answering ‘the Call of History’

WASHINGTON — House Democrats approved a far-reaching overhaul of the nation’s health system on Sunday, voting over unanimous Republican opposition to provide medical coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans after an epic political battle that could define the differences between the parties for years.

With the 219-to-212 vote, the House gave final approval to legislation passed by the Senate on Christmas Eve. Thirty-four Democrats joined Republicans in voting against the bill. The vote sent the measure to President Obama, whose yearlong push for the legislation has been the centerpiece of his agenda and a test of his political power.

After approving the bill, the House adopted a package of changes to it by a vote of 220 to 211. That package — agreed to in negotiations among House and Senate Democrats and the White House — now goes to the Senate for action as soon as this week. It would be the final step in a bitter legislative fight that has highlighted the nation’s deep partisan and ideological divisions.

On a sun-splashed day outside the Capitol, protesters, urged on by House Republicans, chanted “Kill the bill” and waved yellow flags declaring “Don’t Tread on Me.” They carried signs saying “Doctors, Not Dictators.”

Inside, Democrats hailed the votes as a historic advance in social justice, comparable to the establishment of Medicare and Social Security. They said the bill would also put pressure on rising health care costs and rein in federal budget deficits.

“This is the Civil Rights Act of the 21st century,” said Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the No. 3 Democrat in the House.

Mr. Obama celebrated the House action in remarks at the White House.

“We pushed back on the undue influence of special interests,” Mr. Obama said. “We didn’t give in to mistrust or to cynicism or to fear. Instead, we proved that we are still a people capable of doing big things.”

“This isn’t radical reform,” he added, “but it is major reform.”

After a year of combat and weeks of legislative brinksmanship, House Democrats and the White House clinched their victory only hours before the voting started on Sunday. They agreed to a deal with opponents of abortion rights within their party to reiterate in an executive order that federal money provided by the bill could not be used for abortions, securing for Democrats the final handful of votes they needed to assure passage.

Winding up the debate, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said: “After a year of debate and hearing the calls of millions of Americans, we have come to this historic moment. Today we have the opportunity to complete the great unfinished business of our society and pass health insurance reform for all Americans that is a right and not a privilege.”

The House Republican leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, said lawmakers were defying the wishes of their constituents. “The American people are angry,” Mr. Boehner said. “This body moves forward against their will. Shame on us.”

Republicans said the plan would saddle the nation with unaffordable levels of debt, leave states with expensive new obligations, weaken Medicare and give the government a huge new role in the health care system.

The debate on the legislation set up a bitter midterm campaign season, with Republicans promising an effort to repeal the legislation, challenge its constitutionality or block its provisions in the states.

Representative Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin, denounced the bill as “a fiscal Frankenstein.” Representative Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Republican of Florida, called it “a decisive step in the weakening of the United States.” Representative Virginia Foxx, Republican of North Carolina, said it was “one of the most offensive pieces of social engineering legislation in the history of the United States.”

But Representative Marcy Kaptur, Democrat of Ohio, said the bill heralded “a new day in America.” Representative Doris Matsui, Democrat of California, said it would “improve the quality of life for millions of American families.”

The health care bill would require most Americans to have health insurance, would add 16 million people to the Medicaid rolls and would subsidize private coverage for low- and middle-income people, at a cost to the government of $938 billion over 10 years, the Congressional Budget Office said.

The bill would require many employers to offer coverage to employees or pay a penalty. Each state would set up a marketplace, or exchange, where consumers without such coverage could shop for insurance meeting federal standards.

The budget office estimates that the bill would provide coverage to 32 million uninsured people, but still leave 23 million uninsured in 2019. One-third of those remaining uninsured would be illegal immigrants.

The new costs, according to the budget office, would be more than offset by savings in Medicare and by new taxes and fees, including a tax on high-cost employer-sponsored health plans and a tax on the investment income of the most affluent Americans.

Cost estimates by the budget office, showing that the bill would reduce federal budget deficits by $143 billion in the next 10 years, persuaded some fiscally conservative Democrats to vote for the bill.

Democrats said Americans would embrace the bill when they saw its benefits, including some provisions that take effect later this year.

Health insurers, for example, could not deny coverage to children with medical problems or suddenly drop coverage for people who become ill. Insurers must allow children to stay on their parents’ policies until they turn 26. Small businesses could obtain tax credits to help them buy insurance.

The Democratic effort to secure the 216 votes needed for passage of the legislation came together only after last-minute negotiations involving the White House, the House leadership and a group of Democratic opponents of abortion rights, led by Representative Bart Stupak of Michigan. On Sunday afternoon, members of the group announced that they would support the legislation after Mr. Obama promised to issue an executive order to “ensure that federal funds are not used for abortion services.”

Mr. Stupak described the order as a significant guarantee that would “protect the sanctity of life in health care reform.” But supporters of abortion rights — and some opponents — said the order merely reaffirmed what was in the bill.

The vote to pass the Senate version of the bill means that it will become the law of the land as soon as Mr. Obama signs it, regardless of when — or even whether — the Senate acts on the package of changes the House also passed.

The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, has promised to take up the package of changes in short order, and he has said he has the votes to pass it. The Senate will consider it under a parliamentary maneuver that will allow the Democrats to pass it with a simple majority, averting the threat of a Republican filibuster.

Indeed, Senate Republicans were quickly faced with a need to recalibrate their message from one aimed at stopping the legislation to one focused on winning back a sufficient number of seats in Congress to repeal it.

Mr. Obama, in his remarks shortly before midnight in the East Room, urged the Senate to complete the final pieces of the legislation. “Some have predicted another siege of parliamentary maneuvering in order to delay it,” he said. “I hope that’s not the case.”

He continued, “It’s time to bring this debate to a close and begin the hard work of implementing this reform properly on behalf of the American people.”

Mr. Obama watched the roll call with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in the Roosevelt Room in the White House.

The House galleries were full, and the floor was unusually crowded, for the historic debate on health care.

Working together, Mr. Obama and Ms. Pelosi revived the legislation when it appeared dead after Democrats lost their 60th vote in the Senate and with it their ability to shut off Republican filibusters.

Republicans said they would use the outcome to bludgeon Democrats in this year’s Congressional elections. The White House is planning an intensive effort to convince people of the bill’s benefits. But if Democrats suffer substantial losses in November, Mr. Obama could be stymied on other issues.

The campaign for a health care overhaul began as a way to help the uninsured. But it gained momentum when middle-class families with health insurance flooded Congress with their grievances. They complained of soaring premiums. They said their insurance had been canceled when they got sick.

“It’s not just the uninsured,” said Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts. “We also have to worry about people with insurance who find, for crazy reasons, that they are somehow going to be denied coverage.”

In the end, groups like the United States Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business tried to stop the bill, saying it would increase the cost of doing business. But other groups, including the American Medical Association and AARP, backed it, as did the pharmaceutical industry.

Lawmakers agreed that Sunday’s debate was historic, but they were poles apart in assessing the legislation.

Representative Rodney Alexander, Republican of Louisiana, said, “You cannot expect to expand coverage to millions of individuals and to curb costs at the same time.”

Republicans said the picture painted by the budget office was too rosy, because the new taxes and fees would start immediately, while the major costs would not show up for four years.

Moreover, Republicans said Democrats would pay a price for defying public opinion on the bill.

“Are you so arrogant that you know what’s best for the American people?” Representative Paul Broun, Republican of Georgia, asked the Democrats. “Are you so ignorant to be oblivious to the wishes of the American people?”

Lawmakers spoke with deep conviction in explaining their votes.

“Health care is not only a civil right, it’s a moral issue,” said Representative Patrick J. Kennedy, Democrat of Rhode Island, who invoked the memory of his father, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat and a lifelong champion of health care for all.

After the legislation passed, Mr. Obama sought to place the day in perspective.

“In the end what this day represents is another stone firmly laid in the foundation of the American dream,” the president said. “Tonight, we answered the call of history as so many generations of Americans have before us. When faced with crisis, we did not shrink from our challenges. We overcame them. We did not avoid our responsibilities, we embraced it. We did not fear our future, we shaped it.”

Source: nytimes.com

Ten Minutes That Could Save Your Life

Oral, head and neck cancers most of which are preventable account for approximately 3 percent of all cancer cases in the United States, according to the American Cancer Society. In 2009, more than 35,000 Americans were diagnosed with these cancers and 7,600 died.

To help combat cancers of the oral cavity, larynx and pharynx, Loyola University Medical Center will offer free screenings for oral, head and neck cancers as part of the 12th annual Oral, Head and Neck Cancer Awareness Week, April 12-18, sponsored nationally by the Head and Neck Cancer Alliance, formerly the Yul Brynner Head and Neck Cancer Foundation).

"Oral and other head and neck cancers remain a target for early detection. When diagnosed very early, it is easier to treat and cure," said Dr. Chad Zender, assistant professor, Department of Otolaryngology, Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood.

The screenings will take place from 4-7 p.m. on Monday, April 19, in the Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, 2160 S. First Ave., Maywood, Ill. Screenings will be open to the public and will be done by Loyola physicians and nurses. The screenings, which take less than 10 minutes to perform, will include a visual examination of the inside of the mouth and a check for areas of swelling or lumps in the head and neck.

The event will also include information on how to prevent oral, head and neck cancers and counseling on ways to reduce risk factors and make lifestyle changes, such as quitting smoking and cutting down on alcohol use, said Patricia Mumby, Ph.D., associate professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, Stritch School of Medicine.

"More than 85 percent of head and neck cancers are related to tobacco use, making this one of the most preventable diseases of our time," said Mumby, who provides counseling to patients in Loyola's Smoking Cessation Clinic. "It's heartbreaking to see people suffering who didn't have to. We hope to encourage people to get regular checkups and to eliminate high-risk habits like smoking."

Common warning signs of oral, head & neck cancer include:

-- A red or white patch in the mouth that lasts more than two years

-- Change in voice or hoarseness that lasts more than two weeks

-- Sore throat that does not subside

-- Pain or swelling in the mouth or neck that does not subside

-- Lump in the neck

Warning signs that occur during the later stages of the disease include:

-- Ear pain

-- Difficulty speaking or swallowing

-- Difficulty breathing

Source: Loyola University Health System

Are Doctors Knowledgeable About Herbal Medicines?

by Stephanie Brunner (B.A.)

A survey of Drug and Therapeutic Bulletin (DTB) subscribers indicates that doctors are poorly informed. In addition, they think their patients know little on the subject of herbal medicines.

The DTB survey on herbal medicines was carried out online in January 2010, by emailing a random sample of 1,157 DTB subscribers. The response rate was just over 14 percent.

More than 80 percent of respondents to the survey were doctors. Most of them were family doctors. Pharmacists made up the bulk of the remainder.

The findings illustrate that more than seven out of ten respondents believe that the public has misplaced confidence in the power of herbal medicines.

Additionally, more than 85 percent think that the public is "poorly informed" on the subject. Not one single respondent considered the public to be well informed.

On the other hand, healthcare professionals rated themselves slightly better. When asked how well informed doctors are on the subject:

• three out of four respondents said they were "poorly informed"
• one in five (21.5 percent) thought doctors were "moderately well informed"
• about half of respondents (48 percent) described their current knowledge and understanding of herbal medicines as either "quite poor" or "very poor"

In addition, nine out of ten admitted that their knowledge of herbal medicines was "much poorer" than their knowledge of prescription medicines.

More importantly, not more than seven out of ten respondents said that if they knew a patient was taking herbal medicine about which they knew little, they would seek additional information before starting or adjusting prescription drugs.

Generally, the greatest reason for doing so (almost 96 percent) was because of concerns over potential interactions between the two forms of treatment. Two thirds (just under 69 percent) worried they might ignore a side effect if they were not well informed.

Among the reasons offered by the three out of ten respondents who said they would not seek further information were:

• uncertainty as to where to find reliable information (60 percent)
• doubt on how to assess and use it (43 percent)

A considerable proportion of respondents (77 percent) worried that their patients would take herbal medicines without telling them. However, despite these concerns, few doctors actually asked their patients about it.

When reviewing or planning prescription drug treatment, only one in eight (13 percent) "always" asked their patient if s/he was taking herbal medicines. More than half (55 percent) either "never" asked or did so only "occasionally."

Also, knowledge of the regulatory arrangements for herbal medicines was poor.

No more than 3 percent of respondents said they knew "a great deal" about this area. However, almost 85 percent considered that herbal medicines are not well regulated.

Dr Ike Iheanacho, DTB editor, commented on the findings: "It's obviously worrying that doctors in general seem to know so little about herbal medicines, given the widespread use of such products."

In 2008, an Ipsos-MORI survey carried out for the drugs regulator the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) revealed that more than one in three people surveyed (35 percent) had used a herbal medicine. Also, one in four (26 percent) had used one within the past two years.

He added: "The fact that few doctors make a point of asking patients whether they are taking herbal medicines raises further safety concerns." He comments: "Similarly unsettling is that even when doctors don't know the effects of a herbal medicine a patient is taking, many won't try and look these up."

Michael McIntyre chairs the European Herbal Practitioners Association and is a member of the UK Department of Health Herbal Medicine Regulatory Working Group. In an accompanying DTB podcast, he exposed doctors' belief that familiarization with herbs is somehow a retrogressive step.

He explains that before the beginning of modern medicine, ailments were often treated with herbs, suggesting that doctors feared being "pulled back into the swamp."

In the podcast, Dr Linda Anderson, Principal Pharmaceutical Assessor at the MHRA commented that the Agency's research indicated that patients were ready to tell their doctors if they were taking herbal medicines. Also, they expected them to be knowledgeable about these products.

F.D.A. Cracks Down on Nestlé and Others Over Health Claims on Labels

The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday released 17 warning letters to food manufacturers, making good on a vow to crack down on misleading labels on food packages.

The agency accused the companies of pumping up the nutritional claims of their products or masking contents like unhealthy fats. The letters went out to the makers of a broad array of products, including Gerber baby food, Juicy Juice, Dreyer’s ice cream, POM pomegranate juice and Gorton’s fish fillets.

“The F.D.A. is not merely firing a shot across the bow; it is declaring war on misleading food labeling,” said Bruce A. Silverglade, director of legal affairs of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, an advocacy group that had pushed for stricter rules.

The warning letters followed commitments last fall by the F.D.A. commissioner, Margaret A. Hamburg, who has made a priority of improving information for consumers on food packages.

Asked about the warning letters, Scott Faber, vice president for federal affairs at the Grocery Manufacturers Association, pointed to an open letter from Dr. Hamburg to the industry that was also released on Wednesday. In that letter, she pledged cooperation with food manufacturers in improving labeling.

“What’s significant today is that Commissioner Hamburg took the extra step of reinforcing her commitment to work with industry to develop a clear, science-based labeling system that is effective with consumers,” Mr. Faber said. The letters, sent last month but just made public, addressed a range of violations.

Several products were singled out for labels that boasted prominently that they contained no trans fat, even though they had high levels of saturated fat. The products included Gorton’s Fish Fillets, Spectrum Organic All Vegetable Shortening and two products from Dreyer’s, the Dibs bite-size ice cream snacks and the vanilla-fudge Drumsticks.

According to Dreyer’s, the Dibs contain 17 grams of saturated fat per serving. Federal guidelines recommend that a person not consume more than 20 grams in a day.

In the case of POM pomegranate juice, the agency said that the company’s Web site, which is listed on its bottles, carried misleading claims that the juice could prevent or cure diseases like hypertension, diabetes and cancer.

Such claims are not allowed on food products and would require that the juice be treated, in regulatory terms, as a drug, according to the letter sent to the company.

POM said that “all statements made in connection with POM products are true” and supported by scientific research.

It added, “We are currently reviewing the F.D.A.’s concerns and, as strong advocates of honest labeling and fair advertising, we are looking forward to working with the agency to resolve this matter.”

The letters also singled out some baby foods made by Gerber and Beech-Nut. The letters say that those foods make numerous health claims that are not allowed because appropriate dietary levels for the nutrients cited have not been established for children under 2 years old.

The F.D.A. said that the labels of some Nestlé Juicy Juice products implied they were primarily made of a single juice, like orange or tangerine, rather than a flavored blend of juices.

Nestlé, which owns Juicy Juice, said that it believed its labels complied with regulations but that it was working with the F.D.A. Dreyer’s and Gerber, which are also owned by Nestlé, said they were cooperating with the F.D.A. and would not comment beyond that.

Efforts to reach several companies were not successful.

Source: nytimes

A Child’s Allergies Are Serious but Can Be Treated Effectively

IT starts with a telltale sniffle, itchy eyes and an occasional cough. You think your little one is getting a cold, but the cold never comes while the runny nose seems never to leave.

“That could be a sign of allergies,” says Dr. Kevin Weiss, an expert on allergies and president of the American Board of Medical Specialties. Not a surprising diagnosis when you consider that more than 40 percent of children (and 20 to 30 percent of adults) suffer from allergic rhinitis, often simply called allergies. With spring pollen season just around the corner, parents are bound to hear more of those telltale sniffles.

Allergies are no trivial matter. Each year, allergic rhinitis accounts for two million missed school days and $2.3 million in health care costs for children younger than 12. It’s not unusual for allergy sufferers to spend thousands of dollars each year on doctor visits, medications and other products, says Dr. Linda Cox, an allergist practicing in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., and a former committee chairwoman for the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology

What’s more, Dr. Cox said, allergies left untreated in children can often lead to asthma, a chronic and debilitating pulmonary disease.

For the purposes of this article I’ll focus on allergic rhinitis, particularly among children. (The subject of food allergies may warrant a separate, future column.) The condition can be set off by outside elements like pollen from ragweed, grasses and trees and indoor allergens like dust mites and pet dander.

Combating allergies often requires a multipronged and sometimes costly approach. Here’s what you can do to make sure your child gets the best results.

THE RIGHT DOCTOR Most allergies can be identified and treated by a pediatrician or family doctor. The doctor will use blood tests and your child’s symptoms to come up with an educated guess on what is causing the problem.

“Mild allergies can be treated without a lot of testing,” Dr. Weiss said. New nondrowsy prescription and over-the-counter medications make it easier to treat symptoms, he added. Your child’s doctor should know which drugs are appropriate for children.

That’s good news, because allergists aren’t always part of an insurer’s network or covered under high-deductible plans.

Nevertheless, an allergist can best treat your child if symptoms become moderate to severe. If your child is extremely uncomfortable, losing sleep or missing a lot of school, and the current medications he or she is using aren’t working, you may need to take the next step. An allergist will most likely do a skin test to pinpoint exactly what your child is allergic to. This is often more precise than the blood tests and is usually covered by insurance.

To find an allergist, ask your pediatrician or family doctor for a recommendation or log onto the doctor locator sponsored by the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology. If you’re covered by an H.M.O. or other health network, you’ll need to ask your primary physician for a referral.

ELIMINATE THE SOURCE After you and your child’s doctor have narrowed down the possible culprits, it’s time to reduce or remove the troublemakers. Many of the most effective ways to do this are labor-intensive but low in cost, said Dr. James Sublett, an allergist in Louisville, Ky., and professor of pediatric allergy and immunology at the University of Louisville School of Medicine.

Keep your pet away from carpeted rooms, sleeping areas, upholstered furniture and other places where it becomes difficult or impossible to remove dander. Cats are the animals that cause the most allergy problems, and cat allergen can remain in a house for an average of 20 weeks after an animal is removed.

If you and your doctor suspect dust mites are a problem, remove drapes, stuffed animals, pet bedding, upholstered furniture and even carpeting from the bedroom. Wash linens frequently. Dust with a moist cloth or an electrostatic fabric duster. Both do a better job of actually collecting dust rather than just stirring it around. Remember: dust takes a couple of hours to settle after cleaning and vacuuming.

Tumble-drying stuffed animals on high heat for 20 minutes will also kill dust mites.

Get rid of any pest problems, like roaches or mice. Both can be huge allergy triggers. In addition, keep windows closed during peak allergy season.

CONSIDER IMMUNOTHERAPY Even after you’ve identified and tried to eliminate the source of your child’s allergies, he or she may still be suffering. If that happens, you may have to go for the shots.

Allergy shots have come in for criticism over the years because, well, they are shots and require repeat visits to the doctor’s office — two things children really don’t like.

And many parents may wonder — in some cases, rightfully, alas — whether the allergy doctor is overdiagnosing allergies and overtreating their children. Dr. Cox argues that allergists get to the root of the cause instead of just treating symptoms. General practitioners can prescribe medicines to treat symptoms without easing the condition, she says. In any case, it is important to get a referral from a pediatrician or family doctor whom you trust to do what’s right for your child.

A new study published last month in the peer-reviewed Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology found that allergy shots, also known as immunotherapy, could actually help eliminate allergy symptoms after only 18 months. What’s more, shots may help save you money in the long run. Among the children with allergic rhinitis studied, shots helped to reduce total health care costs by a third, and prescription drug costs by 16 percent, said Dr. Cox, who was a co-author of the study.

In immunotherapy, an allergist injects a small amount of the allergen into a patient. This prompts the body to make natural antibodies, which naturally increase one’s immunity to the culprit. “It is the only therapy that doesn’t just treat allergy symptoms but tries to get at the cause,” Dr. Cox said.

But because the allergist personally mixes the allergens according to a patient’s needs, the shots are not considered pharmaceuticals and are sometimes not covered by insurance.

The first year of allergy shots, which includes a three-month build-up period during which a child receives injections as often as twice a week until the proper dosage is found, would cost a bit less than $1,000 for the year, according to Dr. Cox. The next year, with twice-a-month injections, would total an estimated $350.

For parents who are uninsured and cannot afford shots for their children, Dr. Cox suggests contacting the state allergy society for a list of allergists and clinics that may offer low or no-cost treatments. (Because there is no clearinghouse for such information, you’ll probably have to do your own Web sleuthing.)

AVOID THE UNNECESSARY There’s no end to the number of products marketed to allergy sufferers, including air filters, humidifiers, dehumidifiers, ozone machines, mattress and pillow encasements, special breathing masks and more. Many of these products are expensive and some are ineffective. Ozone, for instance, can be a pollutant and actually worsen allergies, Dr. Sublett said.

Several studies show that there are no significant improvements from using mattress and pillow encasements and other allergy-fighting products. The best thing to do is to take the necessary steps to remove allergens like the ones discussed above.

source: nytimes