There has been a lot of interest in having a thread to discuss the pros and cons of the desensitization theory. To be honest the interest actually stems from concerns over the dangers / cons, but the goal of the thread is to open the discussion to both sides.
We must remember that up until now, THERE HAS BEEN NO DEFINITIVE RESEARCH pro OR con, neither for desensitization nor for anything other solution. I’m not sure that the implication of this is really understood. However, while we are so intent on conjecture, we may as well follow forth and try to shed more light in this area.
Because of the potential dangers involved in the desensitization program, we shall likely tend against it, however, we hope not to do so without at least a trace of technical and medical back up. We hope that supporters of the desensitization proposition will also do so with like rigor.
In a conversation between an allergist/immunologist at Yale and a well known NORD participant on board a plane to the American Academy of Pediatrics annual conference, issues involved in desensitization were discussed, in particular SLIT (Sub-Lingual ImmunoTherapy). The doctor, who’s name we can’t disclose at this time, as the discussion was “off the record”, was a keynote speaker at this conference who’s principal theme related to anaphylaxis in children.
In relation to SLIT, he indicated that in Europe, there are better results with SLIT because they use higher concentrations of the allergen. These concentrations aren't available in the US. He said that any US doctor offering SLIT therapy (in the US) is not being honest with his/her patients about the efficacy -- he/she will have a cash customer for YEARS because those higher concentrations are simply not available here.
It was asked “why they're not available in the US?”. He replied that they are DANGEROUS. He also said (with NO prompting ) that anyone trying SLIT therapy at home, regardless of the dose, is putting him/herself in great danger of anaphylaxis. In Europe it must be done in the doc's office under close supervision -- the patient needs to wait in the office for 1/2 hour before leaving -- because anaphylaxis can occur within that 30 minutes.
Last – he was asked how long people need to take allergy shots (SCIT, Sub-Cutaneous Immunotherapy) in general. His reply was "two - three years at the most." Remember, SCIT is more effective due to the stronger dilutions and more intimate infusion of the allergen.
The allergist indicated that he took desensitization shots for severe mold allergies for almost two years “ they helped “, he says, “ but I started getting asthma reactions in the office in that 30-minute period”. The allergist indicated that “it's time to stop this approach -- not worth the risk”.
This was a discussion by a well know allergist and dealt ONLY with anaphylaxis, perhaps touching lightly on the affectivity issue. But there are much deeper concerns expressed about longer term and much more serious issues involved on a desensitization program involving sperm.
On another note, an experienced allergist comments: she thought the sperm allergy hypothesis is ridiculous. She's even had women come to her practice who don't know about POIS, but who get the sniffles and sometimes a headache following an orgasm and she said it's just accepted (and well known) that this is down to histamine release. They might not be getting as bad cognitive symptoms so the POIS sufferer may just have something wrong with the H3 receptor (or histamine metabolism) in the central nervous system.
So if female allergic reactions to sex are well known, what is Dr. Waldinger thinking?
A more likely answer is that semen injections increase histamine in EVERYBODY and his desens treatment forces the body to lower histamine (via the normal feedback mechanism) while teetering on the brink of anaphylaxis. i.e. he could use any allergen to do this, the use of semen just fits his theory.
And unfortunately, so far it is little more than a theory, as research has provided very little undisputable evidence that we are indeed allergic to our own semen.
