Balsam of Peru - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Balsam of Peru

The Experts below are selected from a list of 228 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Eckhard Wollenweber – 1st expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • Propolis allergy (IV)
    Contact Dermatitis, 1992
    Co-Authors: Moema Hausen, Paul Evers, H.-t. Stüwe, Wilfried A. König, Eckhard Wollenweber

    Abstract:

    26 different compounds have been investigated experimentally for their sensitizing capacity in guinea pigs. 19 of these occur in propolis as well as in poplar bud exudates, and 14 of them are also found in Balsam of Peru. 4 caffeates and benzyl isoferulate were found to be strong sensitizers. 7 compounds were moderate, and 13 compounds showed only weak sensitizing potency. Methyl cinnamate was negative. Patch tests in 11 propolis-sensitive patients once more revealed 3-methyl-2-butenyl caffeate and phenylethyl caffeate as the major sensitizers. In addition to the 8 compounds already known to occur in propolis as well as in Balsam of Peru, we detected 5 further substances that both materials have in common. Among these, benzyl isoferulate is considered a noteworthy sensitizer. Coniferyl benzoate, which was shown to be a moderate sensitizer, is present in fresh samples of Balsam of Peru, while in propolis it has been detected only once so far. The flavonoid aglycones occurring in poplar bud exudates, and hence also in propolis, are weak sensitizers which play only a minor role in propolis hypersensitivity.

  • Propolis allergy (IV) Studies with further sensitizers from propolis and constituents common to propolis, poplar buds and Balsam of Peru
    Contact Dermatitis, 1992
    Co-Authors: Bjoern M Hausen, H.-t. Stüwe, Paul Evers, Wilfried A. König, Eckhard Wollenweber

    Abstract:

    26 different compounds have been investigated experimentally for their sensitizing capacity in guinea pigs. 19 of these occur in propolis as well as in poplar bud exudates, and 14 of them are also found in Balsam of Peru. 4 caffeates and benzyl isoferulate were found to be strong sensitizers. 7 compounds were moderate, and 13 compounds showed only weak sensitizing potency. Methyl cinnamate was negative. Patch tests in 11 propolis-sensitive patients once more revealed 3-methyl-2-butenyl caffeate and phenylethyl caffeate as the major sensitizers. In addition to the 8 compounds already known to occur in propolis as well as in Balsam of Peru, we detected 5 further substances that both materials have in common. Among these, benzyl isoferulate is considered a noteworthy sensitizer. Coniferyl benzoate, which was shown to be a moderate sensitizer, is present in fresh samples of Balsam of Peru, while in propolis it has been detected only once so far. The flavonoid aglycones occurring in poplar bud exudates, and hence also in propolis, are weak sensitizers which play only a minor role in propolis hypersensitivity.

Aila Niinimaki – 2nd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • double blind placebo controlled peroral challenges in patients with delayed type allergy to Balsam of Peru
    Contact Dermatitis, 1995
    Co-Authors: Aila Niinimaki

    Abstract:

    : Patch tests (PTs) with spices, such as clove, cinnamon, Jamaica pepper and vanillin sugar, and with Balsam of Peru were made on 29 patients 0.8-2.9 years after an allergy to Balsam of Peru had been detected. Positive reactions to Balsam of Peru were seen in 17 patients, and to clove, Jamaica pepper or cinnamon in 5. Double-blind placebo-controlled peroral challenges (DBPCPCs) with Balsam of Peru and spices (active substances) were performed on 22 patients. A substantial increase (30-280%) in the number of palmar vesicles after the DBPCPC with the active substances, but not with placebo, was seen in 8 patients, an increase with both the active substances and placebo in 3, and with placebo but not the active substances in 1 patient. 4 of the 8 patients with positive DBPCPCs with the active substances were negative to Balsam of Peru in the 2nd PT. No other objective symptoms were seen after the DBPCPCs. Balsam of Peru and the spices were retested 3 months after the DBPCPC. Both alleviation and aggravation of the PT reactions were seen. It is concluded that ingested flavoured foods might cause systemic contact reactions in some patients with allergy to Balsam of Peru, but the benefits of a flavour-avoiding diet are questionable in all of them.

  • Double‐blind placebo‐controlled peroral challenges in patients with delayed‐type allergy to Balsam of Peru
    Contact Dermatitis, 1995
    Co-Authors: Aila Niinimaki

    Abstract:

    : Patch tests (PTs) with spices, such as clove, cinnamon, Jamaica pepper and vanillin sugar, and with Balsam of Peru were made on 29 patients 0.8-2.9 years after an allergy to Balsam of Peru had been detected. Positive reactions to Balsam of Peru were seen in 17 patients, and to clove, Jamaica pepper or cinnamon in 5. Double-blind placebo-controlled peroral challenges (DBPCPCs) with Balsam of Peru and spices (active substances) were performed on 22 patients. A substantial increase (30-280%) in the number of palmar vesicles after the DBPCPC with the active substances, but not with placebo, was seen in 8 patients, an increase with both the active substances and placebo in 3, and with placebo but not the active substances in 1 patient. 4 of the 8 patients with positive DBPCPCs with the active substances were negative to Balsam of Peru in the 2nd PT. No other objective symptoms were seen after the DBPCPCs. Balsam of Peru and the spices were retested 3 months after the DBPCPC. Both alleviation and aggravation of the PT reactions were seen. It is concluded that ingested flavoured foods might cause systemic contact reactions in some patients with allergy to Balsam of Peru, but the benefits of a flavour-avoiding diet are questionable in all of them.

Reinhart Jarisch – 3rd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • the significance of fragrance mix Balsam of Peru colophony and propolis as screening tools in the detection of fragrance allergy
    British Journal of Dermatology, 2001
    Co-Authors: Stefan Wöhrl, M. Götz, Wolfgang Hemmer, Margarete Focke, Reinhart Jarisch

    Abstract:

    Background Patch testing to fragrances is an important step in the diagnosis of fragrance allergy.

    Objectives To determine the usefulness of adding propolis to the European standard series to test for fragrance allergy.

    Patients and methods A total of 2660 consecutive patients were patch tested with a standard patch test series; 747 suspected of fragrance allergy were tested further with a special fragrance series.

    Results The positive results to the standard series in 2660 patients were: fragrance mix 243 (9·1%), Myroxylon Pereirae [Balsam of Peru] 144 (5·4%), colophony 32 (1·2%); these fragrance mixtures are used as screening substances for fragrance allergy in the European standard series. Propolis, also known as bee’s glue, was also an important allergen in this locally revised standard series (n = 35, 1·3%). Positive reactions to the aforementioned allergens were associated significantly among each other (P < 0·01, χ2-test) and did not differ between the sexes. The primary locations of dermatitis in patients with a positive test to one or more fragrance allergens (n = 162) among those suspected of fragrance allergy (n = 747) were: face 46·9%, hands 23·5%, neck 17·9%, axillae 12·3%; 92 of the 747 patients suspected of fragrance allergy had positive skin tests to the special fragrance series comprising the eight constituents of the fragrance mix (most frequent: isoeugenol 5·4%, oakmoss absolute 5·0%, eugenol 2·5%) and 14 other fragrance allergens (most frequent: clove oil 1·6%, lemon grass oil 0·8%, cedar wood oil 0·7%). The additional value of propolis as another screening substance for fragrance allergy in these patients was low. The likelihood of a reaction to one or more of the extra fragrance allergens increased with the number of reactions to fragrance screening allergens in the standard series.

    Conclusions The number of positive reactions to fragrance screening allergens in a standard patch test series may be used as a rule of thumb for predicting a positive outcome of a more detailed testing to fragrances. Propolis is an important allergen in its own right but its value as a screening substance for fragrance allergy is limited.

  • The significance of fragrance mix, Balsam of Peru, colophony and propolis as screening tools in the detection of fragrance allergy.
    British Journal of Dermatology, 2001
    Co-Authors: Stefan Wöhrl, Wolfgang Hemmer, Margarete Focke, Manfred Götz, Reinhart Jarisch

    Abstract:

    Background Patch testing to fragrances is an important step in the diagnosis of fragrance allergy.

    Objectives To determine the usefulness of adding propolis to the European standard series to test for fragrance allergy.

    Patients and methods A total of 2660 consecutive patients were patch tested with a standard patch test series; 747 suspected of fragrance allergy were tested further with a special fragrance series.

    Results The positive results to the standard series in 2660 patients were: fragrance mix 243 (9·1%), Myroxylon Pereirae [Balsam of Peru] 144 (5·4%), colophony 32 (1·2%); these fragrance mixtures are used as screening substances for fragrance allergy in the European standard series. Propolis, also known as bee’s glue, was also an important allergen in this locally revised standard series (n = 35, 1·3%). Positive reactions to the aforementioned allergens were associated significantly among each other (P