Little Allergies™ Allergen Block—“Quack Quack Quack!”

[Bob Blaylock]

Spotted at Wal*Mart less than an hour ago. It was odd, I wasn't even looking at it or for it, and I just got this sense that there was some spectacular bit of quackery nearby. Following that sense, I zeroed in on this.

No list of ingredients anywhere. Closest thing is in the “Product Description” on the back of the package, which reads:Little Allergies™ Allergen Block is a topical gel containing petrolatum, glycerin and other ingredients. A patented formulation process creates a positively charged gel which blocks negatively charged allergens on contact. It is dye-free, stain-free and non-greasy, so like all Little Remedies® products, you can trust it to safe and gentle. This description would have pegged my BS-meter if it hadn't already pegged from the mere presence of this product. “A patented formulation process creates a positively charged gel which blocks negatively charged allergens on contact.” Sadly, I suppose that there are enough people in the world who are dumb enough to believe such crap as this to provide a thriving market for such products.

15932 15933

[Seanette]

I'm not quite sure how this thing caught my attention, but my BS meter pegged hard when I read the box, for the same reasons Bob describes. I'm not sure why Bob had brought his camera, but he did take my suggestion to photograph the item (no way were we going to shell out $12 USD for this!) to post for suitable ridicule.

Sadly, this is apparently made by the otherwise reputable Chloraseptic, and there's a version of this "allergen blocker" for adults.

[fls]

It's not a totally crazy idea.

http://archotol.highwire.org/cgi/content/full/130/8/979#REF-OOA30149-7

Linda

[Eos of the Eons]

I'm not allergic to pollen, and neither are my kids. We do have cat allergies though. If I was more prone to not checking things out, we could be in grave danger if I tried using that product instead of antihistamines when visiting relatives with cats. Also, pollen can land on eyes, can you use this product on your eyes the way you can with some antihistamine eye drops? Thought not. I doubt this product would pass a good test against a placebo once enough pollen was encountered and breathed in as well.

[Eos of the Eons]

Little Allergies™ Allergen Block is a topical gel containing petrolatum, glycerin and other ingredients.

http://www.littleallergies.com/faq.html

Oh please. How often do you have to slather that into the nose and then keep your mouth shut and goggles on your eyes to prevent enough allergen from getting in the body and to trigger the usual allergic reactions?


My throat would close up after the usual hour, and we usually spend a good 6 hours or more visiting.

Do they say this on the label like they do on their website? It is for:
Airborne allergens such as:

•Ragweed
•Pollen

NOT for other allergies, and certainly not for severe allergies.

So that pollen junk might stick on the petroleum and glycerin for a while, but it will cease to work once enough pollen bypasses that sticky mixture via the mouth, nose, and eyes.


f your child suffers from allergies, you know that once the symptoms start it can take a while before they subside. If your child is already experiencing nasal allergy symptoms, you should make sure your child takes the allergy medication prescribed by or recommended by your doctor.

However, your child can still use Little Allergies™ Allergen Block along with his or her regular allergy medication.

Why? Because although Little Allergies™ Allergen Block works best when used BEFORE the appearance of nasal allergy symptoms, Little Allergies™ Allergen Block can still help target airborne allergens, especially if your child remains in an environment where the allergens are present.

It's kind of like using a leaky condom with birth control pills. You're gonna get some symptoms of something after a while still, but probably not get pregnant. Oh yay. So make sure you keep real medicine on hand, since you're still going to need it. A leaky condom and this product alone are not enough protection.

In the link fls provided they used:

carboxymethylcellulose in gel (placebo) (n = 48) applied sparingly to the lower internal nose region 4 times daily for a total of 9 days.

Is that glycerin? Again, you have to rely on the allergen sticking to it, but once you get a stuffy nose from enough pollen not sticking in it, and you have a severe enough allergy, then you're gonna be mouth breathing. Then your throat will close up.

I'll bet the people used in the study didn't have severe allergies. They don't say why certain people were excluded.

[Eyeron]

This is a curious phrase:

negatively charged allergens

Is there such a thing?

[Eos of the Eons]

This is a curious phrase:


Is there such a thing?
I think it is irrelevant. Just there to distract buyers from what it is really made of and how it really works.

The product they are selling is sticky, and pollen may or may not be trapped by it depending on where it is applied, how much, how often, etc. If applied in the nose, then you'll get it down your throat at some time, causing an allergy attack still. So, you need to apply it somewhere you can hope will trap pollen and still not get inside your body. It is also apt to clog pores on some people, and leave a nice shiny glean on your skin, so it will look like there is mucous on ya. It will be interesting to see if this stuff sells after a while.

Pollen particles are bigger than dander that causes pet allergies? At least on the website they specify pollen, but I hope kids with severe allergies don't have parents that try to use it alone.

[Eos of the Eons]

http://www.school-for-champions.com/SCIENCE/electrical_charges.htm

I'm not expert, so if anyone else here knows what particles usually run around non-neutral on this planet, then it would be interesting to see a list.

You have to physically cause static to get charges on your own. So, I'm not sure how they can say glycerin and petroleum jelly has any electric charge, and how they can claim pollen has any electric charge too. None of these substances are sub-atomic particles.

I'd like to see their evidence for these claims, since I see no reason it has any merit.

All I can see is that pollen sticks to glycerin and petroleum jelly, cuz that stuff is sticky, not charged.

[Eos of the Eons]

Sorry, not trying to spam... but this article shows how air can cause pollen to be come charged... both negatively and positively. So their claims abut glycerin and petroleum jelly being negatively charged still fall flat, and pollen still just sticks to sticky stuff.

All species had charged pollen, some were positive others negative.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VH3-4MHPC28-3&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1113192258&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=9cfe6a92d298adcf8cd3c4a9db78c9f9