Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am writing an article on atopic allergies - predisposition to develop an allergenic reaction, and I was wondering if the mum/dad of a child who suffers multiple allergies will be willing to talk with me? (for example eczema, food allergies, asthma - although not an allergy has been linked to allergies - skin sensitivities, etc) I will be asking you how the allergies have developed in the child, over how long and in what order. It will be a very brief chat. The article will be published in one of the broadsheets in the next few weeks. Please let me know if you'd like to help!
You can always have a chat with me; I had multiple allergies, and eczma/asthma as a child, many of which have followed me into adulthood. They're not all linked (for example, I am allergic to penicillin and latex and certain fruit acids but they don't have a 'dermatitis' style reaction as you'd expect with someone with eczma. If that makes sense???)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think that's a big assumption.  Many people vote for the candidate precisely because they are a member of a particular party and represent that party's policiies.  I personally didn't know who McAsh was in the last election, but I knew what party he represented.  When politicians don't act "morally" what are we to think of them and their motivations? But I think there will be people who want to vote Labour, don't know that McAsh has defected and accidentally vote Green precisely because they do vote for the name.  Yes, you could say they need to read the ballot paper more carefully but it's possible to see one thing and not notice another.
    • Morally they should, but we don't actually vote for parties in our electoral system. We vote for a parliamentary (or council) representative. That candidates group together under party unbrellas is irrelevant. We have a 'representative' democracy, not a party political one (if that makes sense). That's where I am on things at the moment. Reform are knocking on the door of the BNP, and using wedge issues to bait emotional rage. The Greens are knocking on the door of the hard left, sweeping up the Corbynista idealists. But it's worth saying that both are only ascending because of the failures of the two main parties and the successive governments they have led. Large parts of the country have been left in economic decline for decades, while city fat cats became uber wealthy. Young people have been screwed over by student loans. Housing is 40 years of commoditisation, removing affordabilty beyond the reach of too many. Decently paid, secure jobs, seem to be a thing of the past. Which of the main parties can people turn to, to fix any of these things, when the main parties are the reason for the mess that has been allowed to evolve? Reform certainly aren't the answer to those things. The Greens may aspire to do something meaningful about some of them, but where will they find the money to pay for it? None of it's easy.
    • Yes, but the context is important and the reason.
    • That messes up Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland - democracy being based on citizenship not literacy. There's intentionally no one language that campaign materials have to be in. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...