A Ad dd dr re es ss s f fo or r c co or rr re es sp po on nd de en nc ce e: : Katarzyna M. Basista, Department of Pharmacodynamics, Jagiellonian University, Medical College, 9 Medyczna St, Poland, phone: +48 508 932 783, Original paper A b s t r a c t I In nt tr ro od du uc ct ti io on n: : A bee pollen allergy is rare and often confused with a pollen allergy. The possibility of inducing an allergy in pollen allergic patients by bee pollen is still controversial. A Ai im m: : To determine the prevalence of bee pollen allergy in beekeepers and their families and its possible association with other conditions. M Ma at te er ri ia al l a an nd d m me et th ho od ds s: : The questionnaire study was carried out on 493 Polish beekeepers. The questionnaire was based on the current literature and touched on several aspects of a bee products allergy. R Re es su ul lt ts s: : Only 19.4% (493 from 2540 questionnaires sent) of questionnaires were returned by 15 October 2011. From the total group, only 2 beekeepers reported adverse reactions after bee pollen ingestion. They presented only minor reactions. From 493 beekeepers, 43 responders reported other allergies. From that group, no one reported a concomitant bee pollen allergy. Additionally, beekeepers reported only 22 cases of bee pollen intolerance among their customers and in family members a bee pollen allergy occurred in 0.56% of cases. C Co on nc cl lu us si io on ns s: : This preliminary study provides some new aspects on the bee pollen allergy. The thesis that a bee pollen allergy is associated with the occurrence of proteins from bee saliva rather than the occurrence of anemophilous plant pollen should be evaluated in future studies.K Ke ey y w wo or rd ds s: : bee pollen allergy, beekeepers, bee products allergy, occupational allergy.

A Ad dd dr re es ss s f fo or r c co or rr re es sp po on nd de en nc ce e: : Katarzyna M. Basista, Department of Pharmacodynamics, Faculty of Farmacy, Medical College, Jagiellonian University, 9 Medyczna St, Poland, phone: +48 508 932 783, Original paper A b s t r a c t I In nt tr ro od du uc ct ti io on n: : According to the literature propolis is a non-toxic and safe substance. However, propolis can induce allergy. Beekeepers may be the group most affected by contact allergy and propolis is an occupational contact allergen for them. A Ai im m: : To determine the prevalence of propolis contact allergy in beekeepers and theirs families and its possible association with other coexistent conditions. M Ma at te er ri ia al l a an nd d m me et th ho od ds s: : The questionnaire 'Allergy to propolis among beekeepers' was distributed to beekeepers by hand through the Beekeepers Associations, especially the Provincial Association of Apiarists in Krakow. The study was conducted on adults of both genders who had given informed consent to participate in the study. The program Statistica was used for data management and statistical analysis. R Re es su ul lt ts s: : A total of 2540 questionnaires were distributed, including 1360 questionnaires from Malopolska region. Five hundred and fifty-eight questionnaires were returned, including 345 from Malopolska region. The response rate was 21.97% (25.4% Malopolska region). Among 558 beekeepers propolis contact allergy occurred in 17 cases (3.05%). Four hundred anf four of 558 beekeepers used propolis as a therapeutic agent. Eleven of 404 (2.72%) beekeepers reported propolis allergy. Only 5 beekeepers reported concomitant propolis allergy after contact with this substance during beekeeping and using propolis as a therapeutic agent. Among 2205 members of families who were using propolis only 14 patients (0.63%) reported propolis allergy. C Co on nc cl lu us si io on ns s: : Allergy to propolis in Polish beekeepers does not seem to be a common phenomenon. K Ke ey y w wo or rd ds s: : propolis allergy, propolis, beekeepers, contact allergy, occupational allergy.

The paper describes an atypical case of simultaneous airborne and direct contact dermatitis in a beekeeper from the Małopolska region. This is the third such case described in a beekeeper in the world and the first in Poland. I suggest that propolis should be regarded as both a direct and airborne contact allergen in beekeepers.

No abstract

No abstract