Guest guest Posted June 17, 2002 Report Share Posted June 17, 2002 Dr. Lazoff, I am assuming you are talking to me with the Subject, 'Tripwires in Terminology " and addressing this comment to 'Barry' but I could be confusing myself with someone else, so forgive me if I am wrong. Having a copy of the email you are responding to at the bottom will help clarify this somewhat, if 'Barry' is Brady. Your discourse just makes my head spin since I really do not understand the pathophysiology of rosacea unless you explain it better but I am trying to grasp the discussion. Pathos is Greek for disease or suffering and physiology is the functions, collectively, of an organisim or its parts, or the branch of biology concerned with the functions of living organisms. My dictionary does not list this word and I do not have a medical dictionary. I am guessing from your discussion function is the key word here? I agree with you that a flush is not a flare and 'a flare is a relatively quick-appearing exacerbation of rosacea.' And I think we are on the same page with what flushing is. I think I see what you are driving at, that the trigger is related more to the effect even though it implies the cause MAY have something to do with it. Your statement and question, " I can't think of any trigger that doesn't cause either a flush, or a skin sensitivity, or a trigger that can cause both in a single person at a single time. Can anyone? " is probably correct, but I fail to understand what you are pointing out. As to food, the mechanism Dr. Nase is postulating with regard to sugar is found on page 101 of his book, Beating cea – Vascular, Ocular & Acne Forms, which says: “Eating large amounts of simple sugars (i.e., chocolates, syrups and food stuffs that contain large concentrations of fructose, sucrose, and maltose) can cause glucose levels in the blood stream to rise quickly and trigger skin flushing.” It may be just one of the " factors that may cause a rosacea sufferer to experience a flare-up " but may explain the mechanism and I can't come up with a better mechanism than Dr. Nase describes here. You are really on a roll with this tripwires in terminology. I appreciate your insight into the complexity of triggers. Brady Barrows Message: 12 Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 19:41:08 -0000 Subject: Re: Tripwires in terminology Barry, I know you brought up your definitions for a different reason, but with your permission I'm grabbing them to use in furthering my discourse on flares and triggers. <g> Instead of flare you say a trigger and tripwire causes " a reaction " , which to me emphasizes the end product rather than what causes it, whether identificable at the time or not. But if we aren't better defining the reaction, and we aren't better defining the stimulus, then isn't what we're talking about too general to be helpful? That's where I started with all this -- it's so diffuse when we don't distinguish among triggers and tripwires and flushes and skin sensitivities and flares. Here's the problem I see with saying a trigger necessarily causes a rosacea flare -- it forces us to define *all* flushing and skin sensitivities with identificable causes as rosacean flares, instead of acknowledging all the simple flushes and itchings experienced by rosaceans and non-rosaceans. Further, what do we say when a person requires a number of triggers in unison or close proximity to elicit a response -- flushing only when alcohol is imbibed in a hot dance club or in front of a roaring fire or BBQ, for example. It seems to me that there's an ill-defined, indirect link between triggers and flares, not Deryk's straightforward metaphoric gun shot. One definition of a trigger is whatever cause flushing or skin sensitivity in rosaceans. Alone or in concert with other factors, triggers might -- or might not -- be capable of exacerbating an underlying rosacea. That focuses on the cause, and leaves the result as a superficial description without relating it to any underlying condition or stage. Besides, to me, a flush is not a flare, it's a flush, even in a person whose rosacea manifests solely as flushing. Admittedly, in such individuals it's hard to distinguish a flush from a flare; it may be only possible in retrospect. The point is this: a flush or skin sensitivity from any cause -- regardless of the trigger -- might initiate or exacerbate the pathophysiological process that results in however that person manifests rosacea. Understanding rosacea to me is linked to the pathophysiologic process. Alternatively, if we concentrate on the effect, a trigger can be defined as anything that has been found to temporarily initiate or continually exacerbate the rosacean pathophysiology, however that manifests on the skin -- even if it doesn't manifest as anything! This incorporates your definition of tripwire -- a skin reaction that may not have an identifiable cause -- and also includes a cause without an identifiable reaction at the time. An example of the latter: chronic sun exposure seems to advance rosacean pathophysiology, even if a single sun exposure does not cause an obvious change in the skin. We can still call the sun a trigger, and talk about avoiding significant sun exposure, even if the skin doesn't cause any triggered response -- not a flush, skin sensitivity, or flare. So to me, a flare is much different than either of the above definitions of trigger suggests. To me, a flare is is a relatively quick-appearing exacerbation of rosacea; a flare has to be obvious AND it has involve the pathophysiology of rosacea, it can't just be a process that dilates blood vessles or releases cytokines, both of which are normal process. This is also distinct from more slowly developing destablizations that may be part of the normal course of the condition (beit ongoing chronic inflammation or vascular instability or whatever causes the condition itself to, or reactions to chronic physical stressor). Incidently, I can't think of any trigger that doesn't cause either a flush, or a skin sensitivity, or a trigger that can cause both in a single person at a single time. Can anyone? Regarding foods: there are foods that can cause a histamine-induced flush (in rosaceans and non-rosaceans), and there are foods that can cause an allergic dermatitis or other skin-related intolerance (again, in rosaceans and non-rosaceans). I don't understand either as rosacean flares. By what mechanism are you postulating that a food can cause a rosacean flare? Marjorie Marjorie Lazoff, MD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.