that the knowledge gained from cellular and molecular research in allergy was not being translated into clinical practice and was identified as an area of unmet need that required greater priority. Immunotherapy is a valuable resource in the prophylactic treatment of patients with life-threatening allergies, or whose allergic disease does not respond to other medication. Although initially expensive, immunotherapy can prevent a symptomatic allergic response for many years, and may prevent the development of additional allergic conditions, so its wider use could potentially result in significant long-term savings for health services. Full cost-benefit analyses of the potential health, social and economic value of immunotherapy treatment needs to be conducted so the case for its use and funding can be strengthened. 4) We recognised the appreciable impact that allergic rhinitis has on student performance in schools and examinations. Indeed, we wished to encourage health professionals to interface more closely with schools to ensure children with allergic disease receive optimal care. We support the use of individual care plans for children with medical needs. However, we were concerned that many teachers and support staff within schools are not appropriately educated in how to deal with allergic emergencies and should take urgent remedial action to improve this training where required. We were especially concerned about the lack of clear guidance regarding the use of autoinjectors of adrenaline on children with anaphylactic shock in the school environment. Foreword by Baroness Finlay, House of Lords, United Kingdom 4 Pawankar, Canonica, Holgate and Lockey Copyright 2011 World Allergy Organization 5) We considered that controlled trials should be conducted involving multiple interventions to examine the effect of ventilation, humidity and mite-reduction strategies on allergy development and control. As climate change and air pollution may significantly impact upon the development of allergic disease, we supported greater effort to take account of the interlinkages between air quality, climate change and human health. 6) Vague defensive warnings on food product labels for consumers with food allergy can lead to dangerous confusion and an unnecessary restriction of choice. We recommend that the responsible government agencies should ensure the needs of food-allergic consumers are clearly recognised during any review of food labelling legislation. Many teenagers and young adults with food allergies sometimes take dangerously high risks when buying food. We considered that the relevant government agencies, charities and other stakeholders should explore novel ways to educate young people about allergy and the prevention of anaphylaxis. As sensitivities to various allergens vary widely, the setting of standardised threshold levels for package labelling is potentially dangerous for consumers with allergies. Instead, we considered that food labels should clearly specify the amount of each allergen, and if it is contained within the products, we wish to discourage vague defensive warnings. The phrases “hypoallergenic” and “dermatologically tested” are almost meaningless, as they only demonstrate a low potential for the products to be a topical irritant. Such products should warn those with a tendency to allergy that they may still get a marked reaction to such products. 8) In various parts of the world, traditional and complementary medical interventions for treating allergic disease are available and frequently accessed by the public, but the evidence base for this is poor. We recommend that robust research into the use of complementary diagnostic tests and treatments for allergy should examine the holistic needs of the patient, assessing not only the clinical improvement of allergy symptoms, but also analysing the impact of these methods upon patient wellbeing. Such trials should have clear hypotheses, validated outcome measures, and risk-benefit and cost-effectiveness comparisons made with conventional treatments. 9) We were also concerned that the results of allergy self-testing kits available to the public are being interpreted without the advice of appropriately trained