Background: In 1999, an extensive study among bell pepper growers showed a prevalence of 53.8% work-related symptoms and 35.4% sensitisation to bell pepper pollen. Experiments with bees to remove pollen from bell pepper flowers have been done for a few years. Objectives: It was the aim of this study to investigate whether bees can reduce the pollen exposure in bell pepper greenhouses and whether this reduction results in a decrease in allergic complaints in the greenhouse workers. Methods: Eighteen greenhouses were selected for the study. In each greenhouse, pollen exposure was estimated. In 6 and 3 of the greenhouses, high, respectively low, numbers of honeybees were placed throughout the pollen season of the sweet bell pepper plant. Nine greenhouses without honeybees were used as control. At baseline, as well as after 4 and 8 months, nasal symptoms assessed with a visual analogue score and lung function parameters were used as outcome measure. Results: Forty-four of the 133 employees invited reported work-related symptoms. High numbers of bees reduced the pollen amount in a dose-dependent way to 18% of the baseline exposure. A significant trend relationship between the visual analogue scale in nasal symptoms and the number of colonies of bees was seen. Conclusions: The interference of bees in bell pepper greenhouses significantly reduces the pollen amount. This reduction is associated with less work-related rhinitis symptoms in allergic greenhouse workers. This intervention study supports the hypothesis that allergic work-related complaints of greenhouse workers, sensitised to bell pepper pollen, are caused by occupational exposure to this pollen in the greenhouse.

Keywords:
Honeybees, Occupational allergy, Bell pepper pollen, Skin prick test
1.
McDonald JC, Keynes HL, Meredith SK: Reported incidence of occupational asthma in the United Kingdom, 1989–97. Occup Environ Med 2000;57:823–829.
2.
Ross DJ: Ten years of the SWORD project. Surveillance of Work-related and Occupational Respiratory Disease. Clin Exp Allergy 1999;29:750–753.
3.
Monso E, Magarolas R, Badorrey I, Radon K, Nowak D, Morera J: Occupational asthma in greenhouse flower and ornamental plant growers. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;165:954–960.
4.
Groenewoud GC, de Jong NW, Burdorf A, de Groot H, Gerth van Wijk R: Prevalence of occupational allergy to Chrysanthemum pollen in greenhouses in the Netherlands. Allergy 2002;57:835–840.
5.
Miesen WM, van der Heide S, Kerstjens HA, Dubois AE, de Monchy JG: Occupational asthma due to IgE mediated allergy to the flower Molucella laevis (Bells of Ireland). Occup Environ Med 2003;60:701–703.
6.
Arif AA, Whitehead LW, Delclos GL, Tortolero SR, Lee ES: Prevalence and risk factors of work related asthma by industry among United States workers: data from the third national health and nutrition examination survey (1988–94). Occup Environ Med 2002;59:505–511.
7.
Groenewoud GC, de Jong NW, van Oorschot-van Nes AJ, Vermeulen AM, van Toorenenbergen AW, Mulder PG, et al: Prevalence of occupational allergy to bell pepper pollen in greenhouses in the Netherlands. Clin Exp Allergy 2002;32:434–440.
8.
Delaplane KS, Mayer DF: Crop Pollination by Bees. Wallingford, CABI Publishing, 2000.
9.
Dreborg S, Frew A: Allergen standardization and skin tests. Position paper EAACI. Allergy 1993;48(suppl 14):49–75.
10.
Blom HM, Van Rijswijk JB, Garrelds IM, Mulder PG, Timmermans T, Gerth van Wijk R: Intranasal capsaicin is efficacious in non-allergic, non-infectious perennial rhinitis. A placebo-controlled study. Clin Exp Allergy 1997;27:796–801.
11.
Terreehorst I, Hak E, Oosting AJ, Tempels-Pavlica Z, de Monchy JG, Bruijnzeel-Koomen CA, et al: Evaluation of impermeable covers for bedding in patients with allergic rhinitis. N Engl J Med 2003;349:237–246.
12.
Groenewoud GCM, de Groot H, Gerth van Wijk R: Impact of occupational and inhalant allergy on rhinitis specific quality of life in employees of bell pepper greenhouses in the Netherlands. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2006:96:92–97.
13.
Mitakakis TZ, Tovey ER, Xuan W, Marks GB: Personal exposure to allergenic pollen and mould spores in inland New South Wales, Australia. Clin Exp Allergy 2000;30:1733–1739.
© 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel
2006
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.