Peanut allergy cured for 4 years in majority of children in immunotherapy trial

A small clinical trial conducted at the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute has led to two-thirds of children treated with an experimental immunotherapy treatment being cured of their allergy. Importantly, this desensitisation to peanuts persisted for up to four years after treatment.
[…]
Forty-eight children were enrolled in the PPOIT trial and were randomly given either a combination of the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus with peanut protein in increasing amounts, or a placebo, once daily for 18 months.

At the end of the original trial in 2013, 82% of children who received the immunotherapy treatment were deemed tolerant to peanuts compared with just 4% in the placebo group.

Four years later, the majority of the children who gained initial tolerance were still eating peanuts as part of their normal diet and 70% passed a further challenge test to confirm long-term tolerance.

Source: Peanut allergy cured in majority of children in immunotherapy trial

USA: those massive terms &c you never read are legally binding: and can stop you from using the legal system to sue! (Victory for Uber!)

You may never read those lengthy terms and conditions attached to every digital download or app but, in America at least, they are legally binding. Sorry.

That’s the conclusion of a panel of appeal judges earlier this week when shining beacon of corporate responsibility Uber insisted its users had agreed not to sue the company somewhere in its long list of lengthy legal locutions.

On Thursday, the US Second Court of Appeals decided [PDF] that when customers installed Uber’s ride-hailing app and agreed to the terms and conditions – even though virtually none of them actually read the details – they were obliged to go through arbitration if they had a dispute with the company.

The case was very closely watched by technology companies for obvious reasons – if the court ruled differently it could have opened them up to a wave of potential liability and public scrutiny.

As it stands, the arbitration requirement will hold: a situation that enables many companies to keep embarrassing cock-ups and business practices under wraps since unhappy consumers are obliged to go through the process privately and details are not made public.

Source: Sorry, but those huge walls of terms and conditions you never read are legally binding

Absolute legal lunacy!