{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021834061135371178, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006550218340611353, 'mean_word_length': 5.195945945945946, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Venison contact dermatitis

A 37‐year‐old meat inspector presented with a 5‐month history of forearm eczema. His symptoms improved at weekends and over holidays but flared within a day of work. Scratch patch tests were strongly positive to fresh venison diaphragm and venison liver and weakly positive to venison hide and blood, and lamb blood. They were negative to other venison and lamb components. Type IV allergy tests with Standard European and fragrance batteries were negative. The eczema cleared with a change in work role, clobetasol‐17‐propionate cream, flucloxacillin and aqueous cream. He was then able to return to meat inspecting. Provided he was diligent about applying ‘Dermashield’ barrier foam and minimizing contact with irritants, his eczema has remained well controlled over the last 4 years. Attention to irritant contact dermatitis is important in the management of protein contact urticaria.