{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01606805293005671, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008506616257088847, 'mean_word_length': 5.156976744186046, '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}}
The Editor takes a closer look at some of this month's article

The reasons why some environmental organic entities are very allergenic is one of the enduring conundrums in allergy. While the role of protease function has been investigated in detail there is increasing evidence that immunomodulatory chemicals present in allergenic extracts are also important. For example, lipopolysaccharides and other immune stimulants in dust mite extracts appear necessary for sensitisation to occur in animal models and diesel exhaust-derived pollutants delivered at the same time as allergen have an adjuvant effect. This story is taken a step further by Gilles et al (pp. 269–278). Extending their previous work demonstrating the ability of E1-Phytoprostanes in birch pollen extracts to polarise Th2 responses they show here that other, non-protein, low molecular weight substances in birch pollen extracts can inhibit the activation of Th1 biased dendritic cells in peripheral blood. It will be interesting to know whether this is a mechanism common to all pollens.