A claimant with a latex allergy appealed a refusal to award her employment and support allowance, on the basis she should have qualified under Regulation 29(2)(b) of the Employment and Support Allowance Regulations 2008. The tribunal’s decision that the claimant did not qualify for ESA was upheld. There was no substantial risk under Regulation 29(2)(b) when read with Regulation 29(3). Despite the gravity of the potential harm being serious, on the facts the likelihood of the harm being suffered was low. Risk was also reduced by a significant amount within Regulation 29(3), so it was not substantial within Regulation 29(2)(b), by reasonable adjustments and precautions being taken by both claimant and any prospective employer to avoid latex, and by the taking of prescribed medication (an epipen) if there was inadvertent exposure.