Peanut Allergies and Accommodation by AnthonyT

America loves a winner!

Regardless of its origins, those affected should be the ones who bear the burden of defending against it. The public, those not affected, should not be forced to submit to the needs of an extreme minority.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 4:44 AM

DREAMTROVE

Hmm. Taking this idea further one would have to consider whether it would lead to opposing wheelchair ramps, not to pull a strawman.

I actually can accept that idea, particularly on historical buildings, but also the freedom to design things as you feel fit, but that society in order to accommodate this would need something which would allow those affected to go up and down stairs particularly if this were a public building.

There are enough minority conditions that absolutely everything could be banned. I generally agree. I suppose you could say that all broadcasts will be in French and if you don't speak it, tough.

One that bothers me is the bright white light in the red stoplight, that strobes in a manner targeted to give an epileptic a seizure. This seems deliberately insensitive.

Stuff to gnaw on

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 4:58 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Oh this is definitely a strawman. On Rappys part.

I think the issue is REASONABLE accommodation. There will always be some % of the population incapable of doing "X", whether that "X" is eating peanuts or climbing stairs. Banning everyone else from an activity because 0.000001 % of the population can't do it doesn't seem to be a reasonable accommodation. I'm sure there is a technologically feasible way to ensure that everyone can do their activity. Why not - for example- have designated seats with air curtains? That would not only be useful for people with peanut allergies but also useful for people who are wildly sensitive to perfumes. (I'm sure we all remember getting into a confined space with someone who drenched themselves in perfume!)

Anyway, the laws says that REASONABLE accommodations must be made. It seems the airlines are more worried about lawsuits than the law.

Once again Rappy attacks the sick. But they're not an "endangered species"... right, Rappy?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:09 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Once again Rappy attacks the sick. But they're not an "endangered species"... right, Rappy?

Care to elaborate on the 'stick' reference ?

As for the rest... who determines what the definition of 'reasonable' is ? Is there a % of those affected by peanut allergies which constitutes a tipping point between action on those who are allergic, and the rest of us, who aren't ?

Is it 1 in 100,000 ? A million ?
Ten million ? And of those affected, are they ALL at risk of death ? Are half of them, and the other half just inconvieneinced, like those who suffer other allergies, like to pollen or dander ?

I am not allergic to much of anything. Some in my family are. They took it upon themselves to take precautions so as to not be affected... medication and masks. Seems reasonable enough to me. Is it too much to ask those with peanut allergies to carry an epipen around them when they travel ?

At what point do we change our lives to accommodate others , and to what extent ?

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:21 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Is it too much to ask those with peanut allergies to carry an epipen around them when they travel ?

Unlike your original post and title and the apparent cause of your aggrievement, the law does not require "accommodation" but REASONABLE accommodation. The law - the government- does not require more. If the airlines have decided to eliminate peanuts, then that is the airlines' decision, It's certainly not mandated by government.

Are we both clear on that? Can we nail that part down before we go on?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:25 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:

It's certainly not mandated by government.

Are we both clear on that? Can we nail that part down before we go on?

Not YET....

But sure..., works for me.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:34 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Hope this doesn't spread to the fast food business. I'd sure hate to not be able to munch on the free peanuts while waiting for my order at Five Guys.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:44 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Not YET.

Ok. So this is on the airlines. Why do you suppose they went this route?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:53 AM

America loves a winner!

An airplane is a enclosed environment. PR issues, fine... but what of schools ? Banning PBJ ( or any peanut items )?

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:55 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Hope this doesn't spread to the fast food business. I'd sure hate to not be able to munch on the free peanuts while waiting for my order at Five Guys.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

How many fat grams are you ingestin' ? I bet Michelle Obama would have an issue w/ peanuts AND 5 Guys... oh, and don't forget the fries.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 7:20 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
How many fat grams are you ingestin' ? I bet Michelle Obama would have an issue w/ peanuts AND 5 Guys... oh, and don't forget the fries.

Nothing like that greasy bag o' fries. Yum. And don't forget that Pres. Obama has been seen at Ray's Hell burger in D.C. Here with Dmitry Medvedev.

We hit Five Guys about once every couple of months. It's the only national chain restaurant we eat at, since we knew it when it wasn't big (our local store is #3). Generally we eat out no more than once a week, and have a pretty good diet at home(fresh veggies, homemade soups and pasta sauces, homemade bread and pizza, little or no processed food) the rest of the time.

We've really have fun applying the "No chain restaurant" rule on road trips. We sometimes have to really search to find a local place. Most times it's really worth it...occasionally, not so much.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 7:31 AM

America loves a winner!

I think I've hit 5 Guys two or three times, since they popped up here in ATL. Has to be in excess of 6 months since I've visited last....

I need to go swim some laps now, just thinkin' about it.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 7:34 AM

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Nut allergies can cause mouth sores.

Um. Yeah, that's one possible reaction. The allergy can also close off the throat and suffocate someone. I have a friend who has that reaction to pine nuts, and has nearly died a couple times when she ate a cookie or something.
And strictly speaking, allergy to peanuts is not a nut allergy, as they aren't nuts. They can also cause the throat-close-up problem, though. Often this reaction will happen only when they've been ingested.

Moving on to the issue of banning peanuts, that does seem a little extreme. I love the curtain idea, as someone who has fairly severe sensitivity to perfumes.
I also can't remember the last time I was given peanuts on a plane. For awhile it was pretzels. The last several times I've flown it's been cookies. Now, this to me is far poorer an option, because I'd bet money in Vegas that there are more diabetics in this country than there are peanut-sensitive people. When I stopped eating sugar for my own health reasons, I started noticing how few accommodations there really were for someone sensitive to sugar. Since the main bulk of my problem was too much insulin (which is the first step down the path to type 2 diabetes, so is likely a problem a majority of diabetics have) it's not like I can inject myself and then eat a cookie. There were no alternatives to these cookies on my flights, unless I wanted to shell out ten bucks for a sandwich. Is this the more sensible accommodation, in terms of percentages? I kinda don't think so. Cookies are also likely to contain gluten, which has gotten a lot of press lately as an irritant to a lot of people. Not deadly, just kind of painful. Pretzels are the same way. Maybe they could hand out Brazil nuts, though there are people allergic to them as well. Really, is there any snack that no one in the world would have a reaction to? Probably not. I haven't heard of many people allergic to humus or carrots, which I personally really like snacking on. Probably get more complaints trying to serve something healthful than they get from cookies, though, more because a lot of people would find it weird than because of allergies. Can anyone come up with a viable alternative?

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 8:11 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
What is it with all these extreme allergies? No one had peanut allergy when I was a kid

Ahhh, a point we haven’t discussed, at least since I’ve been here. The explosion of allergies which never existed before, if one believes them (which I’m sure some here don’t), is a recent development in our society. The use of so many chemicals has only naturally created in some the inability to deal with same, and from what I’ve read, this IS increasing at an exponential rate. Peanuts may not be among those, but what about people allergic to paint, perfume, etc., for example? In past societies I don’t believe this was as prevalent, but it has become so in today’s world—-at least within our society. Maybe that deserves its own thread...

DT’s mention of the necessity of “hyperallergenic products, soaps, fabrics, etc.” in some people is what I’m talking about...so many chemicals surround us that it’s causing problems heretofore never imagined.

I had to giggle at this:

Quote:
Regardless of its origins, those affected should be the ones who bear the burden of defending against it. The public, those not affected, should not be forced to submit to the needs of an extreme minority.

Does this mean that once smokers are an “extreme” enough minority, they shouldn’t be forced not to? I’m not talking about smoking in offices or on airplanes, as obviously everyone around a smoker is affected, but smoking in one’s own home? There are laws being considered (or maybe already in effect) to ban that...in California I believe one is being considered that would ban smoking, PERIOD. Where does that fit in? Do we have to be a small enough minority for that? That’s a “strawman”, obviously, but just for fun...

As to the original question, I come down on the side of both “reasonable” accommodation and the concept that the general pubic shouldn’t be forced to accommodate a tiny few. As well as the theory that it’s avoidance of lawsuits rather than logic which is creating the original situation. And, too, the fact that it is the airline’s decision whether to ban them or not, not the government’s. On that issue; there are others which don’t fall into that category.

Rose, the perfume problem is one of those I mentioned, tho’ “perfume sensitivity” is different from an actual allergy, and boy, do I have it! I don’t even go into Macy’s, etc., because they hit you with that shit right off the bat and I just can’t stand it. When it comes to diabetics, however, I do think that’s on them, to stay away from things which might exacerbate the situation. I know Jo was absolutely ASTONISHED at how, in America, virtually everything has sugar in it, including breads---yes, it’s used for rising, but apparently we use it in much bigger quantities. I never knew prior to her that in England, “breakfast” foods are more like meats, etc., as oppose to our sugary breakfast fare.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 8:26 AM

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
tho’ “perfume sensitivity” is different from an actual allergy

Could be, but I've gotten hives from exposure to chemical-based perfumes. If it's oil-based I have no problem. As to breathing it, it literally makes my nose and eyes run, similar to hayfever. Which is funny because I don't have actual hayfever a bit.

Quote:
When it comes to diabetics, however, I do think that’s on them, to stay away from things which might exacerbate the situation.

So you don't think that diabetes, a recognized medical condition, should get the same accommodation levels as vegetarianism? That is, that they should have options that actually allow the avoidance of things that might exacerbate their medical condition? Options outside of bringing their own homemade food with them everywhere they go, I mean. Vegetarians certainly don't have to do that, and would probably scream bloody murder if they did. How is it reasonable to offer no options? And most especially, how is it reasonable to expect someone to avoid sugar when they are given no options? Should they just not eat?

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 8:27 AM

THEHAPPYTRADER

Taking a cue from smoking, maybe they should have a section on the plane that accommodates these folks. A 'no nuts' section reserved for them to protect their unique sensitivities. Of course, they should have the option of choosing between sitting for 'no nuts' and 'has nuts' seating, but if they want to sit with nuts, they'll be responsible for their own preparedness.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 8:28 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

As someone who is allergic to wheat (and trust me, there are far more celiacs than peanut allergics out there!) entire grocery-store aisleways are enemy territory. The difference between me and peanut allergics is that wheat only makes me uncomfortable, whereas most food allergy deaths are caused by peanuts.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 9:32 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
So you don't think that diabetes, a recognized medical condition, should get the same accommodation levels as vegetarianism? That is, that they should have options that actually allow the avoidance of things that might exacerbate their medical condition?

Of course I do! But I believe most (if not all?) airlines take requests for specific condition difficulties and one has the choice; the discussion was about banning ALL peanuts for everyone because some are allergic. Totally different situations. They're not talking about banning all sugar for EVERYONE.

By the way, those perfumes make my eyes burn, too, tho' for me it's probably psychosomatic, I hate it so much. But what you described happens to you, yes, I would consider that a valid allergic reaction.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 9:34 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Trader: Prize for first giggle of the morning, thank you!

Sig: I didn't know any of that. How awful! It's one thing to read the ingredients if one CHOOSES to avoid this or that, but to HAVE to read them to stay safe, that's awful!

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 9:49 AM

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Quote:
So you don't think that diabetes, a recognized medical condition, should get the same accommodation levels as vegetarianism? That is, that they should have options that actually allow the avoidance of things that might exacerbate their medical condition?
Of course I do! But I believe most (if not all?) airlines take requests for specific condition difficulties and one has the choice

Well, no, that was my whole point. I was offered a free cookie or a ten-dollar sandwich (which likely contained sugar as well) the last three times I flew. There was no other option. I had, of course, learned to bring my own food with me, but I think it would have been nice if they'd offered something sugar-free. Wasn't even on the menu, that was my point. I'm not talking about banning sugar or peanuts or anything, but since we're talking about reasonable accommodation, I was just saying that there are more diabetics and gluten-sensitive people than there are peanut allergies, and that sort of concern should perhaps be addressed instead of talking about banning a legume entirely. But seriously, I don't remember the last time I was offered peanuts anyway.

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 10:16 AM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Ahhh, a point we haven’t discussed, at least since I’ve been here. The explosion of allergies which never existed before, if one believes them (which I’m sure some here don’t), is a recent development in our society.

3 million Americans plus with peanut allergies
http://www.webmd.com/allergies/news/20100514/peanut-allergies-in-kids-
on-the-rise

The common explanation is the hygiene hypothesis. But I like to entertain a few others as well.

Vaccination hypothesis
http://www.avoidingmilkprotein.com/vacandpea.htm
http://www.amazon.com/History-Peanut-Allergy-Epidemic/dp/1449916651/re
f=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1303675815&sr=1-2

EMF hypothesis
http://bastyrcenter.org/content/view/313/

Not claiming anything. Just tossing out ideas.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 10:51 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Rose, when you make an airline reservation, there's a section where you can choose your meals, and I believe both vegetarian and diabetic is listed there. I only stumbled on that by accident (since I haven't traveled by air for decades except to go to New Orleans), but I think that's accurate.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 12:00 PM

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
when you make an airline reservation, there's a section where you can choose your meals, and I believe both vegetarian and diabetic is listed there.

There was one time I made a reservation and was asked if I wanted vegetarian or kosher, but that's been nearly ten years ago. Meals aren't really provided in the same way anymore, at least not on flights I've taken. I could buy a 'meal' for twice its worth, or get a cookie as a snack. If I didn't want a cookie and didn't want to pay out the nose, I got no food. Bear in mind that I've flown five times in the last four years or so, and had basically identical experiences on three different airlines. The fourth airline, Southwest, gave me pretzels. I'd fly Southwest all the time if they went where I generally go.

What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 2:22 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
The fourth airline, Southwest, gave me pretzels. I'd fly Southwest all the time if they went where I generally go.

Amen - back when I did occasionally fly commercial I would fly with no one else, not only are their pilots a cut above and the 737 near indestructible, the customer service was top notch as well.

We had one of our bags not make it onto the connecting flight, because they chose not to hold the flight, and we were in fact eight minutes EARLY on final arrival - and instead of the usual runaround, they SENT someone to the baggage carosel to tell us some bags were on the next flight, and if we'd like we could give them the address we were at and they'd bring it out to us - which they did in about half an hour, only twelve minutes after WE got there.

And the whole time they were very courteous and professional, mind you.

I refuse to fly commercial cause of TSA/DHS and that bullshit nowadays, but for those who must, Southwest comes highly reccommended.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 24, 2011 2:32 PM