No nuts please!
Apr 9, 2019, 6:48 pm
#106
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 51,027
My daughter has a peanut allergy. On our flight last night we informed cabin crew (as recommended by BA). Turns out a member of the CC also had an allergy to peanuts. Passengers were requested not to eat them. Remember a two year old is a lot less likely to resist putting something they find into their mouths.
I was therefore disappointed when the cereal bar served with breakfast clearly stated ’may contain peanuts’.
I was therefore disappointed when the cereal bar served with breakfast clearly stated ’may contain peanuts’.
Apr 10, 2019, 4:55 am
#107
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Cumbria
Programs: BAEC GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond, Starbucks Gold
Posts: 4,510
Apr 10, 2019, 4:55 am
#108
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 386
May I ask that you do a little reading on this topic before posting such a response. It mayhelp you look less ignorant.
Apr 10, 2019, 5:03 am
#109
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North of Watford Gap
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 602
I would love to see an area on planes that could be used to separate those with allergies from the items that cause allergies. I am very allergic to dogs and unfortunately, I have had to leave a plane because of my allergies... the dogs can stay, the people have to leave. I cannot help my allergies anymore than someone with allergies to peanuts. Just venting I guess there is no actual solution.
Apr 10, 2019, 5:06 am
#110
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North of Watford Gap
Programs: BAEC
Posts: 602
Apr 10, 2019, 5:14 am
#111
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: London / Brighton
Programs: BAEC Gold / M-Life Gold / HH Diamond
Posts: 1,629
Apr 10, 2019, 5:16 am
#112
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Cumbria
Programs: BAEC GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond, Starbucks Gold
Posts: 4,510
Furthermore, this just proves that there are those in society that cannot see an issue unless they can physically see it. Not all disabilities are visible. Would we have the same discussion if this was around somebody with a guide dog or if they were in a wheelchair? There are similarities that can be drawn. They can all make travel more complicated but people are more tolerant of the issues that they can see.
Apr 10, 2019, 6:07 am
#113
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 51,027
Because that approach is impractical. Nobody will die for not eating peanuts/nuts.
Furthermore, this just proves that there are those in society that cannot see an issue unless they can physically see it. Not all disabilities are visible. Would we have the same discussion if this was around somebody with a guide dog or if they were in a wheelchair? There are similarities that can be drawn. They can all make travel more complicated but people are more tolerant of the issues that they can see.
Apr 10, 2019, 6:52 am
#114
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 190
I think it's very respectable and heartening that so many here would do anything and everything to help others over such a serious issue. All kudos to all of you, and on current knowledge I'm sure it's the best thing to do.
As more of a discussion point, I do find the science/evidence behind this confusing. I find it hard to believe that air circulation of nut dust over the whole of a (let's say large, wide-body) aircraft is a serious risk for anyone who survives normal urban life without a spacesuit or plastic bubble - when it comes to infectious diseases like TB, the way aircraft air circulation and filtering works means that you're mainly only at risk a couple of rows either side. And it seems hard to believe that someone who is at risk from a person on the other deck of an A380 opening a packet of nuts would have even made it to the airport, whether by taxi or public transport (I've never been in an Uber or tube train with no food crumbs on the seat fabric).
The psychological element of all this shouldn't be under-estimated either (cf. nuclear energy. The death toll from stress-related illness around Fukushima and the public fear-driven evacuation, far outweighs deaths from actual radiation, which are minimal). I've never actually seen any stories about someone dying on a plane due to random airborne exposure (as opposed to something they mistakenly bought/ate). But this is just what I've seen and I don't want to make any false reassurance to people, especially those here who are actually affected in their families.
I do take the point made above that some of this is around basic things like touch and food service (CC picks up someone's nut packet at other end of plane, hands you your food 10 min later), and that managing the whole plane may be easier than managing 2 (3? 4?) rows either side. So current precautions may be the only sensible and enforceable actions, especially on a narrow-body aircraft where a handful of CC are passing among lots of passengers.
With regard to causation/reason for increasing numbers, there was some media interest recently around the poor girl (and her devastated family) who died after eating an incompletely labelled Pret, and some chats with allergists following it. A current line of thinking seems to be that your body learns to tolerate foreign proteins by the simple expedient of doing what all toddlers/pets do with all new stuff, which is to try and eat it; and if you don't have the chance to do this as an infant due to excessive cleanliness but instead encounter the stuff later, especially through broken skin, then your immune system processes it differently ("whoa, this isn't from my gut, I didn't choose to eat this, it's got in somehow from the outside, danger!") and it sets up a more violent immune response if you then ingest it later in life.
Therefore (the thinking goes) the most at risk are those who (a) do not have oral exposure to the allergens at a very early age, due to excessive (advertiser-driven) home hygiene/lack of play opportunities, and (b) have eczema with weakening of skin defences, which means they then get exposed to the allergen in a more 'priming' way. This may be getting more common, mainly due to (a). This is NOT intended as 'victim- (or carer) blaming' - for a start it doesn't explain everyone, it's just statistical and (so far) unproven, and secondly those who scrub their home clean of every substance are just trying to do their best for their child - maybe due to exactly the fears discussed here. It may be that in future we realise that a bit of early-age random dirt-eating (or peanut exposure in pregnancy, or whatever) is healthier than Dettol and isolation, but it's too early to say for sure.
I must admit that when it comes to the recent news story (and I know I am opening myself for criticism here) if I had a daughter who could die in an instant from a very small amount of nut protein, I wouldn't just teach her to "be very careful about reading the label" at an airport sandwich shop, as quoted there, I would teach her that her life is different to other people's and to take her own food rather than buy processed (even if starting a trip abroad, you can always shop fresh ingredients). I know this is very life-limiting when it comes to restaurants and social life and that some risks (with precautions/checking) will need to be taken at times, but there is a sensible middle ground and taking your own cheese sandwich for a short flight, with the individual components from a trusted source (if you don't trust the baker, just buy some cheese and an apple), would seem to occupy it.
I appreciate the latter is a different point to the whole nut packet/air circulation discussion.
Disclaimer: not my field and derived from media reports only.
As more of a discussion point, I do find the science/evidence behind this confusing. I find it hard to believe that air circulation of nut dust over the whole of a (let's say large, wide-body) aircraft is a serious risk for anyone who survives normal urban life without a spacesuit or plastic bubble - when it comes to infectious diseases like TB, the way aircraft air circulation and filtering works means that you're mainly only at risk a couple of rows either side. And it seems hard to believe that someone who is at risk from a person on the other deck of an A380 opening a packet of nuts would have even made it to the airport, whether by taxi or public transport (I've never been in an Uber or tube train with no food crumbs on the seat fabric).
The psychological element of all this shouldn't be under-estimated either (cf. nuclear energy. The death toll from stress-related illness around Fukushima and the public fear-driven evacuation, far outweighs deaths from actual radiation, which are minimal). I've never actually seen any stories about someone dying on a plane due to random airborne exposure (as opposed to something they mistakenly bought/ate). But this is just what I've seen and I don't want to make any false reassurance to people, especially those here who are actually affected in their families.
I do take the point made above that some of this is around basic things like touch and food service (CC picks up someone's nut packet at other end of plane, hands you your food 10 min later), and that managing the whole plane may be easier than managing 2 (3? 4?) rows either side. So current precautions may be the only sensible and enforceable actions, especially on a narrow-body aircraft where a handful of CC are passing among lots of passengers.
With regard to causation/reason for increasing numbers, there was some media interest recently around the poor girl (and her devastated family) who died after eating an incompletely labelled Pret, and some chats with allergists following it. A current line of thinking seems to be that your body learns to tolerate foreign proteins by the simple expedient of doing what all toddlers/pets do with all new stuff, which is to try and eat it; and if you don't have the chance to do this as an infant due to excessive cleanliness but instead encounter the stuff later, especially through broken skin, then your immune system processes it differently ("whoa, this isn't from my gut, I didn't choose to eat this, it's got in somehow from the outside, danger!") and it sets up a more violent immune response if you then ingest it later in life.
Therefore (the thinking goes) the most at risk are those who (a) do not have oral exposure to the allergens at a very early age, due to excessive (advertiser-driven) home hygiene/lack of play opportunities, and (b) have eczema with weakening of skin defences, which means they then get exposed to the allergen in a more 'priming' way. This may be getting more common, mainly due to (a). This is NOT intended as 'victim- (or carer) blaming' - for a start it doesn't explain everyone, it's just statistical and (so far) unproven, and secondly those who scrub their home clean of every substance are just trying to do their best for their child - maybe due to exactly the fears discussed here. It may be that in future we realise that a bit of early-age random dirt-eating (or peanut exposure in pregnancy, or whatever) is healthier than Dettol and isolation, but it's too early to say for sure.
I must admit that when it comes to the recent news story (and I know I am opening myself for criticism here) if I had a daughter who could die in an instant from a very small amount of nut protein, I wouldn't just teach her to "be very careful about reading the label" at an airport sandwich shop, as quoted there, I would teach her that her life is different to other people's and to take her own food rather than buy processed (even if starting a trip abroad, you can always shop fresh ingredients). I know this is very life-limiting when it comes to restaurants and social life and that some risks (with precautions/checking) will need to be taken at times, but there is a sensible middle ground and taking your own cheese sandwich for a short flight, with the individual components from a trusted source (if you don't trust the baker, just buy some cheese and an apple), would seem to occupy it.
I appreciate the latter is a different point to the whole nut packet/air circulation discussion.
Disclaimer: not my field and derived from media reports only.
Last edited by GCab; Apr 10, 2019 at 7:27 am
Apr 10, 2019, 7:33 am
#115
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold / OW Emerald
Posts: 753
With regard to causation/reason for increasing numbers, there was some media interest recently around the poor girl (and her devastated family) who died after eating an incompletely labelled Pret, and some chats with allergists following it. A current line of thinking seems to be that your body learns to tolerate foreign proteins by the simple expedient of doing what all toddlers/pets do with all new stuff, which is to try and eat it; and if you don't have the chance to do this as an infant due to excessive cleanliness but instead encounter the stuff later, especially through broken skin, then it sets up a more violent response if you then ingest it later in life.
Therefore (the thinking goes) the most at risk are those who (a) do not have oral exposure to the allergens at a very early age, due to excessive (advertiser-driven) home hygiene/lack of play opportunities, and (b) have eczema with weakening of skin defences, which means they then get exposed to the allergen in a more 'priming' way. This may be getting more common, mainly due to (a). This is NOT intended as 'victim- (or carer) blaming' - for a start it doesn't explain everyone, it's just statistical and (so far) unproven, and secondly those who scrub their home clean of every substance are just trying to do their best for their child - maybe due to exactly the fears discussed here. It may be that in future we realise that a bit of early-age random dirt-eating (or peanut exposure in pregnancy, or whatever) is healthier than Dettol and isolation, but it's too early to say for sure.
I must admit that when it comes to the recent news story (and I know I am opening myself for criticism here) if I had a daughter who could die in an instant from a very small amount of nut protein, I wouldn't just teach her to "be very careful about reading the label" at an airport sandwich shop, as quoted there, I would teach her that her life is different to other people and to take her own food rather than buy processed (even if starting a trip abroad, you can always shop fresh ingredients). I know this is very life-limiting when it comes to restaurants and social life, but there is a sensible middle ground and taking your own cheese sandwich for a short flight, with the individual components from a trusted source (if you don't trust the baker, just buy some cheese and an apple), would seem to occupy it.
Therefore (the thinking goes) the most at risk are those who (a) do not have oral exposure to the allergens at a very early age, due to excessive (advertiser-driven) home hygiene/lack of play opportunities, and (b) have eczema with weakening of skin defences, which means they then get exposed to the allergen in a more 'priming' way. This may be getting more common, mainly due to (a). This is NOT intended as 'victim- (or carer) blaming' - for a start it doesn't explain everyone, it's just statistical and (so far) unproven, and secondly those who scrub their home clean of every substance are just trying to do their best for their child - maybe due to exactly the fears discussed here. It may be that in future we realise that a bit of early-age random dirt-eating (or peanut exposure in pregnancy, or whatever) is healthier than Dettol and isolation, but it's too early to say for sure.
I must admit that when it comes to the recent news story (and I know I am opening myself for criticism here) if I had a daughter who could die in an instant from a very small amount of nut protein, I wouldn't just teach her to "be very careful about reading the label" at an airport sandwich shop, as quoted there, I would teach her that her life is different to other people and to take her own food rather than buy processed (even if starting a trip abroad, you can always shop fresh ingredients). I know this is very life-limiting when it comes to restaurants and social life, but there is a sensible middle ground and taking your own cheese sandwich for a short flight, with the individual components from a trusted source (if you don't trust the baker, just buy some cheese and an apple), would seem to occupy it.
I'm lucky that my allergies aren't life threatening - but I have gotten sick from too many things that were supposed to be safe that I wouldn't be surprised if some more serious allergy sufferer would go into shock from any pre-made food at the airport or anything from a restaurant. Some allergy sufferers are able to see the signs early and treat themselves with epi-pens and steroids, and that is usually enough. The Pret case also did highlight some issues with the design of Epi-Pens, which may have contributed to the issue.
Apr 10, 2019, 8:24 am
#116
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 190
Agree and it wasn't meant to be exclusive, just some light on the "why does there seem to be so much of it now?" question earlier. Added to which there is of course the usual "increased awareness" reporting bias (though beneficial in this case).
Your point about "pre-made food" is the key really.
I know it's easy to be wise in retrospect and that there are real people involved (including FTers here) but the nub of it for me, we all put our lives in the hands of pilots and ATCs and aircraft manufacturers every day, knowing they have endless safety training and drills and revalidation and worldwide information dissemination and they still get it wrong every now and then. We do it because there isn't an easy alternative (cargo ship to Johannesburg, anybody?).
But I find it personally astounding that we (quite validly) talk about someone not opening a nut packet on one deck of a jumbo while an allergy sufferer is on another, while at the same time people with a life-threatening condition (or their parents) are happy to buy a sandwich put together by a mass-catering employee (possibly a Saturday temp) with nowhere near the same training and drilling as the aviation staff but with (for them) just as critical a role, just because "I/she always read(s) the label", when there is the easy and safe alternative of making and bringing their own stuff.
It's all about risks and balances and maximising experiences vs. risk vs. unthinking convenience. Would I personally sacrifice an F or even J class meal for this if it was me? No (with suitable questions, and assuming there was no actual concrete reason such as "we cannot guarantee..."), because you do have to live. Would I go for an airport Pret on a European short-haul rather than bringing a picnic from local produce, just because pre-made convenience food is always the answer? No.
Anyway, this isn't about the opening the nuts angle and I of course applaud all those who value a life above their convenience. I also agree about the Epi-pen design.
Your point about "pre-made food" is the key really.
I know it's easy to be wise in retrospect and that there are real people involved (including FTers here) but the nub of it for me, we all put our lives in the hands of pilots and ATCs and aircraft manufacturers every day, knowing they have endless safety training and drills and revalidation and worldwide information dissemination and they still get it wrong every now and then. We do it because there isn't an easy alternative (cargo ship to Johannesburg, anybody?).
But I find it personally astounding that we (quite validly) talk about someone not opening a nut packet on one deck of a jumbo while an allergy sufferer is on another, while at the same time people with a life-threatening condition (or their parents) are happy to buy a sandwich put together by a mass-catering employee (possibly a Saturday temp) with nowhere near the same training and drilling as the aviation staff but with (for them) just as critical a role, just because "I/she always read(s) the label", when there is the easy and safe alternative of making and bringing their own stuff.
It's all about risks and balances and maximising experiences vs. risk vs. unthinking convenience. Would I personally sacrifice an F or even J class meal for this if it was me? No (with suitable questions, and assuming there was no actual concrete reason such as "we cannot guarantee..."), because you do have to live. Would I go for an airport Pret on a European short-haul rather than bringing a picnic from local produce, just because pre-made convenience food is always the answer? No.
Anyway, this isn't about the opening the nuts angle and I of course applaud all those who value a life above their convenience. I also agree about the Epi-pen design.
Last edited by GCab; Apr 10, 2019 at 8:46 am
Apr 10, 2019, 8:24 am
#117
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: London
Programs: BA Silver, Marriott Platinum, Hilton Silver, IHG Gold
Posts: 453
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uts-board.html
https://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...1fc82345de1648
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-...plane-13548734
https://www.foxnews.com/travel/south...-family-claims
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/774006...anuts-onboard/
I could probably find more but I'm bored of having to. Seems common sense to me and not worthy of being justified. Lives matter more than you eating your nuts.
Apr 10, 2019, 8:29 am
#118
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: London
Programs: BA Silver, Marriott Platinum, Hilton Silver, IHG Gold
Posts: 453
It's NUTS.
You're just not able to eat NUTS.
This. Is. Not. An. Inconvenience.
Out of this chat...
Apr 10, 2019, 8:32 am
#119
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2002
Programs: Mucci des Hommes Magiques et Magnifiques
Posts: 19,058
Any advice in what you do in this case, someone I know has just had two children travelling that were allergic to nuts including pine nuts, they were travelling with their parents in WT, the problem was that 40% of the meals we served were pasta with pesto, what is the expects opinion on if we should this meal to customers around the children?
Apr 10, 2019, 8:34 am
#120
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: London
Programs: BA Silver, Marriott Platinum, Hilton Silver, IHG Gold
Posts: 453
Any advice in what you do in this case, someone I know has just had two children travelling that were allergic to nuts including pine nuts, they were travelling with their parents in WT, the problem was that 40% of the meals we served were pasta with pesto, what is the expects opinion on if we should this meal to customers around the children?
Nobody dies NOT eating nuts.
People DO die eating nuts.
Simple.
