Has anyone ever, anywhere (on an aeroplane or anywhere else), had a severe allergic reaction to airborne nut particles? What about from touching a surface which was previously touched by someone who had nut residue on their hands?

Here is a report from The American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology titled "Reactions to Peanut During Air Travel: Can Anaphylaxis Be Due to Inhalation?". https://www.aaaai.org/ask-the-expert/peanut-air-travel

I quote the summary:
From this and other studies I have read (just do a search on Google), it is extremely unlikely that anyone will have a severe reaction to nuts on a plane especially if they take it on themselves to wipe down their table and local area with commercially available cleaning wipes on arriving at their seat. In fact, probably no more likely than when they travelled to the airport by train! I am still open to persuasion to the contrary but I am now of the opinion that to stop the entire plane from eating nuts because of a passenger with nut allergy is over the top and, quite frankly, unnecessary.

Here is another interesting paper on the persistence of peanut allergen: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3599460/

(Note: Sorry I double quoted the AAAAI report. The previous quote was posted while I researched and wrote my post!)

All true, but when my daughter travels, who has a severe nut allergy (all tree and ground nuts), we find the main issue staff is not realising cross contamination as the main risk factor. Serving nuts to one customer and a drink to her without washing hands in between.

Unfortunately nut allergies are just scratching the surface these days. I know of someone who is potentially coeliac but is waiting for the tests. She definitely has a gluten issue, can’t eat certain nuts, egg, certain pulses and seeds, dairy, most types of fish. She’s basically on a limited semi-vegan diet. I’ve seen first hand the problems that any of these foodstuffs cause and it’s extremely unpleasant.

I’ve had the peanut announcement on several flights and I don’t mind it if it keeps everyone safe. Cross contamination is the issue

I would have thought the "main risk factor" is consumption.

I realise that having a severe nut allergy is difficult to manage but if I had one then I would be insisting that CC do wash their hands before serving me. Yes, we all have the responsibility not to deliberately expose anyone with allergies to the allergens but at the end of the day, it is a public transport service: the bulk of that responsibility IMO should rest with the person with the allergy to ensure that safe practices are followed around them. If I was informed I was sitting near someone with a nut allergy then of course I would not eat nuts. But to ask someone at the other end of the plane not to do so is excessive in the extreme IMO. If CC are told someone has a nut allergy then they should, IMO, ensure they properly clean their hands immediate prior to serving that person and if that means serving that person first or last then so be it. I am sure that this could be accomplished without undue disruption to the service as there are never likely to be more than a very few passengers that would require this treatment.

It is about striking a balance that sensibly take into account the risk factors vs the inconvenience of other passengers. IMO banning the eating of nuts for one person with a severe nut allergy seems unnecessary and could be effectively managed in a more balanced way.

On my BA2770 flight last Thursday, there was an announcement about a passenger with severe nut allergies and therefore nuts would not be served (do they ever on those short LGW–JER flights anyway?). The FA then proceeded to say that it would also be appreciated if other passengers would refrain from getting their own nuts out. I will leave you to imagine the reaction of most of the passengers… :-)

It must’ve been the same we had when the IAG office, then still on Bath road, was being picketed by Iberia employees during IB’s restructuring. They circled the building chanting “Willie out!”. That definitely didn’t work out as intended.

I agree it is about balance and consideration for folk with a condition. An allergy that can cause anaphylactic shock must be taken seriously, just as seriously as any disability. There should be a kindness in society to be empathetic to our fellow passengers, as said above, we are all on public transport. I find it incredibly disrepectful to suggest people should 'choose not to fly' if they suffer from a condition or disability that makes it difficult. We as a society should be making allowances so people can perform the same work and have the same freedoms as those who are able-bodied / free of medical conditions. Whether it be allowing service (guide / hearing) dogs, allowing those with mobility issues to board first, allowing those with (unseen) medical bowel or bladder issues to use the CW toilets when they aren't travelling in CW, or not serving warm nuts on a flight. I am glad that there are procedures in place for crew to minimise risk to the passenger and hence disruption to everyone else; I would far prefer to err on the side of caution and have no nuts served.

There has been some attention in the Finnish media this week because earlier this year they shot an episode of the UK version of The Apprentice in Finland some of the contestants have a nut allergy and the cabin crew on Finnair were not as accommodating as the BA crews mentioned earlier in this post and refused to make any special arrangements or announcements telling the rest of the passengers to keep their packets of peanuts and crunch bars tightly closed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9201016.html
The explanation offered by the airline is that Finnair have a lot of flights to Asia and nuts are a common part of the cuisine there and less people have become severely allergic to them, so Finnair don't intend to make the majority suffer on behalf of the few.
From what I've seen the contestants attitude and subsequent attempts to shame Finnair on twitter have not gathered much sympathy in the Finnish media, I think partly because in Finland they're not quite so obsessed with "health and safety" .. playgrounds with slides and climbing frames, seaside cliffs without warning signs and ropes, coffee served hot in cafes etc.

I agree. We should all have respect for those with any special needs. But as I said in my post, it is about what is reasonable and about striking a balance. If we are to ban nuts on a flight then what is different to being on a train? Should we then ban nuts on trains because there is a passenger that has a severe allergy? What about busses? In fact, why not just ban nuts in all public enclosed spaces? Make nuts the new cigarette?

Obviously, I am not serious about that but it does beg the question... what is reasonable and just where does it stop?

In my opinion it should be evidence based. If it is shown that there is an increased risk then there is an argument to banning. However, from what I have read, there is no significant increase in the risk providing sensible precautions are taken by the crew and by the person with the allergy themselves. It doesn't need a blanket ban to make people safe (not that banning blankets would help in any way!!!!! :) ).

There is a simple answer to this... Just don't serve nuts on flights. I have had packs of popcorn or other "nibbles" on flights and although I love nuts (especially the warm ones) I have not blinked an eye. It just isn't important enough to worry about not having nuts.

Take a look at the show Rotten on Netflix, season 1 ep 2 entitled The Peanut Problem. It'll explain a whole lot about the increase in allergies. Great series all-in-all.

Go on, give us a clue! Not the full clinical analysis but a sentence in summary would help.

The first few times I was in Berlin there is a particular playground near one of the bars I frequent. Talking to the bar owner he called it the "danger playground". Children all seemed happy and they were, supervised, making a big bonfire and working with basic power tools.

www.nytimes.com/2016/06/05/travel/berlin-family-holidays.amp.html

I have a fairly significant dog hair allergy. It won't kill me, just produces symptoms akin to a heavy cold... running nose, sneezing, spluttering, watery eyes and so on.

I've no issue with any sort of dog sitting beside me on a flight, as long as the owner/handler has no issues with me potentially sneezing and spluttering over them for the entirety.

In which case win win I'd say.

SQers got over peanut prohibition when it was confirmed peas and crackers snacks will be provided to replace peanuts https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/sing...l#post29701185, and satay will continue to be served. Economic/gastronomic not scientific concerns by passengers.

I have the same with cats. And it starts asa clothes with cat hairs comes close to me. No need for the cat to be present. May I kindly ask BA to make sure that not only nuts disappear from planes but any kind of cat hairs, too?