I have head of a few airlines refusing passengers with sever allergies as it presents too much risk for them

Could a staffer elaborate on what actions (if any), crew would / should take if a passenger completely ignores the request and opens and tucks into their home made peanut butter sandwich. Could be said the passenger is ignoring the valid actions of a member of the crew, or is the request not enforceable.

We all read the DYKWIA stories and if this has not happened, it is only a matter of time?

How many deaths are you prepared to cause by eating nuts on a plane? How long do you think you could cope with not eating nuts, if you know it could cause the death of a fellow passenger? If you think your need for nuts outweighs the need for someone else to live, then you've answered your question. Simples. Why bother asking for other people's opinions to validate your own, if you're sure of own opinion. Because otherwise it just looks like victim-blaming.


If it could cause the death of a fellow passenger, I'd say that's reasonable. I'm just surprised you have to ask that question. What exactly is your issue with assisting those with life-threatening conditions? How much inconvenience are you prepared to put up with to prevent a death?

What's their incentive for doing so? They just like to be a PITA?

Is it just me that thinks if someone has, in this case, a potentially life threatening nut allergy, inserting themselves inside a confined space, for several hours, a long way from professional medical help with a group of strangers who have little understanding of their allergy is playing Russian roulette?

Going on public transport and expecting everyone to cooperate with whatever you desire (don't smell, don't snore, don't drink too much, don't drink too little, open the window blind, close the window blind, bang my legs every time your weak bladder talks) is asking too much IMO.

If the allergy is that severe, consider taking personal responsibility for your own safety.

Puts on Flack Jacket, hard hat and Hi-Viz.

I think conflating what someone desires, and what they need to stay alive is unhelpful in this debate. Talking about smells, snoring et al is inflammatory.

Not every trip is a jolly. People have to fly for all sorts of reasons, and some are more necessary than others. Taking personal responsibility for one's own safety is second nature when you have a life threatening allergy. It's not just a preference. But when there are very minor adjustments that others can do to further reduce the chance of an incident, it doesn't seem too much to ask.

And for the record, I don't have a severe allergy.

I've never had a flight where I knew there was an allergy announcement.

Because I can't hear announcements anyway.

I do wonder what happens when a passenger eats nuts on a flight after they've made an announcement about it. After all, AFAIK the announcement is only a request not to eat nuts, not an edict.

And how would the allergy sufferer prepare for the fact that the airline can announce whatever they like, but you can always count on passengers to disobey; much in the same vein that I never believed that phone signals could noticeably interfere with flight instruments, because there is a near-zero chance that literally every passenger on any given flight turns their phone off just because they're told to. If phones could really bring planes down, they would confiscate them at the door.

Surely for the same reason, if someone's truly so horrendously allergic to nuts that airborne particles can bring about a reaction, they would have no reason to rest assured after such an announcement?

I have had this announcement twice in over 500 flights taken since May 2013 when I started keeping record of such things.

Compare that to the following in the same period;

Three go-arounds, two cancelled flights, one case of a passenger being offloaded by Police, one diversion en-route, two flights missed due to traffic, two connections missed due to late inbounds, one rejected take off.

Yes I know I am very sad keeping such notes. It would suggest in this totally non-scientific sample of one that you are more likely to have a go-around than a nut allergy announcement.

Had this announcement twice on recent flights, then had crew, on both flights serve me with a dish with nuts in it.

Replay in both cased was that the concerned passenger was not in this cabin...
Other option was we would go hungry.

Beats me. The person I know pretends to be intolerant to gluten/coeliac (depending on the day of the week). Of course nothing to do with real coeliacs or those with genuine allergies.

I can't handle strong perfumes/aftershaves and the scent of lavender. Something causes my lungs to spasm out or something, and makes it hard to breathe. I feel like I'm suffocating; I have had to have oxygen a couple of times because of it. So, for my sake, can we please ban heavy perfume/Axe/lavender users from my flights? (I can't use most room sprays, scented wax warmers or incense sticks either. I use non-scented oatmeal shea soap, non-scented shave cream, but I do use a lilac scented shampoo and conditioner; it's lightly scented and barely noticable after a couple of hours. My spouse can only use a certain kind of bath soap and deodorant.)

And for the person allergic to cat hair, I am so sorry. I have 3 cats, one of whom is a serious shedder (very fluffy white cat). My computer desk is constantly needing wiping down from her jumping up on it. I use a rolly brush to get as much of it off me as I can before I leave the house, but it feels like the hair just keeps multiplying as it floats about.

I had it twice on my recent 2 flights, and given that people can simply die when they eat/ come in touch with nuts, I am happy not to have nuts on the plane and just now I am wondering why someone would need to challenge this.

I have been served nuts by cabin crew after the request not to eat your own has been put out. My VGML was nut based!

What should I do, forgo my meal? Because in that case I feel the other passengers can forgo milk products, since I am allergic to them. Also a lack of food on a long haul could leave me needing medical attention, depending on duration and when I last ate, I suffer from passing out due to low blood sugar.

I should add that I was happy to skip the nuts with a pre dinner drink, but when my meal was nut based skipping it would be a step too far. Especially as it had already been cooked in the same oven as all the rest of the food...

Sorry but you have interpreted what I said all wrong. I have no issue at all with people with life-threatening conditions. If you actually read what I said you will see that. If it was actually putting their life at risk then I would have no problem with the announcement. It is just that if you read the research then you would see that it doesn't necessarily put their life at risk. with proper management by the crew, management of their surroundings by the afflicted person and consideration from those around them there is no significant increase in the risk according to the research. As I say... it is about a reasonable response and about balancing the rights and needs of everyone... not just the person with the allergy.

I would be surprised if many people would say that eating some nuts with their drink is more important than someone's life but it is not reasonable for someone at the back to not eat nuts because someone at the front has a nut allergy as it isn't increasing the risk. Now, if it was the person sitting next to them, or even close by, then that is a different matter.

BTW, I don't have any inconvenience. I can live without nuts even if there is no one near me with a serious allergy :) I am just discussing what is reasonable and sensibly and what might be over-reaction.