trilinearmipmap

A family member has anaphylactic reactions to certain foods. He has had two near-fatal episodes. We take all the precautions we can (carry two Epipens, travel with a doctor present who is trained in resuscitation, bring all his food along on the trip, seat him in between other family members, etc).

If you eat nuts, then touch the bathroom door handle, and my family member touches the same door handle, he could have a fatal allergic reaction.

Fortunately 99.9% of the population behave like human beings. They are considerate to others and would not dream of endangering a child's life.

It is an unfortunate reality that 0.1% of the population value their nut snack more than someone else's life. By definition, they are sociopaths. They view others as two-dimensional cartoon characters and the death of another human being matters not at all to them. Thank you for speaking up and identifying yourself.

H3A3H3

As someone who has dedicated their career to forensic psychiatry, I must respectfully disagree with your analysis. I believe the case in point is of fairly standard variety risk:benefit analysis that we in health policy and academia perform all of the time. When last I looked the universe of patients with known anaphylaxis were a small number, as were estimates of those who were speculated to have an unrecognized acute allergy. While I understand the sensitivity and emotion that accompanies an illness of this type in a loved one, in truth the level of precaution that you suggest could hardly be justified. I do not believe the public at large wants to spend their life in a test tube.

craz

My Pleasure.

Maybe you shouldnt be taking the child to places where you have to yes possibly inconvince many people. There are countless people out there that suffer from countless ailments. Must everyone stop everything no matter how trivial for that 1 person. I think not.

Again hire you own small plane or join NetJets or similiar programs , where you get your own private small jet. Im sure they will be more then Happy to comply with whatever it is you NEED to have done to make sure you child wont run into any problems, albeit at an additional cost.

I dont think I should have to be subjected to whatever it is that John Q Public is in need of. Your child may have a problem with Nuts another it will be say Flour , therefore all Flour products should not be consumed in their presence. Give me a break!

I weigh 400 lbs and want to fly, I cant fit thru the planes door or sit in a seat. I think All Carriers should redo their doors so that the heavest person in the world will be able to get onto their plane if they so want and there should be seats that they can fit into. Where does it stop. It stops with if its OK for the vast majority of the population thats IT. If someone doesnt fit into that set then Sorry, thats their problem and they should do what they can in order to Live day to day w/o infinging onto anyone else.

j3823x

Were all nuts eliminated from the departure terminal before the flight and the arrival terminal prior to the flight's arrival?

Were announcements made (in multiple languages?) at both terminals asking that people should not eat nuts during such and such time?

Even when it turns out someone has traveled with a drug-resistant TB, only the passengers from the nearby rows are alerted, not everyone on the plane.

IMHO, asking all pax on a large plane to abstain from eating nuts is a bit excessive. If the allergy is that bad, its probably a point where one needs to exist in a purified oxygen bubble instead of assuming everyone is complying with a request that they may or may not have heard/understood.

craz

At least I dont ask the Whole World to stop doing something, when there is an alternative. Buy or rent an RV, that way both the travel and hotel problems wont come about. No youd rather inconvient everyone else for your comfort.

I guess you feel that All sports venues and amusement parks should likewise cease to sell nuts and clean the whole place up prior to your arrival, or maybe even ban it outright so that in case of a last minute decission to attend some function at said venue, you will be able to do so just like any other person can.

I am truely sorry for the situation your child is in and , I dont wish them any harm and hope the day is very near when a cure can be found. But till then, Im likewise sorry but dont think the Whole World has to Stop just so that your child or anyones elses can do something.

I know of times when a Religious group will buy out an entire day at say a water park. 1/2 the day is for women only the other 1/2 for men only. I see nothing wrong with that as its a Private event. They can do the same with any flight if they so chose, buy out all seats and then resell them from their group to only 1 gender. But they have no right to prevent me from boarding flight #013 JFK-FLL since they only want women on it, if I purchased a seat on that flight already, or if they dont want anyone not of their Religious persuasion, thats fine also but they should have purchased all the seats or simply charter their own plane.

nsx

Some people have a really severe (life threatening) allergy to nuts. If you balance their need to travel at reasonable cost without dying against the other passengers' need to eat peanuts, the decision is easy. JMO.

Of course if the allergy is mild then asking everyone to abstain from eating nuts would be selfish of the passenger with the allergy. I would prefer to believe that nobody would ask this favor unless it were really necessary. So I am happy to comply when it happens.

gj83

Are you sure the earbuds were connected to an iPod? I recently saw a new OTC hearing aid that had earbud type headphones. link

If I were an FA I wouldn't be comfortable knowing my coworker was listening to an MP3 player during beverage service or any other time when it is obvious the FA is working.

craz

thats what bothers me at least. I dont wish harm to anyone, especially in a life-threatening case. But if the flight is a pleasure flight, then I hold my own, they do have alternative means.

Heck John Madden cant fly. So he has a Bus or RV that went from Stadium to Stadium each week. Im sure he would have wished there was a faster way to do it.

a friend who is a nervous nelly cant sit still for too long a period of time, so he drives every where. the last thing he needs to hear , is due to turbluence you must remain seated with your seat belt fastened. he hears that and he would pop up right out of the seat. So he sticks to a mode of transport where he wont run into that situation.

If its too costly or would take too long then , dont go. NN will drive anywhere along the east coast and out to Chicago. He just leaves before we do so he gets there when we do. He never was in Vegas or LA or SF with us, nor out of the US. Too much to handle, and too costly in time and $$.

jetBlueNYFL

I must say, as someone who is highly allergic to tree nuts, I am very saddened to read some of your responses in this forum. 99% of the time in restaurants and other places, people (usually complete strangers) are understanding about my life threatening allergy. Fortunately, I am not affected by airborne particles, however, I have sincere understanding and respect for those who are. Life is priceless and it's unimaginable that a fellow FTer (no need to mention names, but posted in this thread) would eat nuts to risk someone else's life. That is pure cruelty. What kind of society do we live in where one can't go up to 6 hours (less with the flight being discussed here) without eating nuts to help prevent the loss of a fellow human's life!? With the increasing food allergy-affected population, I sincerely hope that you won't have to deal with a close loved one's or close friend's life threatening food allergy.

I really believe that asking you to snack on anything but nuts for a few hours is far from an inconvenience or changing your life.

I interned at Marquis Jet (they have an exclusive alliance with NetJets for the fleet) and I can assure you that it is VERY expensive...the typical person cannot afford to fly that way. Stay home? These are just poor analogies.

The problem is not enough people are educated on the topic at hand. Read up...

http://www.foodallergyinitiative.org/
http://www.foodallergy.org/

craz

Since you were talking about me Ill reply in kind.

If we were gonna be eating together at the same table, and I knew about your condtion or was 1st told about when I arrived, I can decide if I wish to eat at your table or not.

However thats way different than a waiter or whomever coming over to my party and informing us that due to jetblueNYFL health condition we wont be able to be served xyz or whatever any longer that evening. Id say, let jbNYFL sit down to eat when we are finished. If we entered a restaurant and were told that that evening xyz wont be served , then we can decide to go elsewhere. But if we had a reservation and werent told before hand that isnt right either.

so too by a flight, if a Carrier lets everyone know before they purchased their tkts that seafood, or booze or nuts etc etc wont be served due to a fellow passengers condition then, I can purchase a tkt on another flight. I know its NOT practicable but the last thing I want is to be told what I can and can not do.. TSA is already telling me too much.

its not a laughing matter, nor am I making light of the circumstances. But if a person is allegic to something that can very well cause their demise, they must take proper precautions as well as not to expect everyone else around them to adhere to their NEEDS. So if the only way you can eat at the 21 Club is to buy the place out for 3 hrs, but thats too expensive then try elsewhere. Nothing says that You must eat at the 21 Club.

trilinearmipmap

For what it's worth I have never asked anyone on a flight not to eat something. But I sympathize with and understand those who request others not to eat something that could be fatal to them.

As for the suggestion that I charter an airplane or not fly at all, it's not really worth responding to, but to give a clear response to a stupid suggestion: I can't afford to charter an airplane. My son's allergist is a two-hour flight away or a two day drive away. Even if I could take five days off work to drive him to his medical appointments, the highway is not safe to drive for much of the wintertime. Even if we never traveled for pleasure at all, it is still essential for us to fly.

Again, fortunately 99.9% of all people are decent and considerate, or for lack of a better word, human. If I am ever asked to make a slight change in my behaviour that would greatly benefit someone else or even prevent them dying, there is no question that I, and most other people, would comply. That is what makes us human and separates us (most of us at least) from reptiles. In fact if we did not have this ability to cooperate socially and think of others as well as ourselves, our species would not have survived. There is more to this world than me me me me me. Or at least there should be, if you want to have a rewarding and meaningful life.

Mimi Imferst

Oh heavens! If I don't eat my peanut butter I'll just die! Problem is...if you do someone else just might.

Once again, I reiterate; you have chosen public travel. As has the person with the allergy. Unlucky you. The closed-air system requires that for the safety of EVERYONE that you may have to be inconvenienced. After all, we can all attest that public travel, by its very name, will never be as convenient as you like. Learn to deal by eating your peanut butter later. Or is that to much to ask?

Remeber we have to compromise for others every day. This is nothing new. Welcome to society. If you can't cope with it, move to the moon where you can enjoy your peanut butter unmolested.

That is until an astronaut asks you to please refrain from eating your PBJ while he occupies your planet with you.

craz

If I was in this situation, I would either use another allergist, or assuming the 1 being used is the best in the World, then I would move my family to where ever that allegist is so that I wouldnt have to subject my child to what might be a fatal flight (G-D forbid).

I would NEVER think to ask people although different ones each time, to NOT do something when moving to that allegists city would solve that problem.

I dont think its fair on anyones part to expect 100+ people not to do something. You obviously have a different opinion and expectation.


I know people who years ago due to their childs condition picked up sold their home and business and moved to Tuscon,Az. It wasnt easy for them, a complete uprooting, but their daughter had a very bad case of asthma and their doc told them if they didnt want the child to suffer , they had no choice other then flying out there on a constant basis. And so they moved, not willingly, but faced with no better choice.Their standard of living never got near to what they had going for themselves here in NY, but their daughter didnt suffer as she did when they were in NY. We are still in contact and they have no regrets and would do it all over again if need be.

You have a right to decide where you wish to live, its your choice for whatever the reason not to live near the allegist. I have a right as well to eat what I want when I want to. I wont chose where you Must Live, Dont you chose what I may eat and when I may eat it

craz

As posted above, there is a choice that wont inconvenient any outside party. Live near to the allegist and no flying will be necessary.

I guess someone with a bad case of TB shouldnt have any concern about flying especially if they are flying to see their Doc. They have just as much a right if they pay for their tkt as anyone else. Let those near to them take what ever precautions they wish to, just let the FA make an annoucement and its not the person with the TB fault. So some people will have to fly with a mask over their face, the least they can do they should feel for the person with the TB after all, and be happy its not them.

caphis

Wow, since when is being politely asked to not consume nuts for a few hours such a huge inconvenience?

No one is being inconvenienced by this. Being diverted because someone had an allergic reaction onboard is an inconvenience -- this is a case of a sense of entitlement, period. You are entitled to very little by purchasing that ticket. You are entitled to travel from one destination to another, and that's all. It is the airline's choice to serve nuts onboard, much like it is their choice to NOT serve nuts on a particular flight. It's also their choice to kindly request that you refrain from the consumption of those products in cases where it could pose a threat to someone else. It's your choice to comply or not.

If you do, yay, thanks for being a thoughtful human being and understanding that your lack of nuts for a few hours will not kill you.

If you choose not to comply, go for it. Consume away. But you'll have 149 other unhappy folks looking your way when that flight makes a diversion because someone had an allergic reaction. They certainly won't be looking at the poor kid whose life is in jeopardy. They'll be looking at you, and blaming you for the inconvenience of a diversion.