I stated that airport vendors should make specialized products available for parents who need it.

What is so horrible about that?

I'm not arguing the legitimacy of TSA's water policy. I'm proposing a solution for parents.

The problem is that will never happen as it too specialist of a product for them to carry in there limited space. Plus if they did sell hyper-filtered and neutralized (which is what nursery water is) water it would probably be inthe $200 a gallon in cost based on the 5000% markups that are common in the shops at the airport

No, of course that is true. It always has been. I expect to pay double if I buy at the airport.

It is the TSA that restricts consumer choice by forbidding purchasing outside the airport.

We should be able to sue them for that,

The general idiocy of the liquids rule notwithstanding, the water should have been permitted through in this case. I'm sorry that you were treated this badly and I hope you'll pursue this with the TSA.

Vendors are out to maximize profit by selling items demanded by the majority of flyers. They are unlikely to carry products that have thin sales.

If the kid needs boiled, sterilized water, (or another specialized product) the vendors may well not carry it. Every bottled water out there seems to have some kind of additive (and natural spring water may contain minerals that are hard to digest). Some folks, and some kids, can't tolerate the preservatives in bottled water.

Generally the airport contracts don't specify the brand, type, and quantity of products carried.

Oh, by the way, bottled water does carry an expiration date.

I only read the OP and that was enough. If she allowed them to do what they did then that was her decision. There is no grey area. People need to memorize and carry copies of the following (if they apply to them) so there can't be an issue.

http://www.tsa.dhs.gov/travelers/air...ren/index.shtm
http://www.tsa.dhs.gov/travelers/air...n/formula.shtm
http://www.tsa.dhs.gov/assets/pdf/sp...needs_memo.pdf
http://www.tsa.dhs.gov/travelers/air...ted-items.shtm :cool:

Ive read the TSA links above and if i understand it correctly, they suggest that larger volumes of baby foods should be packed in your checked luggage.

Some friends of mine recently flew to Orlando from LGW. They were selected to have their luggage screened at Orlando. In the luggage were 2 packs of sealed unopened baby food. They were told these were on the prohibited items list and were removed and thrown away. They started to argue, but being their first trip to the U.S felt intimidated and decided the best thing to do was just get out of the airport. This was their first trip to the U.S

Was the guy right? Or was he just being a jerk.

It's what TSA would like, but neither TSA nor the airline take responsibility for ensuring that passengers make it out of the airplane within a reasonable timeframe. One could set out on a scheduled one hour flight and end up sitting involuntarily on the tarmac in the aircraft for 8-10 hours, or even 18 hours in the case of some international flights. It doesn't happen every day, but it happens dozens of times per year. Do a FT search on "tarmac hostage" if you don't believe me.

Not to mention that checked luggage can get lost for days.

So if you have an infant, it's perfectly understandable why you'd want to have a lot of extra food in your carry-on luggage. And if you have an infant that needs or prefers food that may be hard to purchase at the destination, it's understandable why you'd want an extended supply of food in carry-on, because checked baggage can and does get misplaced frequently.

TSA should not be interfering in the dietary choices of passengers and/or their families. They are not physicians. The war-on-water never should have happened.

I saw TSA at BWI confiscating 2 small jars of baby food from a mother with infant in arms - despite her statement that the food was to be fed to the child while on-board a 3 hour flight.

YOU try and find baby food at the airport.

Sad fact #1: That the TSOs aren't trained in something this basic.

Sad fact #2: This entire incident. These types of TSOs are just bullies. That's it, nothing more. Bullies with a badge. For those of you who haven't read about the Stanford Prison Experiment, please take a few minutes to do so. It's quite enlightening.

Mike

This sounds legit to me. You're saying they were scanned on landing. That is normally done by customs, not the TSA. Many foodstuffs are prohibited from being imported into America. This has nothing to do with airline safety, it has to do with protecting our agricultural industry from imported pests. It's not that we care if you bring in a steak, we care *VERY* much if you accidentally brought in hoof & mouth disease on that steak. Thus the only way such things come in is through procedures designed to ensure there are no pests tagging along.

Applying such rules to materials I would assume are sterilized doesn't really make much sense but there probably isn't an exemption for such cases.

[/SIZE]Baby food in sealed jars/plastic offers zero possibility of being a vector for hoof-and-mouth, anthrax, or other agricultural concerns! Due to changes in stock handling and slaughter practices, probably not even BSE (mad cow disease) at this point.

The only part I'm not clear on is what was meant by "2 packs." If this was two "servings" it should have been no problem at all. If it was sealed boxes of multiple individual sealed units (what in U.S. usage might be "cases") the quantity might have concerned TSOs because of the liquids idiocy, but if medically necessary for the baby should still have been exempt. CBP should have had no concern about baby food imported for use during the visit, unless it had some simultaneous commercial purpose. Just as the airlines advise never to pack vital medications in checked luggage, any baby food that cannot be substituted en route should not be either, in case the bag is delayed or lost.

My guesses: 1) jerk, 2) incompetent, 3) both. FWIW, I've heard similar stories of rudeness/lack of compassion by CBP at Florida ports of entry from British friends—all seasoned travelers (retired aircrew, diplomatic service, etc.), some of whom have been visiting the U.S. for ages. Apologies to Gatwick Alan's friends for the way they were treated.

Just to clarify, it was sufficient for 3 weeks use in the U.S. Being novices they didnt think of the risks of putting things in checked luggage and wanted to make sure the food was available, being unsure if it would be available in the U.S.
Despite the hassles of the airport, they had a great time in the U.S and would love to return but will be a bit wiser next time !!

Yep, Chief Apologist for the TSA, Christopher White, who can't write a coherent thread on the blog.

I'll agree it's not a threat but is there any exemption in the customs rules for such cases???