No water allowed for infant formula
#61
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: MIA
Programs: PC Plat/Amb
Posts: 1,152
like another poster has said because the restriction is pointless. Then again you probably dont understand that there are people out there that are extremely sensitive to the chemicals used to treat water and can cause massive problems. IE a baby doesnt have a fully developed immune system till like age 2. trust me you dont want to smell the diapers coming of a kid with a stomach bug on the ground let alone in a aluminum tube with very little air circulating. I have been there and burned my nose out and certainly dont want to have to repeat that because we almost went down the road with the back ambulance doors open because of the smell, because we couldnt get enough airflow through the box.
What is so horrible about that?
I'm not arguing the legitimacy of TSA's water policy. I'm proposing a solution for parents.
#62
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: North of DFW
Programs: AA PLT, HH Gold, TSA Disparager Gold, going for Platnium
Posts: 1,535
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
#63
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,788
It is the TSA that restricts consumer choice by forbidding purchasing outside the airport.
We should be able to sue them for that,
#64
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: YOW Ottawa, Canada
Programs: Aeroplan
Posts: 61
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.
#65
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,388
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.
#66
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: St. Lucie West,FL/Las Vegas,NV
Posts: 277
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
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
#67
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brighton England
Programs: AA Plat, various hotels
Posts: 1,220
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.
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.
#68
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,723
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.
#69
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,388
YOU try and find baby food at the airport.
#70
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Finally back in Boston after escaping from New York
Posts: 13,644
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
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
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
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
#71
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,410
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.
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.
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.
#72
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PDX,PHX,LON
Programs: too many of the few that are left
Posts: 627
[/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.
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.
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.
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.
#73
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brighton England
Programs: AA Plat, various hotels
Posts: 1,220
[/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.
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.
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 !!
#75
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,410
I'll agree it's not a threat but is there any exemption in the customs rules for such cases???