"if it were my kid, and i made it clear that she had nut allergies, and then somebody nearby opened up a bag of nuts, whatever happened to my kid, i guarantee you that guy would go first."

If you brought your kid, who has a severe allergy, into close confined quarters where people often bring on foods such as nuts, then I hope you'd take yourself out first...ideally before you make such silly comments.

It seems to me that it's about notification. Certainly safety comes first.

Sometimes I bring nuts onboard. If I can't eat them, let me know before boarding so I can grab something else instead.

The pax, or the parents, should notify the airline in advance, to give time for alternate catering. The airline should try to notify other pax in advance, but at a minimum, with signage and announcements at the gate, so pax who BYO can procure alternate food as well.

Otherwise, it becomes a question of which inconvenience is greater:
- Having reduced or no food on a flight of x hours, for 130 passengers. <or>
- Having 1 pax or family wait until a later flight.

I'd argue in favor of the greater inconvenience for the smaller number, given that they were the ones who didn't give notice.

I can comment on this one, being an aviation-type person who also has a nut allergy.

In my case it's cashews and pistachios, there are as you might expect different elements in different nuts, and if I accidentally eat those I now end up in hospital. The attacks (fortunately some years now since I had the last one) get worse each time as my resistance is lowered by each, so if it happened regularly it would eventually kill me.

It's not an unknown condition, so is something to be planned for. And an analysis showed that whereas nuts just nearby someone might not be thought to be a problem, 300 people all opening nuts packages when served with their drinks does indeed release enough nut dust into the confined space of an aircraft to be noticeable.

But I don't understand a carrier just doing something special if you mention the situation. British Airways stopped providing any nuts on board quite some years ago for this very reason.

Yeah, but would it really cost you, me and the (charming) United777Heavy as non-allergic people so much not to eat nuts for a few hours for the safety/convenience of others?

Come on, give a little, get a little, we're all just trying to get by, etc.

This really happened. We were on a 41/2 hour flight. My husband has a gluten allergy. He does look forward to peanuts as he can't have pretzels or any of those things. It took us two hours to get to the airport and an hour through check-in. We were starved but had to board. He asked if they had peanuts and they said yes. But they didn't, he asked for a fruit, they had none. He said nothing. But we did think a meal was served as it was stated. But there wasn't. I usually pack yogurt and an apple on a shorter flight. They had cookies, bread, pretzels, nothing he could eat. We learned a lesson on that flight. Now I am wondering if the new restrictions will keep me from bringing his food?

I'm sorry, have you ever tried to drive to NZ?

Geez.

Does that mean people with allergies can't get any consideration? What about people with disabilities?

yes, almost as silly as suggesting that people who have severe allergies just drive across oceans instead of flying.

that's a real easy burden for you to put on them once you know that you're not one of those people with allergies.

it's not like every allergy can do this (kill by inhalation). basically just nuts in some cases and peanuts in others. it isn't that big of a sacrifice to help keep people alive. you do realize that entire schools have slapped bans on nuts, peanuts, peanut butter, etc, right? parents like you whine, but amazingly, their kids still get the same education, just as you'll still arrive at your destination when planes ban nuts.

some people put more value on the life of a stranger than eating exactly what they want at any moment.

and some people just don't get it, sit back and make high and mighty statements about eating the food they want to eat, and letting those less fortunate than themselves drive for thousands of miles instead of flying.

Yeah, I have to agree. You can't realistically control all the food around.

Yeah--if they don't let us bring food they will have effectively banned me from long flights (and the only way we can get to her relatives is a transpac.) I can never count on finding something edible in what they serve.

Some time ago I kept a hive of honeybees as a hobby. They froze to death one winter (it happens - usually the beekeeper just replaces the dead bees the next season), conveniently the winter when my first child was born. I didn't want to have a toddler in the yard with the bees, so I don't keep bees any more.

But when I did, I had an epi-pen. Not because I'm allergic, but because my mother is, and I realized it was possible that one day I'd discover that I had inherited an allergy that had been dormant for my early life. So I had the epi-pen.

And I used to imagine having to use it. And I tried to imagine what I'd do if it didn't work, or didn't work fast enough. I eventually figured that my backup plan would be to bite into some Benadryl gelcaps I had, figuring that would be a quicker way to get the dose into me than swallowing a tablet (and realizing that swallowing might not be an option during an anaphylactic shock episode). I don't really know whether this would help at all, or not. I'm no doctor. But from my relatively ignorant reasoning, it seemed like it might be worth a try if I were facing asphyxiation in the succeeding minutes.

So I offer it here for comment by those who know what they're talking about, in case it may be of some use to someone with a severe allergy, or in case it's recklessly dangerous and something the doctors among us need to caution against.

Back on topic: I have no dangerous allergies I know of, but I'm perfectly happy never to have another nut-containing food on aircraft again for the sake of those who do. In the current situation, though, I think a previous poster's suggestion was reasonable in proposing that alergic passengers who don't provide sufficient advance notice would have to take a later flight.

I found one significant article in the medical literature related to this topic. The abstract summary follows:

Background: Allergic reactions to food occurring on commercial airlines have not been systematically characterized. Objective: We sought to describe the clinical characteristics of allergic reactions to peanuts on airplanes. Methods: Participants in the National Registry of Peanut and Tree Nut Allergy who indicated an allergic reaction while on a commercial airliner were interviewed by telephone. Results: Sixty-two of 3704 National Registry of Peanut and Tree Nut Allergy participants indicated a reaction on an airplane; 42 of 48 patients or parental surrogates contacted confirmed the reaction began on the airplane (median age of affected subject, 2 years; range, 6 months to 50 years). Of these, 35 reacted to peanuts (4 were uncertain of exposure) and 7 to tree nuts, although 3 of these 7 reacted to substances that may have also contained peanut. Exposures occurred by ingestion (20 subjects), skin contact (8 subjects), and inhalation (14 subjects). Reactions generally occurred within 10 minutes of exposure (32 of 42 subjects), and reaction severity correlated with exposure route (ingestion > inhalation > skin). The causal food was generally served by the airline (37 of 42 subjects). Medications were given in flight to 19 patients (epinephrine to 5) and to an additional 14 at landing/gate return (including epinephrine to 1 and intravenous medication to 2), totaling 79% treated. Flight crews were notified in 33% of reactions. During inhalation reactions as a result of peanut allergy, greater than 25 passengers were estimated to be eating peanuts at the time of the reaction. Initial symptoms generally involved the upper airway, with progression to the skin or further lower respiratory reactions (no gastrointestinal symptoms). Conclusions: Allergic reactions to peanuts and tree nuts caused by accidental ingestion, skin contact, or inhalation occur during commercial flights, but airline personnel are usually not notified. Reactions can be severe, requiring medications, including epinephrine. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999;103:186-9.)

In plain English, this study looked at self-reported incidents, which are always potentially subject to bias, although the symptomatology reported was consistent with peanut allergy. The accompanying editorial states:

"Two things are very clear to me as this debate continues to develop: education and preparedness should prevail. As allergy specialists, we need to continue to be strong advocates for our patients with peanut allergy and other significant food allergies. All potential allergen exposures should be anticipated, and a reasonable, practical emergency treatment plan should be written. We need to educate our patients, the airline industry, our medical colleagues, and ourselves about the best approach to this clinical problem. Specifically, the airline industry needs to be better educated about food allergy and to be willing to work with passengers who raise legitimate concerns. Patients with peanut allergy need to be encouraged to continue in their preventative efforts in dealing with their food allergy and to discuss their concerns with the airlines before actually purchasing a ticket. For example, inquiring about specific flights that serve an alternative snack other than peanuts and trying to book early morning flights when the cabins are generally cleaner are two reasonable alternatives passengers have pursued. As mentioned above, injectable epinephrine and airline personnel trained in its proper administration should be routine on all commercial airliners. In the final analysis, more objective data and proper education will help guide us in the ultimate resolution of this important debate and lower the tension in the peanut gallery."

Although I have nut allergies, thankfully I have not had any serious consequences from them. I agree with the other posters who suggest a compromise between airline and passenger would be best, given the circumstances. If you have a known history of severe peanut allergy, it is entirely responsible and appropriate to let the airline know ahead of time.

What a great, factual addition to this discussion. Thanks for taking the time to bring it to the attention of the FT community. By the way, I do not suffer from any know allergies but I certaintly have sympathy for thoes that do.

I did witness a friend who suffered from a peanut allergy undergo a serious but fortunately self-resolving reation to some food we were served at a dinner party once. Not a pretty sight but no death occured although he was rushed to a nearby emergency room after he injected himself with epi.

A telephone + 9-1-1.

Intravenous Benadryl (or equiv.) along with Epi delivered will generally keep the airway open. If not, medics can do an advanced airway (intubation) and breathe for you.

If you live in a remote location (say... rural Montana) or 911 dispatch informs you emergency response will be delayed (traffic, other calls, etc.), as long as you can swallow, I'd unofficially tell you to take a Benadryl tab if epi isn't available. If you pass out I wouldn't have a family member try and stuff anything down your throat as that can complicate things.

Maybe our doctor student can correct me if I'm wrong, but self-delivered sub-lingual (under tongue) might be a faster absorption route than swallowing the tab or biting into it. I know that's true with Nitro spray.

If you do take something (and I'm not really advocating that) before emergency responsers arrive, make sure someone takes note of the time and the dosage as this will affect other medications that are given.

Naeglerian, interesting study you posted. Thanks. The sticky part here is that only 1/3 identified themselves to flight crews. This leads me to believe that either A) they only have mild allergies - rashes, etc. or B) they're full of something (in addition to nuts).

Well put ^ A very civil attitude. Thank you.

I agree with this sentiment. The inconvenince is small compared to the potential safety issue. I do think those with such allergies should make the airline aware of this when making reservations so appropriate measures can be taken BEFORE everyone is boarding.

That said, if those with severe peanut allergies can die from airborne exposure, doesn't it seem like an incredible risk to get on a plane in the first place? Even if you ask the passengers not to open any peanuts and they comply, what about the guy who brought on food that has peanut oil in it - fried snack food, some pasteries, and many prepared asian foods contain peanut oil. Many people may be unknowingly bringing these foods on. As someone else mentioned, the seats, floors, and seat pockets almost certainly have peanut dust on them.