Peanuts on planes protected by law

[Steely Dan]

I get how serious the peanut allergy is. And I also get how tragic a death from a peanut allergy would be. But I also agree with the personal responsibility idea. Why wouldn't a person with a peanut allergy wear a filter mask on a plane, because it is such a closed system? After all, they cannot regulate what people do before they get on the plane, so the same risks apply whether the peanuts are served on the plane or not.

I guess I have to compare it to someone whose immunity is compromised for some reason. Yet they may choose to fly. I would expect them to wear a mask, not the airline to interview all the other passengers and refuse to allow them to fly if they had any signs of illness or any previous exposure to illness.

BBM

That's a very good question. I don't know if filter masks work for peanut allergies. I have a compromised immune system and have worn a mask when I've flown.

 

[Linda7NJ]

The surrounding seats idea sounds good but it WILL NOT work with someone who has a severe peanut allergy.
A plane is a closed in space. Peanut protein "dust" is airborne and could be deadly even if there are several rows between the person enjoying their peanuts and the person who is in danger.

Well ya know what, then they simply can't fly. They need to get over it. They can drive, take a train, bus or boat.

In life there has been many things I would have loved to do, but I simply couldn't, I'm fine and I survived.

 

[Nova]

Well ya know what, then they simply can't fly. They need to get over it. They can drive, take a train, bus or boat.

In life there has been many things I would have loved to do, but I simply couldn't, I'm fine and I survived.

Because eating peanuts on an airplane is some sort of innate human right?

Believe me, I'm still concerned about the practicality of mingling with strangers if your allergies are so severe, but I don't understand why not serving nuts is such a big deal ethically.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Because eating peanuts on an airplane is some sort of innate human right?

Believe me, I'm still concerned about the practicality of mingling with strangers if your allergies are so severe, but I don't understand why not serving nuts is such a big deal ethically.

It's a slippery slope and one I don't care to go down.

 

[gitana1]

The surrounding seats idea sounds good but it WILL NOT work with someone who has a severe peanut allergy.
A plane is a closed in space. Peanut protein "dust" is airborne and could be deadly even if there are several rows between the person enjoying their peanuts and the person who is in danger.

The only issue I have with this - is if it's that dangerous (and I understand it can be fatal) what if I have a peanut butter sandwhich at home before I leave and wipe my hands on my non sunday best jeans that I am wearing, and sit next to someone in the airport or on the plane?
I think people with that sensitive of allergies need to find other modes of transporation where they can control what they come into contact with - (not that I care if peanuts are or aren't served....but overall this seems to be more of a personal responsibility issue.)

I don't understand, Kimberly. If a person is that sensitive, how do they go out at all?
(For the record, I'm fine with banning peanuts on airplanes. I don't see why that's a big deal. But I do wonder about anyone who is so highly allergic they are affected by something eaten 10 feet away. Shouldn't they stay home?)

I'm on the fence about this. I agree that if having peanuts in an enclosed space can actually cause death, why not replace them with something else? But here's the thing (and I speak as someone with a horrific allergy to oats), to my knowledge, there have been no deaths due to nuts on the plane. In addition, from what I have determined, allergic reactions in general to airborne peanut particles are very, very rare. The thing is, what makes a person react to an airborne allergy is the protein, in the case of peanuts. An allergic person cannot get sick from smelling the peanuts, only from inhaling airborne particles. That IS more likely to occur in an enclosed area where people are shelling tons of nuts, like in a bar. Yet, I have never seen a shelled peanut on a plane:

Although a small amount of peanut protein can set off a severe reaction, it is rare that people get an allergic reaction just from breathing in small particles of nuts or peanuts. Most foods with peanuts in them don't allow enough of the protein to escape into the air to cause a reaction. And just the smell of foods containing peanuts won't produce a reaction because the scent does not contain the protein.
In the few cases when people do react to airborne particles, it's usually in an enclosed area (like a restaurant or bar) where lots of peanuts are being cracked from their shells. Although some people outgrow certain food allergies over time (like milk, egg, soy, and wheat allergies), peanut and tree nut allergies are lifelong in most people.
http://kidshealth.org/teen/food_fitness/nutrition/nut_allergy.html

For some sufferers with a particularly strong allergy, even inhaling peanut particles in the air can trigger a mild allergic reaction.
http://www.nydailynews.com/travel/2011/04/11/2011-04-11_debate_should_we_ban_peanuts_on_planes.html

So, what is a mild allergic reaction? Why do some report severe allergic reactions to peanuts on the plane, etc., when no deaths have been reported?:

As he explained about the popular myth that the odor from peanut products could bring on a severe allergic reaction: There are, in fact, a number of case reports in the medical literature of patients who report symptoms of difficulty breathing, chest tightness, skin rashes, itching, and various other symptoms—all from smelling peanut butter or being in the presence of peanut products. However, a recent blinded, placebo-controlled trial of children exposed to open peanut butter was unable to document any reactions.

Based on these reports of allergic reactions resulting from “inhalation”, many parents express concern that the mere presence of any peanut product can contaminate the surrounding airborne environment resulting in an entire room or area being unsafe for a child with peanut allergy. In evaluating these reactions from “airborne exposure,” it is important to remember several facts. First, allergic reactions to food are triggered by specific food proteins. Without contact with protein, there is no allergic reaction.

The study Dr. Young referenced was conducted by researchers at Mount Sinai School of Medicine. They took thirty young children with documented severe peanut-specific allergies (using IgE antibody testing and clinical anaphylaxis, contact reactions or positive reactions on double-blind, placebo-controlled oral challenges). These children underwent double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized exposures to peanut butter through skin contact and inhalation. Neither the children or researchers knew which exposure contained the peanuts or placebo (scent was masked with soy butter, tuna and mint) and contact exposure used soy butter with histamine. There were no serious reactions. They concluded that “casual exposure to peanut butter is unlikely to elicit significant allergic reactions,” even in at least 90% of highly sensitive children with peanut allergy.

Dr. Young’s article goes on to explain how food particles containing proteins can become airborne, such as during the peanut shelling process which can create a cloud of peanut particles, or releasing particles under pressure in an enclosed space; or high heat processing of peanuts; all of which can affect food industry workers. So, while there are case reports of severe asthma from airborne exposure to food in these extreme situations, “the typical inhalation reaction would be similar to that suffered by a cat-allergic person exposed to a cat walking into a room: itchy eyes, sneezing, and runny nose.” As he said, the “chance of a life-threatening anaphylactic reaction from airborne exposure is very small.”
But smelling peanuts or the odor of any other food cannot cause an allergic reaction, he stressed.

To understand this, we have to understand what actually happens when we smell an odor, he said. The chemicals responsible for the odor and flavor of foods, including peanuts, are volatile organic compounds but they have no protein and cannot cause allergic reactions. So, the reports that some have had reactions to the odor of peanuts is like the nocebo effect [see here, here and here], or a conditioned response to the fear of peanuts in those who’ve had a severe reaction.

http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2008/02/food-fears-run-amuck-government-outlaws.html

Much more at link.

I have posted before about how my brother was accidentally poisoned as a child. After that, he was "poisoned", twice more, had almost the same reactions etc., and ultimately could not even walk down the cleaning products aisle of a supermarket without reacting. But the thing is, the ER visits showed no signs of poisoning after the first experience. He was simply panicking and creating symptoms that felt very real to him.

People say that replacing peanuts with pretzels is fine. Not for me. I need protein in a form that won't rot, during plane rides, due to low blood sugar and fear of flying that is exacerbated by low blood sugar. I bring an apple or other fruit but I need nuts for the protein and I'm sure a lot of people's bodies need a high protein snack during a ride that lasts more than an hour or so. Pretzels usually contain sugar and have no protein.

But, I would find some other way to compensate for my problem if it meant potentially saving a life. Of course, I would. It's just that I am not convinced that prohibiting others from consuming certain products will save a life.

I also understand the argument that if a person is so allergic that an airborne particle could kill them, banning handing out peanuts on planes is not likely to save them.

I don't want to live in a nanny state. I do bend over backwards to be helpful and courteous to my fellow man and I will inconvenience myself to aid another. I just feel that if science shows that only people with the most severest form of peanut allergy would be close to having a reaction from airborne particles, and that the actual medical reaction they would have would be similar to a cat allergy, not an anaphylactic reaction, we need to at least have this debate and not just jump to banning things without more dialogue, studies, statistics, etc. Because our society is ruled by fear right now and the list of does and don'ts can become bigger and bigger based on that fear.

I also think, as callous as it sounds, that we must weigh risks when determining a course of action. We have bubble wrapped our children so tightly they can no longer breathe. Kids no longer know how to fall without hurting themselves because they are not allowed to fall. In fact, the high rate of peanut allergies today as compared to the past may be due to the ultra sanitary environments we have created, overuse of antibiotics, etc.:

Its increase could be attributable to the "hygiene hypothesis" -- the idea that less exposure to allergens and bacteria in childhood leave the immune system underdeveloped and vulnerable, the researchers speculated.

http://www.medpagetoday.com/AllergyImmunology/Allergy/20113

(And if you really want to read an in depth analysis of the studies, etc., about this, read: http://www.allergicchild.com/causes_food_allergy.html).

So I don't think we can so totally control every environment to prevent every possible death that could happen. Thus, for now I am on the fence. If science shows me that a person can actually die from exposure to peanuts on the plane and that the risk of that happening is more than extremely low, I'm for the ban. Otherwise, I think if a person is flying with such an allergy, they should book way in advance, alert the airline and then have the airline alert the passengers that there will be no peanuts on that flight and to bring an alternative if need be.

I am open to suggestions and will listen to every argument. I don't want to be inflexible or without compassion. But, I don't want to live in a world controlled by fear either. I have been there and it's miserable!

 

[Sooner Fan#1]

What is the big deal...who can't live without peanuts for 4 hours? Are they addictive? I don't see as a live or die situation....wth I use a nicoderm when I fly and I fly a lot. Now banning a child from getting an education, that's another matter! Hey...I like the pretzels:crazy:

 

[Kat]

I voted It's not a big deal, just replace them with another non allergenic snack.

My personal perspective is this:

I have a son, who is our younger son. He is in his late teens. He has been treated in hospital twice for Anaphylaxis. 1. Penicillin 2. Pine Nuts

He is also allergic to Peanuts. Soy. And all Tree Nuts. Bee and Wasp stings.

Our course of action has been to educate him starting when he first understood language. (His first hospitalization was at the age of 13 mos. and we almost lost him).

He (and us when we are with him) carry epipens. It's just life. I have never made him sit something out or not be involved in an activity. I've trained him and educated him to make informed choices that were age appropriate.

I don't mind giving up peanuts because someone has an allergy that might be sitting next me. I don't mind that I can't use air freshners and must use green cleaning supplies when my son was younger because he had severe asthmatic symptoms. (I didnt wear perfume for decades). But there has to some personal accountability on behalf of the one that suffers the allergy. There are measures that can be taken to ensure one's own safety and the responsibility lies with the bearer of the allergy. That is just my own opinion and how I have raised a child (young adult now) who has severe life threatening allergies.

I do have compassion. I'd be a monster if I didn't given that I have a son who suffers like this too, but I also don't think that other people are responsible for his welfare. He is responsible. He can speak up and ask if there are any ingredients in a dish that has been prepared that he is allergic to by naming the allergies. If in doubt----forego the dish.

He knows when he is having a severe reaction (and in fact was the one that asked his sister to call 911 during the nut allergy before he couldn't speak) sudden reactions do have a few seconds to grab the epi.

Bottom line: I really don't care one way or another about the nuts. But the onus shouldn't lie solely with the one who isn't allergic. We need to strike a balance.

All JMHO

 

[Kimberlyd125]

I don't understand, Kimberly. If a person is that sensitive, how do they go out at all?

(For the record, I'm fine with banning peanuts on airplanes. I don't see why that's a big deal. But I do wonder about anyone who is so highly allergic they are affected by something eaten 10 feet away. Shouldn't they stay home?)

I guess they could. But really should they have to? I mean it's peanuts! Wouldn't it be a better compromise to just be safe and allow them to travel too?
If this was something really important that people need, I could see the point. But, again, it's peanuts.

I guess I just feel it's such a small thing people could do to allow someone who already suffers enough to at least get to travel.

It's peanuts. :waitasec:

Nobody really NEEDS them.

JMO

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Well ya know what, then they simply can't fly. They need to get over it. They can drive, take a train, bus or boat.

In life there has been many things I would have loved to do, but I simply couldn't, I'm fine and I survived.

Well then! Lol
Enjoy your peanuts.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Because eating peanuts on an airplane is some sort of innate human right?

Believe me, I'm still concerned about the practicality of mingling with strangers if your allergies are so severe, but I don't understand why not serving nuts is such a big deal ethically.

It really shouldn't be.

Human compassion for others outweighs snack food for me.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

What is the big deal...who can't live without peanuts for 4 hours? Are they addictive? I don't see as a live or die situation....wth I use a nicoderm when I fly and I fly a lot. Now banning a child from getting an education, that's another matter! Hey...I like the pretzels:crazy:

I totally agree.

 

[bessie]

I voted to skip the peanuts, but my reasons are partly selfish. When I fly, my one and only concern is to get from point A to point B as quickly and uneventfully as possible, and I'd prefer that there be no in-flight medical emergencies for myself or my fellow passengers. Naturally, stuff happens and not all hazards can be avoided. But if a peanut ban will aid in preventing a situation, real or imagined, that would disrupt the flight and unsettle my own equilibrium, then I say pass the pretzels (pine nuts, granola, cheezy doodles, etc.), and let's just get the hell where we're going.

 

[Nova]

I guess they could. But really should they have to? I mean it's peanuts! Wouldn't it be a better compromise to just be safe and allow them to travel too?
If this was something really important that people need, I could see the point. But, again, it's peanuts.

I guess I just feel it's such a small thing people could do to allow someone who already suffers enough to at least get to travel.

It's peanuts. :waitasec:

Nobody really NEEDS them.

JMO

I hope it was clear I agree with you about the peanuts. Since peanut allergies seem to be on the rise, let's switch to a different snack.

I was just questioning the wisdom--with or without a peanut ban--of trusting your life to the decisions of a stranger sitting near you, a stranger who may very well be unaware of the problem.

But you'll notice a few posts down in gitana1's post that she actually needs the proteins from nuts (because she has other allergies) and questions whether the nut allergy is serious enough to justify a ban.

 

[Nova]

It really shouldn't be.

Human compassion for others outweighs snack food for me.

Isn't it nice that for once we agree? :woohoo:

I suppose Linda has a point that the next thing will be banning fragrances because of the environmentally sensitive. Again, not a huge deal for me, but I don't see how that will ever be successfully enforced.

And the same goes for peanuts. Linda's going to smuggle hers on and sneak them mid-flight (), so maybe those with allergies should beware.

 

[mysteriew]

I guess they could. But really should they have to? I mean it's peanuts! Wouldn't it be a better compromise to just be safe and allow them to travel too?
If this was something really important that people need, I could see the point. But, again, it's peanuts.

I guess I just feel it's such a small thing people could do to allow someone who already suffers enough to at least get to travel.

It's peanuts. :waitasec:

Nobody really NEEDS them.

JMO

It is a small thing I agree. But where does it stop?

If you agree to ban peanuts, for 1% of the population, then what about the immunocompromised? There are many more of them. Would you be willing to be interviewed before your flight and disclose your medical history? To tell them if you are ill, may be getting ill, or have been exposed to a communicable illness? And if your answer is yes, are you willing to be delayed or banned from your flight becauses you may be getting the flu or may have been exposed to the flu?

Or should people who are immunocompromised be discriminated against?

 

[JBean]

What is the big deal...who can't live without peanuts for 4 hours? Are they addictive? I don't see as a live or die situation....wth I use a nicoderm when I fly and I fly a lot. Now banning a child from getting an education, that's another matter! Hey...I like the pretzels:crazy:

Maybe there is a market for peanut patches for those that can't make it. Transdermal delivery of salt and fat as previously provided by Planter's packages.

 

[mysteriew]

Isn't it nice that for once we agree? :woohoo:

I suppose Linda has a point that the next thing will be banning fragrances because of the environmentally sensitive. Again, not a huge deal for me, but I don't see how that will ever be successfully enforced.

And the same goes for peanuts. Linda's going to smuggle hers on and sneak them mid-flight (), so maybe those with allergies should beware.

You made a good point about where an allergic person could go though. If they ban them from planes, you can look for them to be banned from gas stations and grocery stores too. Because someone somewhere might open them in the store, or they might break the packaging accidently.

Or should they be outlawed completely, just to make sure that no one who comes in the physical area of another person could risk eating peanuts, and coming into contact with a person who is allergic.

 

[Sooner Fan#1]

It is a small thing I agree. But where does it stop?

If you agree to ban peanuts, for 1% of the population, then what about the immunocompromised? There are many more of them. Would you be willing to be interviewed before your flight and disclose your medical history? To tell them if you are ill, may be getting ill, or have been exposed to a communicable illness? And if your answer is yes, are you willing to be delayed or banned from your flight becauses you may be getting the flu or may have been exposed to the flu?

Or should people who are immunocompromised be discriminated against?

That's very interesting you brought that up. I live in the south and we have a huge peanut mill in the middle of town...they extract the oil out of peanuts grown. The smell is delish...but do we shut down their right to make a living, after all, one of our presidents was a peanut farmer. I would venture a guess that all cases of allergy to peanuts here in town will be settled out of court...That's a way more sticky problem.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Nova, you are right! We are in agreement. WOW! The day has finally come. :smile:

 

[Sooner Fan#1]

Maybe there is a market for peanut patches for those that can't make it. Transdermal delivery of salt and fat as previously provided by Planter's packages.

Hi JBean, I try to go out of my way to make myself invisible on a plane...I just need to see my grandbabies in PA and some in the Philippines. I don't complain much but I can do without peanuts for a while. I just have a bloody mary and sleep the whole trip. I hate that I smoke but it's the only one last remaining habit I have and not quite ready to give that up. :maddening: