Direct flights cross country severe food allergy?

[kevschickee]

There is a massive difference between being inconvenienced and being dead. You could also look at it from the other end. Maybe the child who needs peanut butter shouldn't fly. Both extremes are ridiculous.

And just how inconvenienced would you be if the plane you were on had to make an emergency stop somewhere, because Little Johnny just had to have peanut butter, even though mom and dad knew there was someone on the plane with a severe allergy?

Wow just wow. Maybe just maybe the parent with a child who has such a deadly reaction to peanuts needs to evaluate whether that child needs to be on a plane. Put a filter mask on that child. You can't expect a parent on a long flight to not feed their child if that is all they brought. Now I'm all for moving the person with pb away BUT you should not expect a peanut free zone if it isn't in the rules.

 

[mistysue]

You don't NEED to be on a plane period. You can drive or if you need to be on the plane wear a mask just in case. If it is long flight and tat is all you brought for your kid then what you let the kid go hungry on a long flight? It may be a huge inconvenience for someone who are you to say it isn't?

I think you are missing some important things. First being that a mask does not address the issue. Second is that saying one's convenience is more important that another's survival is just disgusting. There is no getting around that. Allowed or not, it's sickening that in the name of convenience you think that another person should have to choose between risking their life or they should spend an extra 20-40 hours on travel so you can take a paste out of one jar instead of another. I could not fathom thinking so much of my 5 seconds spreading a different butter I would place it over another person's life.
Anybody who knows the prevalence of peanut allergies shouldn't be bringing peanuts on a plane for convenience alone. It's that simple. In the situation you describe neither person NEEDS to be on the plane, but one person is carrying a potentially deadly substance and the other just wants to get through the flight alive. How can you even take your argument seriously?
It's not the same as reading a book, listening to your Ipod or even carrying an uncommon allergen. We are specifically discussing an allergen that is common, known for causing trouble in confined environments and known for spreading easily.

Peanut butter wasn't even mass produced or widely consumed until the last 100 years, I think you are imagining it's a food with some long history of being useful to our species, but this is a relatively new food that is causing some serious issues.

 

[kevschickee]

I think you are missing some important things. First being that a mask does not address the issue. Second is that saying one's convenience is more important that another's survival is just disgusting. There is no getting around that. Allowed or not, it's sickening that in the name of convenience you think that another person should have to choose between risking their life or they should spend an extra 20-40 hours on travel so you can take a paste out of one jar instead of another. I could not fathom thinking so much of my 5 seconds spreading a different butter I would place it over another person's life.
Anybody who knows the prevalence of peanut allergies shouldn't be bringing peanuts on a plane for convenience alone. It's that simple. In the situation you describe neither person NEEDS to be on the plane, but one person is carrying a potentially deadly substance and the other just wants to get through the flight alive. How can you even take your argument seriously?
It's not the same as reading a book, listening to your Ipod or even carrying an uncommon allergen. We are specifically discussing an allergen that is common, known for causing trouble in confined environments and known for spreading easily.

Peanut butter wasn't even mass produced or widely consumed until the last 100 years, I think you are imagining it's a food with some long history of being useful to our species, but this is a relatively new food that is causing some serious issues.

I think we will never agree which is fine but I can't imagine telling someone not to do something because of me. How will a filter mask not help?

 

[chloelovesdisney]

I fly multiple times a year and have not once been on a flight in which they announced someone had an allergy and passengers were requested to not eat something.

It is unlikely the request will be made, and it's unlikely on that same flight someone will have peanut butter on them to eat.

Most people that don't have a peanut allergy don't have an alternative butter at home or purchase it just for the flight, otherwise I am sure they would be happy to bring that.

No one has died from an inflight allergic reaction, so the airlines and passengers seem to be handling this reasonably well.

 

[mistysue]

I think we will never agree which is fine but I can't imagine telling someone not to do something because of me. How will a filter mask not help?

The mask can keep out some of the air, but it doesn't filter the air 100%. It is also usually the oil from peanuts and peanut butter that creates a problem for others which is not helped by the mask.

I agree we probably aren't going to agree on this at this point. By saying that if somebody is allergic they shouldn't fly so that you can have peanuts is telling somebody to do something because of you, is it not? (something one heck of a lot more inconvenient than use a different jar of butter one time)
I don't expect the world to be peanut free, I just expect people to be reasonable and to respect each other. This seems to also be what you are essentially saying. It's an awkward stretch to me to compare somebody's ability to survive and somebody's preference for a food as if they are equally important.

 

[kevschickee]

The mask can keep out some of the air, but it doesn't filter the air 100%. It is also usually the oil from peanuts and peanut butter that creates a problem for others which is not helped by the mask.

I agree we probably aren't going to agree on this at this point. By saying that if somebody is allergic they shouldn't fly so that you can have peanuts is telling somebody to do something because of you, is it not? (something one heck of a lot more inconvenient than use a different jar of butter one time)
I don't expect the world to be peanut free, I just expect people to be reasonable and to respect each other. This seems to also be what you are essentially saying. It's an awkward stretch to me to compare somebody's ability to survive and somebody's preference for a food as if they are equally important.

Yup respect goes both ways.

 

[kevschickee]

Btw my kids hate the other butters so that wouldn't work.

 

[crashbb]

I fly multiple times a year and have not once been on a flight in which they announced someone had an allergy and passengers were requested to not eat something.

It is unlikely the request will be made, and it's unlikely on that same flight someone will have peanut butter on them to eat.

Most people that don't have a peanut allergy don't have an alternative butter at home or purchase it just for the flight, otherwise I am sure they would be happy to bring that.

No one has died from an inflight allergic reaction, so the airlines and passengers seem to be handling this reasonably well.

The thing that people seem to be missing (not you - just using this as a jumping off point) is that the problem is not just people who need peanut butter during the flight (admittedly, a very small number). The problem includes people who need food and happened to only bring a peanut product - especially on flights like the one above where the airline choose to give out no snacks at all and this was not announced at the gate.

So, you have someone on the plane with an allergy and someone else with a need for food (hypoglycaemia, diabetes, whatever) who only has access to food with peanut products in it. Much more likely than someone needing peanuts and still a conundrum.

Now, you can argue that people should know enough not to bring peanut products onto the plane, but really, many people (myself included) just don't think about it. I actually don't know anyone with a life threatening peanut allergy (or, at least, not that they've ever told me - so no one I've eaten with). I have heard of parents (of kids with allergies) bringing extra snacks that they can offer to those who need them, which seems like a help (though not if the person needing the snack has their own food limitations, I guess).

 

[mistysue]

Btw my kids hate the other butters so that wouldn't work.

See that's the thing though, taking peanut butter because you *prefer* it, knowing that that choice can put a person's life in danger is NOT respecting the other person. It's more like sticking out your tongue, slapping them on the face and saying "too bad, your life is worth less than my just wanting to expose you to this thing that may kill you because I feel like it today."

It is downright disrespectful. There is no honorable way to look at it.

You are going out of your way to select a food that forces a crazy hardship on another person. Do you really not see where your action is disrespectful?

 

[SLCborn]

We were recently on a Delta flight to Miami. The FA's announced before takeoff that there was a severe peanut allergy on the flight and to please refrain from eating peanuts/peanut butter for the flight. It didn't really bother me because we had already eaten a small lunch and planned to eat when we landed in MIA. There were however a few grumbles around us.

After we had reached our cruising altitude the FA's came to several rows, including ours, to let us know that the parents had made arrangements to pay for food that the airline sold if we would refrain from eating peanuts/peanut butter for the duration of the flight.

Many people were so impressed that the parents cared about their child AND those around them who may be inconvenienced by not having something to eat.

I know there are some who must have the peanut butter and the parents on this flight seemed to realize that as well but they did offer to pay for any food Delta sold on the flight for these rows to minimize how many people would be eating peanuts near their child.

I realize that not everyone can do that but I did think it was very nice.

 

[kevschickee]

See that's the thing though, taking peanut butter because you *prefer* it, knowing that that choice can put a person's life in danger is NOT respecting the other person. It's more like sticking out your tongue, slapping them on the face and saying "too bad, your life is worth less than my just wanting to expose you to this thing that may kill you because I feel like it today."

It is downright disrespectful. There is no honorable way to look at it.

You are going out of your way to select a food that forces a crazy hardship on another person. Do you really not see where your action is disrespectful?

No I don't see it as disrespectful. I really don't.

 

[mistysue]

No I don't see it as disrespectful. I really don't.

Ok. I guess if anybody ever tells you your kids life is worth less than a preference for a food you should remember this then. Except nobody will say that to you because it is such a horrible thing to say that most people don't do that.

 

[Robbi]

All anyone can do is contact the airline and hope proper procedure will be followed.
I can see both sides of the peanut allergy vs the child has to eat every so often and peanut butter is the source of the protein. The odds of these 2 types being on a flight at the same time is probably pretty small. Both sets of parents should call the airline directly to book their flights just in case. I would think if a problem arose, the airline would give preference to the family who made the reservation first and the second family would have to take another flight.
There's no need for people to get snippy. There are thousands of medical conditions that might seem weird but they're valid. The no meat and have to eat peanut butter are 2 of them. Posters should not automatically jump to the conclusion that these people are not truthful.
No one has said a child's life is worthless.

 

[Wendy31]

I haven't read the entire thread, so this may have already been mentioned -

For those of you who have to have peanut butter on a flight, have you considered almond butter or Nutella as a potential replacement? There are alternatives to peanut butter.

I realize there are some who have allergies to tree nuts as well as peanuts, but, as far as I know, peanut allergies are more common & potentially more life threatening.

I also understand that there's simply no way to guarantee a flight is peanut free - especially peanut dust free. And, like others have said, many products contain peanuts or have possible cross contamination. There's simply no way to ensure a 100% peanut free environment - anywhere.

However, I seriously cannot imagine willfully eating anything w/ peanut butter or giving my child anything w/ peanut butter if I know there is someone on the plane w/ a life threatening allergy to peanuts.

If I ate a peanut butter sandwich or gave my child some peanut butter crackers & someone DIED because of the peanuts I ate, I can't even imagine how I would feel - just absolutely awful & so guilty!

It's one thing to eat peanut butter or peanuts not knowing there's someone nearby w/ a peanut allergy, but knowing & then going ahead & eating peanuts anyway... I just couldn't do it.

If I were on the plane & had to have something to control my blood sugar or give something w/ protein to my child & the ONLY thing I had was peanuts or peanut butter, I think I'd probably ask a flight attendant for assistance, explain our medical issues, & then ask - "Is there a place we can go where we can eat this away from the person w/ allergies?" "Do you have anything we can eat in place of our peanut butter?"

I'm not just going to sit back in my seat & eat my peanut butter realizing that my doing so could cause the death of someone else.

Peanut allergies do not trump other disabilities, but I think potentially dying IS worse than storming or having a tantrum because you can't have peanut butter.

And, all this aside, I really feel for those of you that have children w/ life threatening peanut allergies. I would be in a constant state of hyper-vigilant anxiety. I could not put my child on a plane - the risks would just be too great for me. We would drive.

And I realize other opinions may vary.

 

[Jedana]

If exposed to perfumes, I will have an asthmatic reaction.

Can we ban perfumes on planes?


There is a possiblity that DH will die if he ingests star fruit. Star fruit contains oxalic acid, and it can accumulate in his non functioning kidney--dialysis doesn't filter it out. Also, there may be a neurotoxin in star fruit that doesn't clear out with kidney patients. It can cause nausea, hiccups, vomiting, insomnia, and convulsions.

Can we ban fruit salads that may contain star fruit or star fruit juice?



The best we can ALL do is show respect for others and treat others the way we want to be treated. As I teach my kids--"We set the example".

 

[Betty Rohrer]

because of breathing issues, i have a scent allergey on my ressie which includes the wipes that most parents use for cleaning for peanuts. yes, i can not breath around them, bad enough to need the EMS. so please have the unscented wipes if you plan to use. now which takes first need?

 

[kevschickee]

Ok. I guess if anybody ever tells you your kids life is worth less than a preference for a food you should remember this then. Except nobody will say that to you because it is such a horrible thing to say that most people don't do that.

It's not the same thing at all. Now if you were in a place you had to be then yes that would be true but you don't NEED to be on a plane. So think what you want but just because I don't agree with you it doesn't make me wrong or a horrible person. You expect the world to bend I do not.

 

[mistysue]

It's not the same thing at all. Now if you were in a place you had to be then yes that would be true but you don't NEED to be on a plane. So think what you want but just because I don't agree with you it doesn't make me wrong or a horrible person. You expect the world to bend I do not.

The part you aren't seeing is that you are expecting the world to bend. You are expecting to inconvenience others for your food choice.


Betty- I think it is completely acceptable for you to ask people not to use scented wipes. If I were wiping something off and you asked that I used something unscented I would happily do so. You ability to breathe is far more important than my using a scented wipe over water. There is no comparison. It would be completely disrespectful for me to hear you and continue to use the scented wipe right by you. This isn't about trying to ban anything, it's just about saying people should be able to ask and decent people should consider others.

 

[kevschickee]

The part you aren't seeing is that you are expecting the world to bend. You are expecting to inconvenience others for your food choice.

Betty- I think it is completely acceptable for you to ask people not to use scented wipes. If I were wiping something off and you asked that I used something unscented I would happily do so. You ability to breathe is far more important than my using a scented wipe over water. There is no comparison. It would be completely disrespectful for me to hear you and continue to use the scented wipe right by you. This isn't about trying to ban anything, it's just about saying people should be able to ask and decent people should consider others.

No you are since your child has the allergy you expect people to bend to that child. So you happen to be wrong there. The majority of the people do not have that allergy. "decent" people realize the the world doesn't revolve around them.

 

[donaldlovesdaisy]

No you are since your child has the allergy you expect people to bend to that child. So you happen to be wrong there. The majority of the people do not have that allergy. "decent" people realize the the world doesn't revolve around them.

So I really have to ask this question because I am having a very hard time with thought process of some of the posters on this thread. Let me start off by saying that my children are not special needs and they have no food allergies so my response to my children if they were upset about not eating peanuts on the plane or if they were unable to eat on a plane due to someones life threatening allergy would be suck it up but I do understand that for some of you this is not an option. For those of you saying well my child NEEDS to eat PB products is there really nothing else your child can consume that would avoid of all this? How do we start deciding whose needs are more important?