Air Canada Ordered To Provide Nut-Free Zone 643
JamJam writes "Air Canada has been told to create a special 'buffer zone' on flights for people who are allergic to nuts. The Canadian Transportation Agency has ruled that passengers who have nut allergies should be considered disabled and accommodated by the airline. Air Canada has a month to come up with an appropriate section of seats where passengers with nut allergies would be seated. The ruling involved a complaint from Sophia Huyer, who has a severe nut allergy and travels frequently. Ms. Huyer once spent 40 minutes in the washroom during a flight while snacks were being served."
Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Should there also be a shrimp free zone for those who are allergic to shrimps, and a strawberry free zone for those who are alergic to strawberries, and maybe a sweater free zone for those who are allergic to sweaters?
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Insightful)
A decent number of people with nuts allergies can react to particles in the air or find the smell of nuts absolutely revolting. They're also the most commonly fatal allergies. There is some iota of rationale.
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:4, Interesting)
Many people with allergies to fur can react to particles in the air as well, or find the smell absolutely revolting. Should we ban dogs and cats from traveling in planes? Admittedly the allergy is rarely fatal--- but the peanut allergy appears not to be in this setting, either, as there is not a single documented case of someone dying due to peanut dust circulating inside an airliner.
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Funny)
I also propose that anyone who receives more than a certain number of down mods be killed. That ought to fix Slashdot conversations on the double.
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:4, Funny)
>> Really, not a joke, modest proposal
Fixed that for you.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:4, Informative)
Really, not a joke, serious proposal: can't we just force everyone to eat peanuts, lots of peanuts, and let Nature take its course? In one generation just get rid of these allergies once and for all. I prefer that to altering everyone's lives to accomodate an allergy that a tiny percentage of the population has.
Speaking as someone whom your proposal would kill, I'm gonna say... no.
Besides, you're assuming that allergies are 100% genetic in origin, while current research seems to indicate a combination of genetic and environmental factors. A single generation isn't going to do it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If they stopped serving peanuts on planes they wouldn't have problems with elephants.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Peanuts are not nuts, they are a legume (bean). I'm not trying to be pedantic. This actually makes a difference as far as allergies are concerned, specifically that peanut allergies and general nut allergies are completely independent. My mom has nut allergies, and eating something with nuts, or cooked with nuts, will cause her to swell up. Conversely, my uncle can eat nuts, but peanuts may require him to take a trip to the hospital.
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Funny)
I'd say that it works especially well on iocane powder, but that would be a joke so bad it would be inconceivable...
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:4, Funny)
Anybody want a peanut???
(Strangely, on-topic)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's actually a form of therapy [wikipedia.org] for some allergies. Whether it works for Peanuts I don't know. I'd guess if the allergy is potentially life threatening, it would require a lot of medical attention, if tried at all.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, in my case I have an anaphylactic [wikipedia.org] reaction to cats, including dander, fur, oils, etc, so having them in the closed-circulation cabin air could indeed be fatal.
It's especially worrisome since allergic reactions often intensify the more often they occur -- someone might not even realize that the next one could be fatal until it's 2 hours too late into a 5+ hour flight.
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Informative)
Fortunately, aircraft generally carry hydrocortisone, chlorpheniramine, and epinephrine for just such emergencies, and probably even a scalpel for an emergency in-flight tracheostomy if necessary. You're probably a heck of a lot safer on an airplane than you are on a bus in that regard.
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Interesting)
Couldn't the allergic individual just wear a face mask while they were serving?
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:4, Funny)
Couldn't the allergic individual just wear a face mask while they were serving?
In addition to the allergy you want them to put on a stewardess costume and hand out the snacks?
You have no heart sir, no heart.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So you feel the needs of the one, outweigh the needs of the many? The masks are not uncomfortable. I wear one when doing the lawn to control my allergies.
Same principal.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes. They are the one with the 'disability' - not me. When there is an easy solution to the problem such as this you take it.
I mean, if you are a cripple you have a wheel chair. If you have airborne allergies you wear a mask.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Plenty of U.S. carriers at least allow small animals in the cabin in pet carriers.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What kind of airlines do you fly on? All the major U.S. domestic carriers do, as far as I can tell. Just now spot-checked Continental [continental.com], Delta [delta.com], United [united.com], and Southwest [southwest.com].
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why wouldn't they simply bump the person with the allergy? You signed up first, why should you be punished?
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Pulled that out of your ass did you!
Number of deaths due to allergic reactions to nuts in US last year according to cdc 0
Number in last 10 years 0
Danger is from nuts in the seats not nuts in a bag!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Total number of food allergy deaths per year in the US appears to be about 11. That's all foods though, not just nuts.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/meredith-broussard/food-allergy-deaths-less_b_151462.html [huffingtonpost.com]
A secondary source, I know, but it sums things up reasonably well.
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Interesting)
There is some iota of rationale.
No, there is not. If Ms. Huyer does not wish to adjust herself to another position in her company that requires less travel, she has plenty of alternative transportation options: car, bus, train, charter aircraft, private aircraft (she can go get her pilot's license), etc. You don't have a RIGHT to get on an airplane. What happens when someone drops a peanut on the floor and it rolls into the "buffer" zone? Is the airline going to be held responsible for not building a glass-enclosed, hermetically sealed environment?
It is not the government's job to bring down an iron fist because ONE passenger had ONE incident where she hid in the bathroom - with full and complete knowledge that on commercial flights, they serve nuts. I'm tired of the government mandated bullshit where everyone ELSE has to accommodate, bend over for, and kiss the ass of the one. Where are all of these people on airplanes that have had violent, fatal reactions to nuts? Either she's full of shit, or all of them except for her have all found ways of dealing with it.
FTFA:
She wants all nuts banned from all airlines.
I say start with her.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah but, you might drop them on a peanut farm. Not good. We'll have to require all peanut farms to have a giant glass bubble over them in case of in-flight ejection.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Funny)
Oh.
Now I understand all those dirty looks I've been getting.
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Allergies that can kill are no joking matter, and a nut free zone might be a better solution....
So perhaps the best solution would to not allow these nuts with allergies on board? If their reaction is so severe as to be life threatening just from being in the same room (and an extremely well ventilated room with excellent air filtration at that) as a bag of nuts then it is clearly not safe for them to be out in public where anyone might be eating nuts. If the problem is that they are scared to be in a room with nuts because they are allergic to them then this is a psychological problem of theirs and not a medical requirement at which point it becomes reasonable to ask why I should have to give up my freedoms instead of them giving up theirs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Someone that allergic to nuts deals with it on a regular basis. I'm really getting tired of a very small minority forcing the much larger majority to adapt.
This is just the first step. If this gets implemented every special interest will get in line. Know all of those handicapped spots in the US?? The original intent was to provide a place so that whe
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Funny)
Stop it! I'm allergic to logic, and YOU'RE MAKING ME ITCH!
Re: (Score:2)
Good grief. I'm far more inconvenienced by the fat turds that take up half my seat but I don't get a special "fat free" zone.
I'm all for reasonable accomodation. People are alergic to all sorts of things, and reasonable accomodation should be made. But really, it's her choice to fly, not something forced upon her. If being in public is so dangerous, she should stay home. (Really, even if the airline doesn't serve peanuts, I can still bring them on board.)
And, will she only fly Air Canada? What about al
Re:Shrimp free zone? (Score:5, Informative)
There are surgical treatments that can get rid of the extreme obesity. Usually, when you lose enough weight, type II diabetes basically goes away on its own. The obesity is not caused by the diabetes. The diabetes is caused by the obesity. Admittedly, this is not always true (about 15% of people with type II diabetes are not obese), but it's usually a pretty safe bet. At a minimum, losing the weight will reduce the frequency of needing insulin injections, will make the diabetes more likely to be controllable through diet alone, and will reduce the risk of heart disease and numerous other health problems caused by inactivity brought on by severe obesity.
Seriously, if you're in the morbidly obese range, diabetic or not, you should look into gastric bypass surgery or other similar treatments. You might also consider eating more frequently, but eating smaller portions. This can significantly reduce weight without making you feel bad.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, considering planes have crashed from an excess of fat, I'd say that's pretty inconveniencing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/28/us/faa-reviews-rules-on-passenger-weight-after-crash.html?pagewanted=1 [nytimes.com]
Seriously, I put this into the "personal responsibility" category. If I know that flying can kill me, I won't fly. I won't whine about requiring many, many thousands of people changing their habit to suit my condition.
I'm allergic to... (Score:5, Funny)
I'm allergic to idiots. Is there anywhere in Canada I will be able to travel?
travelling to Canada (Score:3, Funny)
If you can get past Customs, the rest of the country will be just fine for you...
Baby Free Zone? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm allergic to noisy babies and children who kick my seat-back. Where's my zone?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In most airliners, business class is fairly small and positioned right next to coach. While it may do away with the seat-back kickers, it won't help protect from the crying babies.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Your allergy to noisy babies and children won't kill you. A severe allergic reaction to peanuts most certainly can.
Re:Baby Free Zone? (Score:4, Insightful)
I understand that there are severe allergic reactions.
I understand that some people are sensative to notice it within the same room.
Has there ever been a case of someone being killed by a peanut in the same room?
Or do they merely get discomforted (itchy, hot, etc) much like everyone else on the airplane?
Re:Baby Free Zone? (Score:5, Insightful)
So?
Let's pull a figure out of the air (no pun intended) and say there are 300 seats on an Airplane. Peanuts are just *ONE* allergy in which some individuals have a reaction so severe, that they die.
Your thoughts on this are rather simplistic and serve to encourage people with Severe Entitlement Disorder.
Consider these points:
1) What are all the other allergies that can cause death in extremely sensitive individuals? How do those allergies relate to each other?
2) Are we going to section off whole planes with complex databases of codes of what chemicals, foods, etc. can be present in that single section?
3) What about allergies so sensitive that even the smallest presence in the *WHOLE* plane can cause extreme reactions including death?
4) Even with 300 seats could we possibly account for all the variations required?
5) Are we going to have to include a manifest to every passenger on the plane on what items are allowed for their zone?
6) Would any of this require abandoning seating models currently in use and the exclusive usage of assigned seating rules from now on? (highly likely)
7) Do we have to just sanitize the whole plane and have people wear hazmat suits?
Or do we just say "heck with it" and give people with peanut allergies preferential treatment?
People who have allergies, even life threatening ones, have the *SOLE* responsibility to limit their exposure. It is not the responsibility of the rest of the world to get rid of what causes their allergies in every possible place they may decide to do to. That is just ridiculous.
I can emphasize with people who have these unfortunate allergies, however the option is not to fly. I don't find it reasonable to force an airline to have preferred seating just for them. Especially, since indirect exposure is not mitigated enough with just a couple of seats anyways.
It is also not technically possible to service all the allergies, and since it is not possible, it is *NOT* fair to just get rid of the peanuts.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The problem is compounded that as you get exposed to things your are allergic to you gain a tolerance. Parents get there children tested for allergies at an early age and act like any exposure will kill them. Now my son was tested and was allergic to peanuts, through small exposures he now enjoys the stuff at age 5, and had all of a slight tummy ache and rash when he first ate it. This is not a disability it's people living in bubbles and trying to enforce those bubbles on everybody else.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, that's not a bad idea -- instead of inconveniencing whole planeloads of people and making it uneconomical for the airline to keep flying, why not issue a disposable hazmat suit to anyone who wants it? wouldn't have to be the full gear, just sufficiently tough to survive one flight. Material similar to exam gloves should be adequate, and is not expensive (exam gloves cost under 10 cents apiece). Better yet, the same breatheable-barrier material now used in snowmobile gloves.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
BWAHHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHHHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAH!!! Social Darwinism!!?
That's hilarious. So my position is essentially one of letting the "fit survive"? Sense of entitlement strikes again.
Like somebody else pointed out, this is not a disability. However, let's assume that it is a disability.
As it stands right now it is fairly easy to accommodate people with physical disabilities. 99.999999% of them require the assist
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do tell how that's supposed to work in practice. Families never fly business or first class? Business class is never close enough to families in first or coach to hear crying babies? They have sound proof doors on the airlines you fly?
"She wants all nuts banned from all airlines." (Score:2, Insightful)
Stop serving nuts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Does this mean my Snickers bar will now be confiscated by security?
Re:Stop serving nuts (Score:5, Funny)
Just switch to pretzels and be done with it.
Twisted logic.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From the TFA "She wants all nuts banned from all airlines."
- Peace
Wait wait, What? (Score:3, Insightful)
The Canadian Transportation Agency has ruled that passengers who have nut allergies should be considered disabled and accommodated by the airline
If they are ruling that they are disabled, should they also allow them to park in the blue spaces?
Reasonable Accomodation (Score:2)
With the ADA in the U.S., one only has to make *reasonable* accomodations. You obviously don't have a motion-free zone who get terrible motion sickness. I'd say this request is unreasonable.
Re: (Score:2)
Tell that to all the business owners in Alpine, CA [signonsandiego.com]. In particular, consider debating the necessity of making a Harley Davidson dealership fully wheelchair accessible, among other things.
Pets on Air Canada (Score:3, Informative)
CBC story about Air Canada having to provide nut-free zones [www.cbc.ca] on account of allergies...
...and another CBC story about Air Canada allowing pets [www.cbc.ca] in their cabins starting in July. Err...
Re: (Score:2)
What about my pet nut?
Re:Pets on Air Canada (Score:5, Funny)
You get your nuts pet when you go through security before the flight.
Re: (Score:2)
Does this mean all pets must be neutered before flying?
Re: (Score:2)
Pet allergies are far more rarely fatal than nut allergies.
Special seating? (Score:2)
How about the wings?
I'm 6'5" (Score:5, Insightful)
Can I please have a special government-enforced seating zone that has an extra 6" of leg room, at no extra charge?
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, if the lack of leg room causes you to swell up and die.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actual direct exposure to a lack of leg room has a tendency to cause cramps sometimes lasting several days. Unlike someone with a peanut allergy, though, I must pay extra to tell the airline not to give me that which could cause me harm. I feel this is discriminatory and I demand legislation.
Re:I'm 6'5" (Score:5, Informative)
Sure, if the lack of leg room causes you to swell up and die.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveller's_thrombosis [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_vein_thrombosis [wikipedia.org]
Already happens (Score:2)
I have been on a flight where they've announced no peanuts were being distributed or sold because of someone with allergies on the fllight. Of course they may have just run out of peanuts and it sounded better than "we forgot to stock up".
Jolyon. Oh yes, my .sig is appropriate today
Peanut Hysteria is more of a psychological issue (Score:5, Insightful)
Can anybody provide any real evidence that nut allergies are triggered by the "smell" of nuts? I don't think so -- as far as I know they have to be aerosolized in a cooking spray or finely crushed and thrown into the air as "nut dust". I'm betting this woman is probably just a hypochondriac who thinks she's being affected by smelling nuts when she's not. This article http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/story.html?id=2417934 mentions that her claim is backed up a doctor's note saying that she has a reaction when in the general vicinity of nuts, but other than that there's no real evidence for this.
Air Canada and other organizations should first order complete medical studies on people like this to get the facts before taking action. Clearly, the public needs more evidence because special treatment for allergy sufferers and public bans of nuts are getting out of hand.
A quick Google search reveals the beginnings of a Britannica article which also indicates that banning nuts is a bad idea since nut allergy deaths are not unacceptably higher annually than deaths from lightning strikes and bee stings, and because banning creates a climate of oversensitivity: http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/35883327/Peanut-hysteria--or-is-it
Re:Peanut Hysteria is more of a psychological issu (Score:5, Interesting)
I can. My oldest son is extremely allergic to peanuts, almonds, and most other kinds of nuts. He has to carry an epi-pen with him wherever he goes. One day, my son's class went on a field trip to a farm. He started looking sick, and his face started to swell. Fortunately, the teacher saw it, gave him some Benadryl and he was fine for the rest of the afternoon. Turns out that the farm was near some peanut-growing farms and it was right in the midst of harvest season, so the peanut dust was in the air.
We've also had instances where my son was near some kids at school who were having a peanut butter sandwich for lunch, and my son started getting sick. Again, Benedryl was administered, and the school made sure that if someone had peanut butter in their lunches, they had to sit at least one or two seats away. Worst case, my son had to sit at a different table (although some classmates did come and sit by him).
It's not fun, dealing with allergies like this, but taking sensible precautions helps avoid a true life-or-death problem.
Re:Peanut Hysteria is more of a psychological issu (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sorry, and I mean no offense, but that's not evidence. The problem with parents who tell these tales about how peanuts are like kryptonite to their kids or they're allergic to X in food is also he reason why we shouldn't base public policy on anecdotal evidence (there's another comment below about someone "who knows a family with a son who...")--so please don't take this as if I'm targeting you specifically or questioning he veracity of what you're relating; I'm just pointing that this is isn't how we gather evidence on public health issues and the stories told by parents shouldn't form the basis of public health policies.
The thing is, in the scenarios you're describing, you have a son who is quite allergic to nuts, I'm going to guess because he had something with peanuts actually in it at some point, or came into contact with the oil, and after that happened a couple of times with an allergic reaction, you figured out he was allergic. And people at the school and around him basically know this, too.
So now, when your son doesn't feel well, on a field trip, or at school, everyone looks around for the nuts. And lo and behold, you're next to a peanut farm. Or a kid at the table is having a PB&J. Or you find out his playmate had peanut butter pancakes that morning, or a snack made in a facility processing pine nuts. Or whatever. And you have your "explanation."
Except that you don't actually know how frequently your son is exposed to "peanut dust" or "contaminated surfaces" or whatever, and doesn't have a reaction. Maybe he's allergic to something else, or maybe not. Or maybe it goes down exactly as you suspect. The problem is that in the absence of a controlled study, we just can't tell. And while it makes sense (maybe) for you to just be on the safe side with regard to nuts, it doesn't make sense to make rules, regulations and laws with significant costs for others without that peer-reviewed, study-based justification.
Anyway, I hope people take this as the call for more information and for better study of the public health implications of allergies that it is, and not as an attack on a dad and his son, which it certainly isn't intended to be.
Re:Peanut Hysteria is more of a psychological issu (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd disagree with you as to the symptoms of my son not being considered evidence (e.g. the swelling, difficulty of breath he got during these episodes). Your point, however, is correct - too many parents of kids who have these allergies get overly paranoid, and want to throw out the peanuts altogether just because. (Also, didn't feel targeted).
Yes, he did come into contact with some peanut based foods, and the extreme sickness he got sent us to the doctors where we did get the testing done, and education for us to identify how to recognize the symptoms, and how to deal with it (e.g Benedryl/anti-histamine first, then if they start throwing up and can't keep Benedryl down or face is swelling a lot/breathing issues then apply the Epi-Pen and get to hospital).
Actually, we don't. If he has the specific symptoms of anaphylaxic shock (e.g. swelling of face, breathing, and throwing up) we treat the symptoms as we were taught. However, if he gets sick and isn't showing these symptoms, we do the normal care we would for any other normal kid (when H1N1 went through my house, we didn't go searching for the peanut bogeyman).
Excellent point - you're correct, we really don't know. However, in my son's case, we did have him tested (and unfortunately for him he tested out at the top of the sensitivity scale). We do take proper precautions (e.g. have some space between kids if one is having a PBJ sandwich) to make sure that he doesn't get unnecessarily exposed, but we don't worry too much about it now. However, the last thing I want to do is to ban all peanuts from everywhere - it's something that my son is aware of, and knows how to live with.
the new standard... (Score:4, Insightful)
I know it is not PC to say, but this is a sad joke. People should get over themselves and stop demanding the world change around them. It is as if "only-child syndrome" is now the standard. I am starting to find myself allergic to work, bills, and anything that inconveniences me in the slightest. The plane does not bother me as I do not fly; I am allergic to paying for tickets but the airlines refuse to accommodate me. And I do not need to park in the blue spaces, as I am allergic to parking in spaces; I need to just get out of my car where I want. Now if the police would stop discriminating against me by towing my car when I leave it on the sidewalk! They will all regret it when I file a lawsuit and they learn I am allergic to verdicts against me!
Re:the new standard... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your analogies are intentionally grotesquely flawed. As someone who has lived his entire life with a fairly severe physical disability, I find your casual comparison of these matters to "anything that inconveniences you in the slightest" to be flippant and incredibly ignorant. Of course you will then answer that you aren't really interested in the distinction, as for you it is the same thing... but if this is to be discussed objectively, there should at least be a fair effort at understanding the relative s
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, but I don't understand why it's such a big deal to make such a small accommodation that could save a person's life. Are you really saying that they should be stuck at home for the rest of their lives, just because you don't want to make the most simple of accommodations for someone?
Re:the new standard... (Score:5, Insightful)
You want to eat peanuts - that's your preference. Why should the significant minority of the population who suffer nut allergies be forced to change their behaviour (by staying off aircraft - the only practicable means of travelling more than about 1500 miles, though this could equally apply to trains & buses) to suit you?
With my balancing:
You can choose to travel on the aircraft (suffering the minor inconvenience of not being able to give yourself heart diease), or stay at home.
With your balancing:
The person with the nut allergy can choose to travel on the aircraft (knowing that they may end up dead if they, say, get your peanuts chucked on them by turbulence), or stay at home.
You want to err on the side of freedom to do as you please (within the law) in public - I want to err on the side of the freedom to be in public (i.e. people with fairly common allergies being free to use public places*). I suppose they're just different forms of freedom.
*An aircraft may be privately owned, but it is a public place
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
*An aircraft may be privately owned, but it is a public place
No, it's private property. You have no inherent right to use someone else's property, and most definitely not an inherent right to demand that owners of these properties modify them to suit you. With my balancing:
The person with the nut allergy can wait for a flight that specifically accomodates people with allergies or a flight which offers pretzels instead of nuts. The airline company has the sole right to control the environment of a plane that they paid for.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
there are two adjectives and two nouns:
private place, private property - your house
public place, private property - an aircraft
private place, public property - the mayor's office (the actual room)
public place, public property - the street
A place can be public, despite being privately owned. I assumed that I'd made that pretty abundantly clear by using all four words in that sentence, but obviously I hadn't. The airline will sell a ticket to anyone who has the money on a non-preferential basis, this means th
Nothing new here! (Score:3, Informative)
Gattaca (Score:4, Informative)
No to nuts, but yes to pets? (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only one wondering WTF?
Real or trained response (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder if some of the reactions that people with allergies have when exposure is very low are trained responses. Like Pavlov's dog, ring the bell and start salivating, smell peanut butter and start choking.
My only basis for this is personal experience with chemo-therapy. After just a few rounds of treatments, just DRIVING to the hospital was enough to start me throwing up. It was bizzare and extremely frustrating to be sitting in the chair getting hooked up to a saline only IV and having to hurl. No matter how hard I tried to reason with myself, I was getting sick from the drugs that were no where near my body, much less in them and taking affect yet.
My thought is that people who have had a bad experience with a real allergic reaction have very quickly and effectively trained their brain to induce the reaction response at even the smell of the allergen.
Anyone else have similar experiences / theories about the validity of 'nut-free' zones?
ps - just to be clear, I'm not suggesting the reaction isn't happening, but just curious if it real or trained. If trained, maybe people can be trained out of it and then live less intrusive lives. BTW, 15+ years later I'm basically fine - hospitals don't bother me much, however, there is still a certain ladies deo / perfume that makes me feel queesy.
A man sits down on an airplane, next to a woman. (Score:5, Funny)
He opens up his briefcase, pulls out a Playboy, drops his pants, and proceeds to have a wank.
The woman is horrified.
When the man is finished, he pulls up his pants, closes the briefcase, and then turns to the woman and asks:
"Do you mind if I eat nuts?"
Baba-boom-ching!
Thank you, tip the veal, try the waitress . . . etc.
Re:A man sits down on an airplane, next to a woman (Score:5, Funny)
The way I remember it:
The man sneezes. He takes out a tissue, wipes his nose, then unzipps his pants, reaches in and wipes there too. After repeating this a few times, the woman asks, "What exactly is your problem with the Kleenex in the pants?".
Rather embarrased, he replies, "I suffer from a condition where I orgasm every time I sneeze."
After a bit, she asks, "Isn't there something you could take for that condition?"
"Yes. Pepper."
This is Slashdot comma dammit! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Funny (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Funny Story:
My sister was flying somewhere for a class trip. Stupid kids being stupid kids someone started a food fight and she ended up getting decked with a peanut butter cookie. My sister is severely allergic to nuts. The only thing that saved her life and everyone else getting diverted was the fact she had an emergency epi pen in pocket and was able to use it.
While I find this story a bit silly, I can understand this woman's plight. I think I would be rather upset if an airline told my sister to piss of
Not the case (Score:4, Informative)
Many people with severe nut allergies can suffer serious allergic reactions on contact with nuts, even things that come in contact with nuts. Your skin is quite happy to absorb many things that get on it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Funny (Score:5, Insightful)
Peanut butter sandwiches are a staple of childhood, are cheap, and are relatively nutritious. It's a bad thing.
Re:where did nut alergies come from? (Score:4, Funny)
when i was growing up, no one had this problem, but now it seems that it is almost commonplace. is this a symptom of something we've done lately (to our food source perhaps), or a symptom of me just not getting exposed to news sources as a kid?
In some way, this is all Jimmy Carter's fault.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
when i was growing up, no one had this problem, but now it seems that it is almost commonplace. is this a symptom of something we've done lately (to our food source perhaps), or a symptom of me just not getting exposed to news sources as a kid?
It's a symptom of hypochondria which has spiralled out of control. It's also self-perpetuating, because it's been proven that many allergies are caused by over or under exposure to a certain thing during the early years. Peanut allergy particularly is caused by this because parents just don't give the kid nuts just in case they are allergic.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There's been some research recently that focused on children's exposure to garden-variety dirt and pets vs allergy incidence. Those with more exposure to this sort of "dirt" (what we evolved around in the first place) were significantly less likely to develop random allergies, because their immune systems had been stimulated at a reasonable level and had "learned" to handle it. However, kids that lacked such exposure were much more likely to develop allergies -- lacking prior "experience" as it were, their
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And next passengers will be forbidden from bringing in any food. The airlines would love such a restriction, similar to that of most movie theaters and sports venues, to sell overpriced food to a captive audience.
Re:Where's my perfume-free zone? (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sure lots of us have lists of things that we'd like air transportation to be "free" of. For example: fat people not in first class, drunk college kids on their way to spring break, young yuppie males on their way to (or from) Vegas, babies, children, people who want to start conversations with me that are not cute females, etc. I am particularly allergic to the baby thing, having changed many many diapers some years ago, and now feel I am entitled to not be confronted with the aroma of baby poop when I'm in an enclosed space in which I am not allowed to light a cigar. I mean, outside of some sniffy matron with a stick up her bum, and maybe some of the more "sensitive" Mac users, who could possibly object to a gentleman like myself enjoying a fine cigar whilst flying? Fascists, that's who! But we're all supposed to go "awww.." when a wrinkled little brat squirts a toxic load into his pampers just as you're about to bite into that meatball and melrose pepper sandwich you lovingly wrapped in wax paper and have been waiting to eat since you were back on the tarmac. But that's a fight for another day.
I say, if you are so allergic to peanuts that someone sitting next to you eating an ersatz oreo "cracker" that may or may not have been made on equipment that also processes nuts is going to cause you to have to lock yourself in the bathroom for a 4 hour flight, then I suggest you are certainly a candidate for the no-fly list and possibly a pay-no-mind list, while we're at it, because you are clearly a royal noodge and pain in the ass to be around. In fact, it's things like this that are the reasons you are still single. And everyone knows allergies are psychosomatic, anyway, and besides, who cares about your little anaphylactic shock tantrum because your mother was scared by Mr Peanut when you were in utero? Maybe try for five minutes not to be such a fucking lightweight. And have you ever noticed that people with these so-called "food allergies" also tend to be non-smokers and irritating as hell? No, seriously. Think about the people you know with food allergies. They're really irritating in other ways too, right? Right?
But I'm still trying to figure out what this story has to do with technology, unless Air Canada is about to employ sensitive equipment that will sense as little as 5 molecules of nut meat within a radius of 50 yards and runs Linux.
But where do you put the limit? (Score:3, Interesting)
There was a recent story about electrical (not hybrid) cars being so quiet, that blind people don't hear them. I only learned from reactions to that story that guide dogs don't actually see traffic. Always thought they did, but they just see the curb and then the blind person has to decide wether it is safe to cross. A bit hard with a silent car you cannot see...
So... how far do we go? Do we actually have to make silent cars make noise for a small percentage of people? It can't be easy being blind, I notic