Children are banned from eating Peanut Butter & Jelly sandwiches at school

page: 12
14
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused
 


Traces can cause a problem. Not sure if smells do apply, but I do know of people with some severe allergies that claim just smelling their food allergy can set them off in hives. That could of course be purely mental. But I do know that even minor minor food contamination can cause a severe allergy.




posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


This just shows your lack of understanding and how serious this problem can get for someone who has a bad reaction to peanuts. In Australia, Peanuts are banned in schools, some workplaces. The person with the allegy only has to come in contact with someone who has handled or has peanut residue on their hands/body... To someone who doesn't know they will have a reaction, it can become fatal and very fast..
edit on 15-9-2012 by DarknStormy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by OldSchoolMom
 


It's not just vaccinations.

It's the Frankenfoods we eat.....sugar being huge here.
When we put these processed and refined "foods" in our bodies it stands to reason that there can be unintended consequences. A compromised immune system is high on the list of possiblities.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by DontTreadOnMe
 


At this point we are surrounded by and routinely ingest a toxic cocktail of chemicals. It's a wonder any of us are still standing.
edit on 15-9-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miraj
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused
 


Traces can cause a problem. Not sure if smells do apply, but I do know of people with some severe allergies that claim just smelling their food allergy can set them off in hives. That could of course be purely mental. But I do know that even minor minor food contamination can cause a severe allergy.


There has been some cases where people have simply dropped dead because of contact with peanut residue. They did not know the were allergic to it and apparently the extent of the allergy can be a very fast death. It is something worth looking into.. I remember at one job, bringing a snickers bar to work was against company policy and it was because of the severity of the allergy I believe..



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by DontTreadOnMe
 




It's not just vaccinations. It's the Frankenfoods we eat.....sugar being huge here. When we put these processed and refined "foods" in our bodies it stands to reason that there can be unintended consequences. A compromised immune system is high on the list of possiblities.


I agree. I was just addressing the attack on the immune system that begins as soon as a child is born.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   
There is an Americans with Disabilities act, which I think is the right thing to do. We have ramps for wheelchair access, bus ramps, bathrooms where disabled people can actually pee (for real) and other basic necessities. I'm proud to be a part of a nation that does that for its people. And they are a minority.

As to peanuts, the situation is not vastly different. There is a minority of kids who would suffer greatly if accidental contact with a peanut product takes place. Just like ramps and special bathrooms inconvenience some of us, so will the peanut butter ban. But to whine "I want my peanut butter and screw that allergic kid" is just pathetic.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by noonebutme
reply to post by James1982
 


Well, you're the one who started out your OP with "hilarious" regarding children and peanut allergies.

And you can rage all you want, not my problem. The fact that you feel so "infringed" upon because children are asked not to eat "peanut butter" show your priorities. A few children who may have a deadly reaction to peanuts should in no way prevent others from enjoying it at a public school.

WTF is wrong with you people?? It's "peanut butter" they are being asked to not bring to school, not a pint of blood or sign their souls away. Christ, THIS is what enrages people?

You'd feel a lot different if it was you that had the allergy, or your children. But you don't. And it's clear you don't give a monkey about anyone else except your "perceived" oppression.


The only thing I'm raging about is you putting words into my mouth. If you want to debate the subject at hand then do so, but claiming I said something I didn't is low, very low.

And no, I wouldn't feel any different about it just because I had a kid with allergies. Unlike some others, I don't believe the world revolves around me or my family. The safety, health, and security of me and my family is a responsibility that I take upon myself, not demand others do.

Could you please answer the question I've been asking over and over? Do you think that people should be banned from eating any peanut products in their own home if they have school aged children? Apparently some have such a severe reaction to peanut products that a simple smell or tiny particle in the air will cause issues. It would be incredibly easy for someone who is eating peanuts at their home to bring contamination into the school.

I really hope you DON'T think people should be banned from eating peanuts in their own homes, and I'm going to continue based upon this assumption.

If people can easily bring contamination from home, then what's the point of banning peanut products from schools? It won't solve anything if a person eats a peanut butter sandwich before coming to school, or while at school. The peanut contamination will be on the person either way.

Is your right to eat peanut products at your HOME more important than the lives of children? No? Then why don't you support banning any peanut products all together, make it illegal for the whole country to posses anything containing any peanut products? Does that seem extreme to you? Does it seem like it's going too far? Well that's how I, and other people feel about banning them from schools.

You seem to want to lord your apparent superior compassion over my head, but most likely you too have a point where you'd consider banning peanuts going "too far" Whatever that line happens to be, banning them from the homes of people with school age children, banning them 100% in the whole country, the thing that matters is that you understand that at SOME point it becomes too extreme. Just because my tolerance for overbearing rules is a little less than yours doesn't make me some heartless boogyman.

Unless you support making peanut products completely illegal in this country, then you have to leg to stand on, because you too realize that at some point this needs to stop.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
I'd rather get the allergens out.

~Heff


But the original point remains....where does the State stop in its ban? If peanuts are the reason, than as stated, those products that are packaged in a facility (yet are not peanut products) will also be banned. While it is a slippery slope argument, it is headed straight for only government approved food will be served to our lovely ankle bitters as they get their educations.

Should we also call for banning egg, dairy, shellfish, meat, soy, corn, food additives, and wheat to all be banned also? They surely can cause allergic reactions just as easy as peanuts can.

Maybe we should expand the FDA and only foods they deem "hypo-allergenic" to be of human consumption to complete the bubbles we have been constructing over the past 30 years.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarknStormy
reply to post by James1982
 


This just shows your lack of understanding and how serious this problem can get for someone who has a bad reaction to peanuts. In Australia, Peanuts are banned in schools, some workplaces. The person with the allegy only has to come in contact with someone who has handled or has peanut residue on their hands/body... To someone who doesn't know they will have a reaction, it can become fatal and very fast..
edit on 15-9-2012 by DarknStormy because: (no reason given)


Ok....

So why not make peanut products totally illegal? Banned in the entire country, you can't have them even at home?

Someone could eat a peanut product at their home, and bring contamination into the school or workplace JUST as easily as they could eat the product at the workplace and cause contact with others.

So if you support banning them from schools and workplaces, why not just ban them in general? For the whole country, for everyone, everywhere?

Is it because you realize that's too extreme? If so, how is it to extreme to say you can't eat peanut products at home, but it's not too extreme for work or school?

It just comes down to a matter of opinion, on how much you accept our overlords dictating what we can and cannot do.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
There is an Americans with Disabilities act, which I think is the right thing to do. We have ramps for wheelchair access, bus ramps, bathrooms where disabled people can actually pee (for real) and other basic necessities. I'm proud to be a part of a nation that does that for its people. And they are a minority.

As to peanuts, the situation is not vastly different. There is a minority of kids who would suffer greatly if accidental contact with a peanut product takes place. Just like ramps and special bathrooms inconvenience some of us, so will the peanut butter ban. But to whine "I want my peanut butter and screw that allergic kid" is just pathetic.


I too am proud that I live in a nation that respects the disabled as well as we do. But I don't see the comparison to allergy sufferers, to be honest.

A person in a wheel chair has no other option to use a toilet, or go up stairs. I mean, a building could have several full time staff people who's only job is to stand by the stairs, and lift up the people in wheel chairs. But that's incredibly expensive, and potentially dangerous.

I'm glad you brought up people in wheel chairs because it reminded me of something. People were saying it's somehow wrong to have allergy sufferers eat at a different table or different location because it's singling them out. Why then isn't it wrong to make people in wheel chairs use separate parking spaces, toilets, and ramps?

Do people in wheel chairs view this as being segregated? Unlikely. They are probably happy that a convenient and safe alternative has been provided for them. Just like someone suffering from allergies should be happy that a safe eating space has been provided for them.

We have two basic categories, in my opinion, of people suffering from peanut allergies. Those who have such a severe allergy that a tiny tiny smell or particle can cause them great issue. For these people, banning peanuts from school will NOT help. They could get contaminated from someone eating peanut products at HOME and bring the contamination into school. So it's pointless to ban peanuts for these people.

The second group is those who are allergic, but less so, providing a safe " no peanut area" in the lunchroom would make sure these people don't come in contact with peanut products. As well as making sure that ALL students wash their hands BEFORE and AFTER eating.

What's wrong with this idea? This is not extreme at all. It's not stopping anybody from doing anything. It's a very logical and fair way to deal with the issue.

But evidently people don't want a logical fair way to deal with the issue. They want the whole world to bend to their will and take care of other people's problems as if they were their own.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


I've previously addressed that. Getting rid of the most common food allergen is rational and makes sense. Lesser allergens don't apply in the same way because they effect far few people and are far less prevalent in common food products.

I'm not advocating the notion of creating a perfectly sterile environment, that is safe for everyone.Not by any means. Utopian pipe dreams are unattainable. But wanting to take care of the number one issue is a viable social concern.

~Heff



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Yes, I was still sifting through all the pages when I saw some of your more recent replies, but I posted the most common allergies that account for 90% of all food allergens in the United States. According to the statistics...


Eight foods account for 90 percent of all food-allergic reactions in the U.S.: milk, eggs, peanuts, tree nuts
(e.g., walnuts, almonds, cashews, pistachios, pecans), wheat, soy, fish, and shellfish.


With milk being the big dog....2.5% of children as opposed to 1.4% with peanut allergies.

So, why not milk products as it is more prevalent and last I checked, milk is served to every child at school. Also with a milk allergy, all dairy products are out the window; cheese, cottage cheese, milk, etc.

Even addressed, it doesn't make sense to limit the 98% of children who have no allergies and the choices by parents when it comes to providing food for them. PB&J is cheap, quick and packs all the energy a child needs for a mid-morning/afternoon stretch.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


I could be wrong as I haven't researched it recently, but I think the caveat is that lactose allergies are rarely life threatening - whereas peanut allergies are.

I attended a funeral today and came home to many fires needing attention ( several on ATS.
) so it might be a few hours before I get to double checking my thoughts.

~Heff



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


You are correct that the reactions to peanut allergies is typically more severe. Overall, just not sure the actions of the district is measured or educated and is rather a response to a very small percentage. While those children shouldn't be subjected to life-threatening situations, it still remains, where does it stop?

Car accidents are most prevalent within a 5 mile radius of home, should we have children attend schools outside of that area to limit the possibilities of an accident? I know it is a silly comparison but that is the point.

Take care of what is important Heff....ATS ain't it.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy

Car accidents are most prevalent within a 5 mile radius of home, should we have children attend schools outside of that area to limit the possibilities of an accident? I know it is a silly comparison but that is the point.


True, and we address those risks differently through safety technology, and seat belt and child restraint laws. Every unique danger requires different approaches to risk mitigation or minimization.


Originally posted by ownbestenemy

Take care of what is important Heff....ATS ain't it.


Thanks, and R/L always trumps ATS for me. But I'm good at multitasking!





posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by HIWATT
 


Did you read the original OP sir, the issue is surrounding the ban of peanut products and yes it is fair to polarize the issue and it breaks down into these two extremes.


You either ban peanuts or you allow for the potential for peanut related deaths or health issues,
edit on 14-9-2012 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)



Yes I read the OP and no this is not just about peanuts.

People are allergic to far more than just peanuts so this reaches far beyond just a single allergy regardless of what the OP stated.

If you'd like to stick to peanuts just because it may help make you right about your argument then fine.

There is a much bigger picture though, if you care to examine it (which apparently you do not)

The fact is, MANY kids are allergic to other things. To limit the conversation to just peanuts is silly.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 06:12 AM
link   
According to the CDC, over 200,000 children are injured on playground equipment every year.

Shouldn't we ask for such dangerous things to be banned. Every elementary school I have ever visited has these heinous things installed on their grounds. Are they trying to injure children?



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
There are a number of alternatives that could be used to protect the allergic little folk. For one, the children with allergies could be taken to lunch at a different time than the other children. Another, the allergic children could be segregated during lunch(yes I said it). Equality means nothing if you're dead. These ideas may seem extreme but the blame for that lies with the policy makers.

Every child could eat what they wanted and safely as well. All that would be required is that the school provide an environment for children that it is already supposed to: A Safe Environment. Would it be so hard for the schools to wash the tables that children eat from in between each class coming in for lunch? Would it be so hard for teachers to make their kids wash their hands and face before and after lunch? Would it be asking to much of the school board to educate their students of the dangers of allergies? Hell, when I was in 4th & 5th grade they educated us with that nonsensical D.A.R.E program. I had no idea what any substance they spoke of was at the time. I was lost. Now, if the program was about foods that can make my friends sick I would have known what they were talking about(I knew what peanuts and dairy products were for example). I would have paid attention. Some schools have at least made one step in the right direction in this case: They do not allow peanut products to be sold in school that are intended to be available communally.

Schools take special measures for students that are classified as special needs(or something like that). Truly, I see this policy as the result of lazy and indifferent school board administrators. There are many options available to protect the allergic. The school board simply decided on the one that would cause them the least amount of problems and grief. Banning any activity because a small minority of people might be hurt or killed by that activity is unjust. It deprives from the multitude who are not. Today the issue is peanuts. What will it be tomorrow?

How many allergic reactions are caused by peer pressure? I don't have any sympathy for a kid that willingly puts their life in danger to conform with others. Perhaps this has to do with my niece being able to resist that temptation. I could tell a long story but I will sum up instead: She came from school and told her Mom how proud she was of herself by refusing to eat peanuts offered to her by friends. She is 6. Her mother educated her well to the dangers of her allergy. With this knowledge the little angel knows what to eat and what not to. More importantly, she knows how to resist or refuse the prodding of others.

Dictation is not the answer to a statistically small problem. Education is. Banning peanuts from schools is not going to make the nonallergic aware of the causes of allergic reaction. In essence, the school has dumbed down the majority of the student body. That's just great!!!



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by James1982
Could you please answer the question I've been asking over and over? Do you think that people should be banned from eating any peanut products in their own home if they have school aged children?


No - why should you be? It's your home, your children and if any school friends come round, it's their duty to inform you of their allergy and take appropriate precautions : ie, you to remove peanut products from your home (fat chance as you're self centred) or they simply do not come round.


Apparently some have such a severe reaction to peanut products that a simple smell or tiny particle in the air will cause issues. It would be incredibly easy for someone who is eating peanuts at their home to bring contamination into the school.


Absolutely, hence why it's such a serious issue for concern and why people are trying to educate the masses (you).


I really hope you DON'T think people should be banned from eating peanuts in their own homes, and I'm going to continue based upon this assumption.


Absolutely correct - your home, your rules.


If people can easily bring contamination from home, then what's the point of banning peanut products from schools? It won't solve anything if a person eats a peanut butter sandwich before coming to school, or while at school. The peanut contamination will be on the person either way.


To a degree yes, but as stated in this thread, the point is education to people who don't understand. It's worth knowing if children at your child's school suffer from peanut allergies because then you, the parent, could "help" prevent it. Have your chlidren wash their hands and faces, brush their teeth after eating breakkies, etc.


Is your right to eat peanut products at your HOME more important than the lives of children? No? Then why don't you support banning any peanut products all together, make it illegal for the whole country to posses anything containing any peanut products? Does that seem extreme to you? Does it seem like it's going too far? Well that's how I, and other people feel about banning them from schools.


Well, now you've gone full retard, showing your complete lack of understanding. I'm not asking you to stop eating peanuts at home. I'm simply saying, a) respect the fact that not all children are born as perfect as your little darlings and b) be considerate as your children are ATTENDING A PUBLIC INSTITUTION. That's all.


You seem to want to lord your apparent superior compassion over my head...blah blah blah...


Look, i personally don't care what you really do, I live in the UK where it's understood the severity of peanut allergies, and not America where ANY attempt at civil understanding results in you lot throwing your toys out of the pram and shouting "my rights, my rights are being infringed!"
edit on 16-9-2012 by noonebutme because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-9-2012 by noonebutme because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
14
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join