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

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 



Peanut and tree nut (pecans, walnuts, almonds, etc.) allergy can be a serious condition that affects approximately three million Americans, or 1.1 percent of the population.
Peanuts are the leading cause of severe food allergic reactions, followed by shellfish, fish, tree nuts and eggs. (Food Allergy Network)


Epi pens and 911 are not really viable answers when dealing with small children.

Small kids aren't self-aware enough to recognize the beginning signs of anaphalaxis. Maybe by fifth or sixth grade they might begin to develop that maturity. But younger? They'd be inclined to not notice symptoms in time.

Small kids also would be hesitant to use an epi pen on themselves. I can remember literally running out of my doctors office in tears when I was 6 or 7 years old, over a needle. Kids don't like needles.

You make it sound as if we are discussing a rare allergy. We are not. We are discussing the number one food ( avoidable ) allergy in the world.

~Heff




posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   
A couple of years ago, there was a horrific tragedy at a nearby school. The child was allergic to peanuts, and a friend innocently shared a peanut candy with her at recess. Although the teachers had an epipen, and injected it as soon as they realized there was a problem, the child died.

The solution, I think, is to educate our kids to NEVER share food or medicine, and explain why. Kids will understand the reasons, and they will be careful. At least thats my experience in teaching 12 years.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Yay some more people to join me on my side of the argument.

I hope this doesnt devolve into a debate about the constitution. The only thing i wanted noted is that in public facilities, some concessions need to be made, especially if they help avoid life threatening situations.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   
The obvious solution would be to ban public schools.


Considering that a lot of parents can't seem to teach their children to tie their own shoes, this could create another problem, eh?



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


1.1% isnt exactly epidemic. And as I said 10 people a year die from peanut allergies. TEN. 150 total for all food related allergies.

More people die from falling down. Why arent stairs removed from buildings? We could save more lives if only every home was a single story ranch.

In life # happens. It sucks when Im out with family and a face turns blue and we have to jam a pen into a thigh and drive them to the hospital but that's life. People choose to leave their homes for work, entertainment or school.

If my kid had some special need or some crazy allergy I'd be homeschooling and watching everything in and out like a hawk. At least until the kid was old enough to understand and care for their own allergy.

I wouldnt expect a school with hundreds or thousands of students to pass wide sweeping edicts affecting everyone and everything only to give me an empty sense of false well-being because in the end all the bans in the world wont make my kid any safer.

That's reality.

Administrators and policy makers rarely operate within the confines of reality.
edit on 14-9-2012 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by MDDoxs

reply to post by kaylaluv
 




I think if a child has a severe, extra-sensitive allergy, they should not be in a public school.



Wow, thats quite a statement. Under that logic, anyone who is not of the status-quo or is a nuisance should not be allowed to attend public school?

Ignorance is all i have to say.
edit on 14-9-2012 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-9-2012 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)


No, I don't mean banned by the school -- I mean the parent should make the decision to take the child out of the public environment if the parent is really worried about that environment, instead of making the environment change for the child.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Your numbers seem to source from Wiki. Mine are from the government and do not jibe.

There are approximately 150 deaths per year in the US and about 30,000 anaphylactic episodes. As sourced in this PDF.

30,000 episodes does merit attention.

~Heff



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Your numbers seem to source from Wiki. Mine are from the government and do not jibe.

There are approximately 150 deaths per year in the US and about 30,000 anaphylactic episodes. As sourced in this PDF.

30,000 episodes does merit attention.

~Heff


Numbers jibe fine. The 150 is total food allergy deaths.

Many, many things can cause an anaphylactic reaction including insect bites and drug reactions. Insect bites being the major cause.

No matter how you look at it peanuts take a back seat. A seat in the way back.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Okay, i see what your saying.

That is a seperate decision though and i believe the US prides itself on offering equality to all students regardless of race, religion or physical handicaps, including allergies.

I know its one thing to say equality, but its another to actually impliment it and in a lot of cases it is never equal.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Someone brought up hand-washing. Yes. Before my kids' teachers (I have twins in 3rd grade) bring them to lunch, they all wash their hands. When they are done with their lunches, they are again brought to the bathrooms to wash their hands and faces. Easy fix.

Life is full of bad things that can happen the moment you open your eyes and get out of bed. Every time a parent takes their child with allergies out of the house, they run the risk of running into that allergen. I usually serve peanut butter toast with cereal and a fruit for breakfast. Should we ban peanut butter from my home next? I mean, kids are messy and he could get that peanut butter all over his hands and he could touch a kid with peanut allergies on the bus. No--that won't happen because I have him wash his hands and face after he eats. It's a simple thing to do and will prevent accidents.

Allergic children should know not to share food with other kids and they should know not to touch other kids' food and put their hands to their faces.

I certainly don't have a problem with a ban being put on snacks that a parent might bring to share with the class but I have a huge issue with a ban on my child's lunch because that's what he eats. (I'm tired of it and wish he would grow out of it, but...for now, that's what he eats.)

--kind of a side topic rant:
One bad trend I'm starting to see is the schools doing away with hand-washing and pushing that germ lotion crap. My kids are not allowed to use that in school at all and they are to be allowed to go wash their hands instead. It doesn't prevent the spread of colds and other viruses, it doesn't clean up dirt or food particles, it kills the good germs as well and it ends up getting all over everything. It's useless and if anything is banned it should be that!
edit on 14-9-2012 by CoherentlyConfused because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Your numbers seem to source from Wiki. Mine are from the government and do not jibe.

There are approximately 150 deaths per year in the US and about 30,000 anaphylactic episodes. As sourced in this PDF.

30,000 episodes does merit attention.

~Heff


Numbers jibe fine. The 150 is total food allergy deaths.

Many, many things can cause an anaphylactic reaction including insect bites and drug reactions. Insect bites being the major cause.

No matter how you look at it peanuts take a back seat. A seat in the way back.
Now I'm going to promote banning of stinging insects also.
There, that'll fix things.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


How you can say that the number one food allergy takes a "back seat" is confusing to me. Entrenched positions often are confusing.


Peanut allergy is one of the "Big 8" food allergies that account for 90% of those suffered by 21 million Americans. (AAAAI and FAAN)
More than 3 million people in the United States report being allergic to peanuts, tree nuts or both. (AAAAI)
Approximately 1% of the U.S. population has a peanut allergy (Sicherer, SH, "Prevalence of peanut and tree nut allergy in the US...")
Less than 21% of patients with peanut allergy will outgrow it. (AAAAI)
Peanut Allergy is the most common cause of food related death (AAFA).
Four out of every 100 children have a food allergy. (CDC/NCHS Study, "Food Allergy Among U.S. Children...")
From 1997 to 2007, the prevalence of reported food allergy increased 18% among children under age 18 years. (CDC/NCHS Study, "Food Allergy Among U.S. Children...")
From 2004 to 2006, there were an average of 9,537 hospital discharges per year with a diagnosis related to food allergy among children 0 to 17 years. (CDC/NCHS Study, "Food Allergy Among U.S. Children...")


source

Not only is controlling this issue in the best interest of children, it's also a fiscally responsible thing to do. Nearly ten thousand avoidable hospitalizations is excessive.

~Heff



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


There are over 314,000,000 people in the United States and 30,000 adults and children have issues, 150 deaths.

U.S. & World Population Clocks

Using your logic then we should ban prescription drugs and cars, correct? articles.me... rcola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/10/26/prescription-drugs-number-one-cause-preventable-death-in-us.aspx


37,485 people died from drugs, a rate fueled by overdoses on prescription pain and anxiety medications, versus 36,284 from traffic accidents



And in 2009, there were nearly 4.6 million drug-related visits to U.S. emergency rooms nationwide, with more than half due to adverse reactions to prescription medications – most of which were being taken exactly as prescribed.

Your logic seems to be flawed.

I can understand your wanting to help children, but if this is a life long issue that they are going to have to live with, wouldn't it be better that they do, indeed, learn how to live with it?

Much like we have learned to live with prescription drugs or automobiles.


edit on 14-9-2012 by froglette because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


Stinging insects are part of nature. Peanut butter in foods is not. Apples and oranges. Risk control is all about mitigating manageable risks.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by DontTreadOnMe
 



Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
Mold seems to be much more of an issue with people than it used to be.


ALL allergies are much more of an issue than they used to be. Our toxic environment is ruining our bodies' natural defenses. Food intolerance is but one of the growing number of "allergies".


Isn't it the opposite of that? I thought we are more susceptible to allergies and diseases now because of the sterile environment a lot of parents and establishments try to create for their children? Children's immune systems are becoming weaker by the generation. Today's children will be immune to less than their parents and when they have children, theirs will eb even weaker if exposure continues to reduce. There's another conspiracy all in itself...



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Context is everything.

As a cause of death peanuts are statistically insignificant.

As a cause of anaphylaxis they are still on the bottom of the ladder.

In food specific reactions they are still in the rear of the bus behind shellfish and eggs.

Now in fatal food specific anaphylactic reactions they pop up to a leading role. A role that is essentially insignificant.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by froglette
 


Again, apples and oranges. You're building straw men. By your logic building playgrounds on freeways is rational since kids die in car accidents anyway.


Avoidable risks are the ones we seek to mitigate. We don't ignore problems simply because other problems exist. We seek to do what we can with what we can.

~Heff



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
This happened at my children's school when they were younger, and all schools were made "nut free" zones..(yes, they still allowed me in on occasion
)

Many parents were not happy, and it was a challenge to find cookies and such that had no trace of peanut in them.

Some of the lunch room monitors got a little carried away confiscating any cookie which may contain trace amounts of peanut, and what bothered me is they never gave them back to the students upon leaving the school...which made me wonder if these monitors weren't just finding an easy way to get some cookies to eat


I feel so bad for the children with serious nut allergies, because they have to be constantly vigilant about what they touch , and what they eat, which can't be easy for a 6 year old kid. Not only do they not get the great pleasure of nuts in food, some were harassed by other students, because they were the cause of the ban.

At first I felt angry that my child had to change their diet because of someone else s allergies, yet when I met these adorable little ones who had no say in what they were deadly allergic to , and had to live such a different life that was much more difficult , I realized what a small sacrifice it was for my child to avoid bringing anything that contained nuts to school.

Parents of these children must go through so much anxiety, and many do not have a choice in homeschooling , and I'm sure they appreciate any efforts by other parents and students to keep their precious little ones as safe as possible.

I did find it very ironic though when visiting an emergency ward at one of our local hospitals around this same time. There was a candy dispensary in the waiting room, and two of them were nuts (unwrapped). I saw a child get some nuts in her hand, and then of course she was touching all the furniture. I though to myself how strange that a school would apply a nut free zone for safety, but a hospital would allow open nuts like that in a dispensary.



edit on 14-9-2012 by WhisperingWinds because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by butcherguy
 


Stinging insects are part of nature. Peanut butter in foods is not. Apples and oranges. Risk control is all about mitigating manageable risks.
they are not allergic to just 'peanut butter' , they are allergic to peanuts and 'peanut products'. Heck, some people will swell up like a balloon if they smell peanuts.

Last I knew, peanuts are part of nature. Not like they are manufactured like tires or something, right?
edit on 14-9-2012 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


They are part of nature, but were not prevalent in food products until George Washington Carver went on a one man crusade to make them a staple in our diets.

And that is a totally different track down a side road of post reconstruction socio-economic history.

~Heff





new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join