[Closed] Nut allergies and primary school.

sesame seeds

Are not nuts.

sesame seeds

Are not nuts.

True, but as shown by the Pret a Manger incident, there are people who react badly to them.
Personally, I can’t see how what a child, or adult for that matter, has in their lunchbox affects others in the room, providing no sharing is allowed; some seem to believe that just breathing the same air can cause a reaction, but I’m deeply sceptical of that actually happening.
It’s the school being very risk averse, and with people so willing to litigate, who can honestly blame them.

Is there some sort of blame to be attributed to the parents?

Definitely. It might not hold up in a court of law but it will cost money proving it. Likewise it will cost the school proving it.
Proving the kids world is sterile is of no relevance. Its proving the school is which counts.
It isnt elf & safety gone mad what is relevant its insurers and lawyer seeing a profit/saving which matters. Erring on the side of caution generally dodges painful and expensive conversations.

providing no sharing is allowed

I get the impression from our school that this is the biggest risk. Regardless of policies, kids share snacks all the time

I can see that you’d minimise the risks at home. But to expect the school to be sterile when the rest of that child’s world isn’

probably because the rest of the child's world isn't is the best reason school should be - school should be a reassuring, anxiety free place for children dealing with allergies outside of school is a difficult and worrying experience and labels the child as different

declared interest youngest: antigee is anaphylactic to walnuts and hazelnuts - reckons can smell nutella in same room and maybe her and our problem can become quite upset and anxious

I'd also say that school should have taken up with parents not the child - children can help parents check what goes in lunchbox but shouldn't be held accountable for errors

Little surprised but guess shouldn't be that a couple of the posts focus on the legal issues not the practicalities of dealing with a life threatening condition

True, but as shown by the Pret a Manger incident, there are people who react badly to them.
Personally, I can’t see how what a child, or adult for that matter, has in their lunchbox affects others in the room, providing no sharing is allowed; some seem to believe that just breathing the same air can cause a reaction, but I’m deeply sceptical of that actually happening.

1. It’s virtually impossible to provide foods everyday that contain absolutely zero alergens.
2. It’s only logical to exclude allergens that are likely to result in hospitalisation.
3. If the school say “no nuts” you’d expect sesame is fine.
4. Prets issue was largely the hidden ingredient - not highly visible seeds.
5. I agree a fatal reaction from airborne alergen is very unlikely, but kids are not particularly good at isolating themselves: if someone ate something covered in sesame seeds how sure are you that none get dropped, no other child accidentally picks up a seed on a fork or gets in the wrong bowl etc.

It's a liability issue for the school. They can't stop someone bringing in nuts, but if something happens, they can provide evidence that they warned parents and asked them not send kids to schools with food that could cause a problem.

I guess whether the school's reaction was reasonable depends on what "chastised him a bit" looks like.

A reminder of the rule, and what the consequences of breaking it could be? Fine

Anything a bit more zealous than that is probably going too far.

My eldest has a severe pea (yes pea not peanut) allergy and due to start school in sept so have been asking a lot about this

Basic issue is kids share food and food these days has been buggered about so much you can’t often tell obviously what is in it. Example is sausages and burgers often have pea flour in.

Most schools at junior age will have a member of staff surpervise the allergic kid during lunch and I believe food is not allowed at breaks (pea can also appear in chewy sweets)

Having a kid with an allergy is very stressful, and them being out of your control eating is very very stressful. So yes I expect a school to have things in place to minimalise risk. And I would also hope that parents Udo non allergic kids understand and be as supportive as they can.

It is far more common than you think

I have taught in many dozens of primary schools (18 years of supply) and most have something similar if this situation exists.
Its always done in a friendly manner.
What strikes me a strange is talking to the child not the parent though. Of course we don't know the age or intellect of the sushi eater, the nature of the school, the chastisers relationship with said fish muncher, their position within the school and a lot more qualifiers.
In most cases the parent of the allergic child has also realised that the problem and responsibiity is really theirs and not that of other parents and have thus trained their child to avoid much contamination by having school dinners etc

Agree you train them as much as possible to not share food and that certain foods are evil and will put them in hospital, pointing to little round green things is easy when it’s a hidden ingredient in a veggie pizza base, not so much.

I’m sure the older he gets the less worried we will be about sharing but it is hard to be sure they don’t do it when out of your sight at the age of 4

Little J's school has banned all nuts (wholehazelnuts!,(couldn't resist)).
I had to laugh when a dad brought his "organic artisan fruit loaf" for the Year 1 cake stall, I mentioned the nut ban to him and he said it would be all right and brushed me aside to present his efforts . He wasn't so cocky when He was verbally savaged by two PTA mums who had overheard our conversation. They walked him off the school site.

I don't know anyone with a nut allergy so I'm guessing here, but do most people (when they are children I presume) discover they have a nut allergy when they eat something with nuts in and their body reacts in a drastic way?

And if so, wouldn't they remember what that was like and never want to go through it again? Hence never breaking the sharing rule?

I don't see why the whole school should bend because of one child.

The onus is now on all the parents to see that all food taken into school is nur free.

If the parents of the allergic kid want their child to make it to adulthood then shouldn't the onus be on them teaching their child not to accept food from others?

If it were found that said allergic kid accepts something from another child and has a reaction, could the parents of the non-allergic kid be taken to court?

I kinda agree with Louis CK...

If the parents of the allergic kid want their child to make it to adulthood then shouldn’t the onus be on them teaching their child not to accept food from others?

How do you teach your child to avoid a peanut thrown by someone else’s kid who thinks it’s funny to “wind up the weird nut kid”?

Hence never breaking the sharing rule?

Kids are kids and the temptation of something nice looking might override the no sharing rule. Look at what DT78 said about peas (did you know some sweets had peas in them?).
Or Perchypanthers example or a more benign one with a severe allergy of someone just dropping a peanut or something.
It doesnt seem unreasonable for the school to try and minimise the risk. It would be unreasonable to punish other kids for having the foods but simply asking not to is different.

Well if my lad is anything to go by then nut allergy kids know full well the harm being in contact with nuts can do them.

He has a pretty mild case and gets an unpleasant bloated stomach. But he can smell a nut from 100 paces and turns his nose up, ... "Yuck dad!! Have you been eating peanut butter?" he say 10 mins after I've had breakfast.

But then again my lad ISNT anything to go by because all kids are different.

Age, intellect, maturity, confidence and of course the actual severity of the allergy will all play a part in how they live with their condition.

They may be kids at school as young as 4 with food allergies ... are they meant to protect themselves without help ?

So alpin’s Comments are more where I was coming from. I’m not concerned by my boy being reminded about the rules but the school at all (so maybe chastised was too strong a word).

My point was, is it right to have the school wide rule that enevitably gets accidentally broken. When that may lead to an incident where the parents of the non allergic child get some (non legal) blame with resultant guilt?

Also where does this stop? We’ve had Pea allergies added here, then there’s lactose, gluten etc. How much restriction of diet for the 99% of kids. where chances are it doesn’t reduce risk 24x7 that much for that child. The education approach sounds more effective and realistic for all imho.

Are not nuts.

Nor are most nuts. So?

How do you teach your child to avoid a peanut thrown by someone else’s kid who thinks it’s funny to “wind up the weird nut kid”?

They could check the other kid's allergy to a fist.

I know a ban seems a bit over protective but given that young kids will share and morons will see fit to throw nuts, it's not surprising that schools feel it needs to be done.

My point was, is it right to have the school wide rule that enevitably gets accidentally broken. When that may lead to an incident where the parents of the non allergic child get some (non legal) blame with resultant guilt?

Yes it is where it is potentialy life threatening. Well yes they may feel guilty but feeling guilty usually isn’t life threatening.

don’t see why the whole school should bend because of one child.

Because that child could die.

How do you teach your child to avoid a peanut thrown by someone else’s kid who thinks it’s funny to “wind up the weird nut kid”?

Playing Russian Roulette with a bag of Revels?

depends how you look on schools - should be community where children thrive rather than training for the real world of nastiness - some of the points put above don't differ a lot from "bullying man up punch them first" arguments ....as to Louis CK he is a professional comedian so his input is actually worse than worthless and suggesting it is relevant is a joke? - schools (and other places that deal with kids and their parent/carers) can and should try to control the environment for the safety of the kids (small people) expecting all parents/carers to contribute is tough but give it a go and the assumption here is that the parents/carers of kids with allergies actually care that much about the kid that they will try to educate them on how to deal with it - many kids don't come from supportive families and school input has to push other solutions and get the rest of the parents/carers/mumsnetlawyers on their side

How did we find out about the allergy?

3 trips in an ambulance and overnight stays with him attached to various breathing apparatus when e was 2 followed by a skin prick test at the allergy clinic. He nearly died 3 times. I'm not talking about an 'intolerance' which causes a funny bum and an uncomfortable child.

To expect him to recall that experience which will fade as he gets older will be a challenge (we will never forget though...) I'm actually going to talk to the clinic next time he is tested about whether they can feed him the allergens in a controlled environment (ie. at hospital) so he can start to pick out what it feels like and potentially teach him to pick it up as soon as it comes near his mouth. He is too young at the moment

I don't expect lots of other parents to do things, just to understand the issue, the severity of it, and to help minimalise the risk with something that really is a minor inconvience, which if you didn't could result in a dead child.

There are many other things that we just expect people to do in society to make it safer for all of us.

I do think it is sad that my child will be segregated from others at food times, potentially shunned as the 'weird kid' and possibly may have some social issues because of the allergy, but its just something we will have to deal with, along with the concern that he will eat the wrong thing and get seriously ill

My point was, is it right to have the school wide rule that enevitably gets accidentally broken. When that may lead to an incident where the parents of the non allergic child get some (non legal) blame with resultant guilt?

Egh?
Is it right: yes.

Are you seriously weighing-up whether having an occaisional "incident where the parents of the non allergic child get some (non legal) blame with resultant guilt?" is worth it to avoid another child having a life threatening anaphylactic reaction?!?! Bloody hell.

Also where does this stop? We’ve had Pea allergies added here, then there’s lactose, gluten etc. How much restriction of diet for the 99% of kids. where chances are it doesn’t reduce risk 24×7 that much for that child. The education approach sounds more effective and realistic for all imho.

Where does it stop? Well..... do any schools you're aware of have a ban for lactose? Gluten?

Having a ban in place is an enormous pain in the arse for the school - they only do it (obviously, but perhaps not?) if there is a child with a severe allergy. "severe allergy" means a rest of death or serious injury.

So.... I think what you're asking is: "is it right for some people to be mildly inconvenienced to reduce the chances of some poor young kiddie dying painfully whist at school?". Nice.

There have been a few articles in the educational press recently with experts discussing if nut free schools are a good thing for kids with nut allergies. That one of school's roles is to help students cope beyond school and giving them an environment (undoubtedly alongside home) where they can be complacent is dangerous. Probably more of a thing for secondary aged kids than primary.

It's becoming a problem however - the rise in numbers of vegan teenagers is significant and a healthy vegan diet should involve nuts. Depriving them of that whilst protecting the child with the nut allergy is becoming more of a conflict.

There have been a few articles in the educational press recently with experts discussing if nut free schools are a good thing for kids with nut allergies. That one of school’s roles is to help students cope beyond school and giving them an environment (undoubtedly alongside home) where they can be complacent is dangerous. Probably more of a thing for secondary aged kids than primary.

It’s becoming a problem however – the rise in numbers of vegan teenagers is significant and a healthy vegan diet should involve nuts. Depriving them of that whilst protecting the child with the nut allergy is becoming more of a conflict.

And I think thats all reasonable and correct when applied to older children. However, I think the priority for younger children is probably to keep them safe, and so allow them time to learn how to manage their allergy.

and just to prove why you have to be always on it if you have a kid with an allergy:

Ingriedents for strawberry chewits:
Glucose Syrup, Sugar, Strawberry Juice from Concentrate (3%), Vegetable Fat (Palm, Coconut, contains Soya), Acid (Lactic Acid), Egg White Powder, Concentrates of Blackcurrant and Blackcarrot, Hydrolyse Pea Protein, Flavouring

one shared chewit at playtime, could equal my son in a very bad way.

So I think all kids should be taught as soon as is possible about allergies and not to share food, before they are that bit older and can read labels for themselves

^ this (batfink's post). Yeah the world is big and bad and stuff will kill you, but you can't expect kids aged 4-11 to get this right, especially with innocuous seeming things like food. There will be food thrown, there will be inadvertent sharing, a kid could get bullied into eating something. You'd expect secondary aged kids to manage this, but not primary kids.

don’t see why the whole school should bend because of one child.

Because that child could die.

If one of my children was so allergic to something that they might die if they came in contact with it in school. Something that everyone else was fine with, I'd seriously think about not sending them to school and think about alternative educational arrangements.

If one of my children was so allergic to something that they might die if they came in contact with it in school.

Easily solved by the school banning nuts on the premises. And bear in mind that some children start school with undiagnosed nut allergies.

he got sent in with some sushi ... noticed that it had sesame seeds ...

Completely get that this is a serious condition, possibly fatal.

Regardless of the school policy, and the admittedly small chance that something bad might happen, you're ok with running the risk that a small child might die?

I honestly didn’t realise schools were banning nuts because of allergy.

It must be horrible for parents & child, but is banning really the solution?

In essence it’s conditioning young kids not to eat nuts. Also best will in the world, you might stop your kid taking a bag of leanuts in to school but what about the product that has a little amount in that you are not even aware of?

DT78 - most recent research is actually to encourage kids to eat their allergen to increase tolerance. Obviously under very controlled environment of a hospital setting.

My kids primary school also have a separate lunch room which is for the optional use of the kids with allergies

that's interesting about it being encouraged - is that because they think it maybe able to build up an immunity to the allergy?

When he was last tested I was hoping it had got better, but the tests showed a more severe reaction so we also have to not let him eat lentils and chickpeas.

Before hospital visits he had eaten peas beforehand with no reaction, so it is completely weird it just 'developed' so I'm hoping it can just 'undevelop' just as quickly. Somehow I think that isn't overly likely

There is no way we can expect a school to ban all food with peas in it, but what we do expect is raising awareness of the issue, controlling the sharing of food, and making sure kids with allergies are supervised at food times. Our boy is pretty switched on, so hopefully it won't be an issue, but he is so young that trying to explain how a hidden ingredient in food could kill him doesn't compute.

Before hospital visits he had eaten peas beforehand with no reaction, so it is completely weird it just ‘developed’ so I’m hoping it can just ‘undevelop’ just as quickly. Somehow I think that isn’t overly likely

You're not born with allergies they develop based on previous exposure to the allergn.

that’s interesting about it being encouraged – is that because they think it maybe able to build up an immunity to the allergy?

Exactly the opposite, an allergy is an unwanted reaction by the immune system, what you are doing is getting the immune system to begin tolerating something that is not a genuine threat. As far as I am aware this isn't new thinking at all in other countries.

Definitely wasn't mentioned to us as a viable treatment. his annual check up is in April so I will be asking. might be because he is too young.

we did discuss 'growing out' of allergies which can happen in the teens but not how you could encourage that to be the case

I completely understand the bans relating to nuts and sesame seeds at schools. To lose a child because of something that is entirely avoidable would be tragic.

One thing that troubles me, is where do these alergies come from? When I was at school I don't remember anyone having alergies to nuts etc. Does this stem from from the obsession of everything being sterile and hygenically clean, meaning that kids aren't exposed to certain bacteria etc, so their immune systems aren't fully developed?

When I was at school I don’t remember anyone having alergies to nuts etc. Does this stem from from the obsession of everything being sterile and hygenically clean, meaning that kids aren’t exposed to certain bacteria etc, so their immune systems aren’t fully developed?

Better diagnosis nothing to do with the bacteria.

Definitely wasn’t mentioned to us as a viable treatment

There have finally been some clinical trials run in the UK and the success rate with severe peanut allergies was very high. The issue is that trials are very expensive to run, I know I've spent years of my life at investigator meetings, and at the end of these trials there is never going to be the chance of a product that can recoup the cost of the trial.

so their immune systems aren’t fully developed

This isn't about underdevelopment of immune systems, it's not a weak immune system at fault but an immune system reacting to things that it doesn't need to.

I'll state one simple thing as a parent of someone with severe allergies...

This is someone's life you have in your hands whether you like it or not. Take some tiny amount of responsibility and omit the foods the school has asked. It's not exactly hard.

spekkie
I don’t know anyone with a nut allergy so I’m guessing here, but do most people (when they are children I presume) discover they have a nut allergy when they eat something with nuts in and their body reacts in a drastic way?

Yes. And its bloody scary being sat in a children's hospital with your six month old thinking they're going to die.

spekkie
And if so, wouldn’t they remember what that was like and never want to go through it again? Hence never breaking the sharing rule?

No, because they're usually very young when it happens for the first time. And kids are kids, they think they're invincible. Parents know they're not.

This is someone’s life you have in your hands whether you like it or not. Take some tiny amount of responsibility and omit the foods the school has asked. It’s not exactly hard.

So......would you assume a nut ban would automatically covered non nut items such as sesame seeds? Did the school previously ask the OP to omit sesame seeds? I'm not clear it has. For context the nut ban at our gaff makes no reference to sesame seeds.

I don't think there are more kids with allergies just it is spotted more these days

that combined with the fact diets are more varied and food is generally buggered about with more these days than when we were kids means more cases of it happening.

in my non scientific opinion it must be something to do with the food and how.much it's messed with. Soy used to be the wonder bulking agent and then they found out lots of people had soy allergies. now it seems to be stuff like pea is used instead. hey Presto more pea allergies identified

gluten free, veggie eta all means substitutes are found in the ingredients.

needs to be a return to whole foods, this is far easier said than done

gluten free, veggie eta all means substitutes are found in the ingredients.

You seem to be mistaking intolerance with allergies.

But yes maybe some bulking of foods may to be blame but it is diagnosed easier now, sometimes before a severe reaction.

So……would you assume a nut ban would automatically cover non nut items such as sesame seeds? Did the school previously ask the OP to omit sesame seeds? I’m not clear it has. For context the nut ban at our gaff makes no reference to sesame seeds.

No I wouldn't, but that's because I know enough about the subject now to know what different allergens are.

That circumstance sounds like someone trying to be well-meaning but getting it wrong.

My lad is now 9 and he has a simple rule that he's enforcing himself, he won't eat anything unless he's seen the packet with ingredients on and he knows his own list of allergens. If he's not sure, he won't eat it. This is great, but a marked difference from when he was 4 and the school insisted every child was going to have school dinners, yet couldn't present me with the ingredients in every food. That required a fairly frank exchange of views with the head about my son bringing a packed lunch in from then on whether she liked it or not. Thankfully the school has come a long way in the last five years, and are now really supportive and on the ball.

Just one thing to throw into the mix here ... whilst the home, and perhaps the school can become (more) controlled environments, the outside world doesn't ...
The average adult is an unclean thing, and possibly their kids are worse ... very few people wash their hands these days as a matter of course. Hence tables, doors, chairs etc are all possible points of contamination. And within that trace quantities of allergens. It probably won't affect the intolerant ... but if you are parts per billion allergic......
It is all very well banning peanuts (etc) from schools , or planes, but what about the tray tables, touch surfaces, ticket machines etc ...
Research has to go into increasing the tolerance to allergies and intolerances ... not having a world where everything in banned ...
BTW pea protein will become more and more common, as it is seen within the food industry as a good new protein... vegan and vegetarian friendly, clean etc ... so expect to start seeing it appaering in many things as a replacemnt to soy ...

Research has to go into increasing the tolerance to allergies and intolerances … not having a world where everything in banned …

Or maybe ban it where it can be controlled because at the moment there is no cure.

and are now really supportive

It's a shame the same can't be said on here. There have been certain posters who've come across in lacking any empathy for the very worrying conditions you and yours and others live under.

that's why I was talking about food.being messed with (not.mixing intolerances with allergies)

gluten free is now popular, even people without an intolerance buy it, to make gluten free products they have to 'mess with typical ingredients. hence.more.ingredients.you wouldn't associate with that food stuff being in it.

we were nearly caught out by Tescos the other month. they changed the ingredients to one of their sausages we have used for years. the ingredients had not been updated on the website but luckily my wife noticed the packaging looked different so thankfully read the packaging and found the dreaded pea flour in there.

it's a bloody nightmare. if there are trials we can take part in (or pay for) I'll be doing what we can

there is also a consultation out at the moment I think kicked off by the pret debacle about how councils can help.more.with allergy sufferers

It is all very well banning peanuts (etc) from schools , or planes, but what about the tray tables, touch surfaces, ticket machines etc …

My previous employer brought in a nut (and fish) ban last year. One of the employees has a nut allergy. They became seriously ill after touching a door handle.

So…. I think what you’re asking is: “is it right for some people to be mildly inconvenienced to reduce the chances of some poor young kiddie dying painfully whist at school?”. Nice.

No. That’s not what I’m saying. Quite happy to make that effort and abide by the rule. Just aware as we found out this week that humans make genuine mistakes and therefore multiply that up by 150 sets of parents was questioning the effectiveness of this approach. Not sure you can say the school is nut free and if it significantly reduces the risk. I would be devastated if that slip up had resulted in a hospital trip or worse.

that’s why I was talking about <span class="skimlinks-unlinked">food.being</span> messed with (not.mixing intolerances with allergies)

Ah sorry.

It’s a shame the same can’t be said on here. There have been certain posters who’ve come across in lacking any empathy for the very worrying conditions you and yours and others live under.

Well we can't have poor Tarquin's feeling guilty as a child was made unwell due Tarquin wanting to take an brioche with sesame seed topping for his lunch. The allergy kid should go to the workhouse.

Better diagnosis nothing to do with the bacteria.

It’s not just better diagnosis, it seems to be generally accepted that prevalence has increased too. I don’t think there is conclusive evidence that excessive hygiene is not a factor contributing to it.

So what do you want banned?
Current common allergens

Wheat
Rye
Eggs (btw DNA is eggs is the same as female chickens, so you shouldn’t consume those either)
Nuts
Peanuts
sesame
Soy
dairy
Shellfish
Celery

So how would you legislate that these are banned from some places? ....
BTW - I have a severe allergy to penicilin. Can that also be banned ... just in case.

I do not know what the answer is but excluding all the above for the public is non-viable. Hence we actually need to understand why allergies are on the increase .... exposure seem to be a big issue

And this doesn’t get over the contact issue of common shared spaces ... which, If kids are affected enough that nuts should be consumed on a flight, how do you stop the potential that the previous 7 people in that seat may ate nuts?

Genuine question - are there more allergy sufferers nowadays (compared to when I was at school 40 years ago) or are we just more aware of the issue? And if so, what has caused this and - if we know the cause - can we reverse the trend?

I don’t think there is conclusive evidence that excessive hygiene is not a factor contributing to it.

Allergies are not caused by nil exposure.

And this doesn’t get over the contact issue of common shared spaces … which, If kids are affected enough that nuts should be consumed on a flight, how do you stop the potential that the previous 7 people in that seat may ate nuts?

Try finding nuts on a plane these days. Most airlines have dumped them, I certainly can't remember seeing any for quite a while

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/wet-wipes-allergies-baby-child-peanut-egg-dust-eczema-a8291861.html

My flight to Dubai two weeks ago had nuts on ... but no peanuts. And loads of sesame ... but it was an Emirates flight.

Re allergies and the numbers increasing ... it would interesting to compare the West with Asia, or African consumers .... but I will now ask that question.

I am guessing thing like coeliac are more or less where they have always been ... but peanut / nut/ seafood/ sesame do seem to be reported more. But maybe that is awareness and testing ...

So what do you want banned?

The only thing that should be banned is the thing that a particular child at this particular school have a severe allergy too.
Nobody (except you?) is talking about widespread banning of anything that somebody MIGHT be allergic to. What is actually happening is that schools are banning something that one of the pupils has a known, serious allergy to.

So how would you legislate that these are banned from some places?

Exactly how it's done at the moment: "dear parents, one of the children at our school has a severe allergy to celery. To avoid increasing the risk that he might die, please don't send your children to school with celery in their lunch boxes".

I have a severe allergy to penicilin. Can that also be banned … just in case

Are you a five year old? Are you likely to take some paracetamol by mistake, or is somebody else likely to give it to you without you noticing, or as a "joke"? Or are you an adult who's capable of managing your allergy?

I do not know what the answer is but excluding all the above for the public is non-viable

We know it's not viable, that's why it hasn't been done (and nobody is suggesting it)

What we are talking about here is

reducing

the risk that a child might die or become seriously ill (not removing all risk completely, but reducing the risk of death is good, right?). It's obviously up to each individual to decide how much inconvenience they can tolerate in order to avoid putting a specific child's health/life at risk.

Would you put a seatbelt on your child in the car (even if it wasn't the law)? What about a cycle helmet when they are out on their bike? Wouldn't remove the risk of injury death completely, but it would reduce it.

Ok, now what about if your child with out with another parent/friend of the family? Would you expect that parent/adult to put your child's seatbelt or cycle helmet on? How would you react to that parent/adult telling you that it was too much trouble to put your child's cycle helmet on, and it didn't remove the danger completely, so they didn't bother

btw DNA is eggs is the same as female chickens, so you shouldn’t consume those either

Wait, what? Ok never mind.

DT78 – most recent research is actually to encourage kids to eat their allergen to increase tolerance. Obviously under very controlled environment of a hospital setting.

There have recently been promising trials of a new treatment derived from nut protein:

https://www.nhs.uk/news/medication/new-treatment-peanut-allergies-shows-promise/

^ yes saw that. I did ask a few years ago about similar when my daughter was diagnosed with a peanut allergy but we were told that was some time off, so it's just avoidance and carrying epipens for now. But fingers crossed for a few years time.

Batfink,

Is that you drama queen moment over?
I am not suggesting doing anything to harm any children. Your kids may have issues with celery, so that becomes your concern ....
But there are several other allergens out there that will maybe affect others... so in a school of 1000, how do you deal with the potential issues?

Obviously the best way of addressing this is labelling/ highlighting the matter, so that those with issues can avoid or address. The Pret issue has shown this to be fallable ...

You scorn the egg issue ... but we cannot declare a product as being egg free if it contains any chicken. The DNA / proteisn are shared, proteins cause allergies ... do you now understand.

Re penicilin ... my point is that if I am not concious then it could be administered. So using the peanut analogy, maybe it should be used.
But yes, I am all growed up, and am looking for the rational answer...and you over reacted.

Here is a huge issue - real allergies vs made up ones.
There are systems to cope with real allegeries but those jumping on the bandwagon hinder the support for those who actually have a medical issue.
Coelics are getting a tough time by those palying at being gulten "allergic".

Evidence does seem to support the fact that kids can grow out of an allergy, and that exposure ( under controlled conditions etc) may be a vaible treatment. But by association, that hints that non exposre may have a role to play...

Egg allergies causing anaphylaxis is extremely rare a bit like well gluten.

Egg allergies causing anaphylaxis is extremely rare a bit like well gluten

Drac I think you could spend the rest of your life trying to make people understand the difference between an allergy and an intolerance and still get nowhere. It's so simple that it's beyond the grasp of many.

Yeah I'm not even going to entertain why he's not be given penicillin without knowing his medical history.

There is a huge gap between allergy and intolerance, avdave2. But as you say, most people do not make a distinction... or chose to not to ...
I have lost count of the number of people I talk to for who "allergic" means "I don't like".

The restaurant trade is littered with stories of people who are allergic to different shapes of pasta, or garlic "but not when it is garlic bread"
But then when someone goes into a restaurant, or a store, and says "I am allergic to seafood ....."

Drac - I needed antibiotics for a severe infection that could have killed me. What's your point? Penicilin derived antibiotics were the most effective ... but I could have them.

Drac – I needed antibiotics for a severe infection that could have killed me. What’s your point?

You're very unlikely to given penicillin without knowing your medical history, it's part the protection for those with allergies.

There's a staggering amount of ignorance with regards to the difference between intolerance (might make your tummy funny), allergy (will make you feel pretty ill), and anaphylaxis (will likely result in death if not treated promptly)
Although food is required by law to list all the major recognised allergens not all those allergens are likely to result in an anaphylactic reaction.
Although in theory anything COULD cause an anaphylactic reaction (as per the posters son with a severe pea allergy) , the most common are shellfish, nuts and bee stings and therefore these are usually the ones that are focused upon. Nut allergy is particularly problematic for sufferers due to the prevalence of nuts in food production and the fact that they are easily available as a snack food.
its also worth re-iterating that allergies are as a result of the bodies overactive immune system (not a reduced immune system). reactions are therefore worse where the allergen comes into contact with soft tissue or blood. Touching a door handle might not cause an anaphylactic reaction and may just result in an itchy hand, but ingesting and allergen will likely cause a much quicker and severe reaction, which normally takes the form of swelling as the body tries to stop the 'infection' from spreading and sends more and more defenders to the area. Rapid swelling of the mouth and throat is not something you wan. Death usually occurs due to suffocation which personally I'd find a pretty horrific way to go.

Anyway, back to the OP. I think it's perfectly reasonable to protect children that are too young to protect themselves, furthermore, I think it's good to teach our children to be aware of the needs of others and to consider others needs above their own. perhaps we should also try teaching some adults these lessons...

There have recently been promising trials of a new treatment derived from nut protein:

https://www.nhs.uk/news/medication/new-treatment-peanut-allergies-shows-promise/
/blockquote>

for some reason nut allergies are more common in Aus' than some other countries and there is a lot of research here.....same approach as above but has reached clinical trials stage

[url] https://www.monash.edu/news/articles/new-peanut-allergy-treatment-now-in-clinical-trials2 [/url]

[/carryon]

 

Any of you lot ever watched a kid eat?

Allergen (e.g. peanut butter) on fingers, fingers wiped on trousers, trousers on seats, fingers all over furniture, fingers all over books, pencils etc.

You scorn the egg issue … but we cannot declare a product as being egg free if it contains any chicken. The DNA / proteisn are shared, proteins cause allergies … do you now understand.

Utter bollocks - apart from the bit about it being the proteins that cause the allergic reaction.

My son has an egg allergy. Along with nuts, legumes and white fish. All will cause a severe anaphylactic reaction, legumes being the worst.

I have never seen a product containing chicken also carry an egg warning unless it had egg as an actual ingredient in something else, such as batter. And chicken does not cause a reaction with him.

We cannot declare products as being egg free if they contain any chicken. By law, and a directive of the EU. Even if they have never seen an egg ....
From an analyical point of view ... and hence liability.

Of course, if you know better, and would like to come and instruct to our 15 people strong regulatory department, let me know.
It would make our lives a whole lot easier if you can tell the EU as well....

So I will see your “bollocks’ and raise it to “ double bollocks”
It may not trigger an allergy in your kid ... but there you go...
That is allergies for you

No mention of eggs here.

https://www.sainsburys.co.uk/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/gb/groceries/sainsburys-chicken-korma-(mild---creamy)-400g?langId=44&storeId=10151&krypto=CMEt1xktAIisBnP8BrDQ9R00m4LgqFLeFQ45IV1s8BF%2Fcdy8eaMfz27hm3rnACIDg5U8P6cl6%2BBCfo7ec32mlDV4xqRhOxSBWi%2F4VIiNvTgwO5VCxAWiW1DvZdwWq1wV6qboKGPZfMId8FAyd9xdVYSn5C2LYFzCfHejxcxb30k%3D&ddkey=https%3Agb%2Fgroceries%2Fsainsburys-chicken-korma-%28mild---creamy%29-400g

Are we going after 2 specific and different certifications here?

May Contain Egg Vs 100% DOES NOT contain egg? Both read differently