RULE HOME:The Rule Summary and Post of the Day tell you what the agency wants your feedback on. Open the Rule Dashboard (left) to see all the issues; click any issue to get more details and have your say.
See what others think by checking Recent Comments. For more about how Rulemaking works, click Learn About Rulemaking (top right). Still have questions? Watch the short video.
Peoples' Comments
Join the discussion by clicking on the comment bubble next to a section of the Agency proposal or by replying to someone else’s. You must be logged in.
This discussion is now closed. See the Peanut Allergies draft summary.
show all (562)
There are no comments. Click the text to your left to make a new comment.
While it is hard to know where to draw the line on this issue, without further knowledge, I would support banning peanuts and certain obvious peanut products, like peanut butter crackers, from flights. I think pretzels are a fine alternative, and it seems to be a lesser burden for people who don’t have peanut allergies to be required to refrain from consuming peanut products for the duration of a flight than for a peanut allergy sufferer to have to risk the potential serious allergy attack during a flight. But I am interested in hearing from peanut allergy suffers out there– where should the peanut banning line be drawn? Would it need to include Snickers bars? Any product with peanut oil? What might such a ban look like?
As a frequent traveler and the mom of a 23 year old with multiple food allergies, I understand how complicated this type of rule making can be. The “rights” of the peanut allergy sufferer are in direct conflict with the “rights” of the passengers that want to eat peanuts. For many years we avoided the conflict by traveling throughout the U.S. via motorhome. This is not a reasonalbe option for everyone since it can be very time consuming vs. flying.
Now that my son is older and interested in traveling to Europe, we can’t reasonably get there via motorhome. We choose our airlines carefully, carry multiple Epi-pens, pack his food from home, and I pray.
It’s a very scary propostion being 35,000 feet in the air over the open ocean, knowing that each Epi-pen is effective for approximately 10-15 minutes. My son tries to sleep most of the flight and fortunately has a much larger bladder than I do. He gets a window seat and one of us acts as his buffer to the food cart.
This is a scary and risky proposition with a 23 year old who can quickly determine his own symptoms. It would be even scarier with a young child.
The problem with peanuts and tree nuts is that they are dry and flaky so can readily become airborne. Their oils are sticky and stubborn so can endure through a vigorous scrub with soap and water.
My son is also allergic to milk and eggs. Nobody talks about banning them because they don’t have the above mentioned properties of peanuts and tree nuts.
Traveling the world is an envigorating and enlightening experience that many would argue is as important as the structured education that we experience from 12-16+ years. Many people have to travel for work and others are required to relocate to keep their employment.
Back to the question of your rights or mine. I prefer to live in an educated, enlightened, fulfilled, and respectful society.
If my donut is going to set off your diabetes, I will gladly forgo the donut for six to twelve to twenty four hours. I can live without it.
Everyone can live without peanuts and tree nuts. So let’s be reasonable and let all safely travel. Ban the nuts and see how many more families get onboard. Airline revenues will probably go up and that’s a good thing.
BTW, I’ve been in 6 countries in the last 6 months, so I consider myself a frequent flyer.
Check http://www.FoodAllergiesToGo.com for my more airline specific opinions regarding food allergies and food allergy friendly restaurants in many corners of the world. You have to eat once you get there!
Ann@FoodAllergiesToGo.com
Thanks for your comment. The rights debate is a great perspective. Do you think it has any bearing on other issues in the proposed rule?
I disagree. The “rights” debate is not a good perspective in this context. As used by opponents of accommodations, it is an inflammatory bandwagon fallacy that simply appeals to an ideologically-motivated distrust of government and regulation in any case whatsoever. Even if “rights” was a good perspective, still, there are always competing rights to resolve. In this case, the equal right to travel safely trumps the right to eat a bag of peanuts.
The simple reality is that peanuts have become – for reasons not thoroughly understood – a potentially fatal allergen for a growing number of Americans. There problem will get worse before it gets better, as studies indicate that prevalence has tripled among children in recent years. Unless accommodations are made, this will represent lost income for airlines.
There does not need to be a death record to make this decision. What sort of standard is that? Put the onus on the peanut industry to finalize the non-allergenic peanut, not on those suffering life-threatening peanut allergies to ante up a few more deaths.
This executive/administrative decision is so simple, it’s absurd. Discontinue service of peanuts on airlines.
Thank you for your comments Antanagoge. The rights discussion is an important one when trying to evaluate public policy. If there are any other areas of the DOT proposal you think would benefit from a clarification of the rights issue, or the lack thereof, please comment on those issues as well.
Thank you for your common sense, reason and logic. I certainly won’t ante up my peanut allergic child as sacrificial proof that banning peanuts on flights is a simpler solution than emergency landings and potential funerals.
Occam’s razor – the simplest solution is usually the correct or most effective one.
Again, my sincerest thanks for your well made comments.
Thank you for your common sense, reason and logic. I certainly won’t ante up my peanut allergic child as sacrificial proof that banning peanuts on flights is a simpler solution than emergency landings and potential funerals.
Occam’s razor – the simplest solution is usually the correct or most effective one.
Again, my sincerest thanks for your well made comments.
Thank you for your common sense, reason and logic. I certainly won’t ante up my peanut allergic child as sacrificial proof that banning peanuts on flights is a simpler solution than emergency landings and potential funerals.
Occam’s razor – the simplest solution is usually the correct or most effective one.
Again, my sincerest thanks for your well made comments.
Thank you for your common sense, reason and logic. I certainly won’t ante up my peanut allergic child as sacrificial proof that banning peanuts on flights is a simpler solution than emergency landings and potential funerals.
Occam’s razor – the simplest solution is usually the correct or most effective one.
Again, my sincerest thanks for your well made comments.
Thank you for your common sense, reason and logic. I certainly won’t ante up my peanut allergic child as sacrificial proof that banning peanuts on flights is a simpler solution than emergency landings and potential funerals.
Occam’s razor – the simplest solution is usually the correct or most effective one.
Again, my sincerest thanks for your well made comments.
I just have to say, Yeah right. Did your son actually get diagnosed by a doctor? Foolish paranoia is the real illness in most supposed food allergy cases.
I have the same kind of allergy trouble, but with chewing gum, new latex rubber products, new tires, pencil erasers, and burning rubber. I am not allergic to peanuts.
Our daughter is even allergic to airborne peanut dust in a plane when other people open their bag of complementary peanuts in the opposite end of the plane… gasping for air and almost choking.
Once she told the cabin crew about her allergy at the gate AND again when she got on the plane. The result… they gave her a handi-towel and told her to wipe the armrests of her seat off. Then, then served peanuts to everyone on the plane… even the people sitting next to her. Should she have gotten any worse, they might have had to make an emergency landing… at whose expense???
If you take your daughter on a flight knowing that they serve peanuts, and knowing that her reactions are so severe, then you have created the problem, and that emergency landing should come out of your pocketbook. Consider that before you infringe upon the rights of hundreds of others to cater to your needs. Carry an epi pen or use alternate transportation rather than expecting the world to bow to your needs. It’s simply not realistic.
Absolutely! I think the fact that she survived the people next to her having peanuts indicates that the fear is baseless.
An Epi-Pen will not stop the reaction, unless the allergen is removed, or the patient is removed from the air containing the allergen. This is impossible in the confined space of an airplane.
There is no alternate transportation for international flights. And some people may have to fly because governments require them to be certain places at certain times (e.g courts).
There are no masks that stop proteins.
My child has a fairly severe peanut allergy. Although she has never had a reaction on an airplane, she did have a reaction to the dust/smell of peanut products we disposed of when we first found out she had this allergy (after a serious reaction to a peanut butter snack). Because of that, I know that reactions to airborne peanut particles are real and it raises concerns for me about what happens in the small, enclosed environment of an airplane.
Reading the comments posted, I am surprised at the cavalier attitude of many. The idea that those with peanut allergies should take personal responsibility for themselves is of course reasonable. However, just saying that they should carry their epi-pens and other medications with them and deal with whatever reaction may arise misses the point. First, Epi-pens do not always reverse a serious reaction, and so even with the proper medication available death is still a possible outcome. Second, even if the epi-pen reverses the reaction, having the reaction and having to use the epi-pen both are serious health matters not to be taken lightly and may have consequences in their own right, especially if multiple doses of epinephrine are required.
Also, while this is a disability of sorts, the comparison to a person in a wheelchair is not apt. If a person needs a wheelchair to get around, he/she can live without that wheelchair. There is no question whether the absence of the wheelchair by itself may result in that person’s death. In contrast, in the case of peanut allergies the presence of peanuts in the environment can be life threatening.
The slippery slope argument used by others would make sense if there weren’t clear ways to draw the line in this case. There are. Peanuts are the number one anaphylaxis inducing food substance in the world. There are others, but none come close to peanuts. The suggestion that other bans on other things that are not life threatening would follow is slope that don’t find the least bit slippery!
Finally, if we consider this as a question of rights, then we have to consider that one person’s rights will often be in competition or conflict with another’s. This is such a case. Your right to eat what you like versus the allergic person’s right to an environment that is not life-threatening. So, how do we solve this? I suggest that more “essential” right should trump the lesser. If cannot eat what you want, you can still live. If I can’t breath, well that’s another matter, isn’t it?! The other side of any right is the obligations it imposes on others. In this case, the allergic person still has the obligation to take reasonable precautions, but others have an obligation not to create a hazardous environment for that person just so they can enjoy their peanut butter sandwiches.
Will you also ban latex from all flights? What about ANY substance which someone has a potentially fatal allergic reaction to? There are a LOT of those out there. Where do you draw the line? Or do you draw a line at all?
I have been diagnosed – I say that part for the naysayers – by one of the best Allergists in the country. I want to say that I am allergic to peanuts and latex as well as a number of other items. But with the two above items it’s the particles in the air on board that worry me the most when flying. Until the laws change I just do not fly any longer at all. I’d rather drive for days then risk dying in flight. I do not want to miss out on seeing my daughter grow up. I think that anyone with a loved one with a severe allergy would agree with banning any item from a flight that has reactive proteins that could be recycled through the cabin. And if you are so selfish that you cannot live without a peanut or a balloon for a few hours – I hope one day you have an experience that teaches you how it feels to have a serious allergic reaction. If the Center for Disease Control has a warning about the overexposure to natural Latex then don’t you think the airlines should think about the seriousness of allergies, and airborne proteins?
Will you also ban latex from all flights? What about ANY substance which someone has a potentially fatal allergic reaction to? There are a LOT of those out there. Where do you draw the line? Or do you draw a line at all?
Actually, JJMurray, I would support banning such items from being used/taken out during flights, given that they are capable of doing so simply being circulated in the air. You’re right that peanuts are not the only items that can do this, but the list of items that are well known to cause such reactions in this way is not that long. And I would challenge you to find any reason why a person couldn’t go without them for the duration of any flight.
thebob, Thank you for your comment. Do you believe that a peanut free zone would be sufficient to alleviate the problem? or requiring those with allergies to disclose them prior to flight and then ban peanuts only on that flight?
Hello Moderator. I don’t believe that a peanut free zone would suffice, but it is better than nothing. However, I prefer having those with allergies disclose them prior to flight and then ban them on that flight. Southwest Airlines has done this for us in the past and it worked out quite well. Of course, as I said before, I think banning them outright makes more sense.
Amen. Well said.
This discussion is not the DOT or governments responsibility!
The idea of banning things like peanuts on airplanes is ridiculous. It is not the job of DOT to police what is served on airlines. I get itchy & runny eyes when I sit next to people who wear too much perfume or are wearing moldy clothes or have not bathed and have body odors. Should we run people through examinations before boarding the plane to see if they are emitting any smell that could cause allergy? And make them clean up or change clothes? I sneeze sometimes when near dogs and cats that give me allergic reaction. Should we ban all animals from any more flights?
I have a problem when fat persons allow their body parts to hang over and under the arm rest next to me. It causes me to be nervous and can cause serious medical problems.
Do you see how far reaching this can go? This must be stopped now.
If people get sick in public it is their responsibility to stay out of public places.
It is not the rest of us that must be subject to their health problems.
I vote for peanuts to never be outlawed on any public transportation.
If they are banned this means I could not bring my own either? Or I may be subject to being thrown off the plane because I have caused panic.
I also do not like the smell of some food. It causes me to feel nauseous.
On my last flight from China it smelled like someone was eating rotten dog meat. Should I have told the pilot to stop the plane, eject the person and then demand the plane be fumigated?
Lets stop this issue now before it gets any more press and never bring it up again.
Amish: After typing my comments I read yours and it was refreshing to see another world traveler with the same thoughts. I suspect the people who are behind this rule change fly once a year to Disneyland and they want to change the rules for those of us who actually fly regularly.
Your suspicions about who is behind this are just your clouded musings. There is real data showing allergic reactions to peanut dust in the aircraft. The fact that you are uninformed does not mean the evidence does not exist. A willingness to go without peanuts for the duration of a flight is a small show of civility and empathy. Our family flies regularly and internationally. We are very careful and inform the airlines of our child’s allergy. It would be a life-saving and life-changing regulation if peanuts were banned on all flights. People who like peanuts can simply eat a giant bag after the plane lands. It is good for your personal growth to be able to think of other people’s needs.
This is not a matter of itchy eyes or a runny nose. This is a matter of the airway closing down (preventing breathing), or the entire body going into anaphylactic shock. It causes death.
I have such an allergy, but to chewing gum and rubber. I almost died twice. For this reason, I can never use any form of public transportation.
The proper way to do this is to ban a substance from the conveyance only if a passenger on that conveyance has a life-threatening allergy to it.
Gene: I hope that the airline would charge you! There are millions of Americans who are afflicted by medical conditions; Asthma, Hemophilia, High Blood Pressure, Risk of Strokes, and the list goes on and on. Each of these people take responsibility for their own health. When they leave home they prepare for the dangerous they will face even those which are not dangerous to others.
When you ask us, the general public to take responsibility for the safety of your daughter you are ignoring your own responsibilities and setting a bad example for your child.
First, I have my fair share of allergies and have spent a fair share of time in the ER, with allergic reactions. As a parent, I understand the pain that some of the parents have related in their stories.
We, the ones with allergies are very few and far between, when we consider the flying public. I have my share of epi-pens, in the event one is needed or prednisone, should I have a case of anaphylaxis. As they say in the BSA, “Be Prepared.”
I guess I am fortunate since my symptomology is always similar in nature and covers a four to 12 hour period: Itchy skin, itchy scalp, swelling of joints, poor demeanor, then hives and off to the ER if an anti-anaphylaxis drug isn’t in use by the time hives break out, which is usually 4 hours after the first symptoms start to manifest themselves or the scalp becomes itchy.
If this is a case where people, with these allergies are deemed “handicapped,” these people should have their medication on their person, to mitigate anaphylaxis.
I do. After the medication is ingested or injected, relief comes in less than five minutes and the only discomfort I have had is a case of the sweats and / or a minor headache.
When peanuts are served, they come individually wrapped and it is the responsibility of the passenger to dispose of the wrapper, accordingly.
Is DOT going down a slippery slope? What if the Americans of Moslem and Orthodox Jewish Faiths demand that pork products be banned from all air flight? What if the Americans of the Hindustani or vegeterian beliefs, start demanding no more beef? How about those “dairy folks?” No more cheese or milk?
I regret to say that although pretzels have been offered as an alternative, they aren’t a substitute for peanuts. Also, I have been advised that cashews are edible by people with peanut allergies and could be used as a substitute.
Since medication is portable (Injectibles and oral), I believe that a warning that peanuts are being used is sufficent and that flight attendents be trained in the usage of epi-pens for this purpose.
When airlines are forced to limit the types of food it can serve, esecially when less than 1% of the flying public it serves, it impacts price, quality of service and capitulates to the will of the very small minority, in which there is a ready solution that is present.
Maybe we should have “plastic bubbles” for each individual passenger?
I say “no” to such a food rule and would encourage all passengers and parents to execise a little responsibility and be pro-active in the introduction of the appropriate medication, when necessary.
Note: A long time ago, to be a flight attendent, one also had to be a Registered Nurse.
“I guess I am fortunate since my symptomology is always similar in nature and covers a four to 12 hour period”
Yes, you are fortunate. For some people (my son) the life-threatening reaction of airway constriction is immediate. I couldn’t carry enough Epi-pens to allow the plane time enough to land so that we could get to an ER where a doctor–not a nurse–could save his life. I’m not an expert like you, but last I heard death by suffocation takes a mere 9 minutes. It would be good business for the airlines to voluntarily do everything they can to avoid re-directing aircraft due to an emergency and ruining everyone’s very important trip to Cancun. Perhaps they have contracts with Planter’s?
Your concern about religious people requesting further bans on food reveals a lot about you. I’ll quell your fears with this: My son is not offended by peanuts nor do I have a book that says he shouldn’t eat them; peanuts could kill him. It is a scientifically proven fact that anaphylaxis exists and can kill after peanut exposure. Someone above likened this to the Boogey Man, but if I give my son a peanut, he could die (and almost has); everytime I look under his bed for the Boogey Man, there’s nothing. It’s pretty reliable data.
Let life and death be the standard for what foods to ban, and no one should have a problem with this issue. I didn’t know that there was a sizable peanut lobby, nor that so many Americans tie their rights, freedom, and understanding of Capitalism to their ability to eat peanuts. But I’ve always known that they love to tie their prejudices to matters they don’t understand, and this board is proof of the reason WHY the government resorts to making laws that should be common sense and decency.
Computer_Forensics_Expert and Immunoglobulin, thank you for your comments. You both seem to have good perspectives, based on personal experiences. Do you have personal experiences with other topics discussed in this rule? The DOT really wants to hear comments from a variety of people on issues such as baggage fees, tarmac delays, and bumping compensation. Use the rule dashboard at the left to navigate to this different areas to have your voice heard there as well!
Who’s talking hives? They itch. Try having your airway swell shut and fill with mucus. You are dead in 3 minutes.
If you take your daughter on a flight knowing that they serve peanuts, and knowing that her reactions are so severe, then you have created the problem, and that emergency landing should come out of your pocketbook. Consider that before you infringe upon the rights of hundreds of others to cater to your needs. Carry an epi pen or use alternate transportation rather than expecting the world to bow to your needs. It’s simply not realistic.
Tiffany, the DOT is just recognizing a product that is being provided by companies that pose a serious threat to a fairly large number of people. Most other products aboard flights are considered non-allergenic or do not have particulates that become airborne which is the case with the bagged peanuts. Also, finding another mode of transportation is not an option for me as I might be the Captain on your flight one day. Your suggestions are that discard 26,000 hours of flight experience and not fly or use my epipen because airlines wish to serve peanuts? I would think that suggestion is not realistic. I understand that for those who do not have that/an allergy it might seem “overblown” but I can assure you that overall, it is not. It is simply a desire to eliminate a #1 food allergy product that can become airborne in a small, pressurized aluminum (soon to be carbon fiber with the 787!) tube.
How about people with gluten allergies… we better ban pretzels too… See how ridiculous and out of control this can get if we let it? This isn’t a DOT issue, it’s not a disability issue like a person that needs a ramp for a wheelchair, it’s a common sense issue that requires the person with the disability to prepare for the isolated emergency by taking proper steps like an epi pen, or an allergy tablet, the same as they would anywhere else, rather than expecting a controlling governmental agency to impose more bans that in effect infringe upon the rights of far more people… things have gotten far out of control. How many times have you seen a completely healthy person with no obvious disability get out of a vehicle in a parking lot with a wheel chair placard on their mirror? I know two people exactly like this that have been able to work the system well enough to get such placards when they don’t deserve or require them, they’re in fact lazy. At some point, this nonsense has to stop.
Thank you for your comment. What do you think about the other regulations the DOT is proposing in this rule? Do you have similar objections to any of them? Use the Rule Dashboard on the left to see what other issues you might have something to say about.
Tiffany462, gluten allergies are not normally spread through the air. The limiting factors on such a rule should be:
- Such a passenger is actually on the flight.
- The passenger is affected in such a way that can cause permanent damage or death.
- The allergen is spread by airborne or contact means, not through consumption of the food.
Examples of such substances are peanuts, chewing gum, new rubber products, perfumes, and some skin softening products.
What should be done:
- The allergic person should declare the allergy when buying the ticket.
- The plane should be cleaned of such substances before the flight.
- The materials other people have should be checked in the baggage.
- Other passengers who object should be offered an alternate flight.
And those “obviously health” people you see have invisible heart conditions that can produce a heart attack if they overexert. Also, you might be seeing a normal spouse or relative parking the car to pick up a handicapped person who is in the building.
Thank you for your post midimagic. The DOT is interested in hearing alternative solutions.
Tiffany 462, an Epi-Pen stops the reaction for a few minutes at most. During that time, the allergen must be removed, or the allergic person must be removed from the allergen. And it is dangerous to use a second Epi-Pen soon after the first one. It is not a cure, but a stopgap measure to save life. There is probably not an airport within reach during the time the Epi-Pen works.
Your nonsense has to stop. Some people are required to fly, often by government decree (e.g. a court appearance).
I could not be happier if airlines discontinue serving peanuts on flights. As a life long peanut allergy sufferer, I have always held out hope that airlines would recognize that they are providing their passengers with the #1 food allergy product. I have seen many arguments that they should be banned in restaurants, ballparks etc., however, those venues are completely voluntary (establishments that promote/provide peanuts that are shelled and thrown on the floor do not get my business) but airline travel is a closed quarters, necessity for many people. I, for one, have to contend with residue and airborne particulate from those little bags of roasted peanuts served on aircraft almost on a daily basis since I am an airline Captain. For 22 years I have been meticulous with keeping my work environment (flight deck) safe for me by not consuming items that may contain peanuts, avoiding touching my eyes and asking my co-pilot not to consume bagged peanuts (other peanut products that don’t risk going airborne are usually ok). Unfortunately, my ability to control my environment becomes more difficult when I am assigned a reposition flight and must ride as a passenger. I advise the flight attendants and hope they remember. I have suffered mild/moderate anaphyalactic and asthmatic distress if I am unaware that someone opened a bag of peanuts. Thankfully that type of exposure is not life threatening (at least not yet) but the concern is very real. I am not a child, I am not traveling for pleasure and I don’t have the power of completely removing something that can be life threatening for me while at work so I do the best I can to continue safely performing my duties as an airline pilot. I support the ban for airlines not to serve bagged peanut products and support the requirement that a public address announcement be made for those that have brought their own on board refrain from consuming them. When traveling in the cabin, I am always aware of those around me and what they are consuming. I have come to find that my sensitivity is mostly a distance of 1 row forward and back and two seats laterally (about 5-6 feet). If I can detect the odor of peanuts then I become concerned. In case you were wondering, yes I do carry an epinephrine auto injector (never used one), Allegra and antihistamine eye drops. Not having peanuts served during a flight would be of great benefit for me and other allergy sufferers. As a side note, commercial grade, not cold pressed, peanut oil is fine for most peanut allergy sufferers. The process of extracting the oil leaves none of the offending protein. I have consumed many products prepared with peanut oil, albeit with great trepidation, and have not had any adverse reactions.
I long for the day when I can book a flight for my family. But at the moment, that seems practically impossible as my 4 year old son has a severe peanut allergy. He has reacted in an enclosed room before. Thankfully, we were on land, not thousands of feet up in the air, making treatment much more feasible. I am terrified of being on a plane and him coming into contact with peanuts in any way shape or form. I have contacted airlines to see if a request could be made to keep a flight peanut free, but was advised not to fly with them instead or to simply stand up on the flight and beg everyone not to eat peanuts during the flight. I have chosen not to fly. We live 13 hours from our family. It is a drive-able distance, but I would love to be able to spend more time with my family than getting there and back or consider a vacation where driving would not be an option (i.e. Hawaii).
I know a day will come when we need to get somewhere in a limited amount of time. At this point, I would have to find childcare for my son as he could not come with us, or not attend at all.
My son did not choose this allergy. There is nothing he can do to make it go away. He is dependent upon other people to keep him healthy by preventing him from ingesting or inhaling any peanut product. In this way it is a disability.
I remain hopeful the the DOT will ban all peanut products on flights and inform all passengers on a flight when a person with such an allergy is on board.
I long for the day when I can book a flight for my family. But at the moment, that seems practically impossible as my 4 year old son has a severe peanut allergy. He has reacted in an enclosed room before. Thankfully, we were on land, not thousands of feet up in the air, making treatment much more feasible. I am terrified of being on a plane and him coming into contact with peanuts in any way shape or form. I have contacted airlines to see if a request could be made to keep a flight peanut free, but was advised not to fly with them instead or to simply stand up on the flight and beg everyone not to eat peanuts during the flight. I have chosen not to fly. We live 13 hours from our family. It is a drive-able distance, but I would love to be able to spend more time with my family than getting there and back or consider a vacation where driving would not be an option (i.e. Hawaii).
I know a day will come when we need to get somewhere in a limited amount of time. At this point, I would have to find childcare for my son as he could not come with us, or not attend at all.
My son did not choose this allergy. There is nothing he can do to make it go away. He is dependent upon other people to keep him healthy by preventing him from ingesting or inhaling any peanut product. In this way it is a disability.
I remain hopeful the the DOT will ban all peanut products on flights and inform all passengers on a flight when a person with such an allergy is on board.
howie — My son has a severe peanut allergy diagnosed by respected allergy doctors so it is not paranoia. The part about food allergies (anaphylaxis in particular) is that each reaction can be different. One exposure can simply lead to hives or vomiting, while another exposure can trigger full anaphylactic shock which may be fatal, if untreated. Some people my only react when the item is ingested or some when comes into contact with the skin. This issue is not a joke or to be taken lightly. Consider this. The epi-pen emergency medication is effective for 15-20 minutes per dose before the patient needs to get to the hospital. If you were on the plane with my son and he has an allergic reaction on a flight from the East Coast to the West Coast, he would need to take several epi-pens in case an emergency landing would be necessary. So would you rather divert your plane to save my child’s life in the event of an accidental exposure because you really need a peanut on a six hour flight or could you hold off and avoid endangering my child’s life and not risk impacting a whole planeload of people?
I wish no one would have to deal with this issue. I don’t relish the fact that we would inconvenience other travelers, but I think that if it was your child you may think differently. We deal with this on a daily basis and have only travelled by plane one time. We contacted the airline in advance, found the first flight of the day to ensure the plane was as clean as possible, took several epi-pens, covered the seats with towels and worried the whole time and that was only 1.5 hours.
My vote would be to ban peanuts and peanut products only on a flight where a passenger with a peanut allergy requests a peanut-free flight in advance.
Peanuts should never be banned anywhere! Best food for the size available. If my kid’s school were to attempt to ban them, they would be the target of a discrimination lawsuit. Food allergies are incredibly rare. Most people who believe they are allergic only think so because their parents misinformed them out of total paranoia. c1r2mom – have you actually HAD that reaction, or do you just think you might?
I think it’s fair to ban airlines from serving packets of peanuts. If people want peanuts, they can certainly get their own and really, why do you need peanuts specifically? On Southwest you can already request a peanut free flight as far as what they offer (they offer crackers instead).
DO I think they should ban all peanut products, such as peanut butter or Snickers or things like that? No. Maybe work to create a peanut free zone, allow people with allergies to move and/or make the peanut product eating person move. Dust won’t spread in that way, making it safer for people who are allergic to peanuts, but without restricting too much the rights of others. Even schools, for example, generally have a place where students can eat their lunch – a peanut free table or something similar. We need to balance things.
For the record, I have friends with gluten allergies, etc who have a limited set of foods they can eat, peanut products being one of them. If we start regulating food too much, you’re going to always be having someone who can’t eat anything allowed on the flight due to their own sensitivities.
*I’d like to add – I don’t think airlines need to necessarily serve peanut products. If you want peanut stuff, bring it, but you don’t have a “right” to be served peanuts by the airline. I say this as someone with no allergy. But banning people from bringing peanut products – especially products that just contain peanuts as one ingredient, not bagged – goes too far.
Well, a peanut allergy should be known in children flying, but sadly, too often it is too late then. I do not back banning peanuts, but even in doubt, a child would get peanuts, when they can produce proof of no such allergy, if in doubt, give something else. A law that prevents harm, does not have to be a blanket law. There are intelligent ways to do this. There is a way, to tell someone whether or not a patient is allergic to peanuts. It could be part of a passport. What about salt sensitive folks and pretzels? What about gluten allergy?
An outright ban on all commercial flights is unjustifiable and would be strongly fought by the peanut industry, congress, and others. Follow existing models. For example, in schools across America, there are peanut-free classrooms and peanut-free lunch tables in cafeterias. Peanut-free schools in whole are rare to non-existent.
If you mandate the offering of peanut-free flights, airlines are likely to simply phase out peanuts from their menus.
For a peanut-free flight, it is not enough to simply ban handing out peanut snacks. All passengers must be told and screened for peanuts and peanut-containing products. Those PB&J sandwiches are ubiquitous — I’m sure at least one passenger has one on most every flight.
So yes, provide a safe, peanut-free environment, but don’t go overboard and beyond what is necessary and customary to accommodate the disability.
I feel bad for the peanut industry. All this negativity translates to economic losses. I would encourage you not to single out peanuts but rather all allergyns. Allow people to specify their allergyn and severity, and then either make the area or entire flight free of the allergyn (including informing and restricting what passengers can board with — oh, and they should wash their hands well to remove the oils/allergyns).
Whatever happened to personal responsibility? I am a firm believer that people should not put themselves in harms way…that being said, if a person wants to do something that may cause them harm, then need to take precautions to mitigate the harmful effects, or not partake in the activity. If you want to fly and have an allergy, you should insure that you have medication available and wear a mask, gloves and whatever else you need to protect yourself.
One percent reported incidents is hardly enough to attack an entire industry, be it the Airlines or the Peanut industries.
What next must be banned to appease those people that have no personal responsibility?
As a traveler with no peanut allergy, I am nevertheless sympathetic to the problems that can arise. However, I think that either a complete restriction or a buffer zone should not be an airline responsibility. One cannot sterilize the environment of all dangerous or potentially dangerous items or conditions.
I believe that responsibility resides with the allergy-sensitive person, to make the decision on exposure, and have the medical items needed to deal with individual exposures. Certainly, airlines could carry Epi-pens, but the allergic individual should rely on their own medication to control an allergic reaction.
I believe, that NO regulation should be adopted on this issue.
I would only support restrictive rules banning passengers from carrying any items containing peanuts if and only if airlines resumed serving free meals. Most people who do not suffer peanut allergies do not know how to purchase foods that don’t contain peanuts. It is unreasonable to expect that every single passenger on every single flight will avoid for example, peanut butter crackers, peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, chocolates, and Thai food. If airlines served free food on the flights once again, they could make sure the food did not contain any peanut products, and the passengers would not feel the need to bring their own food and accidentally expose sensitive passengers to peanut products.
We recently flew with our 9 year old peanut allergic child. We notified the airline in advance as we have for every other flight. I do travel prepared for emergencies,knowing that an epi pen will only work for a short period but carrying it nontheless.
The airline we were on, Delta, announced early in 2010 that they would NO longer be serving peanuts, which is why we chose this airline. First flight, no problem, serving pretzels or cookies. Return flight, as the attendants were approaching our aisle, I thought I was smelling peanuts. I asked and Yes indeedy, they were serving peanuts. Ddn’t know she was onboard, and Gee they’re sorry but they haven’t actually implemnted the policy they advertised of no peanuts. They quickly gave us a 3 aisle buffer zone, which totally made the other passengers angry as they wanted the same peanuts the other passengers a row or two ahead of them had gotten. Always nice to have people make angry comments aimed at a CHILD. Yes my daughter felt terrible and was very embarrassed, and I was angry that she had put in a situation that embarrassed her and, more importantly, I was angry that her health was in danger.
The buffer zones, even when implemented in advance of food service simply can not work. Peanuts have oil and that oil gets on the hands of every single person eating them. The oil is then transferred onto every single surface of the airplane, and we all know that no cursory cleaning will take care of it. Even if she is in a “clean zone”, the previous 1000 flights have so contaminated the plane that it is not safe for her. And the bathrooms, armrests, overhead bins, you name it. ANY surface that is touched by a peanut eating person is deadly to my daughter. Fortunately for us, she does not have a severe airborne allergy, or the smell of the forward cabin’s 100 passenger’s munching on peanuts would have killed her!
Being asked to forgo peanut snacks for one flight, one snack, one meal is not a big deal for people when the cost of that snack could be a life. I mean really, even if it’s your fav snack in the world, wouldn’t you give it up for a day if it meant YOUR child might die?? This seems like a no brainer!
In this discussion many mention a ‘slippery slope’ – extending to examples of banning of perfume, latex, body oder, etc. This point is interesting, but what if we stand back for a moment and consider what the intended impact of a regulation like this could be? The clear sort of first order response you would expect would be to protect the livelihood / convenience of the sensitive members of our society. I would argue, however, that there is a more dangerous unintended consequence inherent in removing the responsibility of these individuals to be so cautious and concerned for their own safety; by promoting an ‘allergen free’ environment you dilute individual responsibility by distributing the liability evenly to those who travel with the allergic individual.
More clearly: (hypothetically) packets of peanuts are banned on planes. Passenger A – allergic to peanuts, Passenger B – packs a snack containing traces of peanuts for his/her x hour plane trip. Serendipitously seated next to one another passenger A realizes too late that B has ____ – and ends up dead. Passenger A’s family wants to know who is responsible?
You can’t search everyone’s bag for explosives / sharp objects / and peanuts. You cannot ensure that everyone will read signs and participate willingly. If someone purposely or even accidentally brings a banned peanut on the plane – should they be arrested? or just scoffed at very harshly?
In my opinion, the question of a ban is absurd. I would gladly forgo my allotment of peanuts to preserve someone else’s comfort – but you’re not going to find any solidarity among a random sample of individuals. So I would assert that the most reasonable solution is that allergic people remain guarded in their own concern as this is the situation in which the most value will be generated to motivate proper management. Their steadfast concern for their own health, or that of a loved one will generate the safest environment for everyone involved.
Rather than debating where peanuts should and shouldn’t be, I believe we would be better off investing this energy in trying to find ways to help people better manage their own allergies. This situation (in my mind) does not mandate legislation – but instead reveals that we aren’t yet properly equipped (though tools and further understanding) to allow these members of our society a comfortable / regular life.
I know that peanut allergies are a serious problem for some in our society, but I think DOT is on a slippery slope if it bans peanuts. I am allergic to tree nuts and I know others that are allergic to wheat or dairy, is the DOT going to ban those products as well? What if someone buys peanuts at the airport shop, how will the airlines police those peanuts. I do like the idea of using technology to attack the problem. It would seem easy for the airline to include as part of the buying process a drop down menu about being allergic to peanuts or wheat or something else.
I have two children with multiple severe food allergies. I support a ban on any food with peanut ingredients on airplanes (processed in a factory or may contain trace warnings are acceptable to me)actual peanut ingredients in the actual ingredient list should be banned . Presently We only fly airlines that do not serve peanuts or agree to not serve it on our flight (like southwest airlines does). although, once on a southwest flight my daughter had a mild reaction. We think it was from residue from the previous flight. it was mild enough that benadryl was sufficient to control the symptoms. Individuals with severe allergies typically carry their own emergency medical kit (epi-pen, benadryl, steroid, inhaler). I wouldn’t expect the airline to provide the emergency medical equipment. we carry ours wherever we go at all times.
Sorry about the format. Everything HAD been neatly spaced.
The buffer zone solution would not give me any confidence. The time that my daughter had a reaction it was right after visiting the restroom. In a buffer zone situation the person could still be exposed to peanut residue in other parts of the plane (e.g. the restroom door handle, sink faucet, etc). Now we carry wipes and wipe down every surface in our seating area and in the restroom when we fly an airline like southwest that serves peanuts on previous flights even if they aren’t serving it on ours.
Welcome to the community Martine. It seem that you take active precautions to avoid peanut allergy problems. What steps do you think the airline should take?
What do others think about the proposed buffer zone?
Buffer zones do not help in common areas like bathrooms. Also, that means that the persons prior to the flight ate peanuts there. I mentioned on another discussion board that the flight crew pointed my son out and told passengers they could not have Peanut M&Ms because my son had an allergy. The passengers were all nice about it but it made me very uncomfortable. I have seen people be really nasty about asking them not to do something because fo someone else.
Thanks for the information? Are other contributors aware of similar experiences?
I was told once when I booked a flight that the airline (I believe continental) didn’t serve them anyone and after taking off found out that they DID still serve them and was told, when I voiced my concern that there was no guarantee. I am a person who is SEVERELY allergic and the passenger beside me who accepted the peanuts, hearing about my concern, could have cared less that his neighbor (me) was covering her nose with her sleeve for the entire 3hr flight with an inhaler in hand. While it will never be banned as a terminal they can have “Peanut Free” flights and advertise them that way… and I guarantee they will get more business. Anyone who flies that flight and agrees upon purchase of the tickets to abide by rules, should be fine if found with a product in violation. I mean afterall, if it wasn’t a big deal, whiy would public schools and daycares be banning it across the US?
c1r2mom: I’m curious how much you fly each year?
I’ve experienced tantrums from fully grown adults because they were restricted in their peanut consumption in daycare environments. I’d rather not have this experience on a flight. My daughter will only fly on peanut-free planes (if peanut is on the ingredients list, the item should be banned. Made in a peanut facility is fine and the allergic individual should know not to consume the item. As far as I understand it, highly processed peanut oil is safe.)
Just read about a buffer zone, and the lavitories, good point, I also, know if Flight attendants eat these items with there hands it still would create a problem also, that is why no one has wanted to address this, that is why it is important that it is. How do you stop people from breing it one, and such that is ahard issue
My 9 year old peanut-allergic son had his last major exposure 2 years ago when he touched a smear of peanut butter left under a tabletop where someone else had touched. He then wiped his hand on his jeans and then touched his ear and his cheek. All without realizing it was peanut butter he’d touched. He immediately broke out in horrible hives and I gave him benadryl and got him home, stripped and bathed. All the while, I was watching for breathing problems and other signs of anaphylaxis. This is why I don’t support buffer zones alone. They don’t address peanuts stuck down in cushions, left in seatbacks or peanut product oils left, well, anywhere by earlier passengers/flights.
Why is this anyone else’s problem? Your child had an unpleasant reaction. NOT a dangerous one. This is not a life or death issue, it is only a matter of comfort. If a smear of peanut butter that got wiped on his face just caused hives, then there really isn’t anything to be afraid of is there?
The buffer zone does not work. First – if the allergy is severe enough to be airborne – the air in the airplane is circulated through the whole plane, not just the three rows in front and behind you. It also singles out the person and makes the people in the buffer zone upset that they had to sit there.
I don’t see the harm in banning at least the service of peanuts on the airlines. The ban should include all peanut and peanut containing products. Recently we flew across the country and followed all of the procedures the airline gave us in turn they promised to clean seats and create a buffer zone to sheild my 3 year old son from any peanut exposure. As I walked to me seat expecting what I was promised I find left over peanuts in our seats! I came prepared with wipes and medicine just in case. The airline offered no assistance in fixing the problem. After cleaning everything up and getting all settled in, I had to hold my son for the next 5 hours because it was too risky. At the onset of an attack the use of an epi-pen would give us about 20 minutes to be in a hospital. During the snack a member of the flight crew pointed at us and told the other passengers that he could not offer them peanut M&Ms because there was an allergy sufferer on board. Thankfully, after a dose of benadryl my son was fine.
I do think the passenger should come equipped with medication if case of exposure. Most severe allergy suffers carry medicine with them anyway. It would not hurt for the airline to carry addition medication because the epi-pen only allows 20 minutes to seek immediate medical attention.
I forgot to mention that I would not expect the airline to provide my son’s medication! Currently southwest does not serve peanut products on their flights. After this experience we only fly with Southwest!
That’s crazy. What airline was it?
Southwest DOES serve peanuts (thank god) unless you impose your paranoia on the rest of us and request a peanut free flight.
I would like to see the airlines stop serving peanuts. Having them not serve peanuts when my children are going to be on a particular flight doesn’t do much for us. If they have served 200 people 200 little bags of peanuts on the 200 previous flights…. – it makes my skin crawl.
We can live with them serving other foods that “may” contain peanuts. It would be nice if they at least had one “safe” alternative for my children to eat – or allow them to bring safe food of their own on the plane with them.
As for the “slippery slope” argument – I don’t buy it. I’ve never heard of anyone having a wheat allergy going into anaphylaxis from some one sitting next to them eating a sandwich. People with food allergies have reactions when they INJEST food. The issue with peanuts is that when 200 people open 200 little bags of nuts and all the dust goes Poof! There is enough peanut dust in the air for some one (like my sons) to actually injest the allergen.
As for meds – everyone that has a true life threatening food allergy should be carrying their own epi-pens with them. I wouldn’t think that the airlines are going to want to get into the hassle of giving passengers medicine.
I would like to mention though that on the last flight I was on with my children we payed quite a bit of money on a “snack box” that didn’t have the ingredients labeled on the outside of the box, only to find that most of the food in the box was not safe for my kids to eat. A list of ingredients should always be available to us before we have to pay for food.
My son has a severe peanut allergy, we also avoid tree nuts. While he’s never had a reaction to just being around peanuts his allergist has suggested we do what we can to avoid contact. Flying makes that difficult. We’ve only flown once since we found out about his allergy and thankfully it was not on a flight that served peanuts. I did later take a flight (on Delta) by myself where they served peanuts and it made me cringe. I think that they should stop serving peanuts or things that directly contain them. Yes, other passengers could bring on their own, but that isn’t as bad as the entire plane having a package of peanuts!!! And just because you haven’t currently had an airborne reaction to peanuts doesn’t mean you won’t have one ever. Most (responsible) allergy sufferers carry their own epinephrine auto injector BUT I don’t think it would hurt for the airlines to carry a few in their medical supplies. We typically carry two because I know that the effects of it can wear off in 15-20 minutes, so just in case we are far from a hospital we have an extra, but I know not everyone does that, or even if they do, being in an airplane it is likely to take much longer to get the medical help you need. I would love to see a ban on peanuts though, I’d feel better about flying if that happened and possibly do it more often, especially since trips back “home” take almost 20 hours by car!
Allergist has an agenda. the fact that he has never reacted is more telling than any suggestion by the self-servig allergist.
While a peanut allergy is a huge issue, what about other allergies? 10% of the population is allergic to perfumes yet this is not mentioned here. Airlines are filled with perfumes and international flights sell it duty free. Personal air purifiers are not allowed so it leaves 10% of the population unable to fly or risk anaphylaxis on every flight.
Thanks for the comment! It looks like the proposed rule is narrowly focused on peanuts. Where is the allergy data from in your post? Is it misguided for the FAA to only address peanut allergies or what’s your position?
Yes, perfumes and many other products are allergens, most would be classified as irritants and are not life threatening. Peanuts are in a unique class of allergen that is quite widespread among the general population that has airborne particulate and that can be life threatening. This is about documents risk mitigation for a voluntary product provided by a company.
I have one child who is severely allergic to peanuts. She is one of those few who react from dust, practically. We made a decision at an early age simply not to fly. The airlines have no cohesive, consistent policy and this issue is not something we can show up and be surprised about.
It would help children, and adults, like my daughter if the DOT banned peanuts on all flights. Of course, asking airlines to stop serving peanuts is not enough. The DOT would need to require that no passenger bring them aboard as well. Let’s face it, cuts to the airlines have put food at the bottom of their priority list (hence handing out “snacks” like peanuts). So…if you will be flying for hours and have little prospect for food, what is the perfect protein packed food you can bring that needs no refrigeration?
I almost feel like banning peanuts would give people a false sense of security UNLESS a complete and total ban was instituted (airline & passengers).
That being said, I appreciate the argument about other allergies, as well as perfume (though I do not believe anaphylaxis is generally an issue for those allergic to perfume). Why do we need food on board at all? Perhaps that is a bit naive and narrow-minded, but how about a drinks-only rule? Do 1 or 2 hours flights really need to serve ANY kind of food? Propose that to the airlines as a cost saving measure! (Of course, longer flights or international is a whole other ballgame.)
So, to answer the DOT questions over there <—- I would say:
1. From empirical evidence, I believe there is a strong likelihood of a peanut allergy sufferer having a severe reaction if the conditions were right. My daughter developed hives from peanut shell residue that had touched a banana peel. She touched the peel to her skin and broke out in hives. It doesn’t take much.
2. I feel strongly that people should take responsibility for themselves and, therefore, would expect all allergy sufferers to carry their own epinephrine. However, I am under the assumption that a plane would have first aid available and possibly a defibrillator. Adding epinephrine to this kit would only be a good business practice.
3. I would feel (relatively) safe on a plane where peanut-ingredient products are banned from airline and passengers, but “may contains” were permitted. My allergic daughter would not consume them, but the chance of her having a reaction from cross contact or inhalation are virtually nil. Again, it’s about personal responsibility. We will take care of her food. We just need help keeping her alive and safe from other peoples food.
Thanks you for sharing your story and this information. If a total ban (airline and passenger) weren’t possible, what would the ideal policy you’d support as far as the airlines conduct is concerned?
Few if any airlines offer peanuts anymore. But peanuts are not the only allergen- what about pets? More people are allergic to pets than peanuts.
Thanks for commenting. Is there some place we should look to find information regarding which airlines distribute peanut foods or foods in contact with peanuts? Also, where should I look for the data regarding pet and peanut allergies? Let’s get the information out in the open so we can start sifting through it!
I know Delta serves peanuts as I travel to and from Detroit on Delta. I was really surprised to learn this as I didn’t know until I was on the plane and in the air. I mean really, shouldn’t they tell people before they pay for a flight?
Oh and the two row minimum around a person with a peanut allergy is a joke. Someone with a peanut allergy is not going to be protected by that!
Airlines should disclose potential allergens on a flight (i.e. pets allowed, food served, etc.).
I agree – it’s be wise to disclose potential allergens. However, what happens beyond the disclosure?
I agree, r88c, there are more allergens than just peanuts (my family has a few beyond peanuts in our own list.) However, there’s a difference between my cat allergy (stuffy head, watery eyes) and my daughter’s peanut, tree nut and shellfish allergies – threat of anaphylaxis, vomiting, swelling of lips, itching in the mouth, etc.) *Any* food allergen (any allergen) can trigger life threatening reactions – BUT, peanuts and tree nuts combine for the top cause of ER visits for treatment of life threatening symptoms each year.
WHole peanuts/nuts are also more apt to release dust particles through the air system, then, say, opening a milk carton. Is it perfect? no but it is a start.
As a mother of a peanut allergic child, I won’t fly with her on flights that serve peanuts. I won’t fly with her if i can’t have her EpiPen with her in flight.
Peanut allergies are severe allergies. The one item that people are deathly allergic to can easily be eliminated from food served by airlines. People allergic to peanuts also have to worry about other people eating peanuts as residue can be left, or peanut “dust” from bags opening can potentially cause a reaction. As previously stated, banning it from one flight is not very helpful to the severely allergic. Think about a young child. If someone left residue or even a peanut on a seat from a prior flight – if the child touches it and then touches their mouth a severe reaction could occur. As for questions of why look at peanuts – an article on CNN’s website looking at 31 food allergy deaths, says that “More than 80 percent of deaths were caused by peanuts or tree nuts.” http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/conditions/03/26/food.allergies/index.html
Another statistic give by AAAAI (American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology) is that fatal food anaphylaxis is most often caused by peanuts (50-62%) and tree nuts (15-30%).” http://aaaai.org/media/statistics/allergy-statistics.asp
Thanks for the data!
More than 31 people drop dead each day FOR NO REASON. Food allergies are so rare, that the rest of the world should not concern themselves. IF you have a problem (doubtful) then it is up to YOU to take precautions!
WI feel sorry for anyone with any type of severe allerery. What about the other causes of the 20% of deaths or don’t they count? SHouldn’t we ban eggs, latex, shellfish etc as there may be a passenger who has a severe reaction to those.
I would support a full ban of peanut products on any airline. Peanut reactions can be life threatening. An individual doesn’t have to consume the product to have a life threatening reaction. They can have contact or inhalation reactions.Restricting to certain flights is not enough, as residue can be rampant. Providing buffer zones is a thoughtful gesture, but from a practical point of view does not work. With so many food choices available, why are peanuts a necessary choice? I am a physician , and author on the subject. I have free food allergy online support forums with 3000 members. http://www.drmomsallergyrx.com/
I would be more than willing to work with you in any way on this decision making process. Feel free to contact me with any questions you may have.
Welcome to Regulation Room and thanks for the offer. We’re looking forward to your future thoughtful comments.
The allergic community is so grateful that you are allowing our voices to be heard. The decision you are considering could save many lives. Thank you. From the bottom of my heart, anything you need or want to know please ask.If you email me, I will send you my telephone number author@drmomsallergyrx.com
And hasn’t there been new studies that show 1 out of 10 people with a peanut allergy will have a reaction on an airplane?
Here is a link to that study
http://foodallergysupport.drmomsallergyrx.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1078&p=2526&hilit=flying#p2526
Thanks for the information Dr Mom.
So that more users and the DOT could access the information, perhaps you could post a link to a pdf version of the study or the name and author of the study.
Has ANYONE ever actually died on a plane from eating peanuts? Didn’t think so. Most food allergies are imagined. You clearly have a financial interest in promoting the myth of food allergy. If someone is actually that allergic, they should stay home and not inconvenience the rest of us.
I wish it were imagined – I have a 9-year old with a peanut allergy and she has had a reaction on a plane due to peanuts being served. The doctor above understands that the peanut allergy is different from most ofter food allergies because in it life threatening. I don’t understand how not being able to eat peanuts for a few hours out of your life is worth putting another life at risk.
Howie,
You have no idea what you are talking about. They are not mostly imagined and it is a serious issue. If you can’t survive hours or days without peanuts then that is your problem and if you think it is that much of an inconvenience then maybe you should see somebody to deal with your own lack of discipline.
The airlines/DOT should absolutely adopt a blanket policy concerning severe food allergies to peanuts but not limit it to that, I would like to see it extended to tree nuts. Many people/children who are allergic to 1 are generally allergic to the other. The policy should be adopted because severe food allergies is a disability in the eyes of the ADA (Americans with Disabilites Act) A person who cannot perform one of lifes major functions definition:
Major life activity” means functions such as: caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and/or working.
A severe allergic reaction includes anaphylaxis..the major function here the person cannot perform is breathing.
I have an allergic child who can have3 a severe reaction to tree nuts/peanuts & we have seen her go into anaphylactic shock from minimal exposure to allergens & have seen her react to contact..touching a contaminated surface then touching her own skin/face.
We have flown SOuthwest & Jet Blue, both very accommodating..JB more than SW are so knowledgeable, know what snacks to remove & what ingredients to look for. They also make an announcement to request passengers refrain from eating their own snacks because of an allergic passenger..and they are good about respecting privacy. SW removes snacks & allows preboard to wipe down seats, etc., but no announcement. They do have an alternative snack ready & know ahead of time that there will be a PA child on board as our itinerary gets double noted..online & follow up phone call. JB also allows preboard so we can clean, they even offer their own anti bac wipes. I have heard horror stories about Delta who will only provied a buffer zone which is no help if the allergy is airborne or contact. We bring our own emergency meds which is only good for 20 min. An airline should have EpiPen & EpiPen jr on board in case there is 1st time exposure & should be trained to use them, it is not didfficult. Most will bring their own.
Thanks for all of the information regarding your experiences on JB and SW.
Can other contributors provide further details on this or on other airline’s policies?
Is JB the gold standard for their food allergen policies?
Should the rule be for peanuts, pinenuts, or what types of nuts?
I agree. While my daughter is peanut allergic only, I would in no way be opposed to banning other foods that are common anaphylaxis causers on a plane.
I think there is a problem in assuming that a “blanket policy” is going to be a good solution for every customer. By definition, a “blanket policy” is going to make someone unhappy, because it involves tradeoffs. If you have a blanket “no-peanut” policy, peanut eaters will be unhappy; if you have a blanket “pro-peanut” policy, obviously allergy sufferers will be unhappy.
I think the solution is to let the different airlines have different policies which are easily accessible by customers, so that customers can make their own decisions about where to fly. This way, peanut lovers and people who are allergic to peanuts can both get their ways- by choosing to fly different airlines.
For example, you say that Southwest and JetBlue are both very accommodating. If this is the case (I believe it is) then you should reward those companies by giving them your business. Those who dislike those policies can choose to fly elsewhere.
Here is a link I’m not sure if anyone else has posted from the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network about which airlines do not serve peanuts in coach class:
http://www.foodallergy.org/page/faq
Because this information is available to you, you are free to make your decision on this basis. I think, if anything, the DOT regulation should make sure that allergy policies are disclosed. However, airlines should be free to pursue different policies to give consumers the choice to fly peanut-free if they so desire.
Here’s the thing with letting airlines decide-why should I be limited in my modes of transportation because of the airline providing an optional snack? Or a passenger bringing them on board?
I’m I to seek employment that doesn’t require travel? Am I not to visit my relatives? Maybe the peanut free flights aren’t on an airline I can afford or that is traveling to a place I need to go.
The ADA is about equal access-not about what’s easy for others. banning peanut and tree nuts from air travel is not a hard or obtrusive thing to do.
Your argument is like the people parking in the disabled spot for a second as they run in to get the pizza. “It’s only for a minute”
Is it really that important for a non-allergic person to eat peanuts on their flight? They can’t pick them up at the grocery store?
If someone is going to potentially die because of a food allergy on my flight I’d gladly give up my bag of peanuts or anything else for that matter.
I have a young son who is beyond Class 6 (highest class)for peanuts/tree nuts. For him, it simply is not a matter of “passing up” on a snack. Anaphylaxis can happen much more readily for him by the transfer of oils (peanut oils on airline tray tables, arm rests). It can also happen by airborne dust. In a flight where peanuts are being served and all 100+ bags go POOF at the same time they are opened – well, let’s just say it would be a mother’s nightmare. Especialy with recycled cabin air. Even without a peanut allergy, peanuts are just such a choking hazard for any small children. Why serve them? There are plenty of reasonable alternatives. I recall when my son was first diagnosed, 1 week prior to Christmas. Our pediatrician called us at all of our nighttime emergency numbers just to ensure we wouldn’t step onto any holiday airline flights without an epi-pen and proper documentation of his condition. I was FLOORED to f sind out that Delta still served peanuts. Really?? Peanut allergy is unlike some other food allergies in that there are multiple ways to have reaction (ingestion, touching, breathing). My suggestion would be to ban peanut products on all airlines. But that still does not/will not control what snacks others bring on. So I would suggest they still offer peanut free buffer zones and have some method of ensuring passengers in those rows are aware of what that means (don’t bring or open peanut snacks). I also think that pre-boarding should be an option, so that peanut families can go and wipe down the tray tables/arm rests themselves and feel comfortable with the environment in which their child will be sitting. I’ve been on one too many flights were peanuts have been banned simply due to an allergic person flying…and I feel SO MUCH sympathy for those families, because the airline staff does not seem to be good at respecting their privacy. In fact, they almost act begruding or point out the poor child to other. What kid wants to be labeled? In all honesty, I can’t see making the switch to peanut free snacks to be that big an impact to the airlines. As long as items are clearly labeled (most, not all pretzels) are o.k. If nothing else, I am so very appreciative that this issue is gaining attention. I don’t think airlines realize how many passengers don’t fly them due to their poor policies. In fact, I learned so much already today reading these message boards. I will make it a point to frequent the airlines (that serve my area) where people seem to have had really positive and supportive environments when flying with their children. Great info for me to have as a parent. I also wonder if you couldn’t look into how the major sports arenas handle peanut allergies. Most will offer at least one “peanut free” day so that children can enjoy major league sports like baseball etc. So it can be done. And they have WAY more people in one arena than on a single flight. Thanks again for allowing us to share our thoughts!!
Link for what I could find regarding how major sports arenas handle peanut allergies: http://www.sportsdestinations.com/ID-63-articleDetails.aspx
Welcome to Regulation Room and thanks for your comment!
The sports arena information may be useful to other contributors as they continue to comment.
Given the concerns expressed regarding singling out allergic passengers, does anyone have a suggestion for the best way to inform passengers of the need to refrain from peanut consumption?
Should this be a part of the rule? Should it be up to the airlines? Should there be announcements to passengers? Should this be part of the rule?
Thoughts?
There’s no need to single out passengers if the ban is airline-wide. There should be written announcements when a ticket is purchased, when a passenger is checked in and a verbal announcement by the flight attendant during the safety spiel at the start of the flight.
It should be part of the rule. As many times as I have flown, I can’t remember a single time someone brought their own bag of peanuts on board.
But this way, if they are banned, you prevent some allergic person from potentially dying because someone is a selfish jerk.
You articulated that very, very well. Welcome to my world as a severe peanut allergy sufferer and airline Captain. I have been dealing with this for over 22 years! I am yearning for the day (to return for the airline I work for as they had discontinued serving them for a few years only to declare the substitute, almonds, was too expensive and brought back peanuts) that I do not have to tell, an incredulous, flight attendant that I need a peanut free zone if I have to travel in the cabin!
Make your voice heard, Captain!
I have a son w/ life threatening food allergies. I believe all nut products should be ban, especially peanuts. I have flown w/ my son on several occasions and I have called the airline when purchasing tickets, a month ahead and a day before to make sure it would be a peanut free flight. On 2 occasions they have still served peanuts or peanut butter. This is very upsetting, my son also has asthma which makes his allergies that much worse. A buffer zone in my opinion is not a option because the air circulates around the whole plane. One time we refused to get on the plane until the peanuts and peanut butter were removed, which caused the flight to be delayed. I don’t understand how smoking can be banned on flights when people are physically addicted and no one complains. Ask people to refrain from eating peanuts or peanut products and everyone is put out acting like there rights are being taken away, when it can put other passengers lives at risk. We only fly when we absolutely have to, its just to scary.
Welcome to Regulation Room, and thanks for sharing your experiences.
Please continue to comment on what you think the policies should be.
What does DOT have right? What should they rethink?
MODERATOR: I am having page formatting trouble when replying……
I don’t know that I would feel safe flying without a total ban. There are too many variables. Realistically, I know that a total ban is unlikely. For most people, an airline ban, a buffer zone, epinephrine in a first aid kit, and pre-boarding would probably go a long way to making them comfortable. But, like I said, it probably would not be enough for me and mine.
I’ve also heard in the past of some airlines forcing passengers to sign statements acknowledging that they will not stop the flight and seek assistance if an allergic reaction happens. I think it was American Airlines and I read the actual documents. Obviously, this practice is incredibly paralyzing. Last I knew, medical emergencies in the form of heart attacks and pre-mature labor are handled on a case by case basis and it is not unheard of to land a plane early. AA made the allergic community an exception to this practice. Could you imagine a planeload of 200 people, including crew, who sat around and did nothing while watching a 4 year old slowly suffocate and die?
Though our comfort zone is very tight, I do appreciate that the DOT is trying to reach a compromise with the allergic and non-allergic passengers. For many people, minor changes to the system will go a long way.
Email us regarding formatting issues here: regulationroom@cornell.edu. The more detail you can provide, the better chance they’ll be able to address a fix. Feedback only makes us stronger, so please do so!
Thanks for your comment as well.
I think red eye is correct: DOT is on a slippery slope if it bans peanuts. However, I also understand the concerns of people with severe peanut allergies. Perhaps airlines could offer only select flights as “Peanut-Free” instead of a complete ban on peanuts.
I am the mom of a child with allergies to peanuts (& I have an allergy to shellfish) and have flown six times (on Delta) with my child and had no problems, though some anxiety. Delta’s policy is to create a peanut-free buffer three rows in front & three rows behind the peanut-allergic person. One flight happened to be peanut-free because there were several passengers on the flight with peanut allergies, and the buffer zones pretty much took up the entire plane. The other flights were not peanut-free.
What I do for flights:
* Carry all necessary medication, including at least two self-injectors (I get Twinjects because two injectors have four doses.)
* Let the airline know at the time of my reservation of our allergies and that I plan to board early.
* Mention this again at the gate.
* Bring Clorox wipes and clean my daughter’s seat, tray table etc. and the seats on either side or window/wall if she has a window seat.
* Bring food so we don’t have to rely on the airline food.
As mentioned by someone previously, banning peanuts is a slippery slope because there are many people with life-threatening allergies to many foods. Shellfish allergies are more common in adults than peanuts.
Someone wrote above “As for the ‘slippery slope’ argument – I don’t buy it. I’ve never heard of anyone having a wheat allergy going into anaphylaxis from someone sitting next to them eating a sandwich.”
Interesting point, but I can turn it around as I have never heard of a documented case of anyone going into anaphylaxis from airborne contact of peanuts. From what I understand, airborne anaphylaxis is very rare.
If anything, I would suggest a ban on warming up peanuts, since that is more likely to put peanut proteins in the air.
I would also suggest training staff to be sensitive to passengers with allergies. They should create allergy policies and post them in an easily findable place on their websites (most have them, it’s just tough to find on their sites) and be consistent so a passenger doesn’t think she is flying on a nut-free flight when it isn’t. And while this forum is great, I would weigh more the advice of researchers. Many people react emotionally regarding this issue and when DOT considers options, it should take into consideration what scientific studies have shown have occurred or may occur, not what well-intentioned people or panicked people think may occur.
Epinephrine should always be the responsibility of the passenger, though it may be good policy to have extra on board in the event of an anaphylaxis (or severe asthma attack).
A passenger’s bill or rights/ responsibilities would be helpful. (e.g. Encourage people with allergies to carry two or more self-injectors; Giving people with food allergies — Anyone with a medical condition actually– the option to board the plane early)
I am the mom of a child with allergies to peanuts (& I have an allergy to shellfish) and have flown six times (on Delta) with my child and had no problems, though some anxiety. Delta’s policy is to create a peanut-free buffer three rows in front & three rows behind the peanut-allergic person. One flight happened to be peanut-free because there were several passengers on the flight with peanut allergies, and the buffer zones pretty much took up the entire plane. The other flights were not peanut-free.
What I do for flights:
* Carry all necessary medication, including at least two self-injectors (I get Twinjects because two injectors have four doses.)
* Let the airline know at the time of my reservation of our allergies and that I plan to board early.
* Mention this again at the gate.
* Bring Clorox wipes and clean my daughter’s seat, tray table etc. and the seats on either side or window/wall if she has a window seat.
* Bring food so we don’t have to rely on the airline food.
As mentioned by someone previously, banning peanuts is a slippery slope because there are many people with life-threatening allergies to many foods. Shellfish allergies are more common in adults than peanuts.
Someone wrote above “As for the ‘slippery slope’ argument – I don’t buy it. I’ve never heard of anyone having a wheat allergy going into anaphylaxis from someone sitting next to them eating a sandwich.”
Interesting point, but I can turn it around as I have never heard of a documented case of anyone going into anaphylaxis from airborne contact of peanuts. From what I understand, airborne anaphylaxis is very rare.
If anything, I would suggest a ban on warming up peanuts, since that is more likely to put peanut proteins in the air.
I would also suggest training staff to be sensitive to passengers with allergies. They should create allergy policies and post them in an easily findable place on their websites (most have them, it’s just tough to find on their sites) and be consistent so a passenger doesn’t think she is flying on a nut-free flight when it isn’t. And while this forum is great, I would weigh more the advice of researchers. Many people react emotionally regarding this issue and when DOT considers options, it should take into consideration what scientific studies have shown have occurred or may occur, not what well-intentioned people or panicked people think may occur.
Epinephrine should always be the responsibility of the passenger, though it may be good policy to have extra on board in the event of an anaphylaxis (or severe asthma attack).
A passenger’s bill or rights/ responsibilities would be helpful. (e.g. Encourage people with allergies to carry two or more self-injectors; Giving people with food allergies — Anyone with a medical condition actually– the option to board the plane early.
If you’re concerned about wiping down in-flight surfaces, I read on the Southwest website that people who are allergic to peanuts can take morning flights, because the planes are cleaned every night.
Thanks for your comments. That is an interesting idea. How do others feel about airlines offering select flights as peanut free? Do you feel that would be a fair solution to this problem?
Just as smoking was removed from flights due to the health risks to innocent travelers, this falls into the same category. The main difference is that a peanut reaction happens rather quickly and lung cancer/emphysema can take years. Hmmm….
This is a very good point and a lot of parallels can be drawn.
There is NO COMPARISON.
Tobacco smoke, unlike peanuts, not only affects EVERYBODY, it also affects the HVAC and electronics / avionics, on-board an aircraft. Anybody who had done a “C” or “D” check aboard aircraft in the 70′s and 80′s can tell the difference, especially with the tobacco gunk on the wires and avionics.
Peanuts does not have same health risks “to innocent passengers,” as tobacco smoke. This becomes especially true if there is knowledge and forewarning that the affected passenger assumes that peanuts are going to be served and efforts to mitigate the situation are employed.
I don’t feel it is a viable solution as a “peanut-free” flight could follow a “peanut-allowed” flight on the same plane. Leaving peanuts in cushions and peanut residue on everything from the prior flight.
That’s a good point. It has been suggested by other participants that there be “peanut-free zones” on flights, just as there are non-smoking zones in restaurants, where the zones are to be maintained on the airplane at all times and are kept the same for every flight. Would this address the issue of residue, or would more be needed to keep passengers and flight attendants who handle peanuts out of the area?
I have to say I think this is going too far. You can’t legislate everything. In the years of flying and billions of passengers how many are truly affected by an allergy so severe that merely sniffing the air near someone eating is enough to send them into convulsions? I have to say I’ve never seen such a thing on the news. What is next? No perfume, because people are allergic to that. No deodorant, because some are allergic to that. Oh, and make sure you wear all cotton because you might bump up against someone with a skin allergy to synthetic fiber. It can quickly slide into ridiculous. I’m sorry for those who have allergies, but those people also live with them daily and know how to cope and deal with them in public.
I think a buffer-zone would be a more realistic approach to the issue than select peanut-free flights. What if your flight is delayed and you miss a connecting peanut-free flight?
Only problem is the recycled air. Buffer zones aren’t quite enough for those in the highest reactivity grouping.
Elle brings up an interesting point.
If we were to implement peanut-free flights and a person were to miss a peanut-free connecting flight or regular flight, how should this problem be dealt with?
When people start dying from the aroma of perfume and deodorant or cotton clothing, your comments will be taken seriously. Keep this in perspective.
Pixel brings up an interesting point.
So that the regulators can regulate based on evidence, does anyone know if data exists on the number of peanut-related incidents on planes?
Well, how many people avoid flying because of their allergies and not being able to control the environment they are in?
Amen, this proposal goes too far. Freedom loving travelers don’t want to be told what they can and can’t bring on board the aircraft to eat. I know I would ignore any such ban as I currently regularly bring peanuts aboard any aircraft I am flying. What’s next? Ban crying kids? Ban passengers with Tourette’s? Ban caffeinated or alcoholic beverages? Who dreams up this ridiculous stuff?
None of your examples can result in the death of another passenger.
You disregard the well-being of others less fortunate than you and try to make a virtue of your selfishness.
King Slav- Your ignorance and selfishness is amazing.
This slippery slope argument is a false one. Understand that peanut allergy can be life-threatening, leading to anaphylaxis or death. Please visit the websites for the Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network, the Food Allergy Initiative, or the American Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology for reliable information.
pixel97-Hopefully, you’ll never find out personally. A server allergy to anything can result in death. And its a death where you suffocate to death within about 10 to 20 minutes. And its hell for the person suffering as well as those around them who are helpless to do anything.
Banning nuts is not a hard thing to do.
I do not have an allergy to peanuts but I do to Carmine coloring. I have to watch what foods I eat and keep an epinephrine pen with me at all times. I believe all people with allergies must follow this same rule. If a person with very severe allergies boards a plane and allerts them ahead of time of their allergy, then keep the peanuts off the flight. This would apply to all kinds of allergies.
As a flight attendant of 19+ years, we never had peanut allergies in the earlier days, people dealt with their own issues and got on with it. Where did all these peanut-people come from? It seems like the latest “illness” fad that plagues this country far too often. BTW, no one has seemed to have died due to peanuts on Southwest, why does this have to be a Federal issue?
My 9 year old daughter is one of the “peanut people” you mentioned in your post. While no one has seemed to have died due to peanuts on Southwest, the threat is there. I feel confident if you had a loved one with this life threatening allergy, you would feel differently.
My daughter has been tested 4 times for her allergy to peanuts. She is in the highest category of reactivity which means if peanuts are being ingested in her vicnity, she could die. A buffer zone simply doesn’t work in a cinfined space such as an airline. I have to treat her with Benadryl before any flights as a precaution. There are many more food and snack options that don’t have the anaphylaxis potential to innocent human beings. I for one am ecstatic to hear about this initiative. It’s becoming news for a good reason. People- kids- are dying from this and it can be 100% prevented.
How was your child diagnosed with a peanut allergy? Did they eat penuts while under medical observation and have their blood tested for IgE antibodies? If not, then you don’t know if they have an allergy, or even to what severity.
As for your claim that she could die if peanuts are ingested in her vicinity, that is utterly false. The only way to have any reaction (including death) is to have contact with the offending allergen. So anyone else can eat all they like in her vicinity; she just has to not come in contact with it.
Some people die from a severe reaction to peanuts, but not many, and I’ve yet to find a single instance of an airline passenger dying due to anaphylactic shock caused by peanuts.
I utterly concur. While I am sympathetic to those with this condition, what will we ban next? It is the TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY of the parent/adult to adequately prepare for the possibility of being exposed to an allergen. What if other passengers brought peanuts onboard? What do these people do when they are on a subway? In a taxi? At the mall food court? In a restaurant? Airlines have enough to worry about without all of these over-the-top issues. It’s time for MORE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY and FAR LESS government nannying.
ricport – “total responsibility” is only possible when you have control. when you have both feet on the ground, you can drop everything and get to emergency services within 20 minutes. “Adequate preparation” = reducing possibility of exposure and carrying epipens just in case – but they only buy you 20minutes or so and limit is 2 without medical supervision. so, small-minded pax eating peanuts at 30,000 feet and unsympathetic crew could = death. and as for nannying, my experience is that government treats people according to the way they’re acting.
In the examples you give, a person can call 911 and get to a hospital within the 30 minute time-frame that 2 EpiPen doses buy you. On a plane, especially one going overseas, that is not an option.
The ‘peanut people’ are not taking their business to Southwest. Since your airline continues to serve peanuts, people with severe allergies are flying with other airlines. So I’m sure no one has died because they can’t fly on your planes.
Oh yeah, it’s fad, everyone wants to be allergic to peanuts. I’m sorry but that was rude! I hope and pray you NEVER EVER have to deal with the anxiety of having a loved one DEATHLY allergic to peanuts (or anything). It is nerve racking day in and day out about the possibility of them going into anaphylatic shock. I think more education needs to be done so more people understand how bad these allergies have gotten and how much they have risen over the years. Maybe then you and others wouldn’t say things like that!
Thanks to those that have commented on this thread. We know that this can be an emotional topic for all involved.
Ambersky, you mention education as a means to combat the problem. As airlines currently make a preflight announcement about seat belt use, do you think airlines should also make an announcement about peanut allergies?
What other steps should airlines take?
I think more education needs to be made, period, not just in flights. I have had people not understand why I ALWAYS have my son’s epipen on me even when no signs of peanuts are seen. They don’t understand the need to limit exposure best they can, and on a flight it’d be very difficult to limit it. I do think if complete bans aren’t made an announcement would be a good start, but since education on the subject isn’t well known, most passengers just wouldn’t care. I think it’s sad that people do not care that they are risking the life of someone, just so they can have a package of peanuts or peanut butter snack that they could wait til AFTER the flight to have, that won’t kill them, but the peanuts could kill my child or someone deathly allergic. I once compared my son being around peanuts as to someone else eating their snack/lunch with rat poison on the tray/table. Would anyone want to eat or sit with poison right next to them? Well, peanuts are poison to people with allergies to them! The risk is always there regardless of a ban, but with a ban at least it might be less likely to happen. I just saw this video today and I think it helps explain the seriousness of these allergies.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yriX-3UwrCA
And what makes you think your kid is actually allergic? Did you read a news story about the one person in the history of the world who actually had said allergy and assume YOUR kid must be the other one? Munchasen by Proxy – look it up.
The problem has increased over the years with the advent of more efficient turbofan engines. It was found that excessive bleed air extraction from the engines (fresh air) consumes more fuel than recirculating the air. Unlike the “coal burners” of the past, modern jets recirculate much more of the air. Yes, they go through filters but it is quite noticeable when those filters need to be changed, airflow decreases dramatically. With airlines scrambling to make money, non safety related items take a back seat and those expensive filters, I believe, are not changed as often. Also, your point about the number of people that died aboard a flight is only part of the question. One should ask how many people reached a critical stage during flight with anaphlaxis necessitating the use of epinephrine from the on board medical kit administered by a physician or nurse on a flight? In other words, how many times was it necessary to intervene or risk the death of a passenger? Airport Crash Fire and Rescue facilities would be a valuable asset for those statistics as they are the ones to meet a flight if a passenger was ill.
You got that right! The whole anti-peanut movement is the result of hyper-paranoid parents imagining worst case scenarios and thinking that they have the one child in a billion who actually has a problem with the supposed allergen. The only way peanuts are going to hurt you is if you choke on them.
I have two children with potentially life threatening allergies to peanuts. Unlike what one person commented, this is not a latest illness fad. The latest research indicates that peanut allergy doubled in children from 1997 to 2002 and that number continues to increase. It is one of the most deadly food allergies.
The presence of nuts on planes is a real fear. While my kids have other potentially deadly food allergies, peanuts pose a unique risk. Nuts break into fine pieces with dust that can become airborne. Peanut butter is sticky and gets wiped on seats and tray tables. Even the slightest microscopic amount of nuts can create an anaphylactic reaction.
Although EpiPens can help, they are not 100% effective and should not be considered a solution to the risk peanuts pose to allergic individuals on planes. Additional steroids, Benadryl shots, oxygen and other medical intervention may be necessary to stop an anaphylactic reaction. EpiPens may need to be administered every 15 to 30 minutes as well. People still die even with intervention.
Please help protect people by offering people the opportunity to get peanut free flights or ban the sale and serving of nut products on the planes.
Laura, could provide the community the information from which you state that between 1997 and 2002 the number of children with peanut allergies doubled?
I’m not her, and don’t know if that info would be found on this site, but http://www.foodallergy.org/ is a great source of info on food allergies and anaphylaxis.
“Food Allergy Among U.S. Children: Trends in Prevalence and Hospitalizations”
Centers for Disease Control (CDC)
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db10.htm
There is no scientific data to support the claim that food allergies have doubled during any time period, much less the one that’s mentioned by Laura. If you read the NCHS Data Brief on the CDC web site, it specifically uses the term “reported food allergy”, which isn’t the same as an actual food allergy.
Parents report just about any adverse reaction to food as an allergy, but true allergies can only be confirmed by observing the patient after consuming the suspect food and testing for the presence of IgE antibodies. Without that, all you have are overanxious parents conflating two separate and distinct things into the same, potentially life-threatening thing.
@Elle: thank you for the website.
@Mulder: thank your for your comment. You seem to draw a distinction between reported food allergies and actual food allergies. Do you have any knowledge of any study or paper that draws out the importance of such a distinction in terms of public policy?
Sorry, most “studies” don’t draw any distinction between reported allergies and actual, clinically diagnosed allergies, with the possible exception of the language they use. Every one that I’ve read glosses over such distinctions, so you have to read them carefully to see how the “study” data was obtained.
The prevalence of peanut and tree nut allergies tripled in children in the United States between 1997 and 2008. See http://download.journals.elsevierhealth.com/pdfs/journals/0091-6749/PIIS0091674910005750.pdf
thank your for the link Antanagoge!
My child with a severe nut and peanut allergy had a reaction on a domestic flight. Luckily her breathing was not compromised but she broke out in hives across her entire body. I was very very close to using epi-pens on this flight and had all the flight attendants hovering around us.
She only ate the safe food we brought onto the flight – nothing from the airline. I also wiped down our seating area before she boarded. However, she is very touch-sensitive and the seats are hard to clean as they are made of fabric. For the flight home we brought a sheet to cover the seats and she did not react the same way but did get a hive or two none-the-less. Peanut-residue is very hard to remove from fabric surfaces.
I would love to see a ban on having loose peanuts on flights – food like Snickers that contain nuts are ok from my perspective.
This goes too far. If you start precedence nor – what else in the future will be banned?
anything else whose risks of fatal reaction outweigh the mere convenience of the ignorant, I hope.
Very articulate, dadwith4.
No, no, no! If you have an allergy to peanuts and you know you have it then take your own precautions. If I decide to bring a bag of peanuts onboard an airplane and am then told I’m in a “peanut free zone” or something like that, then my rights have been trampled as have the rights of everyone in that zone. Request peanut free services from the airlines for yourself, but do not force those restrictions on the rest of the flying public. I have no problem with the airline offering peanut free foods, etc. but it should be an option that people can select not a requirement for everyone else to abide by.
What’s next? Can I have all perfume banned from an airplane or have people wearing them banned? How about deodorants, hair sprays, any product with latex in it?
It is not a “right” if you have to impose that behavior on others for yourself.
What about my child’s “right” not to die?
I agree with chartley81. My child has a right to live. What about the fact that other things have been banned on airlines-weapons, the amount of shampoo a person can bring on board, etc. I think you can survive not eating peanuts for a few hours, but my son may not survive the flight if you decide to touch the armrest with a peanut oil covered hand and then he touches it. yes there are always risks but banning it lessens that risk to an extent.
Where is your “right” to fly? Or where is your “right” to limit my choices? The shampoo ban is supposed to be to prevent liquid explosives from being brought onboard, not to prevent exposure to some allergic to it. Sure I can “survive” without eating peanuts, but you know what, you can also survive without flying wherever it is you are going, why is it what you can survive is more important than what I can survive without? What makes you more important than the 98% of the population that is not allergic to peanut products?
You have a responsibility to keep your child safe. You don’t let them play in traffic but we don’t ban cars. This is no different. It is YOUR responsibility, it is not the airline’s or the government’s job to keep everything away from people that can hurt them because you know what? Whatever you pick, someone out there has a SEVERE allergy to it that can kill them.
Pretty sure your kid will be fine. If not, DON’T FLY!!!
I think the problem, as seen with JJM, is that some people don’t view peanuts in the same category as guns and cigarettes. These things kill. Just because they (peanuts) won’t kill YOU doesn’t make it your right to expose others to it. It’s a matter of education. We’ll get there. This dialogue is a good step.
I don’t support banning guns or cigarettes either. Those are choices people make (to buy a gun or smoke) and that is what I support and what I propose…choice. If you think a ride is dangerous for your child you don’t let them ride it. Is it their “right” to be have the ride toned down for them or is it the right or every citizen to make a choice on what risk they accept and what they will not? This, like many other regulations is simply taking that choice and handing it over to the government and forcing their decision on everyone. Just because peanuts MAY kill someone doesn’t mean everyone else should have no choice in eating them.
Unless you choke on them, these things (peanuts) WILL NOT kill anyone. Go to a real doctor and get tested – he will tell you peanuts are harmless.
You are right on sir! Most of these supposed allergies are the paranoid imaginings of over anxious parents. The rest of the public should not be forced to accommodate them. A hive or two is not going to kill little jimmy, and the previous poster “shoeslut” should have her head examined for panicking like that. She is causing more harm to her child by being such a paranoid freak than any peanut ever will.
As an air traveler and peanut-allergy sufferer, I appreciate the considerations.
I flew in February and March (Delta and US Airways) Because of the severity of my life-long allergy, both times I hoped that the passengers I sat near would choose pretzels instead of peanuts.
What would be helpful to a passenger such as myself, would be banning the service only when a passenger requests it ahead of time or requiring a peanut-free buffer zone. It seems that other passengers would be less disturbed if other (non-peanut and non-peanut oil) snack options were provided on flights where a person has a medically-documented severe allergy, instead of relegating some people to sit in a peanut-free buffer zone.
It can be very likely that a passenger with a severe allergy would need an epinephrine auto-injector.
As for Pixel’s comments: Often the allergic actions do not warrant the news media. Most of the time it happens to me, I’m focused on staying alive.
I can only speak from my own reactions: Yes, I can get that sick from the air particles in an airplane. While I may prepare myself for being stuck in an airplane with peanuts, it would be nice to trust that my fellow passengers don’t mind eating pretzels in exchange for me not having to seek medical attention.
Thank you.
There is a non-profit organization called the food allergy network their web site is foodallergy.org. This site will give you some insight into the peanut allergy issue. My son now ten years old has a very severe peanut allergy. Some of the things most kids take for granted are not available to him due to the allergy. He cannot go to a professional baseball game for one. We also have to plan our vacations the locations that peanut free airlines to. The common misconception is “just don’t eat peanuts!” It would be nice if it were that simple. The confined space and recycling of the air in a plane is a peanut allergy sufferers nightmare. When people eat peanuts or open up bags of preanuts some of the allergens are released into the air. Therefore the allergic person can be affected without physically eating the peanuts. The air becomes toxic to them. For my son this is a not just discomfort it could kill him. JJ
There’s no truth to what you say about recycled air on planes. Contrary to your belief, fresh air is circulated in the cabin from the engine compressors, air conditioned (cooled), circulated through louvers, vents and those eyeball graspers above your seat. After that, about half is sucked out through the bottom of the fuselage; the remainder is run through filters to remove pollutants and particulants and mixed with fresh air again.
The result is that the air in the cabin is cleaner than most public buildings, and it is completely exchanged every 2-3 minutes.
I found this particular article to be interesting: http://www.justnews.com/travelgetaways/23871727/detail.html
Still, a safe threshold has not been established.
Anyway, how does this technique work at 35,000 feet in the air?
Peanut dust can trigger allergic reactions.
As someone who carries an epipen for beestings, I understand that allergies can be serious and life threatening.
Banning airlines from serving peanuts inflight seems reasonable; several posts mention the risk inherent in many people opening bags of peanuts at one time (which can easily happen when snacks are served) throwing a large amount of dust in the air, which could be enough to trigger an allergy in severely allergic people.
However, banning people from carrying on their own snacks does seem to violate their rights, to eliminate what seems like an extremely small risk to allergy-sufferers. Nuts are a healthy, portable form of protein, and cannot be replaced by pretzels. No, being hungry or not eating protein won’t kill someone; but, I’m a vegetarian, and I fly constantly, often on long-haul international flights, but mainly between the east and west coasts, to help care for my mother who is dying of cancer. The return flight is 6 ½ hours (plus commute time to the airport); when time allows, I make something to bring on the flight, but if my mother is having a bad day, that’s not always possible. On a recent trip, I didn’t have time to eat anything at all the day I flew home; got stuck in traffic and barely made my flight (I was the last one on) so didn’t have time to eat or buy anything at the airport; and as we started to taxi, the flight crew announced that we had a nut allergy on board, and that they (JB) would not be serving cashews and requested that we not eat any nuts we may have brought on board. 6 ½ hours feels pretty long at that point! No, it didn’t kill me, but it does seem that if JB hadn’t served cashews, the risks involved in one or two people eating nuts they may have brought with them would have been extremely, extremely small….and, NOTHING in life is risk-free. I understand that people want to minimize the risks for their loved ones, but you cannot eliminate the risk completely, regardless of what legislation you put in place. If I ate peanuts at the airport, didn’t wash my hands, and then opened the rest room door on the plane immediately before a peanut allergy sufferer, that person could suffer a reaction.
I can support airlines not serving peanuts/peanut products, thereby eliminating the most likely possible cause of a peanut-related incident on a flight; but not restrictions on what people may choose to eat.
I agree that telling people they can’t bring it on board is a bit much, but I definitely thing airlines themselves not offering it is a great step (that limits the amount likely to be on board). Also making an announcement that someone actually IS allergic on board and to please try to refrain from opening/eating any nut products during the flight would be nice. I do think this could lessen the risk a great deal.
My son’s allergist told us not to bother with a “peanut free” table for him at lunch at school, it gives a false sense of security, but also not to let him sit RIGHT next to someone eating a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. So for a lot of people, the airlines not serving it would probably do a lot for them.
A peanut-free table is less likely to have smears of peanut butter on/under it. Risk of exposure is reduced which is not as good as eliminated but is better than full exposure. I see the parallel with these flight proposals. Ban peanut products. Yes, people will “sneak” them. However, the risk will still be reduced over the nothing that we are doing now.
As an adult with a severe tree nut allergy, I certainly empathize with the folks with peanut allergies. That said, it seems arbitrary to ban peanuts and not tree nuts given the likelihood of a serious reaction is fairly similar. If the airlines could have precautions in place, such as keeping an epipen available or offering surgical masks to those who need then, that would be a positive step. However, supplying those items really should be the responsibility of the person with the allergy or, if it is a child, the caretaker. Further, the logistics of implementing such a ban would be almost impossible. Are we looking at searching passenger luggage, banning the sale of all foods with peanuts (and since most carry the “made in a facility that also handles”, you’d be looking at eliminating almost all foods) and regulating all restaurants at airports as well? Unfortunately, personal responsibility and proactive steps on the part of the person with the allergy is likely the only viable solution.
Welcome, Hgranato. You raise a unique point. Is regulating peanuts in this manner arbitrary? What do other commenters think?
it’s a question of degree to which the allergic traveler (or parent) can reasonably manage the risks. When in the terminal (or any other public space on the ground), exposure can be managed/avoided and if anything happnes, emergency services are a 911 call away and the ambulance can get you to a hospital before the epipen(s) wear off. When in an aircraft, the traveler is confined and if anything happens, the epipens still buy you 20 minutes but you’re no closer to a hospital.
Finally the voice of reason. While I still dispute whether your reaction will be as severe as you believe, at least you realize that it is your responsibility to take precautions. Your ailment is not shared by the general population, and should not be an excuse to infringe upon the rights of others.
It would be difficult to justify only addressing peanut allergies and ignore other conditions that threaten the health and well being of passengers. The affected person should bear the responsibility to know their own condition and to properly prepare for managing it. Airlines should be expected to accommodate special diet requests which are made with adequate prior notice. In the case of passengers who are not able to manage their own situations, written disclosures to flight personnel should enable flight personnel to institute an appropriate response.
I’ve registered my son on a flight as peanut-allergic and had the attendant try to hand him a bag of peanuts. Flight personnel need more education on this.
This raises an interesting point that has been mentioned here by other commentators: even with prior notice, flight personnel often overlook those passengers with peanut allergies. Besides better training, what else could be done to make flight personnel more aware of the issue as they balance their other duties? Should notices of keeping “buffer zones” or “no peanut zones” free of peanuts be included in the routine safety announcements? Should personnel be required to check off a list of self-designated passengers with peanut allergies and make note of where they sit before in-flight service?
I have two children with severe peanut allergies, and as it turns out I myself also suffer from peanut allergies. I didn’t know why I was getting sick for so many years without reason.
We have had several unfortunate situations while traveling
1) my then 4 year old son having an anaphylactic shock on an overseas flight although we did avoid nuts and peanuts but another passenger consumed a product labeled “may contain peanuts” next to us.
2) I have myself been severely sick on an overseas flight from US to Europe – vomiting on the entire flight due to peanut exposure in the lounge.
3) We have several times had issues with airlines not caring about the allergies. One Continental Flight attendant once insisted on that it was a rule that she had to serve peanuts to us and everyone around us – even though we had informed them before hand that we had peanut allergies. I believe Continental since has stopped serving peanuts, but it was very unpleasant and we had to give Benadryl to our then 2 year old as he started wheezing – it was not until he was wheezing that the flight attendant was kind enough to inform the Captain and take back the peanuts!
4) the peanut buffer zones just don’t work. I don’t know how many times we have notified the airlines and yet not once have been allowed pre-boarding to wipe down the area, been condenscended at the gate or by the stewardesses – this is no matter if we fly First or Economy. They still seat people with their own food next to us and they refuse helping us by asking these people not to eat peanut products – to the extend that we even experienced on AA last year that a lady sat next to us and insisted on eating her pbj sandwiches in spite that we were 3 people with peanut allergies next to her. She didn’t care and the stewardess didn’t care. When we asked her to help us she wouldn’t let us reseat somewhere else, she wouldn’t ask the lady to eat something else (even though we offered to buy her anything) and she wouldn’t ask the woman to move. She was rude and yelled that it was our problem and if our kids are so allergic we shouldn’t bring them into public. Her colleague said that people with peanut allergies should hire a private jet (yet it is not all of us that would ever be able to travel if we have to do this). Our oldest boy ended up getting sick and it wasn’t until then that the one of the stewardesses apologized but they still refused doing anything. They wouldn’t even notify the captain of the anaphylactic shock because then everyone would get delayed…..(and the stewardess said the flight was delayed enough as is. So she chose to risk our sons life. This happened on Aug 22, 2009 with AA from DFW to EWR.
5) The biggest problem is truly that so many people doesn’t understand how serious and dangerous peanut exposure can be to a person with peanut allergies. Even people who understands it behaves irradic when it comes to treating people with peanut allergies decently. On a overseas flight we overheard the steward telling his colleagues that “I wonder how serious the boys (meaning our son) allergies are – what would happen if we just crushed up some peanuts and put them in his food?”. We did complain and the airline did apologize but it still shows how people not caring are the biggest threat. The easiest way to ensure everyones safety (also the people without allergies) is really just to ban peanuts and peanut products on flights. It is not that anyone will die having to go without for a flight but some people may die or get seriously sick if they are not. I recall the time when passengers were allowed to smoke on the flights – this is not allowed any longer for safety. Although no one will die immediately from second hand smoke – but a fire may happen. Also, if there is an anaphylactic shock from peanut exposure then the entire plane may have to emergency land, causing possible danger to all passengers – shouldn’t that be the main consideration?
Also, how many people like me actually walks around with a latent unknown peanut allergy? My parents never thought to get me tested and I just didn’t know what made me so sick at times. I only learned when my children was sick and then got tested.
I learned that peanut allergies among children have tripled over the past 10 years. How many serious sick children or incidences does DOT need in order to ensure the safety of all these children?
So please either ban peanuts and peanut products or at least ban service of peanuts and peanut products on flights where the airlines know there is a passenger with a peanut allergy. This is the only way to ensure everyones safety, not to mention comfort.
Your vomiting was not an allergic reaction – you were probably airsick. Allergies are not genetic, so it is pretty much impossible that you and two of your offspring suffer from them. This is clearly a case of you getting some bad information and believing the worst. Please let your kids get tested out by a real doctor (not an allergist), before you deprive them of any more of the enjoyable things in life.
Actually, Howie, vomiting IS a part of an allergic reaction. Allergies also do tend to run in families although not necessarily of the same variety. Kids with allergies tend to get tested by lots of people during the course of their lives doctors and allergist alike. Food challenges (most reliable), skin prick tests (reliable), and blood test (least reliable) are the top three methods of determining true allergies. Living in a world surrounded by lack of awareness tends to deprive them of enjoyable things in life far more then avoiding the offending food.
Do NOT in any way regulate the service of peanuts on airlines. This is a ridiculous intrusion on free enterprise and personal freedom. Not to mention, it will simply encourage freedom loving travelers to bring large amounts of peanuts on the aircraft themselves. Someone should stuff a bag of peanuts up the backside of Ray LaHood for proposing this stupid proposal.
I’m a freedom-loving, peanut-friendly traveler, and I have no problem with the government protecting other people from dangerous activity. That’s the government’s job.
I would like to thank the DOT for soliciting input – I think opening the floor for public comment is helpful on so many levels. Those of us dealing with food allergy issues on a day-to-day basis feel that the opportunity to have our voices heard is exactly what we would wish for. Those in the public who do not or have not lived with this issue can see a variety of viewpoints and develop an informed opinion. I believe that our cultural expectations need to be re-assesed when considering food allergy issues. 1.) Food is sustenance 2.)We associate events/environments with food (why peanuts when we fly?) 3.)We hold onto traditions rather strongly until forced to evaluate the extent to which they are truly meaningful and necessary.(If I eat this food, I may seriously jeopardize someone’s well-being. Do I need to eat this, or can I choose something else?)
I believe that good faith is being shown in evaluating the peanut allergy issue, but as so many before me have clearly illustrated, not just peanuts cause life-threatening reactions. I strongly encourage you to contact and work in tandem with the Food Allergy and Anaphlyaxis Network, http://www.foodallergy.org. They have worked tirelessly to serve as a clearinghouse of information on these very issues.
I believe that people generally care about the well-being of others, and when informed, make informed choices.
Well said. I fly extensively in the US and internationally. And, in reading all the comments posted thus far, for the most part, there appears to be a lot of emotion and not a lot of facts surrounding this issue.
The airlines should not be banning any food and they certainly should not be come the food police.
I strongly urge the DOT to get more scientic-based information. Any disability needs to be treated with sensitivity. However, i want to point out that when we installed ramps for those in a wheel chairs, we did not remove the stairs.
Some facts to consider. studies show that you cannot have a serious/deadly reaction to peanut, tree nut, or other food allergy protein by smelling it; despite what some of the contributors here have said. Less than 1% of the population has a peanut allergy and not all of those are “severly” allergic. (Compare that with the exponentially higher incidence of diabetes–diabetics need plant based proteins like peanuts during flights to keep their blood sugar levels under control.) or, a milk allergy which is far more prevelent.
Airborne exposure will not affect the body systemically, so therefore cannot cause anaphylaxis. If extremely allergic, you may have some symptoms like sneezing, running nose and coughing. For those peanut or tree nut allergic, and for all food allergies, you MUST ingest the food protein to have a systemtic reaction. And, even with direct skin contact to tree nuts, peanuts or peanut and nut butters, most allergic people will not show signs of a reaction, or it so it will be a localized minor one such as hives, or a welt.
You can, however, have a psyhcosomatic reaction to anything you are afraid of. Peanut allergy has become an exaggerated fear to the detriment of those who suffer from other food allergies and other serious and chronic diseases.
A few Facts: more than 3,000 kids die from asthma each year; 10,000 kids go to the hospital each year with brain injuries due to sports; 45,000 kids die in car accidents. Last time i saw a statisic on food allergy fatalities it was aobut 100 to 150 over a five year period for all foods. This is not to say that peanut and tree nut allergies, or any allergy is not serious. They are.
But I wonder if these same parents who are demandting that peanuts and tree nuts be banned from everywhere are asking for sports be eliminated from school programs, or if their children are being kept out of sports. or, have they given up driving their children in a car; or, will they get their son or daughter a drivers license at age 16.
i have a friend whose child almost died twice from a serious allergy to milk because people think milk allergy can’t be fatal; they confuse milk allergy with lactose intolerance because the hysteria created by some about peanut has drowned out any sense of reason and overshadowed everyone else’s issues. A recent widely publicized study showed that far more people think they have food allergies than actually do. Again, i am not minimizing those who do, but a food allergy needs to be diagnosed by a certified immunologist who conducts a food challenge. Then and only then does a patient really know what they are allergic to. and, a food allergy is very different than a food sensitivity. Many people have multiple food allergies, but once properly diagnosed that person needs to be taught to care for themselves and take all necessary precautions.
Also, I read in the news is that patients with egg and food allergy have now been de-sensitized in clinical settings with guess what? egg and peanut! so, let’s rid ourselves of the hysteria. let’s stop our demanding and outrageousness and let’s call for ome common sense. i fear for these children that are being raised by parents to live in fear of the “bogey man”. instead of teaching them to handle whatever afflication they have in a responsible and calm manner–whether it’s severe asthma, other food allergies, diabetes, cystic fibrosis, and the hundreds of other afflications that so many of us live with everyday.
I myself have a food allergy so i truly understand what it takes to be vigliant; it isn’t easy.
in all my years of flying and with all the different carriers i have been on, i find that whether in the US or abroad, without legislation, they try to be as accommodating as possible when people plan ahead and are not behaving rudely.
we have more than enough regulation and every time a new regulation comes along it always carries unintended consequences. so, once you ban peanuts and tree nuts, will you prohibit seeing eye dogs on flights for those of us who are severly allergic? Remember, you can die from an asthma attack caused by a reaction to an animal. or, will you have a voice of reason and talk with the carrier, check on your medications, where a highly refined mask and take the right precautions.
My own near fatal experience to a different allergy reinforced for me that if you demand the world conform to you, you will become lax making it more likely you will have an accidenta encounter. we need to be prepared and proactive, not create a bubble around ourselves and our children.
Thank you for your comment. Do you have links to any of the studies you cite?
I would love the links to those studies also. I unfortunately have seen my daughter have an allergic reaction to inhalation of peanut dust twice-once on an airplane and once in a restaurant we entered before we were aware of the peanut shells all over the floor. Her face swelled and her eyes completely swelled shut-something I would label as a serious reaction. She was too young for it to be from stress. I don’t have any studies to back it up – just what I witnessed. I don’t think the DOT should monitor what each person brings onto the flight – there is a big difference if 150 people open up peanut packs verses 5-10 people bringing on their own snacks. If you have the allergy you do need to be prepared with medications and clean your area with wipes or cover your seat.
What a lot of people don’t realize is that peanut allergies actually worsen as a person ages. I have had a fatal peanut allergy all my life, and at age 28, I found my throat swelling from the smell of peanut products. Also, EpiPens are great, but they DO NOT stop the reaction to all people. I carry two injections with me all the time, and those injections buy me an hour to get to a hospital for further treatment. Without a hospital and immediate follow-up care, I would continue in a reaction. TO CONGRESS: YES, it can happen, it does happen, it will continue to happen, and as I AM AFRAID TO FLY FOR THIS VERY REASON, I urge you to do something! You cannot count on EpiPens to do everything! I vote for banning all peanut products AND making an announcement, asking passengers to refrain from eating any peanut products they may have brought on board, if a passenger informs the airline about his/her allergy.
first off, you do not have a ‘fatal’ peanut allergy – you are still alive. MAYBE you have a ‘potentially fatal’ allergy – extremely unlikely, but possible. Your only viable solution – DON’T FLY.
There must be a complete ban on tree nuts and peanuts on planes. It is a closed space. I am allergic to peanuts and almonds and I am impacted every time I fly. A nut free zone does not work since the dust from nuts gets in the closed air system of the plane. For the time that people are on planes there should be consideration of others who have no control as to the reactions they have to nuts. For almost all other foods the allergy only occurs if the food is ingested so you can easily avoid the allergic reaction but not eating the food. This is not true for many of us with nut allergies – we react if other people are eating the food since it is an airborne allergy. I do fly but I have to take multiple Benadryl pills every 4 hours to keep from reacting to the airborne dust of the nuts. This works for now but I always wonder when it will no longer be enough. An epipen is not the answer as it lasts only look enough for the plane to land which is not a practical solution when you are flying on a long flight over water and would certainly be a much greater inconvenience to the other passengers than a ban on nut products on planes if the plane was able to land. The rules airlines have are ridiculous – Southwest is not nut free they will not serve nuts but if you fly a late flight the peanuts are all over the floor and seats. Some other airlines have the rows around you ‘nut free’ but advise you they can do nothing if the person seated next to you brings nuts on and wants to eat them. Other airlines with advance notice will not serve nuts but all airlines allow passengers to bring on foods including nuts and will not stop the person from eating them if they wish to. So you can have a ‘nut free’ flight and the person sitting next to you can take out their package of peanuts and eat away – and the airlines will do nothing to help you. Again all nuts should be banned from airplanes unless it is your own private plane – then go ahead and eat what you want.
Thanks, all, for such a spirited discussion. To those who have have experienced flight with severe peanut allergies, would having a “no nut” section of the plane comprising multiple rows help? Some commenters have drawn analogies to no-smoking sections in restaurants — would this be a viable compromise?
Moderator, why are you not asking those in support of this where their responsibility comes into play . . .?
I think they all use their responsibility by continuing to take the medications needed in a reaction, but as others have said epinephrine only lasts 15-20 minutes, then the person needs other medical intervention.
ricport, everyone is responsible for themselves AND their effects on others. ever hear of involuntary manslaughter?
ricport: I don’t see the supporters shirking responsibility. I see them saying that even when they do everything they can, it’s not enough to stay alive. Not when on a flight without hospital access. Please be specific in areas that you are seeing within this discussion that show lack of responsibility on behalf of supporters.
elizwestly – Actually I read a lot about dying here but can anyone provide a single statistic of how many people have died from peanut allergies onboard an airplane? How about how many people die from peanut allergies in the US each year? I know that the “estimates” are that .6 to 1.5% of the US population may be allergic to peanuts. And I found the following in a story “In 2004, the Centers for Disease Control cited just 14 deaths due to anaphylaxis. The only known registry of deaths from anaphylaxis noted 33 deaths between 1994 and 1999. Remember, all of these estimates refer to the total number of people who had an anaphylactic reaction for any reason, not just from peanuts or other foods.” but I have yet to find anything I can pin down that says how many people REALLY die from a peanut allergy each year.
To me it seems pretty obvious that people with peanut allergies do fly (as many here have stated they do) and yet as far as I can tell no one has died. So, why are we even discussing banning peanuts when they have not killed a single person on an airplane?
dberger – Once again we see the attitude of everyone must change for a few, a very few. This allergy is yours and yours to deal with, why in the world do you expect all of the rest of us to change anything in our own lifestyles to accommodate you? As it is, you have a solution, you take Benadryl when you fly. Great. Other people need to take other medication to fly as well to deal with their own issues/problems also which they have no control over. Should we therefore make exceptions for all of them as well? I say no. There are steps you can personally take to deal with your own allergy but instead you insist that everyone else take steps so that you don’t have to. Sorry, I’m not accepting that.
I have sympathy for those with peanut allergies, but banning peanuts from flights via a DOT regulation seems to go too far. Perhaps advocacy groups for those who are peanut-allergic will approach the major carriers to voluntarily set aside seating blocks that are reserved for allergy sufferers, and non-sufferers who are willing to agree not to eat peanuts while sitting in that particular block. As someone who suffers from a medical condition which requires me to carry my “rescue” medication with me everywhere I go, I think that if the risk to an allergy sufferer is deemed to be significant, then they should (a) consider alternate travel methods other than flying, (b) ensure they have sufficient “rescue” medication to last the entire time they might be stuck in an aircraft, and (c) they should wear appropriate clothing / face masks to minimize exposed skin and inhalation risk. Requiring other passengers to forgo their “right” to eat peanuts so as to accommodate the “right” of allergy sufferers to fly seems a bit much, particularly if the allergy sufferers don’t fly often, anyway.
FrequentFlyer, though I appreciate your attempt at proposed solutions, I cannot support them. (A) we live in a remote area and air travel is the only option to go anywhere interesting. (B) “resue” medication only lasts 10-20 minutes, and you can only give two doses without medical supervision, and (C) we already take very careful measures to minimize the possibility of exposure. I fail to see why eating peanuts in particular is seen sa a “right”
Eating peanuts is as much a “right” as packing a gun or smoking a cigarette.
I fail to see why it is a “right” to fly so you can go somewhere “interesting”.
I had no idea that peanut allergies can be so severe that proximity was enough to trigger a reaction.
While I sympathize with the situation, the nature of the industry defies an easy fix. With the advent of “food-for-purchase” on airplanes, more and more passengers bring their own food. Not serving peanut products won’t completely protect those who are violently allergic because of what other passengers bring on board.
The only way I can see to ban peanuts altogether is a TSA regulation to ban it on top of an airline ban for their food service. This increases costs of screening and imposes new regulations on all passengers and, in turn, increases the cost of airline tickets, not to mention slowing the TSA screening lines due to increased security to check food products.
I wish I had a creative solution to the problem. But, finding a practical solution will be much harder than may first appear.
steps airlines should take: 1. cease offering peanut products immediately (may contains is fine, as long as labeled accordingly). 2. educate flight crew about the dangers and precautions, including immediate emergency landing even if reaction seems under control (epinephrine does NOT equal antidote – i’ve watched my son rebound with epi and crash again as it wore off, several times). 3. require pax to carry two (better three) doses of epi, and allow them to pre-board to re-clean. 4. inform all pax when an anaphylactic traveler is on board and to kindly refrain from eating crumbly, oily or gooey peanut products, hand out extra towelettes to ALL pax and encourage use before using common areas, and relocate adjacent obstinant pax if wilfully disregarding the safety of the allergic traveller.
Allergic travelers should have two (even three) auto-injectors. The airline should also have one or two auto-injectors in every first aid kit.
Food items prohibited for offer or sale onboard should include any dusty, crumbly, oily or gooey products in which peanuts is an ingredient, as those are the most likely to be transferred/accidentally ingested in sufficient quantities to cause a reaction. When informed, all pax should be reminded to refrain from eating such products throughout the flight, and to practice extra care and handwashing if they choose to eat them anyway.
That would go a long way to easing my weeks of anxiety before every flight with my anaphylactic son, when air travel is our only option.
Interesting proposal, what does everyone else think about the flight crew having access to epi-pens?
Although we always travel with epi-pens in case our fiver-year-old peanut & tree nut allergic child needs them, I think having some on board is a good idea, as long as crew are trained in the proper usage. Moreover, I think the crew need training on how to respectfully treat people with allergies or disabilities.
Since our son was diagnosed with the allergy one year ago, we have travelled several times on multiple carriers and have found the foreign carriers to be far less worrisome for those with nut allergies. In fact, none of the foreign carriers we used during that time even served nuts in economy. Our only trouble came with Delta. On flights to and from Atlanta to El Salvador, I requested a nut-free buffer zone as listed as an option on the Delta website. This request was not observed on either flight, and I when mentioned it to the cabin crew on one segment, they began taking back the nuts from the passengers around us, pointing out that they couldn’t have it because “that little boy is allergic.” This made us very uncomfortable, but at least the other passengers were polite about it.
I find it amazing that people get so incensed about “their rights” to have nuts being infringed upon. I have a feeling that these are the same people who would be the first to complain when a plane has to make an emergency landing when a nut-allergic passenger goes into anaphylaxis.
You are partly right. I would be upset if we had to make an emergency landing because someone did not take the proper precautions when they have a serious allergy and thus caused a hundred plus other people to have a major delay.
My daughter is allergic to peanut and tree nut. The problem with this allergy, is that anaphylaxis can occur from ANY contact with peanut. This includes airborne inhalation, cross contamination with other foods, or contact with residue left from previous and nearby passengers. It is not simply a matter of “don’t eat it.” It is well-known that Epipens address anaphylaxis on a SHORT TERM basis. The effects of the Epipen last for 15 or 20 minutes, but if the medication wears off, the individual can resume their life-threatening reaction. On the ground, after the use of an Epipen, you are supposed to go immediately to the emergency room because you may need further treatment to save your life. In the air, you don’t have that option. I believe the current diagnosis rate of peanut allergy is almost 1 in 100 children. That is a HUGE percentage of the population that is at risk by flying in an airplane. I choose not to fly because of the risk to my daughter, but it would be wonderful to be able to travel like everyone else again. I fully support this ban on any product that contains peanut.
Thank you for your comment, cmvs33. Aside from banning airlines from serving peanuts on flights, what other steps do you think the DOT could take to make flying safe for people with peanut & tree nut allergies?
You simply have no idea what you’re talking about. There is no “diagnosis rate” of peanut allergies; there is a common, misguided belief that peanut allergies are rising and that any reaction to any food is an allergy. Unfortunately for you, you actually need to be observed and tested by a licensed, certified doctor for the presence of IgE antibodies to determine if you really have an allergy.
Furthermore, if you really think that 1 in 100 having a true allergy to peanuts is huge, you’re daft. That would be 1%, which is 3.3 million people in the U.S.—not a huge number at all. Far more people (most people, in fact) are allergic to one or more types of dust, but you aren’t proposing that the FAA should ban dust, since that’s not possible without shutting down air travel altogether.
Maybe we should just ban people with peanut allergies from flying; that would certainly solve your problem.
Why does Mulder make the unwarranted assumption that people posting here have not been evaluated by an allergist?
I have been lethally allergic to peanuts all my life, and while I always carry multiple Epi-pens, I only forty minutes to get to a hospital after using them. I personally would like to see a ban on peanuts and enforcing passengers to refrain from bringing banned items on board. But as another person pointed out, a lot of people are severely allergic to perfumes. I think the DOT should ask allergists the most common causes of allergic anaphylaxis, and include those in the ban. After all, no one NEEDS to wear perfumes or eat nuts. Another option I support is having no food or snacks on domestic flights. I think we should consider actual needs (such as water) on flights, instead of what people prefer.
I always like it when someone talks about everyone else’s “need” not being important when their own “need” is involved. What about your responsibility to protect yourself? While you can argue someone doesn’t have a “right” to wear perfume I would counter that you have no more “right” to fly. Is it much more convenient than driving or taking a train? Sure, but it is not a right plain and simple. So, stop trying to determine what everyone else “needs” they should be allowed to fulfill and do your own due diligence to protect yourself with filter masks, alternate travel, or whatever.
As the father of a three year old daughter who was recently diagnosed with a life-threatening peanut allergy, I fully support a ban on peanuts and food containing peanuts. While my daughter does not have an inhalation allergy, she is extremely sensitive and if she ingested even a minute particle of peanut protein, she could have a life threatening reaction. While we have epi pens and benadryl to administer in the event of such an event, those medications are only a short term response and immediate medical care is essential. As a parent, it is my job to insure she does not ingest anything that will cause a reaction and we do everything we can to create a large buffer between her and such products. That said, we have little control over the environment in an airplane. Others eating peanuts nearby or even someone having eaten a peanut on an earlier flight could create a very real problem. While we can do everything possible to clean the area in which we sit and diligently parent her while on the flight, the risk is significant. Moreover, with the number of children diagnosed with peanut allergies having tripled between 1997 and 2007 (see recent Mount Sinai study) this threat is neither extremely limited nor decreasing.
The simple fact is that a peanut allergy is life threatening and should not be compared to other intolerances or allergies that are not. Doing so is naive and bordering on ignorant. Balancing both the seriousness and scope of the threat involved against what could only be described as a petty inconvenince associated with banning peanuts and peanut products, the choice seems clear. That is, unless the peanut lobby or ill-informed airline passengers are making decisions in Washington.
I commend the DOT for being on top of this issue and urge the adoption of a final rule banning peanuts and peanut products from airplans.
Thank you for your comment, jmb. In case other contributors are interested, a press release summing up the Mt. Sinai study mentioned here is available at http://www.mountsinaifpa.org/about-us/news-archive/rate-of-childhood-peanut-allergies-more-than-tripled-between-1997-and-2008.
A telephone survey? How many of these children were actually tested to discover if they really did have an allergy vice how many are “assumed” to be allergic from parental observation?
That Mount Sinai “study” is completely bogus and inherently flawed. It was done via telephone survey, which is unreliable and unscientific, as it requires people to recall things from imperfect memories. At the same time, these are people who “report” an allergy; there is no clinical diagnosis of an allergy based on observation and blood tests for IgE antibodies after eating peanuts, which is the only way it can be confirmed.
Scientific data shows no doubling or tripling in peanut allergies during any period of time. People who preach this nonsense and those who buy into it as fact are hurting themselves and spreading needless fear.
Absolutely correct. Allergies are largely the realm of the hypochondriac. Get a real doctor to diagnose this – not an ‘allergist’ as they have an agenda to promote. These peanut people are just a new kind of PC nazi. If you really have a problem, DON’T FLY!
While I realize that peanut allergies can be severe, what about those of us with other allergies? I’m allergic to pet dander and unfortunately every major airline now allows animals in the cabin – while I understand the necessity of service animals, I’ve also seen animals snuck aboard or allowed out of our cages. I’m also allergic to large amounts of perfume or scent – I’ve broken out in hives after one occasion and had no real recourse.
I agree with you Vec. I am severely allergic to cats which leads to many of the same symptoms that people with peanut allergies have (tightness in the chest, the feeling of their throat closing) for me these symptoms are made more severe because I also have asthma, which kicks in when I am around cats – airway constriction, uncontrollable coughing etc.
From reading some of the post I understand that the argument has been made that peanuts should be banned because people can die of a peanut allergy. I also believe that animals should also be banned then because people who are allergic and or have asthma could also die if they are on an extended flight with an animal they are allergic to.
According to the CDC the number of Asthma related deaths was 3,616 in 2006. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/asthma.htm
Welcome to regulation room kas and thanks for the informative first post. You have provided the community with some interesting information.
Kas, where do you fall on the peanut issue? Do you think that it should be banned or only banned if animals are banned? Or something else?
What do others think about this information about asthma-related deaths? What effect should this have on the proposed peanut rule?
Here are my thoughts on the three Proposed Solutions:
Allowing peanuts/nuts but instituting a “buffer zone”
— Although perhaps an improvement over current procedures, this will only help a portion of peanut/nut allergic people, and mostly likely won’t help severely allergic individuals.
— Airborne peanut/nut proteins can cause anaphylactic reactions faster than surface-bound peanut/nut proteins; the recycled air in the plane exacerbates this problem.
— Every surface could still be contaminated, even if you wipe down your seats; for example, touching any other arm rest, using lavatory doors, toilets, sinks, and surfaces right after someone else who was eating peanuts/nuts.
— There would simply still be too many risks.
Requesting a peanut/nut-free flight
— Again, better than current procedures, and better than a buffer zone, but still a problem. A peanut/nut allergic individual would likely be walking onto a plane that was not peanut/nut free 30 minutes prior; and although some cleaning of the cabins occurs between flights, many of the same issues mentioned above would still exist.
— How would the logistics of making other passengers aware prior to getting to airport be handled? Notify people at the time of purchase? How would they be notified after the time of purchase?
— Most people don’t understand and/or are not tolerant of peanut/nut allergy, purely out of lack of knowledge of its severity (prior to having a son diagnosed with peanut/nut and soy allergies I didn’t know what it entailed either); How would it be possible to prevent people “sneaking” peanuts/nuts or simply ignoring the policy?
— This has the potential to single out the peanut/nut allergic “offender” (for example, as soon as other passengers see you wiping down your seats).
Banning peanuts/nuts completely
— The only viable solution to make air travel routinely safe for everyone.
— Although there may still be risks of passengers violating the policy, this resolves all of the issues mentioned above. The surfaces of and air inside the plane would be safe, all travelers would know what to expect, no one would know who was or wasn’t peanut/nut allergic.
— Airlines have nothing to lose by instituting a full ban; they only have customers to gain. Like with any changes in air travel policy, if such a ban is universally instituted, everyone will have to accept it, and it will not prevent people from continuing to fly. However, what will happen is that a large and continuously growing part of the customer market that currently cannot or will not fly, will buy tickets knowing that air travel can be safe.
— Bear in mind the severity of a situation where a peanut/nut allergic individual goes into anaphylactic shock mid-air. In some cases, Benadryl and an Epipen (epinephrine auto-injector) will resolve the reaction for an amount of time. However, in many cases these measures merely buy you enough time to get to an emergency room, typically 10 to 15 minutes; which would not be possible when in mid-air. Therefore, while the first two policy options may reduce risk to a degree, they are not sufficient, assuming that the goal here is to make air travel safe for everyone.
Some direct answers to the DOT’s questions:
“How likely it is that a passenger with a severe peanut allergy will suffer a reaction from peanut particles in the air on a flight?”
— Although there is no direct formula, if there are peanut particles in the air, it is highly likely that a passenger with a severe peanut allergy will have a life-threatening reaction.
“What steps should airlines have to take, if any, to avoid this danger?”
— Complete restriction of peanut products on board a flight is the only way to effectively try to avoid this danger. This includes food supplied by the airlines, as well as food brought by passengers and consumed on the plane.
“Would an epinephrine auto-injector, to allow immediate treatment of an allergic reaction, be sufficient?”
— Possibly, but you certainly can’t bank on it. Epinephrine auto-injectors are designed to temporarily open the air passages; they are for immediate treatment – not long term treatment. Although Epipens might end up staving off a reaction, they most frequently just buy you some time to get long term treatment at the hospital such as antihistamines, steroids, and other measures.
“If so, should it be the responsibility of the airline, or the passenger, to provide it?”
— That depends. As parents who have a child with a severe peanut allergy, we don’t go anywhere without Epipens, nor should anyone with a severe peanut allergy. However, the auto-injectors have a large needle at the end of them (it is retracted until the injection is administered), and I don’t know if this is currently a security issue. If so, and Epipens were not allowed to be carried by passengers onto a flight, it would absolutely be up to the airlines to have a stock of them on board as part of their medical supplies. Otherwise, if passengers with proper medical documentation were allowed to carry their prescribed Epipens, they should definitely be diligent in doing so, but I still think Epipens should be a standard item included with a plane’s medical supplies.
“Should any food item containing peanuts be covered in a restriction, including e.g., peanut butter crackers and products containing peanut oil?”
— Absolutely. Anything containing peanuts, such as peanut butter crackers, should be restricted, no question. Regarding peanut oils, theoretically, very highly refined peanut oil contains smaller amounts of peanut proteins, and therefore poses less of a risk. However, it is almost impossible to determine which food companies use what kinds of oils, how refined the oils are, and what else is involved in the manufacturing process. So in general, items containing peanut oils should be completely avoided.
Thanks for the very complete answers to DOT’s questions Dave. Please feel free to comment on the other topics as well.
Dave brings up an interesting point about security restrictions and epi-pens. Do restrictions exist against bringing epi-pens on planes? Has anyone had experience with these restrictions? Should these restrictions influence the regulation?
I posted a full comment above but wanted to comment regarding EpiPens.
We always carry a doctors note with us stating that our son needs his EpiPen. We’ve never been asked for the note and our EpiPens have never been taken, mentioned, or checked. We fly out of Logan Boston and Manchester NH. We’ve never flown with EpiPens out of country.
I don’t consider the needle to be that large. I guess it depends upon your definition of large. It’s certainly not long. Could an EpiPen be considered a security threat? Probably not but I guess anything is possible if the person knows how to use it in such a way. I can’t even imagine what that would be.
Thanks for the information Ruth. Do you think that the regulation should address EpiPens to avoid any potential problems?
Have others had similar or different experiences with EpiPens?
I don’t know whether the regulation should address EpiPens or not. How are other medications treated, like insulin for diabetics for instance? I think they should all fall under the same category.
DaveW is giving false and misleading information about peanut allergy reactions in-flight.
The results of a self-reporting study done in 2007 (http://www.annallergy.org/article/S1081-1206(10)60835-6/abstract) show that:
“Forty-one of 471 individuals reported allergic reactions to food while on airplanes, including 4 reporting more than 1 reaction. Peanuts accounted for most of the reactions. Twenty-one individuals (51%) treated their reactions during flight. Only 12 individuals (29%) reported the reaction to a flight attendant. Six individuals went to an emergency department after landing, including 1 after a flight diversion. Airline personnel were notified of only 3 of these severe reactions. Comparison of information given to 3 different investigators by airline customer service representatives showed that inconsistencies regarding important information occurred, such as whether the airline regularly serves peanuts.”
His pseudo-fact about peanut particles in the air is definitely misleading. It seems to be based on the widely held myth that air inside the cabin is recycled; i.e. that it’s the same air you started out with on the ground and just moved around constantly during flight. Not true at all.
Cabin air is a mixture of 50% fresh air (from outside the plane during flight) and what’s already in the cabin. Fresh is is cooled, then ducted throughout the cabin and down into the fuselage, where half of it is vented out; what remains is then filtered for particulates and other pollutants and mixed with fresh air and the cycle repeats. The result is that the air in the cabin is cleaner than in most public buildings, and the air is completely exchanged every 2-3 minutes.
So, if there were peanut dust in the air at any point, it would quickly be filtered out of the air.
Banning peanuts, tree nuts, or other items onboard makes no rational sense. A very small minority of the population has an allergy to peanuts and other nuts, and this would be allowing a minority to infringe on the rights of the majority.
People with peanut and tree nut allergies can be desensitized to peanuts, as studies have shown. If they’re unwilling to do it, that’s not a problem that others should have to compensate for by not being allowed to eat a particular food or snack.
We all take risk every day, and we accept those risk as part of living. Far more people die each year from drowning (more than 3,000) than from peanut allergy reactions (about 150), yet nobody’s advocating that we ban outdoor or indoor pools.
The risk here is being greatly exaggerated for the political gain of a very few people.
Just a few quick comments:
According to the TSA website (http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/specialneeds/index.shtm), you can bring EpiPens onboard an airplane. I don’t have an EpiPen, but I have Type I diabetes, and I bring an insulin pen and syringes with me on every flight (about 12 times per year).
Also, while many peanut allergies are very serious, it is still not “highly likely” that a person with a peanut allergy with have a reaction on an airplane where peanuts are served. I can’t access the entire article, but the following abstract has information on the number of peanut allergic individuals who had reactions inflight: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10400859
Banning peanuts and peanut products on flights does not harm anyone and demonstrates the airlines’ (and government’s) reasonable attempt to meet the needs of those with severe peanut allergies. The airlines can’t control what passengers bring onboard, but they can try to regulate it and not have an entire flight full of people eating peanuts. An EpiPen only helps for a few minutes. I’d rather give up peanuts for a few hours than have a child lose his or her life. Is that what it is going to take to resolve this simple issue?
I teach a child with a severe peanut allergy. I can’t 100% prevent individuals from consuming peanut products and coming around the student. But, I can ban peanut products in my classroom and post huge signs on my door saying “do not enter if you have eaten or have been exposed to peanut products”. That demonstrates my reasonable efforts to protect the student.
In the interest of full disclosure, I am an allergy sufferer, mom to a child with multiple life threatening food allergies (peanut included) and founder of BestAllergySites.com.
In regards to the questions asked:
1. Likelihood of reaction: I don’t know that anyone (allergist or not) can say with 100% confidence whether someone might have a reaction from peanut dust. All individuals and allergies are different. An allergic reaction is an immune system response. If an individuals immune system is compromised, they might have a more severe reaction then they would have otherwise. There “have” been reactions in situations where a person is exposed to a large amount of airborne peanut protein when multiple bags of peanuts are opened at once. For instance: at a ball park. I only imagine a plane would be worse.
My son had what we consider an anaphylactic reaction in flight at around the age of 2 from picking up his toy on the plane floor and then rubbing his eyes. His eyes immediately swelled, he started coughing and crying. Hives developed and so on. We can only guess that there was peanut dust on the floor.
2. Steps airlines should take: all allergic passengers should have/carry and be able to carry on board–epinephrine (EpiPen). Planes should also have them on flight due to reactions where 1. someone doesn’t have theirs 2. first time reaction in someone who didn’t know they were allergic. An EpiPen is not enough however. Allergic reactions can and may come back and patients usually need to be watched in a hospital for 4-6 hours following a reaction. Some may need IV treatment or other medications.
3. Should any foods containing peanut be restricted: In my opinion, all obvious peanut containing foods should be restricted–peanuts, peanut butter, peanut cookies, etc. The other products are not necessarily a concern from a dust standpoint but from a contact standpoint. Some individuals are allergic by touching a surface with peanut protein and then touching their eyes, nose or mouth. Most kids do this and even adults rub their eyes. Peanut oil is “usually” so highly processed that no peanut protein remains–so that might not be an issue. Obviously there are always exceptions to the rule. Items labeled “may contain peanuts” or “processed in a facility w/ peanuts” would more than likely be too difficult to ban.
I think the biggest issues are 1. peanut protein in dust from opening bags of peanuts. Solution-no bagged peanuts on flight. 2. Cross contamination on surfaces from prior passengers with peanut products. Examples are trays, floors, arm rests windows, etc. Solutions-a.Thorough cleanings between flights of ALL surfaces, b. banning all peanut containing products, c. adding a peanut buffer zone–but it must be peanut safe/free 100% of the time or completely cleaned.
Honestly–bottom line is going 100% peanut free/safe is the easiest and safest solution for all. There are a million other foods and snacks to eat. These allergies can be severe and life threatening. The only instance where I can personally see a potential actual “need” for peanut/peanut butter is in the rare case that it is a “medical need” for a passenger due to their diet or a disability.In that case–I think there should be accommodations put in place for those passengers.
I’m completely aware of the strong feelings and opinions a “ban” brings forth. Having a child and having seen a child suffer a life threatening reaction is not something I wish on anyone. Experiencing that in mid air with no access to an ambulance, ER or Dr. is beyond words.
While peanut allergies and reactions are not necessarily common–they are by all means not uncommon and certainly not rare. We live in a society and as a society we often have to make accommodations for each other.
As allergies are not genetic, it is extremely unlikely (try impossible) that you and you child have the same allergy. Also, while unpleasant, your child’s reaction was not life threatening. Many children have these mild reactions to various foods – my daughter used to get a rash if she ate strawberries. The sensitivity fades, usually by age 4. The key is not to freak out about it. I bet you are the same mom who rushes to the emergency room for every bump and bruise too. The perception of an increase in severe allergies is just that – a perception. This generation of parents just can’t seem to let their kids grow up normally – which includes a few bumps, bruises, hives, etc. Peanuts ARE NOT going to kill anyone. They should not be banned.
I feel for people with severe peanut allergies (and parents of those with such allergies); it must be terrible trying to avoid such a prevalent product. I don’t see how creating a peanut-free “buffer zone” around pre-registered allergic flyers is going to be genuinely effective in planes due to the recirculating air, and seems likely to cause conflict between airline employees and the non-allergic passengers being affected. An outright ban of peanut-containing products on board airplanes, whether they’re provided by the airline or brought on board by passengers, might be in order. That would likely also have to be coupled with a ban on the sale of peanut-containing products in airports. If we’re addressing hazards to the health of passengers from products that the affected passengers themselves aren’t even consuming, peanut allergies are not the only allergy/immune system problem that affects the flying public on a daily basis. Is the DOT going to follow this up with rules banning the wearing of perfumes or other scented products by airline employees and passengers so said products don’t trigger asthma attacks in susceptible members of the public? Or ruling that airline employees and members of the public who are suffering from communicable illnesses are not allowed to be on flights until they’re no longer contagious (e.g., people with colds, the flu, norovirus)? Those types of rules seem like the logical follow-up to rules surrounding peanut allergies.
I am a little skeptical that DOT has the power to implement this peanut ban. I would think that since Congress took away funding the last time that DOT tried to get rid of peanuts and DOT implicitly agreed to not take away peanuts, that DOT could not implement a peanut ban without Congress’ express authorization. At the very least, I think the DOT needs much more legally based response to this question then is currently included in the notice of proposed rulemaking. It would seem to me that DOT is playing a little fast and loose with the idea that just because Congress hasnt put the ban in place again, it must not want the ban. It would seem to me that Congress would not have any reason to cut off funding over peanuts, if DOT hasnt tried this stunt since 1999.
Also, the notice talks about Congress requiring a peer reviewed study about the effects of peanuts on planes. Does DOT have this study? If so, why is it not included in the notice.
I am not saying that the peanut ban is bad, but there are rules and it doesnt appear that DOT is playing by them.
@kas Well reasoned. Law must be respected.
Does anyone see a way that DOT could address the peanut issue without running afoul of the problem kas and KingSlav see?
As I read through all the comments opposed to the peanut ban, I am amazed as to why some people feel it’s more important to fight for the right to consume the snack of their choice, over the chance to help protect the life of another human being. Is this really a comparison?!?!?
It is a fact that peanuts DO KILL people. Yes, it is a small percentage of the current population – what is the cost of one life to you if it’s your family, your neighbor, your child? And keep in mind, peanut allergies have doubled over the last five years. So perhaps it will not be such a small percentage soon. I think it is a sad statement on our society that this even is a debatable issue.
I would support a complete ban of peanuts and peanut products on aircraft carriers, as they are a confined, temporary space with no access to emergency medical assistance. Airplanes are different than airports, restaurants, taxis and other places that people have mentioned where a ban would not be necessary.
In the future, I would also support a ban of ANY SUBSTANCE proven to cause death … peanuts are not the only food. Tree nuts and shellfish can be just as deadly. And if it was proven that perfume, body odor or bad breath (as some of the other commentators compared this issue to) was shown to cause death, then yes, those should be banned as well.
It will not kill anyone to NOT EAT peanuts during the course of one flight. I WILL KILL someone with food allergies if they accidentally do.
Thank you for your comments. Do you have suggestions on how airlines could enforce the ban on the plane if peanuts are still sold in airports?
Also, you should check out the discussion on tarmac delays and how proposals of debarking the plane when there are delays may impact an airlines ability to implement a ban on peanuts on board. What do you think?
Mallone – so you will not wear any toxic petro based products for ME? Do you even know you are wearing such products (yes you are)… read the labels and get back to me. (unless all you use, wear and clean with are 100 percent based on all chemicals that cause others life threatening reactions, and even so called natural ones such as Citrus oils…. so again, one group is “protected” (they will not be I assure you) and others ignored. Why is that.
Other than death by choking, it IS NOT a fact that peanuts kill people. It is a fact that they provide a very nutritious snack that children will actually eat. If your paranoid imaginings are too sever for you to allow the rest of the traveling public to enjoy a snack in peace, STAY HOME!
Thank you for your comment howie. The DOT would like to see any information you may be aware of concerning the relative safety of peanut products on airplanes.
When a food allergy is life-threatening (and known to cause anaphylaxis), it considered a disability under federal laws such as Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
In other words, people with severe peanut allergies have the right to be protected.
No, allergies are not disabilities, and therefore you get no special treatment under the ADA. Federal courts have consistently ruled this way.
Thanks for the comment. Do you have the specific cases or links that address this distinction?
You can read about it here: http://www.wisbar.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Wisconsin_Lawyer&template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&contentid=92733
Mulder’s comment about the ADA is only partially true, but thoroughly exaggerated, because there has only been one court case. Food allergy is generally considered a disability under Section 504 and ADA. The point Mulder exaggerates is that there is no primary legal precedent, i.e., a court opinion, saying this. But there is secondary legal authority, i.e., settlements, USDA guidelines, etc. Plus, more to the point, airlines have their own version of the ADA, called the Air Carrier Access Act, as the DOT mentions in its notice of rulemaking. The ACAA prohibits discrimination against those with disabilities by U.S. and foreign air carriers, and DOT regulations require airlines to accommodate travelers with disabilities.
While I have sympathy for people with allergies (I have my own), common sense should indicate that you cannot legislate EVERYTHING. People need to take responsibility for their own well-being and take whatever precautions are necessary if they decide they must fly. Imposing restrictions on 300 other people for one person does not seem reasonable, or practical. Who will be the peanut police? Does that include PB&J sandwiches – a practical meal to bring from home? Will this raise costs for the already struggling airlines? Guess who will pay the extra costs – EVERYONE.
What about people with other allergies? Do we ban milk and dairy products?
I am allergic to certain perfumes. Should we ban all perfumes too?
When will it end? There has to be some common sense.
Here are my suggestions:
* Allergy sufferers should be:
* responsible for their own medication (we can’t expect airlines to be pharmacies too; what if they run out?)
* take precautions if they have severe problems (e.g. mask, epi-pen, antihistamines)
* not fly if their problems are that life-threatening (how do they survive in the rest of the real world? The airport? Do we have airports cleared of all potential allergens? Theoretically that is all food, and anything that gives off any sort of aroma/smell. Do they have a person walking in front and behind clearing the way of all allergens? Of course not – they take reasonable precautions.)
* It is NOT a right to fly – it is a CHOICE and convenience for those who can afford it.
What do these sufferers do now? They probably take reasonable precautions. My vote is to not legislate BS like this.
As the mother of a severe peanut allergic child who has had an episode on an airplane that required epinephrine I would like to stress how important it is to remove all peanuts and peanut products from the plane. Even traces of peanut butter left on the tray table can pose a threat to someone with a severe peanut allergy. It is also important for crew to alert passengers through a public announcement and ask them not to eat peanuts that they have brought on board. This is becoming more common as airlines cut down on food service. America airlines are the worst in assisting passengers with peanut allergies. Airlines need to do what most schools today do: ban all peanut products and ban people from bringing peanuts and peanut products onto the plane. Flying is not a choice, it is often a necessity. Would you say to a peanut allergic person that they cannot go to a job interview if it is not within driving distance of their home? It is hard to believe that this issue is even up for debate.
Thank you for your comment. You have a great perspective as the parent of a child who has had an allergic reaction on a plane. It sounds like you have some interesting travel experiences. The DOT would love to hear what you have to say about topics such as tarmac delays, baggage fees, and bumping compensation. Use the Rule Dashboard on the left to navigate to these other issues in the rule.
What is hard to believe is that you feel perfectly fine inflicting your unfounded paranoia on the rest of us. Truly life threatening food allergies are vanishingly rare. These days everyone seems to want to think they belong to a special needs group of some kind. You got a hive once after eating a peanut butter sandwich, and suddenly you have a life threatening allergy. If you are one of the VERY FEW who actually have this condition, DON’T FLY. You can’t go to a job interview anyway, because anywhere you go you will be exposed to peanuts. ‘Most’ schools are not succumbing to this foolish paranoia – just the ones run by PC nazi whackos. I tell you what, anyone tells me I can’t feed my kid the one nutritious snack she will actually eat better be prepared for a lawsuit and a black eye.
I am a mother if a three year old with nut (including peanuts and cashews) and egg allergies. I also support any ban on foods with peanut ingredients on airplanes. We try to avoid airlines that serve peanuts, but that is becoming more difficult in this economy where we are trying to save any where we can and airlines are merging. We have family in Europe and used to fly Northwest with our son, however, since they have merged with Delta that is now our least expensive option (we average $2,500 – $3,500 in tickets each time we fly, so price does make a difference). Delta serves nuts.
My son did have a reaction on one flights. He did not eat nuts, and neither did anyone in our row, we believe he came in contact with the nuts from someone who had sat in our seats on a previous flight. Luckily the reaction was not severe, we could control it with medicine, but when you have a 16 month old reacting at 35,000 feet, it can be very scary.
Then next time we flew where the airline served nuts, we told them of the allergy when we bought the tickets and when we checked in. I felt very discriminated by a few comments we received from airline personnel. One flight attendant got angry that he wasn’t told in advance and later blamed me when he ran out of non nut snacks when asked for a bag of pretzels (they created a “peanut free area” around us). Another flight attendant announced to the plane that they would not be serving nut products because there was a small child with a nut allergy. I felt like my family was singled out because it was a small flight and we were the only family with a small child.
Please change the law to remove nuts from flights, no child’s life is worth the risk.
Thanks for your comment. Do you have any data about how many other people who have had similar experiences to your family?
Also, it sounds like you’ve done some traveling. The DOT would love to hear what you have to say about other issues in the rule! Use the Rule Dashboard on the left to navigate to other topics.
While I am sure it was scary, you said it yourself, the reaction was not severe. I applaud the flight attendant for singling you out – as a fellow traveller I would want to know who had caused MY child to not be able to have a snack on a long flight. Peanuts are harmless to 99.9999999% of the population. In that VERY small subset that are effected, actual life threatening reactions are incredibly rare. The traveling public should not be impacted because of your erroneous belief that this wonderful food might harm your child.
I am allergic to nuts, peanuts included. Even the smell of peanuts makes me want to be sick. The fact the entire plane opens their peanuts at once, makes it an overpowering smell that just unsettles me and makes me nervous. I just can’t see air travelers really loving peanuts so much that 1) it is their preferred snack, and 2) they are willing to eat it at the expense of another person’s suffering. I do fly Southwest a lot and tell them of my allergy, and they are pretty good about banning peanuts from that flight.
If you ban everything that makes people “want to be sick” then you would have to ban air travel since a far higher percentage of people in this country get air sick than have severe (or lethal) reactions to peanuts and believe me, when you are air sick you really wish it was fatal at times.
Hmm, so if people are made aware of the situation you feel discriminated against but if they are unaware of the situation and they have peanuts then you feel, essentially, discriminated against? Seriously, just because the cheaper airfare doesn’t ban peanuts that is no excuse to place restrictions on everyone else who flies. You have children with an allergy that means it is going to cost you in money, time, and diligence in order to protect them to whatever level you deem necessary. That is your burden. I have a bad back and therefore I do not pack a heavy suitcase when I go somewhere and end up buying some items that I otherwise might have carried with me. That is my burden. I don’t expect you to carry my bags for me so that i can pack more in.
Before any rule is made, I would like to see actual hard evidence of the number of incidents graded into at least a simple severity level, e.g., discomfort, controllable severe symptoms, uncontrollable severe symptoms. I have friends who have peanut allergies that range from mild to severe/life-threatening. They all are willing to let people know of their condition, but are also willing to take precautions for themselves to minimize their exposures. Only as a last resort do they seek to limit use by others, and then only to the extent necessary to avoid exposure that would thwart their precautions.
Does anyone have the type of data lutefisk941 is looking for? This data would also be very useful for DOT to know as it makes its decision.
I support an outright ban. First, simply as a peanut allergy sufferer, a key travel worry of mine would be allayed. Second, either the creation of a buffer-zone or removal of peanuts base on a passenger’s request is impractical. What if there are multiple allergy sufferers on the plane? Finding appropriate seat arrangements for everyone is completely impractical and time-consuming, delaying take-off. It also distracts flight attendants from completing their job. Second, among all of the other things a passenger needs to be keep in mind when traveling, notifying the airline of a peanut allergy should not be one of them. And when should the airline be notified? When is it too late to do so? And if it is too late, then what happens if someone has an allergic reaction on the plane? One possible solution is to have a little box checked off when booking a ticket to indicate a peanut allergy. But given the myriad of ways in which tickets are booked and purchased today, this is unlikely to be completely successful. The most practical solution is to just ban them on flights. The decision is not based on the risk to allergy and non-allergy passengers, but the costs of different solutions.
Why ban them? Maybe some passengers like peanuts.
Why not just require the flight attendants to warn you, and only give you peanuts if you ask for them. The same for anything containing peanut products.
Thanks for your comments. Would creating a peanut-free “zone” on an airplane work, similar to peanut-free tables and playground areas in schools?
We’d love to hear your thoughts on other topics, particularly ticket sales and advertising, and how those could be made more responsive to peanut allergy suffers.
There’s no reason to restrict peanuts on any flight. The number of deaths per year due to anaphylaxis (150-200 per year) is much, much smaller than other causes of death (drowning, for example).
People who actually suffer from a severe allergic reaction to peanuts know what precautions to take, and their condition should never infringe on the rights of others. If they can’t deal with the risk they take every day, no matter where they are, then they should be living in a bubble.
Instead of blaming others for their real or perceived allergy, they should take steps to desenstize themselves to peanuts, which can be done, as studies have shown.
Even better, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University developed a way to remove the allergens from peanuts in 2007, so if the various food companies that process and market peanuts take an interest in licensing this technology, people can avoid any fear of allergic reactions from peanuts.
You can read the press release here: http://www.ncat.edu/press_releases/disp_release.php?ID=3132
Peanut allergies a disability? Get serious. What’s next, lactose intolerance is one?
If peanut allergies qualify as a disability, then what is the DOT or FAA going to do about people who are allergic to one or more types of dust (most of the population), or those who have difficulty breathing due to a deviated septum (80 percent or more of the population)?
Should they ban dust on airplanes, and if so, how do they expect to accomplish that without closing the airports (people bring in dust from outside)? They’d have to shut down air travel, since they wouldn’t be able to allow the doors to be opened for passengers to embark or disembark due to the dust on their clothes and luggage, in the jetway, and outside the plane.
For those with a deviated septum, are they going to start requiring that airlines give every passenger a more than adequate supply of non-emergency oxygen (and a mask) for the length of their flight to help them breathe better?
Sometimes the only way to fight back against the ridiculous is to propose something even more ridiculous.
Faulty reasoning on Mulder’s part. There’s no comparison between the leading cause of fatal and near-fatal food allergic reactions and a dust mite. Or a deviated septum.
I have been allergic to peanuts for nearly 40-years! I typically fly Southwest Airlines – a leading airline in distributing peanuts to passengers as THE ONLY SNACK on many of their flights. After a typical flight, I will have itchy, watery eyes sometimes to the point where I can barely keep my eyes open. Luckily my allergy is not AS BAD as many – but I can empathize with those with worse conditions. In Southwest’s defense, if I would call ahead of time and inform them I was allergic to peanuts they would gladly air out the aircraft and refrain from serving peanuts on my flight. Although I am not against the idea of peanuts being restricted from all flights, I do appreciate people’s comments regarding the absurdity of such an all-encompassing rule. I think an effective and simple solution might be to ask passengers either verbally when tickets are purchased person-to-person, or via a question prior to an e-ticket purchase that asks the traveler if they are allergic to peanuts. If yes – then that particular flight can be aired out of prior peanuts and peanuts not served on that flight. I look forward to seeing the outcome to this issue.
Thank you for your comment. Should the airlines be required to ask every passenger whether they are allergic to peanuts/other allergies, or do you think it should be up to the person with the particular allergy to inform the airline ahead of time?
I think it is incredibly rude that you will inconvenience an entire plane load of people to avoid mild discomfort. Take benadryl before you fly, or don’t fly. Your watery eyes and itchy throat are not my problem.
Another way to address this: if Southwest serves peanuts, you could fly United, Continental, or American Airlines instead (the allergy policy of those airlines states that they do not serves peanuts inflight). You know you have the option, so you might as well act on it if it makes you uncomfortable.
Anyone who actually suffers from a life-threatening reaction to peanuts should not be on a plane at all. If the presence of peanut dust on an airliner is that risky to them, they know they shouldn’t be flying. Despite what FAAN claims, there is no scientific data to support the idea that large numbers of people are dying from anaphylactic shock due to peanut allergies, or even that peanut allergies are on the rise through natural causes. Gullible parents telling their kids not to eat peanuts because they are or might be allergic causes needless anxiety for those children, and when they finally are exposed to peanuts or peanut dust, they end up having an allergy. That’s irresponsible parenting.
At the same time, most of the population is allergic to one or ore types of dust; should the FAA ban that from airliners, too? How would they accomplish that? They’d be unable to open the doors to board or disembark, and you’d have to close all the airports, too.
Allergies are not disabilities. If that were true, then the 80 percent or more people who have a deviated septum would also qualify as having a disability, yet nobody’s proposing that airlines supply a separate, non-emergency oxygen supply to help them breathe better.
It’s time to put an end to bending to the agenda of special interest groups that have a political agenda: one that isn’t based on science, but instead based solely on fear and claims that can’t be supported by scientific facts.
With nearly 2 million peanut allergic people out there and the severely allergic classed under ADA protection, the airlines should not serve peanuts in any form on any flight. I am severely allergic as are my twin sons and we cannot fly without specific guarantees from the airline for our safety.
If you or your children are allergic to peanuts, did you have this clinically diagnosed by testing for the presence of IgE antibodies after eating peanut? If not, then there’s no way to confirm you have an allergy to them. You can be intolerant of peanuts, but that’s not the same thing as an allergy, and allergies are not inherited.
If you’re looking for guarantees for safety from an airline or anything else, you’re not going to get that, ever. You take risks like everyone else no matter what you do.
And the ADA does not extend any protection to you, since allergies are not a disability. The courts have consistently ruled against this.
Airlines are NOT public spaces. If airlines ban peanuts, MANY passengers WILL bring their own peanuts on board … as airlines cannot stop people from bringing their own snacks.
What are we going to do? Ban every food that anyone is allergic to? When will it stop?
I am sympathetic to people with allergies, but people with allergies need to be prepared with their medicine and then need to stop trying to impose their need on the 99% of the healthy (non-allergic) population.
Okay-but medication doesn’t stop it, prevent it, or help the person who cannot breathe.
How can this many people be this dense?
With nearly 2 million peanut allergic people out there and the severely allergic classed under ADA protection, the airlines should not serve peanuts in any form on any flight. I am severely allergic as are my twin sons and we cannot fly without specific guarantees from the airline for our safety.
With nearly 2 million peanut allergic people out there and the severely allergic classed under ADA protection, the airlines should not serve peanuts in any form on any flight. I am severely allergic as are my twin sons and we cannot fly without specific guarantees from the airline for our safety.
No, there is no ADA protection for allergy sufferers, nor has there ever been. You already tried this argument in the previous comment section.
With nearly 2 million peanut allergic people out there and the severely allergic classed under ADA protection, the airlines should not serve peanuts in any form on any flight. I am severely allergic as are my twin sons and we cannot fly without specific guarantees from the airline for our safety.
Highly unlikely that you AND two of your offspring actually suffer from the same allergy. Allergies are not genetic. Therefore, I must classify you as a hypochondriac. Unfortunately your paranoia is robbing your kids of one of the most nutritious foods (pound for pound) on the planet.
I am utterly amazed at the ignorance displayed by some of those commenting here. Allergies are not “perceived” as Mulder suggests, and it is ridiculous and unrealistic to suggest that people with severe food allergies “live in a bubble”. No one who has an allergy chooses to be in this situation, and walking onto an airplane where peanuts either are being consumed or have been consumed is like playing Russian Roulette.
We are talking about a SNACK ON AN AIRPLANE. Can you really be complaining about your rights to eat a snack?!? My son could DIE because you can’t forgo a snack for two hours.
While we could drive everywhere we need to go for the rest of his life, there may come a time when time constraints force us to fly. No matter how much “responsibility we take”, we cannot sufficiently protect him if people around us are eating any peanut product. We always carry an epi-pen, and feel that should be our responsibility. But, again, that may not be enough to save his life. Those auto-injectors can only buy us 10-15 minutes, barely enough time for a plane to request an emergency landing site. He would be dead before we taxied to the gate. FOR A SNACK!!
An outright ban should be in place.
Apparently Samsmom is the ignorant one. She attacks what she clearly does not understand. If her child has a true peanut allergy that is so severe, he shouldn’t be flying, since her argument is that any contact with peanut dust or oil would cause anaphylactic shock. Since that possibility is very real even outside an airline cabin, she’s making her own argument for living in a bubble.
Facts are stubborn things, and one of those facts is that the air onboard an airliner is cleaner than in most public buildings, so there’s very little, if any, real risk involved in flying on a jet where peanuts have been consumed before or are even being served now.
Another stubborn fact is that you can be desensitized to peanut allergies, but if you’re unwilling to do it, don’t blame others for not bending to your petty fears.
Thank you for your input. The DOT would be very interested in seeing any data that you have on the airborne risks associated with peanut consumption on commercial flights.
Nobody has studied this subject, so there’s no hard data. But we do know that the air onboard an airliner is much cleaner than people think. Only one confirmed death onboard an airliner has been reported, but it may have been as far back as 1998, and it was an Eastern European airline.
Peanut allergens are indeed present in the recirculated air in the aircraft cabin. This study, “Recovery of peanut allergens from ventilation filters of commercial airliners,” conducted “to help address whether peanut-sensitive travelers are exposed to peanut aeroallergans during airline flights on which peanuts are served” resulted in the conclusion that “that peanut allergens can be eluted from ventilation system filters in commercial airliners. The most likely source of these allergens are the peanuts served during flights.” See http://download.journals.elsevierhealth.com/pdfs/journals/0091-6749/PIIS0091674996811791.pdf
Hi again, Antanagoge, and thanks for providing a link to that study. Is it possible to post the entire article as well, or is that unavailable? Also, while we truly appreciate your interest in the peanut allergen regulation, if you have comments on one of the other proposed regulations, I’m sure the community would appreciate hearing from you.
Mulder, you seem to have a lot of knowledge on the subject of airlines and peanut allergies? Are you a researcher or doctor of some sort?
No, I’m just an allergy sufferer (but not to peanuts or tree nuts) like most of the population. The difference is that I actually know a good number of people in the airline industry as well as reading lots of research papers on the subject of peanut allergies.
I tire of the constant harping that peanut allergies are on the rise, when there is no scientific data to back it up. I do believe that people need to educate themselves as to what is a real allergy, rather than simply an adverse reaction to a particular food. Far too often, people (especially parents) quickly label an adverse reaction as an allergy, without testing them to be certain. Then they hammer away at the child that they can’t have certain foods or have to be REALLY CAREFUL or they’ll die. That creates needless anxiety for the child and causes a great deal of psychological damage to them.
So true! I see this all the time. They try to ban peanuts at school because some over anxious mom saw something on TV about food allergies and that became her kids affliction du jour. Peanuts are harmless to 99.99999% of humans. The 3 living humans who are actually in danger just need to stay in a bubble and leave the rest of us in peace.
There is no indication that Mulder is qualified to make reliable claims on the subject of allergies. He is not an expert in this context. And the fact that an unqualified person makes a claim does not provide any rational reason to accept the claim as true.
There is adequate agreement among real allergy experts that “the most practical solution to reduce the risk of an allergic reaction to peanuts would be to simply discontinue serving packaged peanut snacks on all flights covered by the DOT.” See the statement of the Medical Advisory Board of the Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network at http://www.foodallergy.org/page/dot-proposal.
Mulder’s statement is both mean-spirited and inaccurate. There is currently NO safe effective desensitization for peanut allergy (or any other food allergy) available. There is currently No immunotherapy to lower the risk of anaphylactic reactions and cause people to outgrow their allergy. Yes, studies are underway which could potentially lead to new therapies in the future, but NO desensitization treatment presently exists. Any attempts to personally undertake this are strongly cautioned against by all real authorities on the subject.
In spite of the growing occurrence of food allergies in the U.S. and their danger to sufferers, there presently are NO medications to cure or control food allergies. Strict avoidance of the allergenic food is the ONLY way to avoid a reaction.
Mulder begs the very question at stake and insults a mother in the process. If peanuts were discontinued on flights, then even her severely peanut-allergic child could fly.
My peanut allergic son flew with me on Southwest when he was 3. I carried him in, wiped the whole area down while holding him, etc. etc. Picked up the food all around (I had let SW know about his allergy on several occasions before we boarded but nothing was done). He didn’t touch one thing and he sat in his very large car seat the whole time. About 30 min. into the flight, his eyes were swollen shut and his face was bright red… just from breathing (isn’t breathing a right we deserve?). I let the flight attendant know but all she said was “I hope you have your medicine”. THIS WAS A THREE YEAR OLD! It was really scary. Thankfully, I did have his medicine but I have never flown with him since. It makes me REALLY sad to hear all of your comments about banning other foods, animals, perfumes, etc. (You know that is not the intention.) How insensitive, especially to those of us who have lost a child or a loved one to such a small thing as a PEANUT. No one would EVER wish this upon their child. It is not something we have chosen. It is a dark shadow that we have to live with every day. Would you tell the elderly person who was able to board before you that she/he can’t sit in the first row because it’s not fair? Personally, I teach my children to love and respect all people, in all circumstances. I would hope others are doing the same.
Can you imagine being given a free trip to Disney World with your child and you just can’t go because you can’t fly to get there? This is what has happened to us, just this month. It’s really sad. I can’t even tell my son about it.
So, obviously, I would support the ban of peanuts on planes. I don’t even care if someone brings them on board (well, of course, I would not want that) but packaged peanuts are a different story. The oils on your hands are on those fabric seats forever and the peanut POOF is in the ventilation system for everyone to breathe. In regards to medicines, someone mentioned earlier about a defibrillator being on board. They are prepared for heart problems but a child’s first reaction to peanuts is just as likely and deadly, so maybe it wouldn’t be a bad idea to have one. Although, I can’t imagine someone with a peanut allergy coming on board without their medicines.
On a side note, someone commented about how this would only effect 1% of the population. I’m not sure about that number. But, I do know that out my family of 5, NONE of us can fly with my child… so not only does my son not fly, but we don’t. I would venture to say that this is the same case for most families. So, much more than 1% would be e/affected.
Thanks for letting me give my thoughts.
If your child has a true peanut allergy, was it clinically diagnosed by eating peanuts and then testing blood for IgE antibodies? If not, then you don’t know he has an allergy; you have only anecdotal evidence, which is often mistaken for true allergies.
You can fly with your son, you simply choose not to because of your unfounded fear that something will happen; that’s a choice you made and it can’t be blamed on the airlines or anyone else. You take far greater risks with yourself and your son every day, yet somehow you’ve managed to live this long.
You’re not able to objectively evaluate your risk, which is why you fall into the trap of being afraid of things that are very unlikely to happen. Far more people die every year from drowning, but I don’t think that’s ever stopped you from going to a pool, or that it would stop you from letting your son go swimming in a pool.
Instead of conflating the remotely possible and the inevitable. step back and look at things objectively; when you do, you’ll see there are many things that are far more likely to happen than having a severe allergic reaction on a plane. Even so, you can desensitize your son so that if he has a true peanut allergy now, he won’t in the future.
Absolutely correct. Unfounded fear is paralyzing this country and taking the enjoyment of life away from an entire generation of children. Far less that 1% of the population actually has a severe allergy. 99% of those who think they do are full of it. Oh yeah, the kid had a reaction at 3yrs. old. It is almost certain that by 5yrs. he will have outgrown the sensitivity.
I have a great deal of empathy for those who have, or are related to someone who has, severe peanut allergies. Clearly, their health is much more important that my desire to snack on peanuts for a few hours, and I doubt many people could debate that.
Having said that, how exactly would such a ban on peanuts be enforced? I was on a Southwest flight not long ago, where a mom demanded that peanuts not be served on her flight with her daughter. The flight attendants complied. Mind you, this was Southwest Airlines, which had the marketing tagline “We Fly For Peanuts” for years. Common sense dictates that if your daughter has a severe peanut allergy, YOU DON’T FLY SOUTHWEST. Even if the crew agrees to suspend peanut service for this flight, the last flight served peanuts. There are discarded peanut bags in the seat back pocket in front of your daughter. Peanut dust is on the seats, in the ventilation, and everywhere else. How will keeping peanuts off of THIS leg of the flight protect you or your child? And even if peanuts are not served on that leg, if there’s still an allergic reaction, how does that affect the airline’s liability, or the liability of other passengers who might have eaten peanuts in the gate area and boarded with peanut dust on their hands?
On the same flight I, and many friends of mine who also travel frequently, each had a bag of nuts in our carry-on. Forget for a moment that it would be impossible (if not unconstitutional) for flight crew to prevent people from eating their own snacks while flying. The mere fact that I had an open bag of nuts in my carry-on – even if I never took it out – could have been enough to trigger this girl’s allergy. The slippery-slope potential here boggles the mind. (You had peanut butter on your bagel for breakfast this morning? Sorry, sir, you can’t board this flight.)
You will never convince peanut allergy sufferers or their families that this should not be controlled, and I can see their point without agreeing with it. Consider this: I am violently allergic to dogs and cats, yet most mass-market airlines now allow pets to be st