This is your Profile page. Use it to check replies to your comments, keep track of comments
you've made or endorsed, and manage your regulation room account.
Reading most of the comments it seems that the biggest concern is peanut allergy sufferers inhaling peanut particles. Perhaps instead of banning peanuts and peanut products outright. Airlines and the DOT can provide sufferers with HEPA airmasks which I assume will prevent individuals from inhaling peanut dust. I would think this approach would be of minimal cost (air filters can be bought for about $20 or less) and would not require a ban. If touch is a problem dressing accordingly (i.e. long clothes for the trip to minimize touching surfaces)can help decrease the amount.
I would say that if someone still insists upon a ban if these measures would work that we are then getting into a debate of my rights over your rights and my want to be comfortable compared to your want to be comfortable which definitely takes us out of the need to protect life arena
I think the government should do studies if they insist upon a ban and should not put one into effect without such a study.
I think the DOT should prove that peanuts on planes will cause the problems that other commenters are concerned about. Controlled studies demonstrating that peanuts eaten in one portion of an airplane will be sent through the air into other portions. Studies that can show that there is enough residue left from others eating peanuts to trigger reactions. Although anecdotal evidence is helpful (and I do not doubt the veracity of the claims made by others) I think facts and statistics need to be considered. perhaps some concerns such as air circulation can be alleviated. then creating a buffer zone would make more sense. The problem is that when such a subject comes up everyone uses emotion to make a decision and decisions of this nature should also be made with considering scientific facts.
This is exactly my point regarding emotional reasoning and also the idea that one individuals comfort is more important than anothers. in your zeal to ridicule you may have missed the point of alternatives and discussion which I thought was why we were here. perhaps I was wrong to thing that was what we were suppossed to be doing. Also, you assume the child will scream. I would say that perhaps you should help the child become accustomed to the mask before hand by making it a game. This has worked with other things that children must endure. Secondly you reject the notion outright and my guess is that you have never tried it. This also proves that your concern is more with what you want and not what might work. your reasoning backs us “the collective us” into a corner of take it or leave it. I am sorry that offering other ideas instead of your preferred ban on peanuts upsets you. I refer you again to emotional reasoning on that.
Reading most of the comments it seems that the biggest concern is peanut allergy sufferers inhaling peanut particles. Perhaps instead of banning peanuts and peanut products outright. Airlines and the DOT can provide sufferers with HEPA airmasks which I assume will prevent individuals from inhaling peanut dust. I would think this approach would be of minimal cost (air filters can be bought for about $20 or less) and would not require a ban. If touch is a problem dressing accordingly (i.e. long clothes for the trip to minimize touching surfaces)can help decrease the amount.
I would say that if someone still insists upon a ban if these measures would work that we are then getting into a debate of my rights over your rights and my want to be comfortable compared to your want to be comfortable which definitely takes us out of the need to protect life arena
I think the government should do studies if they insist upon a ban and should not put one into effect without such a study.
I think the DOT should prove that peanuts on planes will cause the problems that other commenters are concerned about. Controlled studies demonstrating that peanuts eaten in one portion of an airplane will be sent through the air into other portions. Studies that can show that there is enough residue left from others eating peanuts to trigger reactions. Although anecdotal evidence is helpful (and I do not doubt the veracity of the claims made by others) I think facts and statistics need to be considered. perhaps some concerns such as air circulation can be alleviated. then creating a buffer zone would make more sense. The problem is that when such a subject comes up everyone uses emotion to make a decision and decisions of this nature should also be made with considering scientific facts.
This is exactly my point regarding emotional reasoning and also the idea that one individuals comfort is more important than anothers. in your zeal to ridicule you may have missed the point of alternatives and discussion which I thought was why we were here. perhaps I was wrong to thing that was what we were suppossed to be doing. Also, you assume the child will scream. I would say that perhaps you should help the child become accustomed to the mask before hand by making it a game. This has worked with other things that children must endure. Secondly you reject the notion outright and my guess is that you have never tried it. This also proves that your concern is more with what you want and not what might work. your reasoning backs us “the collective us” into a corner of take it or leave it. I am sorry that offering other ideas instead of your preferred ban on peanuts upsets you. I refer you again to emotional reasoning on that.