Profile:
practicaljo

This is practicaljo's Profile page. Use it to view practicaljo's comments, other users' replies to these comments, and comments practicaljo has endorsed.

What's Happening Now

July 4, 2010 5:02 pm

While a study on the effect airborne peanut dust in an aircraft has on people with peanut allergies is important, legislators should not solely rely on such a study when considering a peanut ban on aircrafts. Other sources of peanut exposure on aircraft are also a large problem. Crumbs, peanut/peanut butter residue, and whole peanuts are regularly found on seats, in seat back pockets, on floors, and on tray tables from previous flights despite flight attendants’ and cleaning crews’ best efforts to clean the cabin.

My 4-year old daughter has a severe peanut allergy in addition to other food allergies not in consideration for this bill. We limit our flying to destinations beyond a 13-hour drive by car. We try to fly peanut-allergy-friendly airlines when it is not cost prohibitive.… more »

…When we do board an aircraft, we use baby wipes to clean our entire row of seats, seat belts, tray tables, and the seat back in front of us to remove peanut dust and residue. In spite of our best efforts to minimize allergen exposure to our daughter, flying is still a very stressful event. The few times we have flown, she invariably sneezes, scratches, and breaks out in hives; a far cry from anaphylaxis (which she has experienced, unfortunately), but still a real possibility that keeps us on edge throughout the entire flight.

We do carry EpiPens and Benadryl everywhere we go, but for those who think having medication on hand in case of an allergic reaction is analogous to having spare Pampers on hand to change to dirty diaper, you are incredibly out of touch with reality, uninformed on the issue, or both. For anyone to maintain that their hunger “satisfaction” from a 100-calorie bag of peanuts is more important than the safety and/or life of a human being is blatantly insensitive and ignorant.

Take peanuts off of planes. Safety first. « less

July 4, 2010 8:31 pm

It is not only airborne particles that are problematical, it is also the crumbs, whole peanuts that “get away” from the passenger (i.e., dropped on floor or in seat), and residue left behind on seats, seat belts, floors, tray tables and other surfaces. Ingestion or contact can trigger severe reactions.

Take peanuts and items containing peanuts/peanut butter (e.g., trail mix, peanut butter crackers) off of airplanes. This is all the airlines need to do. Most airlines already have a suitable replacement snack.

Anyone with a severe allergy already has EpiPens or other medications. Airlines need not provide these.

Take peanuts off of planes. Safety first.

July 5, 2010 6:00 pm

As an outsider to the airline industry, it is hard for me to say what level of cleaning currently occurs on an aircraft. Obviously, on quick turnaround layovers, flight crews only have time for a cursory cleaning. Does a more thorough or a standard cleaning take place in the evenings after the last flight of the day? I don’t know. If so, perhaps repeated standard cleanings without further peanut exposure would be sufficient?

The rule probably has the best chance of being enacted if it minimizes overall cost to the airline industry while meeting the desired safety requirements. Personally, I would be satisfied if the rule simply called for removal of peanuts from aircraft and allowed the airlines to put forth a good faith effort at cleaning their fleets.

July 5, 2010 6:10 pm

It is my understanding that non-peanut related items made in a facility that produces peanut snacks are more likely to be a problem for peanut allergy sufferers if the product ingested as opposed to simply coming in contact with. The basis for my understanding comes from visits to allergy-specializing doctors concerning my 4-year old daughter’s food allergies. I have also attended lectures from immunologists in an effort to determine precisely what is a threat to my daughter and how large of a threat a particular item may be.

The ban should include peanuts, products containing peanuts (e.g., snack/trail mix), and products derived from peanuts (e.g., peanut butter).

July 7, 2010 12:28 am

There are several institutions researching peanut allergies. Duke University Medical Center, National Jewish Medical and Research Center in Denver, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and The Johns Hopkins University Medical Center all have prominent, reputable, knowledgeable experts in this field studying this problem. I doubt any immunologist or allergy specialist will provide a universal radius for the DOT to establish a peanut-free zone on an aircraft. A single person can have varied reactions from being exposed to the same amount of the same allergen on different days. Now factor in every other peanut allergy sufferer in the country and you have yourself a multivariate problem of the grandest magnitude. With this many variables to solve for, the simplest and most effective solution is a buffer… more »

…radius of infinity (i.e., no peanuts or peanut products in the cabin).

I realize this scientific data is the key to removing the Congressionally-imposed funding restrictions, but it seems like common sense should prevail on issues of passenger safety and the study should simply be a formality.

Removing peanuts and peanut products from aircraft will significantly reduce the probability of an anaphylactic reaction in-flight the same way routine aircraft maintenance significantly reduces the probability of aircraft failures. The airline industry does not wait for parts to fail, planes to crash, and people to die before trying to maintain an aircraft does it?

Regarding peanut free flights, Southwest Airlines has been the most accommodating in our experience. With enough advance notification, they will withhold serving peanuts on our flight(s) and provide an alternative snack for the passengers. We try to take the first flight of the day to minimize peanut residue and crumbs that are found with greater frequency as the day wears on. We also wipe our entire row of seats, tray tables, seat belts and the seat back in front of us with baby wipes when we board. With this self-imposed protocol in place, my 4-year old daughter has avoided severe reactions from exposure to a peanut allergen on an aircraft, although she does spend most of the flight sneezing, scratching, and rubbing her eyes while we’re on the edge of our seat looking for signs of a stronger reaction.

There is not a person on this planet that will die because they did not receive a peanut snack on their flight. There are millions of people (most of them children) who could die due to some form of exposure to a peanut allergen on their flight. This is a no-brainer…take the darn peanuts off of the planse.

« less

July 7, 2010 8:22 am

planes*

July 7, 2010 8:31 am

It is plain to see Mulder is uninformed on this topic. Instead of chiding people from the “peanut” gallery perched in a factual void, take some time to go talk to an allergy specialist, attend a lecture on the matter, do some research from reputable sources, or even get to know someone with multiple severe food allergies and see exactly how their lives are affected. Take the time to truly educate yourself on the topic, then perhaps you could offer the constructive solutions I believe DOT is looking for instead of flaming others from behind your irrational fear of losing peanut snacks on an aircraft.

July 5, 2010 10:47 am

Thanks for your comment, PracticalJo. How do you think airlines should deal with the transition period? Perhaps the airlines should be required to have their planes cleaned according to some protocol that would ensure that peanut allergens were safely removed from the plane, too?

July 5, 2010 10:53 am

Thanks for sharing your personal story with us, PracticalJo. Your experiences and suggestions are welcome and encouraged on other parts of the proposed rule as well.

As a reminder, the matter that you all are commenting on is a proposed rule, not a proposed bill. It will be put into force by the DOT according to its legislative mandate, following standard administrative law procedures.

July 6, 2010 9:32 am

The problem is that we have an irrational group of people who claim to suffer from severe peanut allergies, who are trying to impose their desire to ban peanuts and other nuts from being served by airlines under the guise of safety.

But they can point to no evidence that their worst, unfounded fears have ever happened on any U.S. airliner, so they hype their claims even more, hoping their tiny minority will gain favor. In the process, they refuse to deal with their irrational fears, and point blame at everyone and everything for their “inability” to fly, even going so far as to claim it’s a disability.

There’s no disability here at all. The simple fact is that these people want to shift their responsibility for their own well-being onto others, and they’ll use… more »

…any means they can to justify their goal. The simplest solution would be to ban peanut allergy sufferers from flying. « less
July 7, 2010 8:22 am

planes*

July 8, 2010 2:01 pm

PracticalJo is the one who is uninformed. Reputable sources will confirm that actual severe food allergies of any kind are extremely rare, and life threatening ones are nearly non-existent. There are certainly not “millions of children” who could die from peanut exposure. As far as speaking to someone who suffers several severe food allergies, I’ve spoken to a few who CLAIM that status – hypochondriacs all. These allergies are mostly imagined. There are intolerances to various foods, that is not an allergy and will cause discomfort but not death. Even those with actual allergies are not in any danger of dying – just mild discomfort. Hives and itching are not life threatening conditions. The point is not that I ‘need’ peanuts. The point is I… more »

…refuse to make accommodations for baseless fears. There is not one person on this board reporting an actual death. If there were any actual risk, the survivors of a peanut victim would be all over this board telling the tragic story. Instead what we get are a bunch of wild-eyed claims without any basis in fact. It would be more valid to claim that airlines must increase leg room to avoid deaths due to deep vein thrombosis-which has actually happened. « less

No comments