Peanut Allergy

[Nicoleclaw]

To the bold part above, actually you did, in your very first post you said that you were going to ask that the school be made peanut free, you are therefore requesting that people conform to you dietary restrictions, and feel that it is ok to tell them what to do.

Uhhh it is only 180 days out of the year. Until they are out of elementary. Not the rest of your life. SAid as nicely as possible.

 

[sha_lyn]

Just passing on info from allergist....
Have youever actually seen anything made with cold pressed peanut oil? Asking to increase my knowledge of stuff to avoid. Thanks!

It wouldn't be used for frying but might be used in some ethnic cuisines.
I know it is available in healthfood stores and at some grocery stores.

I found this link while looking for more info on the cold pressed peanut oil
http://www.foodallergy.org/allergens/peanut.html

 

[ntsammy5]

Are there peanuts in beer?

 

[Nicoleclaw]

Are there peanuts in beer?

I hope not since DS takes DH's bottles out of the recycling all the time, pretends to drink and say mmmmmmmm.... (he is only 20 mo old). He has never had a reaction, so I am guessing no!

 

[dreamer17555]

honestly, I would be like dang that is a pain in the ****, but I would do it. But, I have 2 kids with allergies....

I think I have to go reread the 1st post because I don't know the age of the child in question. I doubt I will ever ask the school to ban dairy- it seems too extreme for me. I might have to homeschool him for a year or two until he is mature enough to handle his allergy.

The reason I bring up age is I have a 6 year old DD who deals with both my and his allerigies so very well. We keep soy in the house for her but she is insane about keeping it sealed, wrapping up wrappers, wiping down everything and washing her hands, in fact she is known to yell at kids at dance to "Not TOUCH HIM!" Until they have washed their hands in front of her in case they have milk on them. She has been taught about our Epi Pens and does really well with the whole thing. Granted its not her life we are talking about but still... she is so careful about it.

-Becca-

 

[Master Mason]

Uhhh it is only 180 days out of the year. Until they are out of elementary. Not the rest of your life. SAid as nicely as possible.

Also said as nicely as possible, it still is requesting that others conform to their dietary restrictions. Be it one day or 180 days or every day of the year, if your telling someone else that they can not do something that they would normally do you are impossing your restrictions on them.

I am ambivilant about the subject for the most part, but when you attempt to impose your restrictions on others, you can expect that some of them will be unhappy about it.

 

[Michelle67]

honestly, I would be like dang that is a pain in the ****, but I would do it. But, I have 2 kids with allergies....

i cant believe that just ****** out the word that I typed that I thought would be better than the real word!!

Excellent. Please add wheat for my family. Getting harder and harder to make those lunches... Don't forget to remove the Play Doh from the school, and be sure to send out a letter saying that kids may not play with Play Doh before coming to school.

In other words, we're back to "where do you draw the line?"

FWIW, if my school asked me to do something I would do my best to comply. I just wouldn't agree that it was the way to go. And there are myriad problems even if you are successful with a ban, because as those of us with allergies or allergic children know, it is amazing how often people don't know what is in the food they are eating or serving.

 

[ntsammy5]

I hope not since DS takes DH's bottles out of the recycling all the time, pretends to drink and say mmmmmmmm.... !

My 30 yo son does that too - just to make sure he hasn't missed any beer!

 

[Master Mason]

I don't think they were missing the point. They were sayig that there is a major difference between someone's preference (no matter how much they are attached to it) and someone else's absolute need. Being picky is your choice. Being allergic isn't, and the consequences are dire.

Actually the problem is lots of folks can't be objective. They can only see things from their side of the arguement.

The parent with the allerigic kid says its just a food item, surely you can adapt to my needs. The parent with the picky kid says, my kid will only eat pb&j for lunch and surely it is important that my kid eat a lunch.

Anytime you have an all or nothing proposition, those on either side become polorized to their point of view. See abortion for a good example, not related to food.

 

[LisaR]

I've asked this of people before (in past threads) and never received a good answer but can those of you that have kids allergic to peanuts explain to me why you refuse to have a food trial/challenge done by your allergist? I have challenges done on my son every six months when he goes to the allergist. I want to see if he will react when he touches an offending food. The only answer I have ever received when I have asked this in the past is that, "my child's numbers are so high it isn't safe to challenge him." Sorry, but that is bunk. Numbers change constantly. They are not even remotely conclusive. My son has been off the charts on things that hardly bother him and low or not even registering on things that cause severe reactions.

There are two things to look at:

#1oes the child react when they eat a food? If so, reactions trump blood test results.

#2: Does the child react when they touch the offending item? The only safe way to find this out is in at the allergist.

 

[ntsammy5]

Hey Rob, I see what you mean!

 

[LotsOfQuestions]

Peanut Allergy and School Bans on Peanut Products: Sound Public Policy or Hysteria?
By Carol Bengle Gilbert, published Oct 26, 2007

As someone with a background in public policy making and enforcement, I find it alarming that so much public policy today, particularly in schools, is motivated by fear-of-lawsuit hysteria rather than sound research, cost-benefit analysis, least restrictive means to meet the policy objective and other rational criteria.

One extreme example of hysteria-based decision making is the banning of peanut products in schools. Two articles on Associated Content recently reported an increased incidence of United States schools considering banning peanut products in an effort to protect children allergic to peanuts (you can read them by clicking here and here.) Is this sound public policy or hysteria based over-regulation?

Statistics

There are 53.3 million school age children in the United States, according to the United States Census Bureau's statistics for the year 2003.

Peanut allergies affect 1 percent of the United States population or 3 million people; for one in four of those, or 750,000, the allergy symptoms cause severe respiratory or gastro-intestinal symptoms. These numbers include persons of all ages from babies to adults.

20% of children with peanut allergies outgrow them by the time they reach school age and up to 50% outgrow them eventually.

Different researchers estimate the number of Americans who die each year from food-induced anaphylaxis from all allergy-inducing foods combined at 100-150. Some studies state that most of those who die are children, while others describe those most likely to die as adolescents and young adults. The most severe food-induced allergic reactions result from peanut or tree allergies.

There are 133,362 schools serving grades k-12 in the United States, according to the United States Department of Education.

To Ban or Not to Ban?

Is it reasonable to restrict the activities of 53,300,000 school children in the hopes of preventing the death or serious health risk to any peanut allergy sufferers when:

the total number of annual deaths in all age groups is 100-150;
making the greatly exaggerated assumption that all the deaths would occur among school age children at school, the deaths would affect .0002 percent of the regulated population;

the total number of annual severe peanut allergy episodes among all age groups is 750,000; again, making the greatly exaggerated assumption that all such severe episodes would occur among school children at school, the episodes would affect 14 percent of the regulated population;
however, a more realistic estimate might be one-sixth of that amount or 2.3 percent, since the school age population is roughly one-sixth of the total United States population; and,

there are less restrictive alternatives available to protect the target population without regulating the excess 52,550,000 - 53,300,850 people for whom the regulation is both unnecessary and a burden?

Remember that the incidents affecting preschoolers and babies and adults are included in the death and allergy episode statistics and that the food-induced anaphylaxis statistic includes other foods as well as peanuts. Banning peanut butter and other peanut products in schools will not reduce those incidents. Nor will it prevent incidents involving school age children that occur outside of school.

Motor vehicle deaths killed 7677 children ages 0-18 in 2003. This is 54 - 76 times the number of people that died from anaphylaxis. Should all children be banned from riding in motor vehicles? If banning peanut butter for 53,300,000 school children is reasonable to prevent some number less than 100-150 deaths, why don't we save more than 54 - 76 times that number by banning all 73.7 million children in the United States from riding in cars? This is not a facetious question. Think about the policy implications of both bans.

Between 40 and 100 Americans die each year from anaphylaxis resulting from insect stings. This estimate is believed by experts to be underreported. Is it time to eradicate all of the stinging insects on the face of the Earth?

No one on either side of the peanut ban issue wants to see a child suffer severe allergy symptoms or die from anaphylaxis. The issue is not whether child peanut allergy sufferers' interests require some sort of protection but whether a universal peanut ban is the right protection. To ban peanuts from schools imposes a huge burden on tens of millions of families. Besides not packing peanut butter, it means not allowing children access to foods cooked with peanut oils and foods prepared in places where peanuts have been processed. This requires scrutinizing the labels of all prepared foods the children bring to school and all foods used by the cafeteria. It means worrying about what nonallergic kids and even teachers ate before they arrived at school and whether their bodies and clothing have been scrupulously cleaned to prevent the import of peanut dust. In a word, a ban on peanut products in schools is unrealistic to the point of impossible, besides being bad public policy.

Less intrusive practices such as alternate eating arrangements for peanut allergic students, safe storage/ready access to epi pens (which can cause death if used on a child not suffering an allergy episode), along with ample food allergy education, need to be implemented.

Sources: Peanuts, Folic Acid and Peanut Allergies, http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/14332_1819.asp; Sampson HA. In Allergy, Principles and Practice, 5th Ed., E. Middleton et al, ed. Mosby, St. Louis, p. 1162. 1998; AAAAI Board of Directors. "Anaphylaxis in schools and other childcare settings."; Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 102 (2):173-6. 1998; http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org/indicators/53Numberofchildren.cfm; Peanut Allergy, http://www.allergicchild.com/peanut_allergy.htm; Peanut Allergy Plagues More and More Kids, but Half of Those Affected Will Likely Outgrow It,
http://12.31.13.50/healthtopics/allergies/Sep04acMain.htm; Allergy Statistics,http://medicineworld.org/medicine/allergy/allergy-statistics.html (citing Bock SA, Munoz-Furlong A, and Sampson, HA. "Fatalities Due to Anaphylactic Reaction to Foods." Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 107: 191-193. 2001; Sicherer SH, Munoz-Furlong A, Burks AW et al.: Prevalence of peanut and tree nut allergy in the US determined by a random digit dial telephone survey. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 103:559-62, 1999); www.nationmaster.com.

 

[LotsOfQuestions]

an interesting article for the milk allergic child:

Childhood food allergy deaths not increasing

FEARS that fatal food allergies are on the increase in Britain are unfounded, according to a 10-year study published today. In the past decade, eight children aged 15 or under died from an allergic reaction to food, the equivalent of six deaths for every 100 million children.

But food allergy campaigners said the low death rate could be partly be explained by parental vigilance, adding that the risks rose in the teenage years.

Researchers at Newcastle General Hospital and the University of Newcastle upon Tyne examined national death statistics for children between 1990 and 1998.

They also looked at monthly reports from consultant paediatricians from 1998 to 2000.

Milk was responsible for four of the eight deaths of children over 10 years. No child under the age of 13 died from peanut allergy, although one child died from an overdose of epinephrine, a drug used to treat the allergy.

Between 1998 and 2000 there were six near deaths, none of which was caused by peanut allergy. There were 49 severe reactions, 10 of which were peanut related. That gives a rate of 0.2 near deaths and 0.19 severe reactions for every 100,000 children.

Children with asthma were far more likely to suffer from dangerous food allergies, according to the study reported in the journal Archives of Disease in Childhood.

Dr Andrew Cant, who led the study, said: "The findings of so few deaths in such a large population should reassure parents and doctors that the risk of death is small."

The risk is even smaller for children under the age of 10, he said. Many younger children grew out of allergies.

David Reading, of the Anaphylaxis Campaign, said: "We would agree that deaths through food allergy in children under 13 are rare. Perhaps the reason is that they are under the watchful eye of their parents and other carers."

He added: "Once food-allergic children reach their teens, the risks increase. Most food allergy deaths occur among teenagers or young adults."

 

[Nicoleclaw]

Excellent. Please add wheat for my family. Getting harder and harder to make those lunches... Don't forget to remove the Play Doh from the school, and be sure to send out a letter saying that kids may not play with Play Doh before coming to school.

In other words, we're back to "where do you draw the line?"

FWIW, if my school asked me to do something I would do my best to comply. I just wouldn't agree that it was the way to go. And there are myriad problems even if you are successful with a ban, because as those of us with allergies or allergic children know, it is amazing how often people don't know what is in the food they are eating or serving.

I don't know how to respond.....I guess I am sorry for being understanding?

I never suggested anything that you are referring to in the above quote. All I said is that if they needed diary restricted in my son or daughter's class, I would comply as to keep a young child safe.
As for the play-doh, I just read about that in an article about celiac disease. I had no idea about the wheat until that article. I really wouldn't care if they took play-doh out of school. My kids also don't play with it in the morning, but if they had a sudden urge to, I would tell them they have to wait until after school.

I do agree with you, there is the question of where does the line need to be drawn?? And people really don't have a clue what is safe for a child with allergies and also like you said what is in the food they are serving. Also like you stated, I may not agree it is the best way to go, but I understand the importance and would comply with a ban on whatever item. DD loves pb (yes i have it in the house with ds allergic, she is pretty good about washing face and hands after) and it would really stink if I couldn't send it in with her. But I think that is a good life lesson to teach her about caring for others.

 

[LotsOfQuestions]

Everyones Gone Nuts
The Exxagerated Threat of Food Allergies

Jan, 2008 - Harper's Bazaar

http://www.harpers.org/media/slideshow/annot/2008-01/index.html

Nobody is diminishing the fact that some children do have severe peanut allergies, just as other children have severe food born allergies.

But article after article after article is beginning to show that complete peanut bans are based on a fashionable hysteria fad and fear of lawsuits and not based on the true facts of a peanut allergy. They do nothing to help the problem and actually can be more dangerous to allergic kids.

As I said, I have a severly disabled child that had many potentially life threatening episodes during the years in school. You learn to deal with it within your environment. You always balance the pros and cons of a solution with 1) how it really will help your child vs 2) how much of an impact it will have on the rest of the student body.

 

[Nicoleclaw]

I've asked this of people before (in past threads) and never received a good answer but can those of you that have kids allergic to peanuts explain to me why you refuse to have a food trial/challenge done by your allergist? I have challenges done on my son every six months when he goes to the allergist. I want to see if he will react when he touches an offending food. The only answer I have ever received when I have asked this in the past is that, "my child's numbers are so high it isn't safe to challenge him." Sorry, but that is bunk. Numbers change constantly. They are not even remotely conclusive. My son has been off the charts on things that hardly bother him and low or not even registering on things that cause severe reactions.

There are two things to look at:

#1oes the child react when they eat a food? If so, reactions trump blood test results.

#2: Does the child react when they touch the offending item? The only safe way to find this out is in at the allergist.

If my allergist told me he felt it was unsafe to challenge my kid, I would not do it at that point. Although I would be very curious as to what his reaction would be, especially if it had been a long time since the last known exposure. That is just my opinion though, I can not answer for the people who have told you that.

 

[Nicoleclaw]

Also said as nicely as possible, it still is requesting that others conform to their dietary restrictions. Be it one day or 180 days or every day of the year, if your telling someone else that they can not do something that they would normally do you are impossing your restrictions on them.

I am ambivilant about the subject for the most part, but when you attempt to impose your restrictions on others, you can expect that some of them will be unhappy about it.

FYI I myself have not asked for any ban for items containing eggs for my children that are allergic to them. My son's daycare was and is nut free, as are most around here. That has nothing to do with me though.
It is only what, 8 hours a day. They can gorge themselves with pb and j's when they get home and on the weekend... insert smiley here so you know I am kind of kidding....hehe
I can certainly understand people not liking being told what to do.I understand it would be a total pain. But I really don't get all the backlash.

 

[Nicoleclaw]

I think I read somewhere that kids that grow up with pets are less likely to be allergic to them. So I think that might go along with the idea that exposure builds an immunity.

Yea I read that too! We had cats and dd turned out to be allergic! What gives???

 

[chisnpeke]

FYI I myself have not asked for any ban for items containing eggs for my children that are allergic to them. My son's daycare was and is nut free, as are most around here. That has nothing to do with me though.
It is only what, 8 hours a day. They can gorge themselves with pb and j's when they get home and on the weekend... insert smiley here so you know I am kind of kidding....hehe
I can certainly understand people not liking being told what to do.I understand it would be a total pain. But I really don't get all the backlash.

There's backlash because it's imposing a change for all because of one child. Where does it end?

 

[Aristomommy]

If my allergist told me he felt it was unsafe to challenge my kid, I would not do it at that point. Although I would be very curious as to what his reaction would be, especially if it had been a long time since the last known exposure. That is just my opinion though, I can not answer for the people who have told you that.

No Allergist does a trial if it is unsafe for your child. It is done in the office under controlled conditions. It has nothing to do with personal curiosity. Only certain children are candidates for the trial.

If the Dr. feels it is safe, why do so many parents still refuse? According to our Allergist, he has a hard time getting parents to agree. Much of the decisions surrounding allergies are based on fear and not facts.