Southwest to stop serving peanuts

[Anonymous]

Allergies exist, but this is about shrinking those seats for more money. It's an outrage on this basis alone. Next no water and paying to use the bathroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so, they stop serving peanut to protect those who are allergic to peanuts , but are likley smart enough to know that they can't eat peanuts,

but yet they still allow dogs and cats to travel in the cabin. who's protecting the travelers who l don't have this choice to avoid the dog/cat and are allergic.

not a very newsworthy story.

You do have a choice. You know airlines allow animals, and you may be seated near one. Based on this knowledge, you have the choice not to fly. If you choose to anyway, that's your problem.

Doesn't that same logic apply to nuts?

I'm PP. I'd say yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so, they stop serving peanut to protect those who are allergic to peanuts , but are likley smart enough to know that they can't eat peanuts,

but yet they still allow dogs and cats to travel in the cabin. who's protecting the travelers who l don't have this choice to avoid the dog/cat and are allergic.

not a very newsworthy story.

You do have a choice. You know airlines allow animals, and you may be seated near one. Based on this knowledge, you have the choice not to fly. If you choose to anyway, that's your problem.

Doesn't that same logic apply to nuts?

+1 FOR SURE

[Anonymous]

My 7 year old son has a severe allergy to peanuts. We carry an epipen (epinephrine injection) with us every time we leave the house as he could potentially die from allergic shock if he is exposed to peanuts. We don’t know whether he can breathe peanut dust or touch peanuts without going into shock and obviously aren’t going to test that. He’s had medical tests and all they can tell us is his allergy to peanuts is off the charts.

The Southwest news is good news as now we can fly Southwest but as prior posters have noted our choice was to either fly another airline or not fly at all. We didn’t complain about not being able to fly Southwest as there are certainly many people who have limited choices for any number of reasons and this was just ours.

My guess is that Southwest looked at the growing number of young children with peanut allergies (no one knows why but the incidence of food allergies generally and peanut allergies which are typically the most deadly) have been rising for awhile and just made a simple business decision of how many customers are they losing from peanut allergies versus how many would they lose if they eliminated peanuts as do many airlines have done awhile ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Allergies exist, but this is about shrinking those seats for more money. It's an outrage on this basis alone. Next no water and paying to use the bathroom.

Huh?

Anyway, I think this is a good move. No one needs to eat peanuts and it will help kids with severe allergies. I don’t have any allergies but I try to limit eating nuts in public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My 7 year old son has a severe allergy to peanuts. We carry an epipen (epinephrine injection) with us every time we leave the house as he could potentially die from allergic shock if he is exposed to peanuts. We don’t know whether he can breathe peanut dust or touch peanuts without going into shock and obviously aren’t going to test that. He’s had medical tests and all they can tell us is his allergy to peanuts is off the charts.

The Southwest news is good news as now we can fly Southwest but as prior posters have noted our choice was to either fly another airline or not fly at all. We didn’t complain about not being able to fly Southwest as there are certainly many people who have limited choices for any number of reasons and this was just ours.

My guess is that Southwest looked at the growing number of young children with peanut allergies (no one knows why but the incidence of food allergies generally and peanut allergies which are typically the most deadly) have been rising for awhile and just made a simple business decision of how many customers are they losing from peanut allergies versus how many would they lose if they eliminated peanuts as do many airlines have done awhile ago.

My son is also off the chart for blood work and while he has an immediate reaction, it isn't deadly or super sensitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can't die from a dog allergy

Many more people die of asthma than of food allergies each year. The numbers aren’t remotely close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so, they stop serving peanut to protect those who are allergic to peanuts , but are likley smart enough to know that they can't eat peanuts,

but yet they still allow dogs and cats to travel in the cabin. who's protecting the travelers who l don't have this choice to avoid the dog/cat and are allergic.

not a very newsworthy story.

You do have a choice. You know airlines allow animals, and you may be seated near one. Based on this knowledge, you have the choice not to fly. If you choose to anyway, that's your problem.

By that same argument people with peanut allergies have a choice. It’s very hypocritical to support banning peanuts so people with peanut allergies can be more comfortable and talk about choosing it to fly when it comes to people with animal allergies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can't die from a dog allergy

You can. For me and many others, allergic reactions to animals leads to asthma attacks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't die from a dog allergy

You can. For me and many others, allergic reactions to animals leads to asthma attacks.

Well have your damn meds with you, God knows peanut allergy people still will, because not serving the things guarantees nothing.

You are not guaranteed a bubble any more than my kid with a severe peanut allergy. It is nice to have fewer peanuts around....like you have fewer dogs around since they need a certificate or to pay a high fee. I wish Airlines could charge everyone $175 to eat peanuts on a plane! Then you would have a comparable scenario.

[Anonymous]

Reducing exposure to peanuts on a plane means you might have to wait a few hours to get more peanuts.

You can't just buy same animal again when you land. Reducing exposure to animals is much more of an overall burden. Maybe it's justified, maybe not, but it certainly isn't a comparable burden.

[Anonymous]

Ok, I'm not a huge fan of animals on planes but I think the comparison is flawed. SW isn't banning nuts, so people (like pp) who want to bring nuts still can. But by not giving them away for free, I would guess they cut the number of people eating peanuts by, say, 60-70%. This means significantly lower risk that my peanut allergy toddler will somehow find a surface I haven't wiped down that is covered in peanut dust. There is still a risk that someone by is will eat peanuts or tree nuts- just as there is a risk we will sit next to an animal. The new policy is more similar to saying "we know people have asthma and will stop giving a puppy to everyone on board".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Allergies exist, but this is about shrinking those seats for more money. It's an outrage on this basis alone. Next no water and paying to use the bathroom.

You already do this, in a way. All airlines have a fee called "Passenger Facility Charges"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't die from a dog allergy

You can. For me and many others, allergic reactions to animals leads to asthma attacks.

Well have your damn meds with you, God knows peanut allergy people still will, because not serving the things guarantees nothing.

You are not guaranteed a bubble any more than my kid with a severe peanut allergy. It is nice to have fewer peanuts around....like you have fewer dogs around since they need a certificate or to pay a high fee. I wish Airlines could charge everyone $175 to eat peanuts on a plane! Then you would have a comparable scenario.

I’ll take my rescue inhaler, and your kid can use his epipen. Fine with me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so, they stop serving peanut to protect those who are allergic to peanuts , but are likley smart enough to know that they can't eat peanuts,

but yet they still allow dogs and cats to travel in the cabin. who's protecting the travelers who l don't have this choice to avoid the dog/cat and are allergic.

not a very newsworthy story.

You do have a choice. You know airlines allow animals, and you may be seated near one. Based on this knowledge, you have the choice not to fly. If you choose to anyway, that's your problem.

By that same argument people with peanut allergies have a choice. It’s very hypocritical to support banning peanuts so people with peanut allergies can be more comfortable and talk about choosing it to fly when it comes to people with animal allergies.

Where did I say I supported banning peanuts?