Doesn't that same logic apply to nuts?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.
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.
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.
Anonymous wrote:I thought airlines stopped offering peanuts years ago.
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.