Anonymous wrote:There was a little boy in my son's preschool who had severe eczema and was on all these elimination diets in an attempt to find his triggers. I felt so sorry for him, poor kid.

I personally think the whole nut free stuff is just part of group care. My kid went to a JCC daycare and his food had to be vegetarian as well. It really wasn't a big deal. Lots of cheese, lots of pita and hummus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am over other people’s allergies. Schools can separate kids that have extreme allergies to their own table/room.

Agree. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Wow, that seems pretty harsh. I’m willing to be inconvenienced so that a child doesn’t end up in the hospital.

It’s more than an inconvenience to say you can’t bring several major ingredients for your own child’s lunch. The kids with severe allergies can have their own table were they are placed with enough distance to not contaminate each other’s areas. That is reasonable. Telling the whole school they can’t peanuts, soy, almonds, sunflower seeds, sesame, wheat, dairy, etc. for their own personal consumption in a lunch room is not reasonable.

Correct but this is why it's easier for schools and it's also lazy to say oh you just can't bring this in but they're not checking lunches, parents are not paying attention and even you have suggestions of a sneak it in because who is actually checking the lunches. The actual evidence-based interventions are hand-washing after lunch and cleaning the tables.
In the classroom they shouldn't share supplies and hand washing should happen after snacks it's literally that simple the problem is hand washing actually requires time and honestly from a allergy perspective and a non allergy perspective I would rather them focus on hand washing which would probably cut down on 50% of the colds and viruses that the kids exchange all the time.
I'm in allergy groups and we have the discussion all the time with parents of kids with allergies who want the school to be nut free completely disregarding that there are seven other top allergens and the school is not going to go dairy free or egg free. So there happens to be this prioritization of allergies where people are like oh well I understand the peanut but I don't understand wheat allergies they're all top nine. So again limiting one allergy from the school quote on quote because it doesn't actually work and nobody actually pays attention to it still limits the food choices of kids who have allergies and those that don't.

My kid had allergies to six things in elementary, none of them were top 9. And she was a picky eater. The peanut bans drove me crazy because she wasn't allergic and it was protein that she would eat. They never banned any of her allergens. The last thing she needed was another restriction.

The PP doesn't care about your kid though. She only cares about her kid and insists we all prioritize her kid over our own kids at all times, even when the things we're doing for her kid have minimal benefit to her kid and are a major burden to us and our kids. So your kid can eat Doritos and and a dog biscuit for lunch, whatever, who cares.

Once again let me repeat myself

You will survive if you can’t eat certain foods. My child can die if she gets exposed. The person who only cares about themselves is YOU.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am over other people’s allergies. Schools can separate kids that have extreme allergies to their own table/room.

Agree. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Wow, that seems pretty harsh. I’m willing to be inconvenienced so that a child doesn’t end up in the hospital.

It’s more than an inconvenience to say you can’t bring several major ingredients for your own child’s lunch. The kids with severe allergies can have their own table were they are placed with enough distance to not contaminate each other’s areas. That is reasonable. Telling the whole school they can’t peanuts, soy, almonds, sunflower seeds, sesame, wheat, dairy, etc. for their own personal consumption in a lunch room is not reasonable.

Correct but this is why it's easier for schools and it's also lazy to say oh you just can't bring this in but they're not checking lunches, parents are not paying attention and even you have suggestions of a sneak it in because who is actually checking the lunches. The actual evidence-based interventions are hand-washing after lunch and cleaning the tables.
In the classroom they shouldn't share supplies and hand washing should happen after snacks it's literally that simple the problem is hand washing actually requires time and honestly from a allergy perspective and a non allergy perspective I would rather them focus on hand washing which would probably cut down on 50% of the colds and viruses that the kids exchange all the time.
I'm in allergy groups and we have the discussion all the time with parents of kids with allergies who want the school to be nut free completely disregarding that there are seven other top allergens and the school is not going to go dairy free or egg free. So there happens to be this prioritization of allergies where people are like oh well I understand the peanut but I don't understand wheat allergies they're all top nine. So again limiting one allergy from the school quote on quote because it doesn't actually work and nobody actually pays attention to it still limits the food choices of kids who have allergies and those that don't.

My kid had allergies to six things in elementary, none of them were top 9. And she was a picky eater. The peanut bans drove me crazy because she wasn't allergic and it was protein that she would eat. They never banned any of her allergens. The last thing she needed was another restriction.

The PP doesn't care about your kid though. She only cares about her kid and insists we all prioritize her kid over our own kids at all times, even when the things we're doing for her kid have minimal benefit to her kid and are a major burden to us and our kids. So your kid can eat Doritos and and a dog biscuit for lunch, whatever, who cares.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am over other people’s allergies. Schools can separate kids that have extreme allergies to their own table/room.

Agree. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Wow, that seems pretty harsh. I’m willing to be inconvenienced so that a child doesn’t end up in the hospital.

It’s more than an inconvenience to say you can’t bring several major ingredients for your own child’s lunch. The kids with severe allergies can have their own table were they are placed with enough distance to not contaminate each other’s areas. That is reasonable. Telling the whole school they can’t peanuts, soy, almonds, sunflower seeds, sesame, wheat, dairy, etc. for their own personal consumption in a lunch room is not reasonable.

Correct but this is why it's easier for schools and it's also lazy to say oh you just can't bring this in but they're not checking lunches, parents are not paying attention and even you have suggestions of a sneak it in because who is actually checking the lunches. The actual evidence-based interventions are hand-washing after lunch and cleaning the tables.
In the classroom they shouldn't share supplies and hand washing should happen after snacks it's literally that simple the problem is hand washing actually requires time and honestly from a allergy perspective and a non allergy perspective I would rather them focus on hand washing which would probably cut down on 50% of the colds and viruses that the kids exchange all the time.
I'm in allergy groups and we have the discussion all the time with parents of kids with allergies who want the school to be nut free completely disregarding that there are seven other top allergens and the school is not going to go dairy free or egg free. So there happens to be this prioritization of allergies where people are like oh well I understand the peanut but I don't understand wheat allergies they're all top nine. So again limiting one allergy from the school quote on quote because it doesn't actually work and nobody actually pays attention to it still limits the food choices of kids who have allergies and those that don't.

My kid had allergies to six things in elementary, none of them were top 9. And she was a picky eater. The peanut bans drove me crazy because she wasn't allergic and it was protein that she would eat. They never banned any of her allergens. The last thing she needed was another restriction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elephant in the room is the question as to how far does the majority bend to the needs of the minority? Who’s needs are more important and at what point do we tip too far?

Do you think avoidance of death is too far? Honestly asking you? If kids didnt have epis at their disposal would your calculus change? Is it that epis are available or do you think its some kind of Darwinism at play and these kids are just weak and they should just pull some bootstraps?

This entire thread is parents of kids with allergies saying dont ban foods. Thats not necessary. And the replies are BUT YOU TAKE AWAY MY KIDS PEANUT BUTTER YOU DEMONS. And then the replies of, but we dont want food bans, we just want common sense interventions that dont take anything away for you or your kids And then its HOW FAR MUST WE BENDDDDDD.

In hierachy of needs we are agreeing that food is priority. Have the fuc9in food!!!!!!!! Just know that after that comes safety and health.

I don't get it. You don't want to ban foods in schools but also you don't think people should be allowed to bring allergens to playgrounds? I honestly don't understand what you are arguing for. I think you are trying to seem like you are being reasonable while asking for an intensive, high level of compliance with food restrictions from the general public.

I think you can't read

I think the issue is there are likely two different posters, but it kind of reads like it's one person, hence the confusion of PP.

One poster talks about spontaneous death due to non-direcr exposure to traces of peanuts in a school cafeteria, and she wants allergens (all?, most?, many?, not entirely clear but definitely peanuts) banned from schools. That poster is truly nuts (pun intended).

The other poster doesn't want any foods banned from schools but wants everybody to be constantly washing their hands in public areas (not just schools and not just indoors) regardless of whether or not they have access to soap and water.

Did I get all this nonsense right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elephant in the room is the question as to how far does the majority bend to the needs of the minority? Who’s needs are more important and at what point do we tip too far?

Do you think avoidance of death is too far? Honestly asking you? If kids didnt have epis at their disposal would your calculus change? Is it that epis are available or do you think its some kind of Darwinism at play and these kids are just weak and they should just pull some bootstraps?

This entire thread is parents of kids with allergies saying dont ban foods. Thats not necessary. And the replies are BUT YOU TAKE AWAY MY KIDS PEANUT BUTTER YOU DEMONS. And then the replies of, but we dont want food bans, we just want common sense interventions that dont take anything away for you or your kids And then its HOW FAR MUST WE BENDDDDDD.

In hierachy of needs we are agreeing that food is priority. Have the fuc9in food!!!!!!!! Just know that after that comes safety and health.

I don't get it. You don't want to ban foods in schools but also you don't think people should be allowed to bring allergens to playgrounds? I honestly don't understand what you are arguing for. I think you are trying to seem like you are being reasonable while asking for an intensive, high level of compliance with food restrictions from the general public.

I think you can't read

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am over other people’s allergies. Schools can separate kids that have extreme allergies to their own table/room.

Agree. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Wow, that seems pretty harsh. I’m willing to be inconvenienced so that a child doesn’t end up in the hospital.

It’s more than an inconvenience to say you can’t bring several major ingredients for your own child’s lunch. The kids with severe allergies can have their own table were they are placed with enough distance to not contaminate each other’s areas. That is reasonable. Telling the whole school they can’t peanuts, soy, almonds, sunflower seeds, sesame, wheat, dairy, etc. for their own personal consumption in a lunch room is not reasonable.

Correct but this is why it's easier for schools and it's also lazy to say oh you just can't bring this in but they're not checking lunches, parents are not paying attention and even you have suggestions of a sneak it in because who is actually checking the lunches. The actual evidence-based interventions are hand-washing after lunch and cleaning the tables.
In the classroom they shouldn't share supplies and hand washing should happen after snacks it's literally that simple the problem is hand washing actually requires time and honestly from a allergy perspective and a non allergy perspective I would rather them focus on hand washing which would probably cut down on 50% of the colds and viruses that the kids exchange all the time.
I'm in allergy groups and we have the discussion all the time with parents of kids with allergies who want the school to be nut free completely disregarding that there are seven other top allergens and the school is not going to go dairy free or egg free. So there happens to be this prioritization of allergies where people are like oh well I understand the peanut but I don't understand wheat allergies they're all top nine. So again limiting one allergy from the school quote on quote because it doesn't actually work and nobody actually pays attention to it still limits the food choices of kids who have allergies and those that don't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elephant in the room is the question as to how far does the majority bend to the needs of the minority? Who’s needs are more important and at what point do we tip too far?

Do you think avoidance of death is too far? Honestly asking you? If kids didnt have epis at their disposal would your calculus change? Is it that epis are available or do you think its some kind of Darwinism at play and these kids are just weak and they should just pull some bootstraps?

This entire thread is parents of kids with allergies saying dont ban foods. Thats not necessary. And the replies are BUT YOU TAKE AWAY MY KIDS PEANUT BUTTER YOU DEMONS. And then the replies of, but we dont want food bans, we just want common sense interventions that dont take anything away for you or your kids And then its HOW FAR MUST WE BENDDDDDD.

In hierachy of needs we are agreeing that food is priority. Have the fuc9in food!!!!!!!! Just know that after that comes safety and health.

I don't get it. You don't want to ban foods in schools but also you don't think people should be allowed to bring allergens to playgrounds? I honestly don't understand what you are arguing for. I think you are trying to seem like you are being reasonable while asking for an intensive, high level of compliance with food restrictions from the general public.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has there ever been a documented case of a child having a severe allergic reaction because they interacted with trace amounts of an allergen on playground surfaces or similar? It sounds like the risk is infinitesimally small, and that really what would have to happen is that the child would have to get a critical amount of the allergy on their hands and then put their hands in their mouth or rub their eyes or nose. Like we're talking about a very specific situation.

I don't think we need to ban allergens at playgrounds. Agree encouraging kids to wipe hands after eating is a good idea just generally (even if peanut butter wasn't an allergen, I would still wipe my kids hands if she had peanut butter on her hands). Also people shouldn't let their kids eat on the equipment itself or run around with open containers, this just seems obvious. But beyond that, I don't really think allergens at playgrounds is an established threat that needs super high levels of vigilance from other families.

If someone was smearing peanut butter or soy on the equipment with their hands, or running round with a container of nuts, you have my permission to please ask them to stop doing that. But if someone's kid is just eating a PB&J at a picnic table, wiping up with a wet wipe, and then going down the slide, it really doesn't sound like this is going to kill anyone.

You took the time to write that whole diatribe when you could simply have googled it yourself. Or even read the thread.

Anonymous wrote:Has there ever been a documented case of a child having a severe allergic reaction because they interacted with trace amounts of an allergen on playground surfaces or similar? It sounds like the risk is infinitesimally small, and that really what would have to happen is that the child would have to get a critical amount of the allergy on their hands and then put their hands in their mouth or rub their eyes or nose. Like we're talking about a very specific situation.

I don't think we need to ban allergens at playgrounds. Agree encouraging kids to wipe hands after eating is a good idea just generally (even if peanut butter wasn't an allergen, I would still wipe my kids hands if she had peanut butter on her hands). Also people shouldn't let their kids eat on the equipment itself or run around with open containers, this just seems obvious. But beyond that, I don't really think allergens at playgrounds is an established threat that needs super high levels of vigilance from other families.

If someone was smearing peanut butter or soy on the equipment with their hands, or running round with a container of nuts, you have my permission to please ask them to stop doing that. But if someone's kid is just eating a PB&J at a picnic table, wiping up with a wet wipe, and then going down the slide, it really doesn't sound like this is going to kill anyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am over other people’s allergies. Schools can separate kids that have extreme allergies to their own table/room.

Agree. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

That’s the logic that justifies slavery fyi. Humans suck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elephant in the room is the question as to how far does the majority bend to the needs of the minority? Who’s needs are more important and at what point do we tip too far?

Do you think avoidance of death is too far? Honestly asking you? If kids didnt have epis at their disposal would your calculus change? Is it that epis are available or do you think its some kind of Darwinism at play and these kids are just weak and they should just pull some bootstraps?

This entire thread is parents of kids with allergies saying dont ban foods. Thats not necessary. And the replies are BUT YOU TAKE AWAY MY KIDS PEANUT BUTTER YOU DEMONS. And then the replies of, but we dont want food bans, we just want common sense interventions that dont take anything away for you or your kids And then its HOW FAR MUST WE BENDDDDDD.

In hierachy of needs we are agreeing that food is priority. Have the fuc9in food!!!!!!!! Just know that after that comes safety and health.