Nuts ?

[Geoffrey13]

I can see both sides' point, but I admire the victim's solution.

https://uk.yahoo.com/style/woman-severe-allergy-left-no-103731690.html

Anti-allergy actions seems the only really safe option.

I wonder if medical science can develop a vaccine - that would only leave the stubborn anti-vac brigade at risk.

[naomi24]

I've been on a BA flight when they announced they wouldn't be serving nuts because there was a passenger on board who was allergic. That's the only sensible option.

[barry1010]

That doesn't stop people eating their own food that contains nuts, though. I wonder why it is called a nut allergy when peanuts are not nuts?

[barry1010]

Palforzia is available on the NHS for children, I don't know why adults can't get it

[naomi24]

All any airline can do is withdraw nuts from sale and ask those who've brought a picnic not to eat nuts. The company can't be responsible if that request is ignored.

[barry1010]

I'm not sure I would fly if I were so severely allergic to something that is so commonly available. There are other ways to get from London to Dusseldorf

[youngmafbog]

Me too Barry, however in this world of being perpetually offended and 'victimised' many wont and then wonder why there are problems.

[andy-hughes]

I think the passenger got a little carried away.

As advised, you cannot control what passengers bring and eat on board.

If your allergy is life-threatening, you have to accept that, rather than try and unrealistically change conditions for a plane load of strangers, that air travel is not an option for you.

[roopower]

If she really is that allergic to peanuts, even getting on a flight is fraught with danger! Someone who has eaten peanuts and not washed their hands works their way down the plane putting their hands on the backs of seats. So does she. That would have been enough to give a child I once worked with a terrific reaction.

[naomi24]

^That is the problem. It's often not just a case of a sufferer becoming just a little unwell. It can be a killer.

[andy-hughes]

The sad fact is, if you are cursed with a severe allergy, then air travel is not available.

If you choose to travel, you accept the risk.

[THECORBYLOON]

Is it not reasonable to request the airline and staff mininize that risk?

[andy-hughes]

Corby - // Is it not reasonable to request the airline and staff mininize that risk? //

It would be, if you could, but you can't.

The airline can not sell its own nuts, but if one passenger has nuts, the aircon will ensure that any dust from them is circulated around the aircraft and may cause a reaction.

It is beholden on the sufferer to accept or decline am unavoidable risk in travelling.

[barry1010]

Nuts are in so many products though and with airlines having such a quick turnround the planes are cleaned between flights. Even suntan lotion can be dangerous for those who have peanut allergies - whether on the person sat near you or from the previous occupier of your seat.
There are even some eczema creams that cause a reaction in those who have a peanut allergy. It is nigh on impossible for an airline to minimise the risk.

[THECORBYLOON]

ANDY, that is why I used the word, "minmize" and not, "eliminate".

[Old_Geezer]

The plan's air conditioning may not allow having those nearby abstain to be sufficient. The simple answer is to accept how revolting peanuts smell & taste, opt not to inflict that on the public, and stop selling or providing them. After all, they finally got it into their thick heads not to sell cigarettes etc. for use on flights. Thy just need to use the same logic for all other products.

[barry1010]

A person's first duty of care is to self.

[andy-hughes]

O-G - // After all, they finally got it into their thick heads not to sell cigarettes etc. for use on flights. Thy just need to use the same logic for all other products. //

That analogy does not work.

Inhaling peanut dust will not harm the vast majority of passengers, inhaling cigarette smoke harms each and every one of them.

[Old_Geezer]

I don't believe it spoils the analogy, especially since the one can get immediate problems whereas the crowd has to experience the situation many times over the years. But in any case, is the one less valued than each of a group ? It's about doing the right thing for others.