School bans Peanut Butter & Jelly sandwiches

[Draka]

You also promote that "most people" are not milk intolerant and you are totally wrong.And you promote milk as some sort of necessary food item to get our daily calcium and are totally wrong about that.Who would listen to you about deathly allergies? Or anything you think "ridiculous" relating to food.

I didn't promote anything. I asked. It didn't make sense to me as I was unaware that most Asians had lactose issues. I knew that it was somewhat common for Black people to have lactose issues, but not others. As for white people being "mutants", shoot, we already are. Redheads, green eyes, hell, we're a mutated bunch. Whoopty-doo. Still doesn't have anything to do with peanut butter and if you want to make this point your "gotcha" point on me, the "look she doesn't know anything, don't listen to her" point, have at it. I think it's lacking though.

 

[DallasApple]

Draka you said this...

If you tolerate lactose you are an oddball? Most people aren't lactose intolerant. Besides, dairy is one of the best, if not the absolute best, sources of calcium we have. Something we need in our diets.

The fact is most people ARE lactose intolerant that is the normal human condition.You have a mutated gene if you can tolerate it you are the exception.You also said its something we "need" in our diets so obviously that is not true considering most people can not even digest it properly.

 

[DallasApple]

I didn't promote anything

You said its something we "need" in our diets.Sorry if I saw that is somewhat of a promotion of most people including milk in their diets.

 

[Draka]

Do you know any families with a child who has a severe peanut allergy? Are you aware of the kind of precautions they have to take when they leave the house?

No one is calling you a monster. I just think you're unaware of the risks involved, and that you're clinging to the "zero" risk factor of peanut butter because you see it as an infringement on people's rights to eat peanut butter wherever they see fit, thinking you're being attacked, and happily branding ban-supporters as being over-zealous and ridiculous.

Now that we got that out of our systems, care to address the link to the mayo clinic and your contention that there is "zero" risk from peanut butter toward kids with severe allergies? There are others links and advice and policies put in place by airlines, day care centers, restaurants, and other schools that offer information for those who are unaware of the risks, but let's start with that one.

Airlines ban them because they were dealing with little bags of peanuts. The opening of these little dusty bags of peanuts could send the dust into the air, in the confined space of the airplane, and contribute to inhalation issues. Apples and oranges. PB doesn't have dust.

I looked over the Mayo Clinic reading and couldn't find anything where it said I was wrong about anything. What did I miss?

I've been reading as well Mystic (gave you a sample of just one of my finds below). I will still maintain that Sally's sandwich is not going to hurt Andy. She eats it. Not him. They wash their hands after lunch before returning to class. She may not even be at his table. And in the case of the school in the OP, they even have the students with the offending PB in question sit at an entirely different table. Probably make sure they wash their hands too. What an idea. Something all kids should get in the habit of doing.

http://www.allergysafecommunities.ca/assets/common_beliefs_faan_2003.pdf

Perhaps I am ignorant, but I obviously would not be the only one in your opinion. Seems the good doctor here is ignorant as well.

 

[DallasApple]

It didn't make sense to me as I was unaware that most Asians had lactose issues. I knew that it was somewhat common for Black people to have lactose issues,

Thats cool then.Also 50 % of hispanics..And I also don;t think 15% of "whites" is a low # either..not to have an inability to digest a common food item that is listed on the food chain as a major food group.

 

[Draka]

Draka you said this...



The fact is most people ARE lactose intolerant that is the normal human condition.You have a mutated gene if you can tolerate it you are the exception.You also said its something we "need" in our diets so obviously that is not true considering most people can not even digest it properly.

I said calcium is something we need in our diets. You dispute that? Dairy is a good source of calcium. You dispute that as well? I already said I didn't know that Asians had lactose issues. Well excuse me for not knowing something. As for what I said was something needed in our diets, don't put words in my mouth, I said calcium was needed. Calcium. You know...for bones. Calcium. Dairy happens to be a great source of it. If you can tolerate lactose then you have a wonderful source of calcium available to you.

 

[DallasApple]

[QUOTE Dairy is a good source of calcium. ][/QUOTE]

You said its one of the best if not the best.That would mean 75% of human beings are unable for some weird reason to even digest one of if not the 'the best" sources of calcium.

And it sounds like maybe 10,000 years ago it was closer to 100% of people.The human body was not designed or meant to drink milk after infancy.

And I'll admit it aggravates me ..that is has been "pushed" on the public as a major and important food group through out life.

 

[DallasApple]

OH but more so that the normal INABILITY to digest milk is treated like an abnormality.Like a defect .That just ****** me off.

 

[DallasApple]

AND LOL!! It IS I think the #1 drink item sold in schools.How many kids are being told "drink your milk its GOOD for you"...that have even milder intolerance they deal with that it never enters the parents mind it could be because of the wholesome "does a body good" milk"?

I used to have horrible what i call 'attacks' when i was a little girl ..not every day but still..doubled over with horrible cramps..it would last maybe 15 minutes then dissapear..I had them occasionally as an adult too..I "naturally" over the years lost my taste for milk.(I do like (love) cheese and yogurt ...but I wonder now if those painful attacks could have been from drinking milk everyday .

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Airlines ban them because they were dealing with little bags of peanuts. The opening of these little dusty bags of peanuts could send the dust into the air, in the confined space of the airplane, and contribute to inhalation issues. Apples and oranges. PB doesn't have dust.

I looked over the Mayo Clinic reading and couldn't find anything where it said I was wrong about anything. What did I miss?

You mentioned "zero" risk. That a possible reaction doesn't - or shouldn't - even come up on the radar "at all".

A simple search says that there does carry a risk.

I've been reading as well Mystic (gave you a sample of just one of my finds below). I will still maintain that Sally's sandwich is not going to hurt Andy. She eats it. Not him. They wash their hands after lunch before returning to class. She may not even be at his table. And in the case of the school in the OP, they even have the students with the offending PB in question sit at an entirely different table. Probably make sure they wash their hands too. What an idea. Something all kids should get in the habit of doing.

And more power to them. If they are as a school able to follow through and minimize the risk, I say go for it.

Where you and I disagree is if a ban should ever be on the table. I support an institution if they feel for their establishment that a ban is better suited. I also support an institution if they take considerable measures without a ban.

I was taking issue with your contention that peanut butter carries "zero" risk. I disagree, and stand by that.

http://www.allergysafecommunities.ca/assets/common_beliefs_faan_2003.pdf

Perhaps I am ignorant, but I obviously would not be the only one in your opinion. Seems the good doctor here is ignorant as well.

The debate continues on with allergy specialists and doctors when it comes to the range of severity. I saw a child react with my own eyes, and I hear parents tell me they need to wipe down seats and surfaces with Clorox wipes to ensure their kiddo doesn't start having a reaction from surface-to-skin or hand-to-mouth/nose/eyes contact exposure.

 

[DallasApple]

The debate continues on with allergy specialists and doctors when it comes to the range of severity.

Exactly just like with all allergies.I have seen people with "cat allergies" get the sniffles and red watery eyes..but I also saw a girl within minutes ..(like 90 seconds) start to have a major asthma attack ...and have to "flee" the premises sucking on a rescue inhaler.

 

[Draka]

You mentioned "zero" risk. That a possible reaction doesn't - or shouldn't - even come up on the radar "at all".

A simple search says that there does carry a risk.



And more power to them. If they are as a school able to follow through and minimize the risk, I say go for it.

Where you and I disagree is if a ban should ever be on the table. I support an institution if they feel for their establishment that a ban is better suited. I also support an institution if they take considerable measures without a ban.

I was taking issue with your contention that peanut butter carries "zero" risk. I disagree, and stand by that.



The debate continues on with allergy specialists and doctors when it comes to the range of severity. I saw a child react with my own eyes, and I hear parents tell me they need to wipe down seats and surfaces with Clorox wipes to ensure their kiddo doesn't start having a reaction from surface-to-skin or hand-to-mouth/nose/eyes contact exposure.

I love how people read different things into what I say. Like I said we need calcium in our diets and milk is a great source and Dallas read that I said we need milk. I do believe what I intoned there was "zero" risk of was inhaling peanut butter. That is, having an allergic reaction to inhaling peanut butter or from the smell itself (on that I am completely right). I have numerous times said, when it comes to residue that there may be a mild skin reaction, the doctors agree with this, but that it does not cause a severe reaction and can be usually handled with anything from plain old washing up to a quick dose of Benadryl and/or some Cortisone 10 type cream. What it is not going to do is cause a child to go into distress and anaphylactic shock. Any of which can be prevented by good hygiene practices in general. So, unless your allergic child has a habit of scraping thick peanut butter remains from someone else's plate or sandwich baggie and purposely licking their finger, you aren't going to have an actual serious risk from someone else's peanut butter sandwich. Which is probably why the school in question went ahead and got somewhat reasonable and let them back in the school.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I think schools should ban peas. Yuck!

 

[DallasApple]

I think schools should ban peas. Yuck!

My husband in fact is emotionally scarred because his mother forced him to eat peas..and he threw up...:yes:

 

[Falvlun]

The fact is most people ARE lactose intolerant that is the normal human condition.You have a mutated gene if you can tolerate it you are the exception..

Just a note:

There is a difference between lactose intolerance and a decreased ability to metabolize lactose. Lactose tolerance is the norm (at least in our general culture), though most people do lose some of their ability to metabolize it.

The most common cause of lactase deficiency is a decrease in the amount of lactase that occurs after childhood and persists into adulthood, referred to as adult-type hypolactasia. This decrease in lactase is genetically programmed, and the prevalence of this type of lactase deficiency in different ethnic groups is highly variable. Thus, in Asian populations it is almost 100%, among American Indians it is 80%, and in blacks it is 70%; however, in American Caucasians the prevalence of lactase deficiency is only 20%. In addition to variability in the prevalence of lactase deficiency, there also is variability in the age at which symptoms of lactose intolerance appear. Thus, in Asian populations, the symptoms of lactase deficiency (intolerance) occur around the age of 5, among Blacks and Mexican-Americans by the age of 10, and in the Finnish by age 20.

It is important to emphasize that lactase deficiency is not the same as lactose intolerance. Persons with milder deficiencies of lactase often have no symptoms after the ingestion of milk. For unclear reasons, even persons with moderate deficiencies of lactase may not have symptoms. A diagnosis of lactase deficiency is made when the amount of lactase in the intestine is reduced, but a diagnosis of lactose intolerance is made only when the reduced amount of lactase causes symptoms.

Source

So, it's not really correct to indicate that lactose tolerance is abnormal, and lactose intolerance is normal.

 

[DallasApple]

Like I said we need calcium in our diets and milk is a great source and Dallas read that I said we need milk.

Excuse me that is a complete misrepresentation of what you said.You said MOST people are not lactose intolerant..and you said milk is one of if not THE best source of calcium .Then you said "we need it in our diet"..

 

[DallasApple]

So, it's not really correct to indicate that lactose tolerance is abnormal, and lactose intolerance is normal.

Of course it is "normal" for people who inherited the gene to tolerate milk.But its not "the norm" to have that gene.

 

[Draka]

Excuse me that is a complete misrepresentation of what you said.You said MOST people are not lactose intolerant..and you said milk is one of if not THE best source of calcium .Then you said "we need it in our diet"..

Meaning the calcium. We need the calcium. Obviously.

And I'm right anyway. Milk, dairy products in general, really are one of, and probably the best (see most condensed), sources of calcium. Cheese, yogurt, and so on, all have very high amounts of calcium in them. And obviously I was speaking of calcium as something we need in our diets. I would have thought that something completely understood. Especially as a woman.

 

[Falvlun]

Of course it is "normal" for people who inherited the gene to tolerate milk.But its not "the norm" to have that gene.

You don't need the gene for 100% lactase retention in order to tolerate lactose. Only a fraction of people without this gene are lactose intolerant. The rest of the people without the gene can still tolerate lactose.

In most people, lactase decreases as they age, but doesn't disappear completely. And even people with moderate decreases in lactase are not always lactose intolerant.

This is why it is incorrect to label people without the gene for 100% retention of lactase as "lactose intolerant". Tolerance is indeed the norm (in some areas of the world, like ours), despite a high instance of lactase deficiency.

And actually, upon rereading the passage I provided, it indicates that 80% of American Caucasians don't have lactase deficiency.

 

[DallasApple]

And obviously I was speaking of calcium as something we need in our diets. I would have thought that something completely understood. Especially as a woman.

I don't think anyone in their right mind would deny we need calcium in our diets.The way your post was written seemed more like you were saying milk for calcium is needed in our diets..

And so what if it has a lot of calcium..what if there was a plant that humans had a very difficult time digesting but it had more calcium than milk? Does that mean we should eat it because its an awesome source of calcium and just deal with the symptoms of our body struggling to digest it?

Especially since there are plenty of other foods..high in calcium and other great nuturients(like vitamin C which aides in our absorbtion of calcium A>KA an orange)..Milk isn't IMHO "one of if not THE best" sources of calcium for MOST people.