Nut Allergy

Back to Forum

This topic contains 50 replies, has 30 voices, and was last updated by  LuganoPirate 11 Nov 2019
at 16:37
.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 51 total)

  • Poshgirl58
    Participant

    Last time I flew was VS and they didn’t make any announcement, so assume there was no one on board with the problem. Were served pretzels; they’d already decided to ditch nuts. Only time I can recall hearing this was an Air Malta flight around 10 years ago.

    It’s been many, many years since I’ve flown BA. Don’t think nut allergies were commonly recognised then.

    Pretty sure it relates to airborne dust/particles in the cabin.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    SimonS1 wrote: ‘As for managing the condition….how?’
    To what condition do you refer please and against what exactly given that peanuts are not a problem on aircraft unless eaten ? The solution for which is rather obvious.

    ‘can’t travellers go a few hours without eating nuts?’
    I am trying to understand why they would need to do that, Perhaps you could enlighten.

    I don’t know whether you are deliberately being obtuse here, but a re-read of the full thread might enlighten you?

    We are talking about severe nut allergy (not just peanuts) which some people suggest can be triggered by dust if nuts are consumed nearby. So one means of minimising risk is for nearby passengers to refrain from consuming nuts. Which is what the PA announcement requested in this case. I’m sure there was a reason for the announcement, and maybe it was erring on the side of caution.

    I was responding to those (perhaps like you?) who would say this is the traveller’s risk, and perhaps they should just stay at home.

    As far as canucklad comments are concerned, well a lot of things from the last century are no longer relevant this century. There have been advances in medical science, and a suggestion that allergies are generally increasing in the modern world, caused for example by significantly increased migration. By all means dismiss that as bunkum, most medical journals would suggest that is the reality.

    3 users thanked author for this post.

    openfly
    Participant

    I have heard this nutty warning several times recently on BA. On one flight I informed a crew member that I also have a serious allergy…to babies who scream for hours on end while the parents watch films with the ear plugs in!! But the crew werent interested….!! So unfair..😀


    HongKongLady
    Participant

    I too have heard this announcement. However the problem is that there is a difference between a tree nut allergy and a peanut allergy( peanuts aren’t nuts at all). This confusion can add to the danger and anxiety of the passenger concerned. I might add that this is a problem in many places. My daughter was recently in hospital and explained she has a nut allergy for which she carries an epipen, she explained it was a tree nut allergy but this was recorded on her notes and on her hospital band as peanut and it took a great deal of trouble and many conversations to change this.

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    esselle
    Participant

    Openfly

    What a crass and ignorant comment. A crying baby may be a nuisance, but is not likely to result in you suffering a serious, and potentially life threatening medical condition.

    What a shame this forum has fallen into the silly comment department once again.

    3 users thanked author for this post.

    MartynSinclair
    Participant

    So unfair..😀

    I think the smiley face set the tome of the comment – nothing wrong with humour,

    for avoidance of doubt 🙂 🙂

    5 users thanked author for this post.

    Cronin
    Participant

    Years ago I working in airline catering. One client was a LCC, so everything was BOB from a fixed menu. Due to a court case from a very infrequent traveler (on any airline) I had to to submit the menu with notations of “Manufacturer states” or “Manufacturer does not state” in relation to nuts.
    The travelers reasoning for the case was that they should not have to carry their EPI pen with them all of the time and nuts should be banned from airlines. The person also brought cases against other organisations too, that basically suggested that they were not responsible for the allergy, but everyone else should be.
    The case was dismissed, and they were told to basically take the EPI pen with them as they know the consequences. I can see both sides of the argument but ultimaty it rests with the allergy sufferer. I appreciate that people have allergies, and it doesn’t worry me if the airline serves nuts or not, or if they make the announcement during the flight. I have friends with severe allergies to nuts and to shellfish so cater accordingly. People do need to take personal responsibility for their unfortunate allergies.
    Comments on lazy crew etc are not helpful. They are still doing the service, just omitting one item.

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    AFlyingDutchman
    Participant

    Years ago I working in airline catering. One client was a LCC, so everything was BOB from a fixed menu. Due to a court case from a very infrequent traveler (on any airline) I had to to submit the menu with notations of “Manufacturer states” or “Manufacturer does not state” in relation to nuts.

    Whilst a bit off topic, thanks to some ridiculous litigation in the USA and the UK (predominantly) there are nut warnings on products such as Planters Peanuts and Skippy Peanut Butter stating ‘Caution this product may contain nuts.’ Further craziness, McDonalds now has to label their coffeee cups with a warning that states ‘Caution, Hot Beverage’ due to some idiot buying a cup through the drivethrough, holding it between her thighs as she drove off, braking hard, squeezed the cup, and burned her thighs as the coffee shot out of the cup. She sued in the USA and Won a hefty payout! Litigation gone mad, cases should have been thrown out!

    But back to topic, my Niece has a serious nut allergy, and always travels with her Epipen. She has never requested the crew to make any announcement as she feels unless she is in direct contact with nuts she is fine. She has been travelling with this for over 18 years, and has never had an issue. Would I respect the request if made, of course, but do I think it is necessary, probably not, but if it gives a fellow passenger comfort of mind, then I have no problem refraining from nuts.


    NG123
    Participant

    @canucklad

    There have, of course, been many changes to illnesses affecting people in the last century as the world and the environment people live in has changed more than it ever has in human history.

    I wouldn’t expect to get on a plane today and hear the crew give a pre-flight warning about the risk of contracting consumption or typhoid (maybe on Ryanair, but that’s a different story…)

    Wouldn’t it be simpler if they just replaced the nuts with a packet of pretzels or crisps which have less chance of causing illness to passengers, and from the airlines perspective, less chance of being sued if a passenger has informed of their condition prior to flying and has a reaction due to them continuing to serve an allergen in an environment with a recycled air supply.

    In the scheme of things, being served an alternate snack to nuts to prevent the chance, however small, of someone having a severe and potentially fatal reaction on a flight is hardly a breach of your civil liberties and ‘being told what you can and can’t do’.

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    Fair2380
    Participant

    Airborne particles from nut bags can possibly set off a serious allergic reaction. However unlikely, and it is pretty unlikely, I’m surprised to see so many regular fliers take a laissez faire approach to pax safety. There are many things airlines do to mitigate risks that are improbable.
    I also ask what the majority of pax would rather: no nuts for the flight or a lengthy medical emergency diversion?

    3 users thanked author for this post.

    canucklad
    Participant

    Wouldn’t it be simpler if they just replaced the nuts with a packet of pretzels or crisps which have less chance of causing illness to passengers, and from the airlines perspective, less chance of being sued if a passenger has informed of their condition prior to flying and has a reaction due to them continuing to serve an allergen in an environment with a recycled air supply.

    The point I was making is pretty simple .
    Our fellow citizens who are unfortunate enough to have to live and manage these allergic conditions on a daily basis have my sympathies .

    But, and it’s a very selfish but, why do I , and the rest of the majority adjust to a parity with the minority.

    What next …… All in the name of just in case ?
    Do we ban nuts all together, from pubs and Chinese cooking etc ?
    Should hay fever sufferers demand the ending of rapeseed farms in their locale?
    Should deodorant sprays be banned from gyms ?
    Lets get rid of alcohol from lounges ,there’s more chronic alcoholics out there than people with severe nut allergies.
    I could go on …….

    Corporate behaviour is changing to mitigate and reduce the risk of social media bullying by a loud minority. And as they do I find my rights / freedoms are continually diminishing

    I wonder what would happen if you had a situation with a blind person , who has a bad nut allergy , and someone else on the aircraft who has severe asthma that’s triggered by dog hair ?

    And my views are shaped by interactions with my mates partner who does carry an EpiPen for not only her nut reaction but a list of other food stuffs. Without sounding flippant , she’s as close to the boy in the bubble than anyone else I know . Yet , she flies regularly , is a social butterfly and doesn’t impose her condition on others .
    Although my mate might disagree with me : )

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    SimonS1
    Participant

    @canucklad

    There have, of course, been many changes to illnesses affecting people in the last century as the world and the environment people live in has changed more than it ever has in human history.

    I wouldn’t expect to get on a plane today and hear the crew give a pre-flight warning about the risk of contracting consumption or typhoid (maybe on Ryanair, but that’s a different story…)

    Wouldn’t it be simpler if they just replaced the nuts with a packet of pretzels or crisps which have less chance of causing illness to passengers, and from the airlines perspective, less chance of being sued if a passenger has informed of their condition prior to flying and has a reaction due to them continuing to serve an allergen in an environment with a recycled air supply.

    In the scheme of things, being served an alternate snack to nuts to prevent the chance, however small, of someone having a severe and potentially fatal reaction on a flight is hardly a breach of your civil liberties and ‘being told what you can and can’t do’.

    There are two major challenges with the change of centuries.

    One is the compensation culture where people need to have someone to blame/sue. In turn companies need to be seen to do something to cover their arses (hence the announcements the airlines make).

    The second is the growth of the me,me,me culture where certain individuals are intolerant of anything which affects them and their self-perceived importance makes them incapable of any give and take.

    Perhaps the announcements here do show an excess of caution, but is it really such a hardship to manage without nuts for a particular journey?

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    AlanOrton1
    Participant

    I think I’ve heard this once on BA and a couple of times on EZY. In heaven knows how many flights.

    In todays day and age, it shouldn’t really come as too much of a surprise.

    Is not eating a handful of nuts going to impair my journey in any way – no.

    Bit of a shame to see slippage of the forum into comments that could be considered stale, male and pale.

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    TominScotland
    Participant

    Wouldn’t it be simpler if they just replaced the nuts with a packet of pretzels or crisps which have less chance of causing illness to passengers, and from the airlines perspective, less chance of being sued if a passenger has informed of their condition prior to flying and has a reaction due to them continuing to serve an allergen in an environment with a recycled air supply.

    That would certainly make things easier but announcements might still be required to ensure that pax do not consume nuts they have brought with them on board when there is a traveller with a high risk nut allergy on board.

    I struggle to see the problem with such announcements…..

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    rferguson
    Participant

    Recently flew BA to SFO in First and back to Heathrow from LAC in J on BA

    Crew were excellent on both flights and was made welcome – no issues

    However as part of the pre take off welcome they indicated that there was someone on board with a severe nut allergy and the crew would appreciate if no one ate any nuts

    I found it strange that this announcement was on both flights and was just wondering if anyone else has heard this on BA ?

    Or is this now a standard comment on all BA long haul flights to stop people eating peanuts ?

    Would be interested in views

    These kind of allergies are becoming more and more common. And BA’s policy has changed over the past few years I guess to avoid litigation and uphold their Duty Of Care.

    Previously if anyone said they had a severe nut allergy we wouldn’t serve nuts to anyone within a few rows of them.

    Now the standard is that if someone says they have a severe nut allergy nuts cannot be served in the cabin the passenger is sat or until there is a ‘fixed’ divider or bulkhead. So in terms of First Class or Club on the mid J 747, 777, 787-9 not at all. Customers who notify of such an allergy are also entitled to pre board early to fully wipe down their seating area.

    There is also a worded PA to the effect that we would request that those onboard did not consume their own nuts. Although it’s not something we police and I don’t think we could really insist on it.

    I’ve had one medical issue with someone with a nut allergy on board. It occurred to a passenger about 8 or 9 years old when her father fed her a snickers mini we used to have in the world traveller tuck boxes. Go figure.

    1 user thanked author for this post.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 51 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
BT November cover
BT November cover
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls