MissU28 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Also, like someone previously mentioned, all the severely allergic person would have to do would be to tell the airline. Stewardess makes an announcement, "please don't eat any peanut products if you brought them, we have a severely allergic passenger." I would be sad, but my trial mix would sit in my carry-on unopened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 This is what I have been thinking while reading this thread- who's to stop the other passengers from bringing trail mix or bags of peanuts on the plane??? It defeats the purpose of a ban if you don't. It's akin to saying, "we're not going to serve cigarettes on the plane, but you can smoke 'em if ya got 'em." Of course, unlike second-hand smoke, peanuts don't find their own way into your system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Of course, unlike second-hand smoke, peanuts don't find their own way into your system. ok i think i may be able to shed some light on this... im sure im not the only one here that has served on a submarine.... those of you that have, understand the concept of an enclosed environment and how things can particlize and spread in said environment.... it is the same concept on an airplane..... your air is recycled and circulated.... peanuts are dusty and oily and have the ability to atomize particles to be recirculated to other passengers.... this is why air travel is not exactly the healthiest form of travel.... the oils from peanuts get on the fingers and hands while eating them and then someone uses the restroom they leave the oil on the handle and if an allergic person comes along on that flight it could get ugly.... im sure some of you are/know/have known/are related to SOMEONE with a peanut allergy. if you have ever been so unfortunate to see someone have a reaction to peanut allergy you know it happens VERY quickly and can be very serious in a short amount of time. they already dont allow peanut butter or peanut products to be brought into public schools almost everywhere in the country now.... this WILL happen..... maybe not this time but it will happen. there are so many cheap snack food alternatives, to not reduce this risk, is foolish i think. *and keeastman.... lol ..... if you see this..... this IS different than smoking in a bar or restaurant. :pfft: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 i just wanted to reiterate that those of you that think is crazy, i dont think you fully understand how sensitive peanut allergy is..... there are no degrees of the allergy....ie. you cant be a little allergic.... you dont have to CONSUME them to have a reaction.... all you have to do is to come into contact with them 1 ORALLY.... by eating peanut or nut products 2 RESPERITORY ..... inhaling dust or atomized oils 3 SKIN.... come into contact with the oils as there currently is no alternative flight option .......then i dont think it is too much of an issue to switch to another cheap snack food and ban consumption of nuts aboard a plane. can we accomodate everyone for everything? ......... of course not but this is a potentially life threatening risk.... aside from the whole crashing thing of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandman69 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 As soon as we ban peanuts the terrorist have won! In all seriousness, I haven't peanuts on a plane in forever. And when they were a regular, when has there been cases of someone having a serious allergic reaction on a plane? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 *and keeastman.... lol ..... if you see this..... this IS different than smoking in a bar or restaurant. :pfft: No **** Sherlock. Did you even bother to read my comment on this peanuts in airplanes? Or did you just feel like making a remark concerning another subject you clearly have a problem with me and my supposed, sold-out "agenda" over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan133 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 No **** Sherlock. Did you even bother to read my comment on this peanuts in airplanes? Or did you just feel like making a remark concerning another subject you clearly have a problem with me and my supposed, sold-out "agenda" over? well, it is a little bit hypocritical... and I have a life threatening peanut allergy, but I don't see why the government should ban them. If an individual airline wants to, great for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 well, it is a little bit hypocritical... and I have a life threatening peanut allergy, but I don't see why the government should ban them. If an individual airline wants to, great for them. What's hypocritical? That you cannot see the difference between legislation concerning a peanut allergy and legislation regarding smoking in public areas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 No **** Sherlock. Did you even bother to read my comment on this peanuts in airplanes? Or did you just feel like making a remark concerning another subject you clearly have a problem with me and my supposed, sold-out "agenda" over? whoa..... simmer down. no i didnt read your comments to be honest. when a topic has 5 or more pages i read the op and a few coments then skip to the last page or so and read the most current stuff. still havent read your comment but i will in a second. im assuming we are agreement on this. which is a good thing i think. i just assumed, incorrectly it seems, that you would see my stance as hypocritical. i was actually trying to make light of the previous disagreement. please accept my apology for miscommunicating what i meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da#1skinsfan Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 there's our tax dollars going DIRECTLY down the drain on bull**** like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 whoa..... simmer down. no i didnt read your comments to be honest. when a topic has 5 or more pages i read the op and a few coments then skip to the last page or so and read the most current stuff. still havent read your comment but i will in a second. im assuming we are agreement on this. which is a good thing i think. i just assumed, incorrectly it seems, that you would see my stance as hypocritical. i was actually trying to make light of the previous disagreement. please accept my apology for miscommunicating what i meant. I interpretted your comment to be another jab at me after saying in the other thread you referenced that essentially I've sold out to the government in wanting to take away people's rights because the big bad government will be paying my wages. To be honest, I've had a few friends in my personal life say stuff to this effect to me recently about going into public health and I'm getting pretty sick of it. I apologize to jumping to the conclusion that you were jabbing at this again. Now, as for the actual subject of the thread no, I would not accuse you or anyone else of being hypocritical for having a different view of legislation between peanut bans and smoking bans because they are different issues with different variables. I am actually not for passing legislation regarding airplane peanut bans, or submarine peanut bans, or NASA space shuttle peanut bans. If I were the CEO of an airline, I would definitely ban serving peanuts and switch to something else on my airline as a CYA measure, but I don't think the money should be spent and effort utilized by the government to pass a ban on peanuts although I understand it is a serious health issue for a relatively small segment of the population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forehead Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 when a topic has 5 or more pages i read the op and a few coments then skip to the last page or so and read the most current stuff. You should read the whole thread, this one is actually pretty amusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 They don't give out peanuts on planes anymore, or any free food, at least if you're traveling within the US Different story traveling outside the US to Germany or New Zealand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I interpretted your comment to be another jab at me after saying in the other thread you referenced that essentially I've sold out to the government in wanting to take away people's rights because the big bad government will be paying my wages. To be honest, I've had a few friends in my personal life say stuff to this effect to me recently about going into public health and I'm getting pretty sick of it. I apologize to jumping to the conclusion that you were jabbing at this again. Now, as for the actual subject of the thread no, I would not accuse you or anyone else of being hypocritical for having a different view of legislation between peanut bans and smoking bans because they are different issues with different variables. I am actually not for passing legislation regarding airplane peanut bans, or submarine peanut bans, or NASA space shuttle peanut bans. If I were the CEO of an airline, I would definitely ban serving peanuts and switch to something else on my airline as a CYA measure, but I don't think the money should be spent and effort utilized by the government to pass a ban on peanuts although I understand it is a serious health issue for a relatively small segment of the population. ok kool. we are in agreement then! and i also agree..... this does not require legislation.... somewhere i missed people actually wanted LEGISLATION on the matter. i do think though that it would be in the best interest of the airlines to take this initiative itself! HTTR!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedr01 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 As soon as we ban peanuts the terrorist have won!In all seriousness, I haven't peanuts on a plane in forever. And when they were a regular, when has there been cases of someone having a serious allergic reaction on a plane? I was right about to ask this question, has there ever been a peanut related breakout on a plane ever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sideshow24 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Other things that can cause an anaphylaxis reaction: Latex, bananas, avocados, kiwi fruit, figs, or other fruits and vegetables including even potatoes and tomatoes, fish and less commonly spices. Guess that means no joining the mile high club I don't think you are doing it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pick6 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 The Government should ban the free peanuts at Five Guys! Enough is enough. The Government should not be wasting their time with this and airlines should be smart enough to find an alternative snack. We will live to see another day if there are no more peanuts on flights. Time to move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 as stated earlier by others and my childs best friend in 2nd grade. Peanut dust breathed in caused her to shut down and go the the hospital. if she had eaten a peanut, she'd be dead. Don't think it should be a gov't law... but i know at the school the kids have their own table away from others just in case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 No, the number is a small subset of those with allergies, but the consequences are dire, and peanuts are hardly an essential component of comfortable travel. There are many substitutes.Common courtesy is wonderful, but it relies on the responsibility of 300+ random people. It's easier for airlines to not serve them. Peanuts aren't a right. Niether is Flying. If you don't want to have peanuts on your flight fly united coach class (First Class still serves mixed nuts). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I don't think you are doing it right. you don't use figs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Yeah all the peanuts should be banned from planes. Who wants to sit next to frickin Charlie Brown, always down and woe is me. Lucy, don't get me started she can be a straight up *****. Pigpen stinks so bad you can't stand being near him. Linus and his blanket???? Don't even go there!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sideshow24 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 you don't use figs? Sure. Doesn't everyone? I just don't use any of the other stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 no way!!!! The guy on the left reminds me of the people I'm usually stuck sitting next to, except they're usually fatter. As for peanuts, I don't care but I usually defer to NOT wanting people to die, so go ahead and get rid of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Niether is Flying. If you don't want to have peanuts on your flight fly united coach class (First Class still serves mixed nuts). Neither is a right, but flying is more of a necessity than having your favorite snack on board. I actually agree with you in principle, and have already stated that I don't think the government needs to regulate this. There are airlines that don't serve peanuts at all, I think. On the other hand, I also have to admit that I am a little shocked that so many people are so selfish about something so insignificant as a snack, when they could make the lives of others easier and safer by just eating something else. Well, not really. I read flyertalk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 4,605,098 people in the United States alone, you do realize that's about the population of the entire state of Kentucky (rather Commonwealth). I'd say that's substantial. 4,605,098 is substantial in a vacuum. When compared to 307,006,550 it is statistically irrelevant. And you used the high end of the spectrum..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.