As a parent of a 5 year old with peanut allergies it amazes me how some people cannot grasp the term "life threatening". How can you argue potential death versus taste preference and inconvenience? No contest.
The school systems should educate children and their parents about food allergies. The 200 deaths that happen each year because of food allergies, 90% were due to peanut.
Allergies to milk, egg, wheat, and soy are usually outgrown. Allergies to peanut, treenut, shellfish are considered lifelong.
I’ve never known anyone who died from NOT having peanutbutter and or peanut products at school.
It’s been noted that humans are more prone to allergies today than we ever were in our ancestral past. What’s especially interesting is that the populations that are most susceptible to allergens are those whose gene pool has softened due to the cush life of the West. Although they have their own problems [diseases, etc] peoples of third world and similarly underdeveloped areas tend not to have problems akin to genetic weakness – because they die off and do not propagate.
So, like my subject line says, this will sound extraordinarily callous but I’d like to mention it simply as a devil’s advocate thought question. If we [society] continue to placate to the least common denominator, we will inevitably continue to breed that very weakness into increasingly larger proportions.
Everyone looks at the kids with Downs Syndrome or some other handicap like retardation and wonders how rough it must be. Most people would be lying if they said the notion of a mercy-kill never crossed their mind even for a second. But survival of the fittest only works in a world where the weakest aren’t placated.
Now, I realize that’s an extreme example. We’re not going to go rubbing peanut butter all over your kid while taunting you with cries of, "death to the genetically inferior." Of course not. There’s otherwise nothing wrong with the kid. But, there is an onus on both you and your kid to identify measures for perpetuating ones own life. It’s not MY responsibility to ensure your kid lives. As long as I am not intentionally doing things to cause him harm (like the example above) then there is a level of responsibility that he/she must undertake to ensure their own survival. If that means bringing your own food from home – then bring your own food from home. If that means keeping your kid at home for home-schooling – then teach your kid at home.
Seriously, it’s a slippery slope. What’s next? Are you going to put a class action lawsuit against a supermarket for selling peanuts and peanut butter? That would be followed by all the other allergic folk until all that’s left is for us to drive to each farm we want food from and buy it directly from the farmer.
Shit happens in life when you let your guard down. Sometimes shit = your kid dying from peanuts. Sometimes shit = you dying by being hit by a bus. A society that seeks to protect everyone by wrapping everyone and everything in spongy NERF and banning all bad things … is a stupid society. Each event in and of itself maybe small and discrete, but together, these actions get ridiculous for everyone else.
Hmmm… so, hypothetically, let’s say my daughter suffers from anorexia and is undergoing hard core therapy to restore her back to healthy eating habits. However, currently, she will only eat peanut and other tree nut products. In this case, forbidding these products has a very big impact on her physical and mental health. Would you take issue?
This will sound callous but ... by VnutZ :: NR10 :: Show
It’s been noted that humans are more prone to allergies today than we ever were in our ancestral past. What’s especially interesting is that the populations that are most susceptible to allergens are those whose gene pool has softened due to the cush life of the West. Although they have their own problems [diseases, etc] peoples of third world and similarly underdeveloped areas tend not to have problems akin to genetic weakness – because they die off and do not propagate.
So, like my subject line says, this will sound extraordinarily callous but I’d like to mention it simply as a devil’s advocate thought question. If we [society] continue to placate to the least common denominator, we will inevitably continue to breed that very weakness into increasingly larger proportions.
Everyone looks at the kids with Downs Syndrome or some other handicap like retardation and wonders how rough it must be. Most people would be lying if they said the notion of a mercy-kill never crossed their mind even for a second. But survival of the fittest only works in a world where the weakest aren’t placated.
Now, I realize that’s an extreme example. We’re not going to go rubbing peanut butter all over your kid while taunting you with cries of, "death to the genetically inferior." Of course not. There’s otherwise nothing wrong with the kid. But, there is an onus on both you and your kid to identify measures for perpetuating ones own life. It’s not MY responsibility to ensure your kid lives. As long as I am not intentionally doing things to cause him harm (like the example above) then there is a level of responsibility that he/she must undertake to ensure their own survival. If that means bringing your own food from home – then bring your own food from home. If that means keeping your kid at home for home-schooling – then teach your kid at home.
Seriously, it’s a slippery slope. What’s next? Are you going to put a class action lawsuit against a supermarket for selling peanuts and peanut butter? That would be followed by all the other allergic folk until all that’s left is for us to drive to each farm we want food from and buy it directly from the farmer.
Shit happens in life when you let your guard down. Sometimes shit = your kid dying from peanuts. Sometimes shit = you dying by being hit by a bus. A society that seeks to protect everyone by wrapping everyone and everything in spongy NERF and banning all bad things … is a stupid society. Each event in and of itself maybe small and discrete, but together, these actions get ridiculous for everyone else.
RE: Education is the key by Anonymous :: NR0 :: Show
Hmmm… so, hypothetically, let’s say my daughter suffers from anorexia and is undergoing hard core therapy to restore her back to healthy eating habits. However, currently, she will only eat peanut and other tree nut products. In this case, forbidding these products has a very big impact on her physical and mental health. Would you take issue?