to challenge the schools nuts ban

[pigglewiggle]

The school has a strict no nuts policy. Apparently this is because someone in a higher year has a peanut allergy. I can understand banning peanuts if the allergy is severe but peanuts are very different to normal proper nuts and reactions to these are not to my knowledge anywhere near as bad as peanuts. It just makes lunch quite difficult as we are vegan and would love to pop something like a nakd bar in lunchboxes.

Aibu to go to the school and at least establish if a total ban on nuts is needed / necessary?

Would it be an option for the OP to take her children home for lunch so that they can protein from nuts.

Gomamma
my ds is 19 and been in schools with no nut bans sine he was 4. I have never been worried about his safety. The teachers and parents always asked me if he could have something they were worried about. They were more vigilent because the didnt rely on nut bans. The other kids were vigilant as well which was lovely. He had a very active school life and a member of the scouts so was away with them as well, as far as i am aware they were not nut free either. He has has seed allergies as well which never seem to be banned
He lived through secondary school with no problem.
his schools have all been caring and capable of managing many children with allergies. There were photos on the staffroom wall of all dc with medical problems

Giles
And kids allergic to everything else just have to sit on their own or amongst the danger

On the one hand, you seem to be arguing against a nut ban. On the other, you suggest that other food allergies are marginalised, don't receive the same attention as nut allergies and the allergens are not banned. So what do you think should happen?

TalkInPeace
Your study sounds interesting, but I am no clearer on how it applies to children who react adversely on their first exposure to an allergen.

TalkInPeace
If kids are not taught to look out for themselves, the big wide world of Secondary school and going into town alone can be a bit of a shock.

Early years/primary school children need help and support with all sorts of things during their formative years, including medical conditions. Responsibility and independence take a while to acquire.

bruffin
They were more vigilent because the didnt rely on nut bans.

At the risk of sounding like a cracked record, nut bans and vigilance are not mutually exclusive. The schools I've experienced with a nut free policy also apply additional measures to manage risk. The primary school my children attended even invited parents in for annual epipen demonstrations/discussion of policy and procedures surrounding nut and other food allergies. Hardly complacent.

fascicle

firstly it is impractical to ban every allergen and if they can manage seed and dairy etc allergens without banning, they can manage nut the same. A child is just as likely to smear a hummous sandwich/dip as a peanut butter one.

If they have an allergy they shouldn't treat anywhere as safe, they should behave the same whether there is ban or not.
Touching an allergen does not cause anaphylaxis, its touching it then putting fingers in their mouth.

If you read the study (if its the one I am thinking of) they only excluded children with weals larger than 4mm.
"All 98 children in the group with positive results on the initial skin-prick test were evaluated and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 60 months of age, 35.3% of the avoidance group and 10.6% of the consumption group were allergic to peanuts; the absolute difference in risk of 24.7 percentage points (95% CI, 4.9 to 43.3; P=0.004) represents a 70.0% relative reduction in the prevalence of peanut allergy "

Well either they should ban all allergens that children are anaphalactic to which im sure parents would happily oblige to, given their concern over keeping nut allergic children safe or they should apply the same procedures they use to keep the children safe from all of the other allergens that they do for the nut allergic children.

what they shouldn't do is bend over backwards to ensure one group of children's safety whilst disregarding the other. or help fuel this myth that only serious allergy is nuts. We have people on here who have allergies to things school won't ban and have also suffered reactions or whose kids have been offered foods.

If banning foods is reasonable then treat all foods causing dangerous reactions the same. If they are foods which can be spread through messy children.

because either it's a reasonable policy they believe in and there's no reason not to because it isn't hard to avoid cheese, oranges, tomatoes strawberries, eggs etc.

or they realise that they can successfully apply procedures to lunch times that don't involve a child eating on their own somewhere and keep all children equally safe without placing restrictions on people.

Surely it depends on the children and lunch arrangements at the individual school?

This is an article giving the 2013 Anaphylaxis Guidelines from the World Allergy Organization

The reason I'm linking it is because of this paragraph:
Pediatric allergists surveyed about when they typically
begin to transfer responsibilities for anaphylaxis
recognition and EAI use from adults to children and
teenagers expected that by age 12–14 years their patients
should begin to share these responsibilities. The
allergists individualized the timing of transfer based on
patient factors such as presence of asthma and absence
of cognitive dysfunction [69] . Caregivers of children
and teenagers at increased risk of anaphylaxis in community
settings expected to begin gradual transfer of
responsibilities earlier, to children age

We were invited when we went to see Dr George Du Toit (private consultation) after DD (now nearly 7) started showing reactions to multiple foods at age about 9 months. She fit the criteria (eczema, dairy allergy, asthma, positive skin test for raw egg, v. slight positive skin test for peanut) and so was invited to participate. I'm glad we didn't risk her going in the non-consumption arm - according to the results, her risk of peanut allergy given the slight positive skin test was apparently as high as 30% if we had excluded peanuts from that point! She is now only allergic to dairy, v. happy with peanuts.

I'm actually quite cross that the trial doctors are now having to say 'it needs to go through all the regulatory bodies, don't parents please change your practice on the basis of this etc', when in private they have been telling parents who go to see them exactly that for at least 6 years. I understand why they have to be slightly cautious, but as ever it will be clued up parents who can interpret studies and challenge authority who will be changing their practice first, whereas less confident or educated parents will stick with the official advice, to the detriment of their children.

Talkinpeace my dd is very aware and vigilant and is already refusing items she is not sure of eg at a party recently. Schs I have taught in and the school my dc attend treat all individuals cae by case, eg if a parent comes in with medical advice re allergy or asthma or simply requirement to wear glasses then they are accommodated, nut allergy doesn't have any kind of precedent, why should it?

Buffin that sounds very reassuring thank you, I don't feel the sch is relying on a ban at all, it's just an aspect of their approach. They do same re ask me if dd can have a particular thing, most often she can but its so much better to be safe than sorry or put child through the administration of strong drugs. Hopefully my dds continued experience will be as good as your dc.

nut allergy doesn't have any kind of precedent, why should it?
So you agree that nut bans in schools are just discriminatory then?

I understand that an RCT does need to be randomised. It couldn't be blind in this case, as presumably as soon as you tasted a bamba snack you'd know if it contained peanuts or not! The problem I guess is that they also felt honour-bound to tell parents their hunch when it came to the outcome, which possibly they should not have done - they sort of scuppered the chances of us going on the study as soon as they did, though other parents obviously felt either more public-spirited, or possibly less sure about whether consumption was the right thing. In any case, I suppose if you agree to join a study, you do need to take your chances knowing you might be on the 'wrong' arm of it.

No, they weren't recruiting children who were allergic to peanuts - most were not, certainly not enough to have a reaction when eaten, the most they could allow was v mildly on a skin prick test. Those actually already allergic weren't on the trial. In any case, you wouldn't get an epipen for a suspected allergy, only an actual one.

YABU to feed your child naked bars. They taste like poo!

Yes, they had other allergies, that was a criteria. But I don't really see how eating peanuts would decrease their response to other allergens? They aren't a magic anti-allergy bullet?! Certainly DD is not allergic to peanuts, but still allergic to dairy despite eating peanuts nearly daily for 6 years, and certainly still has an epipen.

Oh wait, I see what you are asking, I misunderstood. If you've outgrown an allergy, then I'm assuming you don't need to carry an epipen any longer. We aren't at that stage yet!

Talk in..... Precedent as in , no precedent over other medical issues a child may have.... Eg as I already said chn in my dc school are treated equally and accommodated whether they have nut allergy asthma or egg allergy or anything else. Some posters implying nut allergy gets all the focus in a sch, I'm saying from exp as a teacher ANY medical issue gets serious attention and medical requirements followed, not just nut allergic ones.

How weird shiney! I'll have to have a closer look at the paper. Hard to know how they'd know it was the peanuts, since some kids outgrow their allergies anyway!

I seem to remember somebody on the allergy board here talking about her DD becoming allergic to dairy again aged 12 or so, after being fine with it for years, so I suppose it can happen:(