To think allergy mum is OTT

[Boogiewoogieanddance]

I genuinely don't know if I am or not, this is a genuine question as I thankfully haven't got any experience in having a child with serious allergies. I am, of course, happy to do what I can to prevent a reaction.

There is a child in my DDs class who is allergic to a list of things so we aren't allowed them in pack lunches. That's fine, I have no issue as I know kids can be careless and gross about their food hygiene. My issue is with the nuts, literally anything that says "may contain nuts" or "may contain traces of peanuts" is not allowed... if the occasional time I don't realise and send something (These are not nut flavoured things or anything with nuts in the ingredients, but I assume are just made in the same factory as nuts.) it is sent home unwrapped and she hasn't been allowed to eat it.

But is it really possible that an allergy can be so served that something that may contain nuts could cause a reaction if opened in the same room.

Many thanks!

Try and see this from a different perspective. Can you imagine how it feels for the parents of this child knowing that, at any time, they could have such a severe allergic reaction that their child might die? They have to live with this all the time and I can't imagine how stressful that might be. So whilst it's an inconvenience to you, it could be a matter of life and death for their child. I know this sounds extreme but it was only through working with a child who had severe allergies that I really understood how serious it is

As PPs have said, a sandwich made in a kitchen in a house that has nuts in it would be classed as "may contain nuts" if judged by the same rules as packaged food. In fact it's probably more risky. It's foolish to think that no one is bringing in potentially contaminated food.

My DH has an anaphylactic allergy to peanuts, tree nuts and sesame and so I know how difficult allergies are, but also how restrictive it is to remove all "may contain" items.

This seems very OTT. How do they function day to day with cafes, shops, public transport. Weird how many allergies there are nowadays

I had a teenage friend who rejected a box of chocolates I bought for her saying "these could kill me".
I have been mindful of nut allergies ever since.

DD had a child like this in her old class, but we were advised to not eat nut products at home at any time to prevent/reduce risk to the child. Totally unsustainable, the ordeal ended when the child ate a nutty flapjack served with the school dinner and had no reaction.

Think of it the other way around... if your child was at risk of anaphylaxis would you want the risk of other children sharing their lunches with them??

Anaphylaxis UK do not advocate this approach at all.
The banning of any product that could ever have crossed paths with a nut is ( but that probably has not ) is ridiculous.

No, but the advice is to train all staff on allergens and how to manage them/know the signs. Unfortunately, lots of schools don't, either through a lack of resources/time or not, seeing it as a priority. Having worked in school catering for years in many schools, it's shocking how little most school staff (outside the kitchen) know about allergies and a lot are very blasé. I doubt they could even name the 14 major allergens, let alone manage children who have them.

Nuts are seen as one of the most severe, although I agree on the logic of bans, milk is the top allergen in the UK so they should ban that too if they are banning things.

So why not ban everything then including being able to send in a packed lunch? I can make a sandwich for my child with all entirely nut- free ingredients but I can’t confirm my whole kitchen where this sandwich has being made is entirely free of traces of nuts.

Everyone I know who has a nut allergy is allowed 'may contain nuts' as it's pretty much on everything.

There are legal requirements on the labelling of all foods that contain any of the 14 major allergens in the UK for anyone who sells food. One of the most recent is Natashas law. There are many factors why allergens are more common nowadays, they aren't just making it up.

OP just take stuff out the packet and wrap/put in a tub with no label. You can't be forced to send brand only food in.

allergyuk.org/
Allergy UK also do not promote a no nut policy due to it promoting a false sense of security.

Maybe I worded it wrong in relation to using the word severe, I know how bad allergic reactions can be and that they can be life threatening/fatal. What I didn't realise is how sensitive they can be when it comes to other people eating "may contain nuts" food

I never thought about cafes etc, I know the child enjoys a Starbucks so when I think of it that way it is quite frustrating having to be so vigilant about DDs pack lunch.

Nut allergy parent here. It sounds OTT - banning products with actual nut ingredients is potentially reasonable especially if the allergy is airborne or the children are young and the allergic child themselves avoiding “may contain traces of” is reasonable (albeit I exercise some common sense with that one because really the chance of cheddar cheese sticks, orange juice, fish fingers or ketchup containing nuts is zero but I’ve seen it labelled as “may contain”). But expecting a child is never going to be in the same room as a “may contain traces of” product is just not realistic - almost all bakery/non prepacked bread would be off limits for a start but are they checking what bread is used to make the kid’s sandwiches? Auditing their kitchens? What about all the food that doesn’t come in a handy printed wrapper?

I wouldn’t assume it’s necessarily the parent though, often it’s a well meaning and worried about getting it wrong member of staff taking a “better safe than sorry” approach to an extreme. There’s very little training for school staff on this and a lot of responsibility.

Utterly ridiculous and OTT.

The child with the allergy isn't going to be consuming the food.

The risk of the may contains actually having the product is low, it's not like a game of Russian roulette.

The HT is well meaning but is acting completely ott.

This is ott. I have a severe nut allergy and eat “may contains” because it’s just manufacturers putting it on to cover themselves. I’ve even seen bottled water with the warning! In this case it’s not even the child with the allergy eating the product which has a minuscule chance of having nuts in it so the risk is basically non existent.

Interestingly there’s also no scientific evidence of airborne allergies causing severe allergic reactions so even in the very unlikely case that something with “may contain” did have nuts in it the child with the allergy is extremely unlikely to react to another child (potentially on the other side of the dining hall) eating it. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33548082/

I don't think this is reasonable or practical.

As PP have said, anything made in my (and most people's) kitchens would be a "may contain traces" level, and they can't expect other families to maintain allergy safe cleanliness levels for an allergy their child doesn't have. So the whole thing is immediately invalidated as the main component of many of the kids lunches will be nut trace risk anyway.

Then you have to deal with other kids who have allergies themselves which may limit their dietary options. But now the families of kids who are allergic to gluten/dairy/whatever have to try and find snacks which suit their child and also don't have any nut traces warnings. It's just not a realistic ask. My DD has a dairy allergy and a quick look shows that most of her lunchbox snacks would be ruled out due to this.

As our kitchen isn’t nut free that would mean our dc couldn’t take a packed lunch.

That’s beyond bonkers, and against the advice of allergy specialists as far as I’m aware. I think any school trying to be 100% nut free is setting themselves up to fail, even with the best will in the world from other families without children with allergies and could bring about a false sense of security.

I would read up a bit and politely challenge the policy.

As a child, a boy in our class took an allergic reaction to a boy who ate a snickers bar then spoke to him. Clearly a snickers contains nut. No idea what the parents were thinking. It was horrific for the boy and everyone involved.
So I understand the allergy is horrendous.
But this really does sound ott.
Most companies now put may contain nuts even if it is the most minute chance.
There is definitely a middle ground for the school to find hopefully.
You could always take the snack out the wrapper and put it in tupperware as long as you are extremely vigilant about checking for nuts.

Starbucks say all their food and drinks may contain traces of nuts and other allergens (as do pretty much all cafes/coffee shops). They have plenty of nut containing products in the place too - almond milk for a start.

So that’s interesting.

I would wonder how they actually manage that. A ‘may contain nuts’ product is less likely to be contaminated than a sandwich made in my kitchen when we’ve had peanut butter for breakfast! So realistically
it’s not likely to actually work.

Boogiewoogieanddance · Today 22:05
@Albiboba I'm not brushing it off? It's a genuine question as I didn't know they could be that severe in relation to being in a room with a child eating something that said "may contain traces of nut" could cause a reaction. I asked because I was curious if the mum is a bit over the top or if she is right to be so cautious.”

Well, now you know. Yes, it can be that serious.

My DH loves peanut butter on toast so whilst we do obviously clean up after ourselves, the sandwiches we send in DC's packed lunches "may contain traces of nuts."

So to me this seems a bit OTT as you would have to effectively exclude all food from kitchens that had peanut butter in them, otherwise how could you be sure?

Excellent, clear post.

Some of the other posts ... 🤦🏻‍♀️