Peanut allergy and school

[bevelino]

In today's Sunday Times Review Section Caroline Coles has written to Chris Woodhead to ask whether he thinks a school has the right to ask parents to avoid putting items containing nuts in lunch boxes because one child at the school has a severe nut allergy. Caroline Coles is unhappy with the school. Chris Woodhead replied that the school's decision is nonsensical and that the rights of more than 200 children to eat the lunch their parents want them to eat overrides the risk to one pupil. I think Chris Woodhead is wrong to support Caroline Coles in her complaint as the school have a duty to protect all children. How could any parent not wish to protect a child with a severe nut allergy?

I didn't call the family dumbass, I called the table dumbass.

Bruffin, I'm repeating what my dd's allergy specialist told me. She also gets a swollen mouth after eating certain fruits - strawberries, melon and cherries. He said that fruit allergies rarely cause anaphylaxis. He also said that dairy allergies can be grown out of in some cases. But that nut and seed allergies are never grown out of and almost always lead to anaphylaxis.

Like I said, it's not a competition about which allergies deserve the most attention. They all do. And for some of them we can offer help and for others it woudl be good to do a lot better to help.

Even if that wasn't bollocks it wouldn't make sense.

You tell a child that is anaphalactic to milk that milk can't be banned because some other peoples allergies to milk aren't very serious and they might outgrow it?

About 20% of peanut allergies are outgrown btw.

Your body does tend to deal with fruit protein quicker and break it down before you die but not always

IA I still don't think you should be prejudiced against the table. It had nothing to do with it.

Bue we're not in North America. We have a massive range of foods to eat. A peanut ban wouldn't 'punish the poor' here. My dd's school is in a deprived SE London area and nobody has questioned the no nut policy. I know because I asked after one of these conversations came up once before.

i would love to see a milk ban in place in dd's nursery. honestly i would.

If she hadn't been at the table she may not have thought that it was OK to touch the pretzel. It has everything to do with it.

No they're not IA, anaphylactic peanut allergies are very rarely grown out of. my dd's specialist said he knew of one case in which a woman's autoimmune system changed during pregnancy and she was no longer allergic to peanuts. that was his only case in thirty years.

So if you can't ban milk that means by default you can't ban anything else that might cause allergies? So if the cleaners started using a cleaning product that brought the kids out in a rash, they couldn't ban it because they didn't ban milk? It doesn't make logical sense. You can ban nuts. It would be virtually impossible to ban milk.

If a milk ban were made a possibility I for one would support it.

"But that nut and seed allergies are never grown out of and almost always lead to anaphylaxis. "
Well that is not true as my DS has outgrown peanuts, he eats them regularly now!
You will see on the allergy boards that there are children who have anaphylaxis to foods other than nuts.

I also don't see how banning helps, as you still need to take the same precautions whether a ban is in place or not.

Yes they are. My own brother outgrew his. There are numerous papers on the subject. My childs Dr said its most common under the age of 8 and for children with a grade 1 or 2 allergy but he has known it with a grade 3 allergy. Its Adenbrookes btw.

A severe anaphylactic allergy to nuts was outgrown? I'd have to see evidence of that because I've never heard of it. Of course I know that other things cause anaphylaxis - dd has a range of foods that cause it in her. She also has some milder allergies that she might grow out of.

Yes, you have to take precautions whether there's a ban or not. But a ban makes things safer.

I'm repeating myself now though and I can see I'm in the minority with these opinions so I don't know what more I can say on this.

IA well if that is the case it gives us much more hope for dd but that was never suggested as an option by her specialist. We tried to talk him into saying it was a possibility but he insisted we should put that out of our minds. Possibly because dp was having trouble taking the severity of her allergies on board and had always hoped she might grow out of them or get desensitized or whatever.

20% before age 7 outgrown peanut.

Ah ... before seven. That might make a difference. Dd is 10 so perhaps that's why her specialist gave us the information. I will certainly ask him to confirm though at her next appointment as that would give all of us a lot of hope.

Is it from this article? www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/02/010213070927.htm

So it seems that some people can outgrow a peanut allergy depending on how bad their allergic reaction was. I think dd's specialist said hers was not only very severe but because she had multiple allergies she wouldn't outgrow it.

I noticed that the article does say later on that peanut allergies are the most severe of all known food allergies and that more people die from them each year than any other allergy. So there is some scientific truth in that.

There are trials at the moment that are showing a cure for nut allergies, There was a also a boy on tv recently who was anaphylatic to dogs and would collapse by just walking past one in the street. He has also been cured by using the same method. There is a poster on the allergy boards who has been taking part in the trialsaddenbrookes study

They basically start by ingesting a micro piece of the allergen ie peanut or in the boys case dogs hair on a regular basis and gradually building up the tolerance on a gradual basis.

Oh is that the LEAP study? I will be contacting st thomas hospital about that one once baby6 arrives due to the strongf history in the familY.

Dp and I asked dd's specialist about that trial and he said they don't use it for anaphylaxis related to nuts because it is potentially too dangerous (apparently a teenage boy died during it in the US) and in Canada they found that even when they thought someone was cured, the allergy suddenly came back when the person was least expecting it. I don't know if he was just being downbeat about everything with us but he kind of made out that all we could do for dd was complete avoidance. It really got us down for a while after we saw him that first time but we've got used to it now. I'd like to think there was a cure though somewhere down the line.

[hijack]

When is Baby6 due, Misdee?

That is not the same study dinglydell, this is at UK and the poster on the allergy board dc was severly allergic.
I think it is the Leapstudy Misdee, there is also the EAT study which is looking at introducing solids and the relationship to allergies.

Oops not the Leap Study.

Next month soupy.

There are a few studies ongoing with regards peanut allergies/weaning/anaphylatics so will try and find them once kiddies are in bed.

I think that LEAP and EAT are both at Guy's (Gideon Lack?) and are looking at whether early weaning or eating a peanut snack a few times a week is more or less likely to lead to allergies developing.

The desensitisation that BBFs dd was/is in is at addenbrookes (Andrew Clarke).

Real head versus heart thing for me.

As a tree-nut anaphylactic, I know logically that nut bans aren't the right approach. But nuts have nearly killed me (or my attitude to risk has, I suppose - twice I ate something I was assured was nut free). And if either of the DC have anaphylactic allergies to nuts, then I'd want nuts banned from their primary school. I wouldn't try to force it though, as it would be up to me to teach them how to manage the risk.

Parents of highly allergic children (to milk, nuts, whatever) - you have my sympathy. It must be very hard.

Hope it helps that many of us survives the 70s and 80s when we were told it was all in our heads!