Banana Buffoonery

Thats right GYW. I am not talking about those people who get a mild allergic reaction, I am talking about anaphylactic reaction which can be fatal in a very short period of time (my daughter turned blue after 20 minutes). She now carries an epipen with her everywhere to be safe – and does not expect the world to revolve around her allergies.

As for taking my own child’s life ‘too seriously’ – are you kidding! I hate to think how you view your own child’s life.

>Australia has one of the highest levels of food allergies in the world.

As the ABC article said.

GYW is right I think that the world revolves around many of these fakers.

My partner is approaching 40 and has been fatally allergic to nuts, particularly peanuts, all his life. I am a year younger than him and have also had two anaphylatic (severe life-threatening allergic) reactions, one of which the doctor was amazed I survived, as my immune system shut down and my heart nearly stopped. Allergies are not some new, trendy thing that has just been invented by pampering parents, although I understand the number of people affected is increasing. When you are genuinely allergic to a food, you can literally die in minutes if you eat it, and children seem to be affected more quickly and easily than adults, ie, if they simply come into contact with the food or allergen they can have a severe anaphylaxis. That is the reason that schools have policies banning or restricting known allergens and the reason that if you go to emergency with an allergic reaction you will be seen straight away – basically, it is to minimise the risk that you will die on their premises!

Having said all that, just because a food doesn’t agree with you and you may have a non-life-threatening reaction to it does not make it an allergy – it is likely to be merely an intolerance. Lots of people confuse the two. I note that in the news article I read on the incident a representative from an anaphylaxis advocacy group was quoted as being critical of the over-the-top requirements for the journos in this case, and I agree. It just makes people think, as displayed by many in this thread, that people who have genuine allergies are faking it and want the world to turn around them unnecessarily, which is not the case.

I apologise for the rant, but you would not believe the sheer disbelief people show about anaphylaxis – until they see it happen – and it is something I feel very strongly about. Thanks to those who do understand how serious food allergies can be.

Perhaps krudd could call a banana summit.

That kid should get the hell out of Doge and move to Innisfail.

Oh, that as much effort went into identifying and disciplining bullies!

Influenza/measles/chicken pox kill a shi#load of kids each year around the world – when are they being banned from the school ground?

A Noisy Noise Annoys An Oyster said :

I’m not prepared to change my life – or society – around to accommodate a bunch of selfish, mollycoddled kids and their parents. The world can’t change just to accommodate you.

I repeated myself there – I meant to say “. . . The world can’t change just to please you”. And I stand by those comments.

I worked with (not for long, thank god,) a “flower hat” woman who told me one day that her and her family were on an allergen free diet.

When I asked her what they were allergic to, she replied “Nothing, my reki master recommended it though.”

deezagood said :

I’m allergic to wankers who don’t ‘believe’ in allergies.

And I’m allergic to bullshit, so I’m having a hard time with this thread and the concept of allergies.

Don’t get me wrong – I understand that allergies exist and can be very dangerous, and I don’t have any desire to call someone out as ‘faking it’ if they are indeed having an allergic reaction of any severity. It’s just too bad that many parents abuse the concept of an allergy and apply it to something a lot less severe, and as a result we are one step closer to the nanny-state of cotton wool, helmet and floatie-wearing kids.

I know people with allergies who have made it through life okay, unless whatever responsible for allergies has mutated into a highly-sensitive, hyper-reactive new form of allergy, what has changed?
(Answer: Us.)

I’m not prepared to change my life – or society – around to accommodate a bunch of selfish, mollycoddled kids and their parents. The world can’t change just to accommodate you.

That of course should be “shouldn’t take all the posts on this site too seriously”. Wish there was an edit function!

It’s not about questioning the seriousness or the validity of allergies (preaching to the choir here, I’m a Celiac). What we’re questioning is what are reasonable actions to go about accommodating these allergies?

Having child care centers be “nut free” is fair enough, but how far do you go with this to protect the children at the risk of human liberties? Banning all nut products from sale in fast food outlets and supermarkets? Extinction of all nut varieties?

Yes allergies are bad and life threatening, but we have to be reasonable and sensible about the threat.

deezagood said :

I am disappointed by the reactions on this site….

julz said :

the comments on this site are very disappointing.

Seriously, you should take all the posts on this site too seriously.

I think most negative posts in this thread aren’t denying the existence of allegies, they’re just having a go at the ‘inconveniences’ being ‘inflicted’ on everyone else

chewy14 said :

Deezagood,
I’m sure that most people here know that these kids aren’t faking it.

The problem is that the parents of these kids want to curtail the freedoms of the vast majority instead of taking responsibility of the problem themselves.
Sure let everyone know about the allergies and the risks but outright banning of foods should never be an option.
If the parents think the risk is too great then the child should be removed from the school.

Yes, but again Chewy, is it really such a HUGE big deal to not have nuts and bananas at school? Honestly; I make my kid’s lunches every single day, and there are plenty of safe alternatives that won’t result in a child dying. Primary school kids are kind of gross; many don’t wash their hands, they share drink bottles, they have smeary, grubby little fingers. If they were permitted to bring peanut butter sandwiches to school, you can guarantee that some of the nut products would end up in the allergy child’s mouth. THAT is why products are banned in oprimary school. It is good and sensible policy to ban products that might kill children from primary school – not a freaky over-reaction.

The basic lesson in risk management methodologies is that
1) if the potential impact of a risk is serious enough, rergardless how improbable, it must be controlled.
2) the first step in controlling the risk is to eliminate it. If you can’t eliminate it you move on to lesser control measures.

If you’re wondering why common sense doesn’t seem to apply these days, you can do a course on managing risk; and you’ll then understand why the first recation of today’s bureaucrats is to close or ban whatever it is that might be worrying them.

anonymous gungahlian said :

I’ve just finished Yr. 9, and I think my school (Daramalan) has some sort of “nut free” rule (or maybe it’s just peanuts) but I have never seen it re-inforced by teachers or seen it in our student policy document. But I guess if a student is allergic to something, they should take responsibility for themselves and if it’s that bad- carry an epi-pen around. Dara is a big school and if we banned all the foods that someone is allergic to, there probably wouldn’t be much that we would be allowed to eat.

I would hope that high school students are a bit more mature and sensible than 5 year old primary school students (just a little…).

you narrow minded pack of so and so’s. If any one of you has a child with food allergies i hope you joke like this at it. I’m not a fan of banning certain food products at school either it restricts what my kids can eat before and during school hours but someone else’s child/ern may well at worst die from mine or my childern’s action and that not something I want to live with. Yes it a pain in the arse sometimes but live with it.

dtc said :

I guess what has changed is that the kids with allergies don’t die now and actually survive to make it through school.

That’s well established now, but it doesn’t account for 100% of the increase in extreme allergies (and the allergy suffering kids haven’t had time to produce allergy suffering offspring in proportion to the increase in allergies). Other factors that have been identified include changes in play (more time watching tv, less time playing outside getting dirty), and more exposure to chemicals in food (preservatives, hormones, antibiotics) and more generally (eg through cleaning products).

Schmeah – are you really prepared to harden up that much? A school has a risk so serious that they decide a product cannot be present at the school. But you think they should be “hard” and just take the risk. Why take as simple precaution when you could, like you say, “harden the **** up”, and just watch the kid die? Nice.

Good on you Deezagood. As a mother of a child who is anaphylactic to tree nuts, the comments on this site are very disappointing. I am not wrapping my child in cotton wool – the fact is that she is at serious risk if she eats anything that contains tree nuts (yes – blue lips, swollen face, huge welts, throat closing up – believe me it is not fun to watch). Luckily she is sensible enough not to eat anything if she is unsure of.
I don’t ask that everyone not consume nuts around her – all I ask is that there is some sensible understanding in the community, and hopefully some common sense if she does happen to have an anaphylactic reaction – not finger pointing and making snide remarks.

I’m allergic to wankers who don’t ‘believe’ in allergies.

My ex stepson went to mcgregor primary a couple of years back, no nuts, no bananas, no eggs or egg based products and no pumpkin.
Yes, no egg based products eg, most cakes.
After their good handling of the student with the nut allergy, they became a beacon.

No I have no kids with allergies, yes, if stung by a bee I am told I will have an anaphylactic attack, I try to avoid them, understanding that I can not change the world because I am allergic, that and I like honey.

I am all for the kids being able to go to a normal school, and not either a) dying, or b) being home schooled. My question has always been what happens when they leave the school and become adults? Convince a department or bus to not have nuts / bananas / eggs on the premises?

As far as I can ascertain, banana allergy is only a threat when the person affected comes into physical contact with banana, normally by eating one. Other people eating one up to 12 hours before shouldn’t be a concern.

Does this child not go out in public at all?

Deezagood,
I’m sure that most people here know that these kids aren’t faking it.

The problem is that the parents of these kids want to curtail the freedoms of the vast majority instead of taking responsibility of the problem themselves.
Sure let everyone know about the allergies and the risks but outright banning of foods should never be an option.
If the parents think the risk is too great then the child should be removed from the school.

While this bananarama is way up there in the buffoonery stakes, the real buffoonery is lefty teachers brainwashing kids of this age with their personal socialist agenda about gorebull warming (aka climate change when it’s cold).

But this buffoonery is then trumped by our buffoon prime minister taking advantage of this to promote his aspirations for the world stage and his UN job application.

A form of child abuse.

I’m alergic to interacting with public servants – but do you see me complaining.

Oh…. Yes -…..

THATS NOT THE POINT!!!!!

James-T-Kirk said :

It is amazing that society has increased the number of kids with serious allergy issues in the past years. It didn’t used to be a problem back when we didn’t disinfect bins constantly, and when we would let kids play on the monkey bars, with asphalt as a surface below.

Whats changed?

Has anybody done a correlation between the number of kids with allergies at ‘alternative; schools’, vs the number at normal – ‘you have to be tough to survive’ schools? that would be an interesting examination, as it would give us an indicator as to whether there is something with the parents.

I guess what has changed is that the kids with allergies don’t die now and actually survive to make it through school.

BTW, OConnor is not an ‘alternative’ school. Its a normal public school. What might be different with ‘alternative’ schools is having parents who are educated/knowledgeable enough to push the issue through the school board/P&C etc and get something to happen.

I’ve just finished Yr. 9, and I think my school (Daramalan) has some sort of “nut free” rule (or maybe it’s just peanuts) but I have never seen it re-inforced by teachers or seen it in our student policy document. But I guess if a student is allergic to something, they should take responsibility for themselves and if it’s that bad- carry an epi-pen around. Dara is a big school and if we banned all the foods that someone is allergic to, there probably wouldn’t be much that we would be allowed to eat.

Those of you who ‘don’t believe’ in serious allergies, should perhaps educate yourselves. I personally would hope that you do not have any children under your care who might suffer a serious allergic reaction … noting that you don’t actually believe in food allergies, what would you do? Laugh and point at them, watch them die and then tell them that they were faking it?

what a crock, seriously. When I was a wee lass, I like every other child in my school was exposed to everything from peanut butter, bananas and alas even the now dreaded sand pit.

Kids get allergies because we shelter them and try to protect them from exposure to everything; sunlight, water, oranges, hard work.. crap!

We’ve created the allergy monster and now we demand that adults who don’t have as many allergies to curb their regular eating habits because one child has a mild banana reaction.

Harden the **** up!

I developed an allergy to one fruit as an adult and I don’t impose my sensitivity on anyone.

Kramer said :

I should have mentioned that my son is allegic to strawberries, and we don’t insist on banning stawberries, stawberry milk, fruit rollups, stawberry icecream, etc… We just tell him he is not allowed to eat anything with stawberries in it, and like the smart kid he is, he obeys. Simple.

I think Kramer, the difference is that your child won’t actually DIE from eating strawberries (am I wrong here?). So even if he does inadvertently eat a strawberry, he won’t actually be dead afterwards. I think that if he could actually die from strawberries, you guys may try harder to ensure that he is not exposed to straweberries during school. I am disappointed by the reactions on this site; I am willing to bet that none of the nay-sayers actually have children, close friends with children etc… that have life threatening allergies. Having watched a child, in a matter of minutes, go from fine to ‘throat completely closed and unable to breathe after accidently eating a nut product, I am no longer a doubter.

It’s all the fault of antibacterial hand wash and cleaners! Good old soap & water people!!!

Second time I have wanted to write.. Spot on deezagood! (lawyer or not to lawyer thread)

I sympathise totally with parents with allergies, must be very scary. My kids and I have always been very respectful of the nuts thing. Not that I haven’t been sometimes amazed by it all!

Kramer said :

I should have mentioned that my son is allegic to strawberries, and we don’t insist on banning stawberries, stawberry milk, fruit rollups, stawberry icecream, etc… We just tell him he is not allowed to eat anything with stawberries in it, and like the smart kid he is, he obeys. Simple.

Shhhh!!!

There should be no semblance of common sense on this thread.

If i had a child at the school, i would get them to set up an underground banana racket. Imagine the pocket money they could make selling black market bananas.

So if they have a Celiac kid they ban wheat, rye, barley and malt products too?

This is ridiculous. When I was a kid I was allergic to tomatoes yet my mother didn’t demand a total ban on the school canteen using tomatoes in sandwiches and rolls. Sounds like the cotton-wool kids syndrome again . . .

I should have mentioned that my son is allegic to strawberries, and we don’t insist on banning stawberries, stawberry milk, fruit rollups, stawberry icecream, etc… We just tell him he is not allowed to eat anything with stawberries in it, and like the smart kid he is, he obeys. Simple.

Now – the serious post –

It is amazing that society has increased the number of kids with serious allergy issues in the past years. It didn’t used to be a problem back when we didn’t disinfect bins constantly, and when we would let kids play on the monkey bars, with asphalt as a surface below.

Whats changed?

Has anybody done a correlation between the number of kids with allergies at ‘alternative; schools’, vs the number at normal – ‘you have to be tough to survive’ schools? that would be an interesting examination, as it would give us an indicator as to whether there is something with the parents.

Warning – I may be eating a banana RIGHT NOW!

Hmmmm — Years ago I made an awesome orange cannon – It shot semi-frozen oranges clear across the oval, with just a squirt of propellant. I have never considered making a banana cannon! The possibilities are awesome.

Warning – this banana may contain traces of nuts….

Well said johnboy, well said

I’ve been trying to think of something to write, but, yeah, wow. Really? And it would so suck to be that kid. Or the parents or teacher.

But to ban reporters?

Look, obviously this seems a bit (lot) extreme; but we don’t know the degree of sensitivity of the allergetic child. So, is it really such a huge deal to refrain from eating a banana for 12 hours? My kids don’t have any allergies, but I am always amazed by the attitudes of parents who’s kids don’t have allergies, and seem to believe that allergies are some sort of ‘scam’, something invented by the parents, or are overly dramatised by the parents. We have this debate over and over at school P&C meetings; with the allergy kid’s parents insisting on stricter policies, and the ‘disbelievers’ adamant that it is up to the allergy kid’s parents to take the necessary precautions.

The fact of the matter is; some of the allergy kids CAN DIE if they are exposed to allergins, and primary school kids are just not diligent enough to be responsible in this regard. So, my attitude is ‘better safe than sorry’. Okay – the kids can’t bring peanut products to school or have peanut butter on their toast of a morning – well big deal. They can eat as much peanuty stuff as they want on weekends. The banana thing – big deal. Eat an apple instead. Seriously; if I were a school Principal, I would much rather have these ‘extreme’ precautions in place than risk a child dying whilst under my care. Can you really blame them for being a bit ‘over the top’? And JB; what exactly are the HUGE COSTS associated with not eating a banana for 12 hours??

Well, pretty much every school bans nuts, and O’Connor has a student with allergies to bananas so they are banned. But I can tell you that the ban at the school is just a ban on taking bananas to the school, not a ban on eating them for 12 hours beforehand. I suspect the press release was an ACT Education Dept over reaction rather than by the people on the ground.

BTW, as I understand it, the allergy people have to bannanas is to the protein that is similar to the protein in latex.

It’ll probably become the ‘new black’ of school allergies?

Stupid stupid bananas, my man and son love them and they’re sending me poor(er)! Maybe my pocket will like it to become a drama at school, one less to buy for.. nah just kidding, bananas are great!

JB – you stopped halfway with the masses of !!! and ???, no gud speeling and not enough spittle landing on the page! But otherwise, pass!

Love it Johnboy!!!!

Touch allergies can be extreme, but this one threatens the sufferer with life in a bubble.

damn right – I knew those bananas were bent – no place for them in straight society

According to the ABC, the school has an anaphylaxis free policy. So therefore anaphalaxis should be banned. Any child seen swelling up, having difficulty breathing or having a fit should be immediately suspended.

Seriously, what a crock. Do we have to pander to a minority of kiddies that may have a reaction to something? I imagine that in a school of 500 or so midgets there would be a myriad of alergies from peanuts to bread or milk. Do we ban everything (even water as I know someone with a water allergy, break out in a rash from contact with cold tap water)?

I might go an lob a few banana and peanut paste sandwiches over the fence.

GOOD!

Haha. Kinda reminds me of the whole peanut butter thing. How come this didn’t seem to be such an issue when I was a wee lad?

Biohazard suits for school uniform?

You heartless bastard!!!

Don’t you know how many kids were killed by water last year?!?

AND WHY SHOULD FAMILIES HAVE TO MANAGE THEIR OWN RISKS WHEN HUGE COSTS CAN BE LUMBERED ON THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY FOR NO BENEFIT!!!!!

Next you’ll be dragging the banana allergic kids off to the gas chambers!

Nazi! Scum!

I demand a ban on all bananas to guarantee the human rights of all banana allergic kids and their shiny new right to go to the same school as any of their relatives that take their fancy!

(How’d I do?)