*Shrugs* if even flying becomes that much of a potential threat I'd say it's a significant impediment to her life (should she want to travel a lot). I'm curious about her safety routine in daily life.
The story struck me anyway as I take about 10 flights a year and have never heard such an announcement banning nuts.
I dont know why some people are not getting the fact that it was because it was in a aeroplane that it was a problem, she was trapped in a confined place with no fresh air.
A few people have said on this very thread, that they have been on flights where they were asked not to eat nuts.
My god this thread has gotten stupid, even by DS standards. We are comparing the request not to eat peanuts on the flight to requesting rape on the flight? I mean... Whaaaaaaa???
no we aren't.
that was a specific reply to a specific post about the captain making anything law.
it was nothing about a peanut allergy.
some things go way over peoples head they should become limbo dancers.
I know what was said, they were talking in the context of the thread, you took it to a stupid extreme; it was still a ridiculously stupid comment none the less, a lot of them are. My point was that people will start making jaw droppingly dense statements on here in order to push their point.
The child had a known nut allergy , enough to alert an airline . So why on earth were her parents not carrying a life saving Epipen for her ? That I find very puzzling . She was saved by someone who was carrying an Epipen . But kids with known allergies that severe that an airline is asked not to open a pack should have an Epipen ready for use
I dont know why some people are not getting the fact that it was because it was in a aeroplane that it was a problem, she was trapped in a confined place with no fresh air..
I do get that, and I said if even taking a plane is so hazardous then it's a big problem for her if she wants to travel a lot. My sympathies are with her, it sounds like a bloody annoying affliction.
The child had a known nut allergy , enough to alert an airline . So why on earth were her parents not carrying a life saving Epipen for her ? That I find very puzzling . She was saved by someone who was carrying an Epipen . But kids with known allergies that severe that an airline is asked not to open a pack should have an Epipen ready for use
I believe she was carrying one, but they hadn't needed to use it before so someone qualified administered it.
I know what was said, they were talking in the context of the thread, you took it to a stupid extreme; it was still a ridiculously stupid comment none the less, a lot of them are. My point was that people will start making jaw droppingly dense statements on here in order to push their point.
no, i quoted a very specific part of a post and responded only to that.
you jumped to a wrong conclusion.
The guy was in the wrong, I imagine the police had done their investigations to see if the man did not have any hearing impairment or learning difficulties.
But I would be peed off if I could not eat my pistachios (I love them) on a plane because of someone.
no, i quoted a very specific part of a post and responded only to that.
you jumped to a wrong conclusion.
Hmm, I read that and still... Nvm, this thread is just stupid now. I don't believe people really think a pack of peanuts on a flight come above the needs of someone with a medical condition, that kind of thought process just doesn't ring with me at all.
The guy was in the wrong, I imagine the police had done their investigations to see if the man did not have any hearing impairment or learning difficulties.
But I would be peed off if I could not eat my pistachios (I love them) on a plane because of someone.
Would you really ? A child has a life threatning allergy and you would be put out because you had to spend 4 hours of your life without pistachios ??
There is really only one side TO it at the moment. Fair enough if the man comes forward but I'd have expected him to be kicking up a fuss already if he was going to - a 2 year ban is a serious matter!
Airline staff on a plane ask passengers not to consume peanuts for clear medical reason; a passenger ignores said request, sending another passenger into serious medical difficulties, airline bans peanut passenger for two years. Corroboration, if the newspaper stories are correct.
I'm sure the airline would have listened to the peanut passenger's explanation before banning him and that it was an unsatisfactory explanation. Seems straightforward to me, we aren't only going by what the allergic child's parents said.
Well, no, that's not factually correct is it ? We have a media report, we don't know the name of the individual who allegedly ate the nuts, and we don't have his side of the story - ergo: by logical definition it is one sided in that respect.
By the way this is Ryanair we are talking about - not necessarily the most reasonable or rational airline in the history of the world.
I don't think he was correct to open and consume the nuts, assuming he heard and understood the announcement, but equally I don't think the parents were correct to take their obviously vulnerable daughter on a flight, where the possibility of exposure to nuts was manifest, and when a reasonable request could - and indeed was - ignored.
No point in people aiming all their venom at peanut guy, when the parents have been wilfully stupid. Peanut guy was inconsiderate, yes, but at the end of the day, it's not his problem. Parents are beyond bloody belief - they didn't even know how to administer the epi pens, despite their daughter's acute nut hyersensitivity !!!
The guy was in the wrong, I imagine the police had done their investigations to see if the man did not have any hearing impairment or learning difficulties.
But I would be peed off if I could not eat my pistachios (I love them) on a plane because of someone.
If you were told that someone could have a reaction to nuts that might kill them, you'd get over your huff before too long though surely?
It's about the guy not believing the warning (I have never come across a situation like this either)
People ignore rules all the time because they feel the authorities are misinformed and imposing an unnecessary ban. In this case the rule was correct and necessary.
My god this thread has gotten stupid, even by DS standards. We are comparing the request not to eat peanuts on the flight to requesting rape on the flight? I mean... Whaaaaaaa???
Well, it is about a man getting his nuts too close to an unconcious girl....
Well, no, that's not factually correct is it ? We have a media report, we don't know the name of the individual who allegedly ate the nuts, and we don't have his side of the story - ergo: by logical definition it is one sided in that respect.
By the way this is Ryanair we are talking about - not necessarily the most reasonable or rational airline in the history of the world.
I don't think he was correct to open and consume the nuts, assuming he heard and understood the announcement, but equally I don't think the parents were correct to take their obviously vulnerable daughter on a flight, where the possibility of exposure to nuts was manifest, and when a reasonable request could - and indeed was - ignored.
No point in people aiming all their venom at peanut guy, when the parents have been wilfully stupid. Peanut guy was inconsiderate, yes, but at the end of the day, it's not his problem. Parents are beyond bloody belief - they didn't even know how to administer the epi pens, despite their daughter's acute nut hyersensitivity !!!
I'm sure they would have done it themselves if no one else had been there. Someone trained was there and did it for them.. That's not unusual. They had never had a need to use it before, its not easy doing anything like that for the 1st time, you worry you will get it wrong, and they were probably panicking but would have done it had they had no one else there.
Sounds like the parents didn't know how severe the girl's allergy was, given that it was the first time the pen was used on her. Which of course would mean the airline & passengers wouldn't have been informed of the severity. Most people with a nut allergy don't react this badly. I sincerely doubt the guy (a father) would have opened the nuts had he known a child sitting four rows away could die.
Ultimately, I think most blame lies with the parents. They should have ensured the girl was wearing a mask.
Sounds like the parents didn't know how severe the girl's allergy was, given that it was the first time the pen was used on her. Which of course would mean the airline & passengers wouldn't have been informed of the severity. Most people with a nut allergy don't react this badly. I sincerely doubt the guy (a father) would have opened the nuts had he known a child sitting four rows away could die.
Ultimately, I think most blame lies with the parents. They should have ensured the girl was wearing a mask.
They didn't sell nuts on the plane, they asked people not to eat nuts, the girl had a epipen. It dont get more serious than that.
Really cannot believe that grown up "sensible" people think no one like this child should travel abroad. People do every single day without problems, you only get problems when someone like the man thinks his right to eat nuts overrule a child's right to live.
Man paid for ticket. Child travels free. Tell me again why child should have priority over paying adult. They should have made her sit with the luggage.
Comments
I dont know why some people are not getting the fact that it was because it was in a aeroplane that it was a problem, she was trapped in a confined place with no fresh air.
A few people have said on this very thread, that they have been on flights where they were asked not to eat nuts.
Ahhh That's what they meant! I kept looking at the thread title and not getting what they meant.
So kept quite as didn't want everyone to know that I'm nice, but dim
no we aren't.
that was a specific reply to a specific post about the captain making anything law.
it was nothing about a peanut allergy.
some things go way over peoples head they should become limbo dancers.
I know what was said, they were talking in the context of the thread, you took it to a stupid extreme; it was still a ridiculously stupid comment none the less, a lot of them are. My point was that people will start making jaw droppingly dense statements on here in order to push their point.
I do get that, and I said if even taking a plane is so hazardous then it's a big problem for her if she wants to travel a lot. My sympathies are with her, it sounds like a bloody annoying affliction.
I believe she was carrying one, but they hadn't needed to use it before so someone qualified administered it.
no, i quoted a very specific part of a post and responded only to that.
you jumped to a wrong conclusion.
Ok . Thanks . Its very odd that a parent was not fully trained to give it . But maybe the para medic stepped in in the panic
But I would be peed off if I could not eat my pistachios (I love them) on a plane because of someone.
Hmm, I read that and still... Nvm, this thread is just stupid now. I don't believe people really think a pack of peanuts on a flight come above the needs of someone with a medical condition, that kind of thought process just doesn't ring with me at all.
Maybe, I don't know.
Would you really ? A child has a life threatning allergy and you would be put out because you had to spend 4 hours of your life without pistachios ??
Well, no, that's not factually correct is it ?
By the way this is Ryanair we are talking about - not necessarily the most reasonable or rational airline in the history of the world.
I don't think he was correct to open and consume the nuts, assuming he heard and understood the announcement, but equally I don't think the parents were correct to take their obviously vulnerable daughter on a flight, where the possibility of exposure to nuts was manifest, and when a reasonable request could - and indeed was - ignored.
No point in people aiming all their venom at peanut guy, when the parents have been wilfully stupid. Peanut guy was inconsiderate, yes, but at the end of the day, it's not his problem. Parents are beyond bloody belief - they didn't even know how to administer the epi pens, despite their daughter's acute nut hyersensitivity !!!
If you were told that someone could have a reaction to nuts that might kill them, you'd get over your huff before too long though surely?
It's about the guy not believing the warning (I have never come across a situation like this either)
People ignore rules all the time because they feel the authorities are misinformed and imposing an unnecessary ban. In this case the rule was correct and necessary.
another ironic username.
Well, it is about a man getting his nuts too close to an unconcious girl....
I dunno. The original story said it was a nut allergy. So pistachios would be baaad.
I'm sure they would have done it themselves if no one else had been there. Someone trained was there and did it for them.. That's not unusual. They had never had a need to use it before, its not easy doing anything like that for the 1st time, you worry you will get it wrong, and they were probably panicking but would have done it had they had no one else there.
Ultimately, I think most blame lies with the parents. They should have ensured the girl was wearing a mask.
Really cannot believe that grown up "sensible" people think no one like this child should travel abroad. People do every single day without problems, you only get problems when someone like the man thinks his right to eat nuts overrule a child's right to live.