The Student Room Group

Brit forced to go on 26-hour BUS ride after ‘getting kicked off 2-hour flight

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Leviathan1611
yes I do, i read the article and have been told multiple times in this thread that I've lost count.

the dairy scenario is a hypothetical question that no one is willing to answer yet.

They make the same point multiple times because the information doesn't seem to actually penetrate your skull.
Original post by AJ126y
Are they? Is there some special species of human that's been recently discovered, which can only go 3 days without eating nuts? Interesting.


I don't mean medically, like they must eat nuts otherwise try die😂😂😂. I just meant that some people love nuts so much that they feel as though they need it as much as water😂
Original post by NotNotBatman
That's not entitled, some people are severely allergic and it could kill her.


then don't get on a plane that has nuts.
and where does one draw the line? what if it were a dairy allergy instead? (hypothetical question)
Original post by Leviathan1611
and where does one draw the line? what if it were a dairy allergy instead? (hypothetical question)

I don’t know of any dairy allergy that can cause anaphylactic shock upon contact with even minute particles but yes, I would still support the restriction. It isn’t a massive inconvenience to be deprived of dairy for a few hours if it prevents someone dying
Original post by Leviathan1611
yes I do, i read the article and have been told multiple times in this thread that I've lost count.

the dairy scenario is a hypothetical question that no one is willing to answer yet.

I'll explain, most airlines connected to the usa have to follow a special procedure to protect nut allergy suffers.
There is a lot of difference between dairy allergy and nut allergy.
A fatal nut allergy can be triggered by coming into direct contact with a person who has recently handled nuts, breathing in traces of nut vapour in the air or touching a surface that contains minute particles of nut dust.
Triggering dairy allergy requires direct contact with the allergy sufferer's mouth or lips- normally by eating or drinking.

My best friend is dairy allergic, to the point that she always ends up in hospital whenever she encounters any in her food or drink.
Her dairy allergy is an immune reaction that will be fatal if left untreated.
Once dairy has entered her mouth, she needs medical attention or else she will die.
She does not have a food intolerance to dairy products that makes her feel sick or sweaty.
But somebody else eating food with dairy ingredients in the same room as her does not risk triggering her dairy allergy.
There's no airborne allergy trigger or particles on surface trigger; my best friend can sit in pizza hut surrounded by other people eating dairy pizza without risking her health.
Original post by Leviathan1611
some people wouldn't though, and they shouldn't have to when they paid for their ticket like everyone else.

in her case, she shouldn't take a plane that serves nuts in the first place. in my opinion.

Does anyone choose an airline because they serve nuts?!
thank you for answering 🙂

that'd mean no tea or coffee (well some not all of them) for passengers because of one individual. do you think that's fair or the other passengers should just suck it up regardless if it's fair or not?
Original post by RogerOxon
Does anyone choose an airline because they serve nuts?!


I dunno, do you?
Original post by londonmyst
I'll explain, most airlines connected to the usa have to follow a special procedure to protect nut allergy suffers.
There is a lot of difference between dairy allergy and nut allergy.
A fatal nut allergy can be triggered by coming into direct contact with a person who has recently handled nuts, breathing in traces of nut vapour in the air or touching a surface that contains minute particles of nut dust.
Triggering dairy allergy requires direct contact with the allergy sufferer's mouth or lips- normally by eating or drinking.

My best friend is dairy allergic, to the point that she always ends up in hospital whenever she encounters any in her food or drink.
Her dairy allergy is an immune reaction that will be fatal if left untreated.
Once dairy has entered her mouth, she needs medical attention or else she will die.
She does not have a food intolerance to dairy products that makes her feel sick or sweaty.
But somebody else eating food with dairy ingredients in the same room as her does not risk triggering her dairy allergy.
There's no airborne allergy trigger or particles on surface trigger; my best friend can sit in pizza hut surrounded by other people eating dairy pizza without risking her health.


I've already been told that dairy doesn't potentially cause death if a person is around it but not touching it.
that's why my question is hypothetical, what if a dairy allergy could cause death just by being in the same room, should airlines now ban all dairy products because of one individual?
Original post by Leviathan1611
thank you for answering 🙂

that'd mean no tea or coffee (well some not all of them) for passengers because of one individual. do you think that's fair or the other passengers should just suck it up regardless if it's fair or not?

I’m a flexitarian so most of my dairy products are vegan equivalents anyway so I personally wouldn’t be bothered about the lack of dairy on a flight

There are non dairy equivalents to milk for tea and coffee; as for whether it’s right or not; I refer you to the point I made before; it is not the entitlement of the passenger to dictate to the airline what food they should or shouldn’t serve
if the airline originally serves those food anyway, and for this one flight they're not serving it because of one individual, do you think that's okay?
Original post by Leviathan1611
I dunno, do you?

No, although I'd be almost certain that it's a neglible number of people, and not something that could reasonably be argued to form a significant part of the contract.

Original post by Leviathan1611
I've already been told that dairy doesn't potentially cause death if a person is around it but not touching it.
that's why my question is hypothetical, what if a dairy allergy could cause death just by being in the same room, should airlines now ban all dairy products because of one individual?

The point is that the foods that are potentially so dangerous are VERY limited. The impact of not serving them is also, very limited.

Allergies are a real danger, worry and pain. As a member of society, I want to make reasonable changes to my behaviour if it makes life easier for others. I simply cannot comprehend how selfish you have to be to think that going without nuts for 2 hours can be compared with risking a life-threatening allergic reaction.

In this case, it was claimed to be the only "food" available. In reality, it was a snack that could easily have been missed. Other airlines seem to have non-nut snacks available, as nut allergies are fairly common.
(edited 4 years ago)
Original post by Leviathan1611
I've already been told that dairy doesn't potentially cause death if a person is around it but not touching it.
that's why my question is hypothetical, what if a dairy allergy could cause death just by being in the same room, should airlines now ban all dairy products because of one individual?

Under that scenario, the duty of care would kick in and the airline would have to run a "guaranteed dairy free" flight service or risk being sued.
Uk and usa law would probably require airlines flying allergic passengers to ensure that no possibly fatal triggering ingredients or product were allowed on board the flight.
It is a very similar situation with shellfish allergy.
Original post by RogerOxon
The point is that the foods that are potentially so dangerous are VERY limited. The impact of not serving them is also, very limited.

Allergies are a real danger, worry and pain. As a member of society, I want to make reasonable changes to my behaviour if it makes life easier for others. I simply cannot comprehend how much selfish you have to be to think that ggoing without nuts for 2 hours can be compared with risking a life-threatening allergic reaction.


thanks for the information but that didn't answer my question.
Original post by Leviathan1611
if the airline originally serves those food anyway, and for this one flight they're not serving it because of one individual, do you think that's okay?

I’ve already told you my opinion on this in my original response to you on this thread; I don’t care. It would be very un-Christian of me to put someone else’s life at risk just because I want to eat a packet of nuts or milk in coffee or whatever
Original post by Leviathan1611
then don't get on a plane that has nuts.

You can inform airlines of this in advance.

I think someone trying to not die is mroe important than a passenger who wants a handful of nuts. I'd prioritise her without thought over someones salty cravings.
Original post by londonmyst
Under that scenario, the duty of care would kick in and the airline would have to run a "guaranteed dairy free" flight service or risk being sued.
Uk and usa law would probably require airlines flying allergic passengers to ensure that no possibly fatal triggering ingredients or product were allowed on board the flight.
It is a very similar situation with shellfish allergy.


that's cool. is there no "guaranteed peanut free" flight because it's not needed?
oh okay, thanks for answering my questions 🙂
Original post by NotNotBatman
You can inform airlines of this in advance.

I think someone trying to not die is mroe important than a passenger who wants a handful of nuts. I'd prioritise her without thought over someones salty cravings.


the lady in the article did exactly that the second time and they said no.

I'll ask you my hypothetical question, what if it were a dairy allergy that could potentially cause death just by being in the same room, so last minute, airline decides not to serve any dairy products because of one individual, is your response the same?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending