Daniel & Elizabeth Phelps
dephelps at embarqmail.com
Tue Aug 12 07:19:20 PDT 2008
Yes, a total ban on peanut butter would be an overreaction, IMO. See my
reply to Niccolo for other thoughts on this; we managed at Margaret's school
fine with them knowing about it. Everybody understood and was reasonable
about making accomodations that did not deprive the other children.
Personally, I miss peanut butter and crackers!!
We don't know where the peanut allergy came from, no one in either side of
the family has it to our knowledge, but at the last visit to the pediatric
allergist he seemed to think she would have to live with it the rest of her
life, so, you live with it. YOu just get really good about reading the
microprint on the back of food packages, and these days they're usually
pretty good about labeling it separately for allergenic ingredients
We will hold a good thought for you on the diabetes issue, we have friends
and family dealing with that one. Stay on top of it!! I had gestational
diabetes with the second kid, so it is possibly on the horizon for me too.
About the sign issue, maybe a pocket telescope?? (;-)
I can't even read street signs without my glasses anymore...
Take care now.
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like
administering medicine to the dead.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefan li Rous" <StefanliRous at austin.rr.com>
To: "SCA-Cooks maillist SCA-Cooks" <SCA-Cooks at Ansteorra.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 1:19 AM
Subject: [Sca-cooks] allergies
> Isabella, Seeking Enlightenment, asked:
> <<< But why would people be so hostile to a not terribly unreasonable
> health issue? Are they that selfish and unsympathetic? >>>
> I think that's a harsh judgement, both the hostile adjective and the
> implication that people are being unsympathetic.
> I do sympathize with you. But I don't think these total bans are the way
> to go. And I suspect that many others feel the same way, rather than
> being hostile to finding a solution.
> A lot of the "hostility" may be towards changing the lifestyle/habits of
> all for the benefit of the few. Maybe that makes me selfish.
> You mention in a follow-on message "A tangential answer to this issue- I
> never knew about so many different food
> allergies until I joined the SCA. Off the top of my head, just the people
> know-dairy, strawberries, vodka, shellfish, mushrooms, wheat, pork, I'm
> there's more."
> Admittedly many of these are probably not as quickly life-threatening as
> a peanut allergy can be. But you can also add sugar to that list. In my
> case, a sugared Coke can cause a big problem as a type-I diabetic. An
> unlabeled or mistakenly provided Coke could put me in the hospital or in
> a coma. If I'm managing things correctly though, I should see the signs
> first and correct it with insulin, as an allergic person can with the
> But if we ban all these items that can cause an allergic reaction, what
> is left?
> We've had quite a number of discussions over the years on handling
> allergies amid SCA feasts. There are folks that are offended that I drink
> beverages containing Nutra-sweet and say it gives them headaches. So,
> should both sugared colas and artificially sweetened ones be prohibited?
> It is probably easier to make a case for peanuts and peanut butter being
> good for kids than sugared drinks.
> <<< This is an honest
> question, I just don't get it. It's not about bad life choices that
> have made or about bad parenting, it's just something that happens, and
> I heard they had no idea why peanut allergies have skyrocketed.>>>
> As has diabetes. Both type I and II. The "free enterprise" medical
> insurance industry that our current administration promotes as a solution
> to our health care crisis, won't sell me insurance at any price. And the
> other day, a spokesman was saying insurance was only needed for those who
> made poor choices and that healthy people shouldn't be subsidizing those
> who made poor choices. Almost all the current evidence is pointing to
> type I diabetes having a strong genetic component. But I guess we can
> start requiring genetic testing and regulate who can and can not get
> married, err, have sex.
> <<< We are lucky
> that our girl's allergy is only moderate, there are much more severe ones
> out there. Eating a peanut butter sandwich and breathing on someone can
> trigger it. >>>
> In your case hopefully she will grow out of this. I haven't got a good
> solution. As we start to understand the human immune system we may
> eventually be able to selectively prevent an individual's body from
> (over)reacting to non-serious "dangers" but it's hard to say how long
> that will take.
> (now about banning all those overhead menu signs in fast food places that
> I can't read and can't get close enough to read...)
> THLord Stefan li Rous Barony of Bryn Gwlad Kingdom of Ansteorra
> Mark S. Harris Austin, Texas
> StefanliRous at austin.rr.com
> **** See Stefan's Florilegium files at: http://www.florilegium.org ****
> Sca-cooks mailing list
> Sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org
More information about the Sca-cooks