jenny mccarthy wants your kid to get measles: autism, vaccines, and stupid idiots

Yeah it was after my time as a kid too, but by 1980, I was seeing friends' kids with big reactions to *something*---and then the parents would take them to the doctor, and come back with lists, charts, even: strawberries, nuts, dairy products...

To clarify re: the peanut butter/nut allergy - rarely but not never it happens that a child's allergy is so severe that they can have a reaction to touching the nut/nut butter. Even more rarely reactions have occurred when there is an area where the nut butter *was* - it was cleaned up - but a child touched that area and had an anaphylactic reaction. So sometimes yes, it is protecting that one child in a class. The schools where I sub as a nurse don't ban the foods (as far as I can tell) but the child's individual classroom may not allow particular foods for that year. There are Epi-Pens available in the classroom and the nurse's office (including ones for general use as well as for individual children's allergies).

I subbed a couple of weeks ago and a very allergic girl came in and she had gotten milk spilled on her - that was one of her allergies. We carefully washed it off and I monitored her skin (looked ok) and asked if her tongue was swelling or if she felt itchy or if she felt like she couldn't breathe, etc. She said no... and then I made her sit there for a couple more minutes. She got bored and excused herself to her classroom (probably thinking, "omg what is WITH that lady") but since I was given to understand her food allergies could be life-threatening, I felt obligated to be a nag.

Did anyone else see Larry Wilmore's show taking on the vaccine controversy last week?

I wanted to reach in and strangle the anti-vaxx lady he had on. "You never want to harm your child." Duh, of course you don't. But you also do the risk/benefit calculation, right? (I guess not but AAAARGH).

And that's my comparison: saying it's someone else's problem to avoid nuts is not that different from saying let someone else get the stupid vaccine.

Peanut allergies are someone else's problem! It's a problem presumably they will have to live with their entire life. They should start. Everyone should get the stupid vaccine because it only works really well if everyone gets it.

Peanut allergies are someone else's problem! It's a problem presumably they will have to live with their entire life.

Sure, just like folks who are immunocompromised, or children, or the elderly. But I still get and give vaccines, mostly not for me but for them. My friends with nut issues, I don't bring peanut butter cookies to their house. My friends with family getting cancer treatments, I let them know when my kids have some bug and keep them away. It's being considerate and compassionate. Fuck an anti-vax person, because they are usually or at least often being selfish. But people with real, diagnosed conditions? I'm happy to forego the PBJ.

Read this heartbreaking story: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/health-and-medicine/article2578293.html#/tabPane=tabs-b0710947-1-1

Shorter version:

On Friday night, during a group gathering, she went into the lodge for a treat. The lights had been dimmed and three varieties of Rice Krispies treats prepared by the camp cook were brought out for the group, said Brothers, who was there with her own family.

"After every campfire, they provide snacks, cookies and ice cream," Brothers said, and Friday night Natalie tasted a treat topped with icing.

She spit it out right away, Brothers said, and went to find her mother to tell her she had tasted something with peanuts.

Her parents, Sacramento urologist Dr. Louis Giorgi and his wife, Joanne, responded immediately. Natalie's mother tasted the treat and also detected peanuts. The girl was given a dose of Benadryl to offset an allergic reaction, Brothers said.

They monitored Natalie, who at first seemed fine, still smiling and enjoying herself, Brothers said. Twenty minutes later, she vomited and began to have trouble breathing.

Natalie's father administered an injection with an EpiPen, a device used to deliver epinephrine that is commonly carried by individuals with serious allergies.

Frequently, an EpiPen can ward off a severe allergic reaction, but the injection had no impact. Brothers said Natalie's father ended up using three EpiPens over the course of several minutes before she stopped breathing.

That story is heartbreaking also has squat to do with what gets packed in my kid's school lunch.

? Had the camp been nut free, she'd be alive. I don't get the resistance honestly. It's only peanut butter.

Replace "packed in my kid's school lunch" with "injected into my kid's arm."

These two things are only comparable in your mind. These shots are not just for "other people's kids".

Also reading that story I am mostly struck by the randomness of all of it. It's not a terribly good argument for banning nuts, but def one for taking extreme care (which it sounds like she did until unfortunately basically that night :().

I guess I don't feel so strongly about nuts that I would want to potentially endanger, not even to the point of death but even to the point of illness, another child. Or another adult. I was on a non-profit board with someone who had a pretty significant nut allergy and I just didn't put nuts in anything that I brought to potlucks. It's just... peanut butter is not that important to me.

As for a kid needing to learn not to eat things that have nuts in them, kids are great but they're kind of dumb. They are kids. They forget things. Even without death or hospitalization, the terror of having your throat close up and being unable to breathe is a pretty harsh penalty for choosing wrong during a learning period.

I'm also 100% behind the "no homemade treats" trend, but that's for personal reasons - who has time to bake a bunch of bullshit for a kid's class? I barely have time to cook dinner.

Ultimately for me it comes down to: if I can avoid being responsible for subjecting another human to trauma, illness, or in extreme cases death, by taking the easy step of omitting a substance from my kid's lunch, I see absolutely no reason in the world not to.

Well I would say liking nuts/nut butters and finding the whole thing overblown is the main reason not to.

Huh.

I'm trying to think of a food I feel strongly enough about that I would balk at a request not to eat it around another person who could have an allergic reaction to it and I seriously can't. Cheese? Tacos? Fruit slices candy? Scrapple? I think I could forego any of them for whatever limited period of time I was around the person with the allergy.

But hey, if you love nuts and nut butters that much, I'd hate to deny you that pleasure.

We're not talking about kids eating PBJs while using kids with allergies as tables. We're talking about banning something everywhere in a school because of an incredibly slim chance that it is going to make it into a probably at most one or two kids' mouths.

I know what we're talking about. The slight risk of harm to a person vs. your personal love of nuts and nut butters. I see that as a completely avoidable risk that has very little cost to me or my kid. You don't. Just maybe put a Mr. Yuck sticker on your kid's lunch bag as a head's up.

We're talking about the difference between school being a safe place for kids with nut allergies -- many of them too young to fully understand the risk their allergies pose or to take sufficient steps to protect themselves against them -- and not. That's also the difference between their parents being comfortable allowing their kids to go to the school, and not.

The school is saying that nuts (peanuts are legumes but whatever) are a threat to the safety of their students. That's an accurate assessment. Even if the threat is rare, the cost of eliminating that threat is a minor inconvenience, so there's no good reason to take the risk.

School fires are rare, the chance of any single child being harmed in a fire is "incredibly slim". You OK with a school not taking fire safety precautions, or practicing fire drills?

Peanut butter is an extremely cheap source of daily protein provided to kids by parents who may be on very limited food budgets, and stores longer than lunchmeats or than comparably inexpensive sources that need to be refrigerated.

That story is heartbreaking also has squat to do with what gets packed in my kid's school lunch.

― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Tuesday, February 3, 2015 2:31 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this reminded me of when joe the plumber said, ‘your dead kids don’t trump my constitutional rights.’

Lol Joe the Plumber and Jenny McCarthy.

I love how say that school bans on nuts are overkill is being equated to FUCK SAFETY altogether. You people are precious.

There hasn't been an increase in nut allergies necessarily, but there has been a dramatic increase in diagnosis of nut allergies. Who wants to be pediatrician who doesn't err on the side of caution with those stakes?

it's not your risk to take, is how i see it. people who get asked to do stuff for others' safety then decide they know better are totally on a par with anti-vaxxers. at least with anti-vaxxers their fear is of something serious, not that they'll have to bring a different type of sandwich.

it also might not be there to stop it going in a kid's mouth but on a shared surface. whoch i imagine is a fairly high probability.

Yes because of the vast physical dangers of touching tables.

Statistics on food allergies basically indicate that this is all much ado about nothing. Chances of kids getting injured playing dodgeball are higher than them getting hospitalized due to a food allergy, but I suppose you ignoramuses would argue that recess should be banned though since physical activity is preventable after all.

I really want to see the anti-vaxxer/911 truther/chemtrail believer/prepper/fluoride negator/gamergater/libertarian/Alex Jones listener Venn diagram.

Yes because of the vast physical dangers of touching tables.

this is why people such as yourself should not be trying to analyse the risks based on your superior knowledge.

Chances of kids getting injured playing dodgeball

Good luck finding grade schools that still play dodgeball.

Fortunately there are plenty of peanut alternatives. My kids can thankfully eat whatever (though they don't, the picky jerks), but they both grew up eating the Trader Joe's sunflower butter in sandwiches for school reasons. Close enough when mushed together with jelly.

Golf clap for your anti-vaxxer parody posts, Alex. Onion caliber.

almond butter is better anyway

if I can avoid being responsible for subjecting another human to trauma, illness, or in extreme cases death, by taking the easy step of omitting a substance from my kid's lunch, I see absolutely no reason in the world not to.

FREEEDOM! That's why. I'm picturing Alex in SF now as a one of those dudes carrying an AK around Wal Mart because fuck you, I have a right to.

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/KoryWatkinsGrocery.jpg

I hope that dude is wearing flip flops.

pictures of people who are not gr8080.

Anti-vaxxers much closer to the WHY WON'T YOU THINK OF THESE POOR PEANUT AFFLICTED CHILDREN DON'T KILL THEM rather than this is overblown everyone should get a grip about this nut nonsense, but hey whatevs.

I'm just surprised that there's not a vigorous "vaccination causes peanut allergy" movement.

oh wait

http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/allergies/vaccines-and-the-peanut-allergy-epidemic/

The irony is that one of the leading peanut allergy theories is that we are actually too safe and careful with what we feed our kids!

I don't know man. This seems pretty level headed to me:

The school is saying that nuts (peanuts are legumes but whatever) are a threat to the safety of their students. That's an accurate assessment. Even if the threat is rare, the cost of eliminating that threat is a minor inconvenience, so there's no good reason to take the risk.

Loving nuts and nut butters so much that you don't care about the safety of your kid's classmates seems like the more overblown stance.

What makes you think that's an "accurate assessment"? Most of what I've read indicates it's not, but a hysterical overreaction.

How many kids do you think take a loaded gun to school in a given day, and how small a percentage of kids die in a given day because of a loaded gun that a kid brought to school? Very, very small. So I really don't get why it's such a big deal if I pack a gun in my kid's lunch.

You are an idiot.

But I think formally the issue is that there's a tradeoff of the form "minor inconvenience for many --> reduction/elimination of major harm to a very few." There are lots of tradeoffs like that and I don't think there's much rhyme or reason to which ones we think of as "obviously you accept the inconvenience" and which ones we think of as "it would be absurd to accept the inconvenience."

Like, if we all drove 5% less, or resolved never to drive when we were tired, or whatever, we would be taking on only a minor inconvenience, and fewer people would get killed under the wheels of our cars. But we don't really strive to do that.

I don't actually think vaccines fit that well, because the potential harm from a large unvaccinated segment of the population is a lot bigger than any possible harm from a world without peanut-free zones, unless I have misunderstood the numbers completely.

In the end there's probably no principled way to think about these questions, you just have to have some vague sense about how minor the minor inconvenience is and how major the major harm is and how few the very few are, and do your best.

xpost The thing is, it may be an overreaction in your estimation, but it's hardly hysterical. It's actually been a very gradual, very reasonable ramp-up.

BRB going to eat all the peanuts and peanut butter in the world to spare everyone this debate.

Fortunately for you, peanut butter in much of the world is considered kind of gross and weird.

Skippy for life.

I ate alone every single day of my education, sharing nothing. So, peanut butter.

xpost The thing is, it may be an overreaction in your estimation, but it's hardly hysterical. It's actually been a very gradual, very reasonable ramp-up.
--Josh in Chicago

I don't think the question of whether this is "hysterical" or "reasonable" are as cut and dried as your post implies. Also probably depends a lot on where you are.