I Feel for Kids with Food Allergies, but an Anti-Vaxx Message.

[RiffRandell]

[RiffRandell]

1. Kick.

[uppityperson]

2. k&r

[RiffRandell]

3. Thanks!

It was nice getting to know you on MIRT. You were very helpful.

[pnwmom]

4. This is bad. It's not fair to conflate people who have life-threatening food allergies with anti-vaxxers.

People allergic to peanuts have enough to contend with without being linked to people who are irresponsibly and ignorantly arguing against vaccination.

Despite what the ad implies, I'm sure the vast majority of children with peanut allergies have been immunized. Their parents aren't hysterical people who only imagine their peanut allergies and are afraid of vaccinations, too.

You recognized before you posted this that it would be hurtful to families or individuals with peanut allergies. Please reconsider and take this down.

[RiffRandell]

5. No it's not, and no I didn't.

Did you read where I stated 'I feel for kids with food allergies'?

I have no problem sending my kids with peanut-free food when notified which our schools have been excellent about.

The point being made is I will make concessions for others and so should anti-vaxxers who go out in public.

What's been on the news more lately?

Peanut allergy deaths or outbreaks of measle cases?

[pnwmom]

8. I read your comment. And yet you posted an ad that linked peanut allergies and anti-vaxxers.

It doesn't matter which has been on the news more lately. The two shouldn't have been linked in the ad or posted here.

[RiffRandell]

10. Feel free to alert on it if it's so offensive.

I think they are completely relatable.

[hopemountain]

11. point well taken, pnwmom

there is enough stigma going around these days on so many levels and issues.

[uppityperson]

12. what "ad" are you talking about? What is being advertised? And no

you missed the point of this graphic. If you want me to act responsibly towards your kids, do the same for mine.

[pnwmom]

30. You missed the point I was making.

The ad conflates parents concerned about peanut allergies with parents who are against vaccines. And the two have nothing to do with each other. (The ad does this with the "my kid" vs. "your kid" phrasing.&quot

And for a cartoon that makes the link even more explicit, see #14 below.

[uppityperson]

35. The graphic, not ad, compares parents doing things to protect other people's kids.

Don't bring pb to school to protect those who are allergic.
Vaccinate your kids to protect those who can't be vaccinated or have vx failure.

Do something with your kid to protect others whether that be not bringing pb sandwiches to school or getting vaccinated. Situations, not people.

[gregcrawford]

6. That's ridiculous!

That isn't what he said, nor is it what the cartoon meant at all! What's the matter with you?

[RiffRandell]

7. Appreciate the defense, but I'm a she.

Happens all the time!

[gregcrawford]

41. OOPS!

All the nicknames on DU make it difficult to discern genders!

[winter is coming]

9. You completely missed the point of the OP.

The point is that we've taken peanuts out of the schools--a community action--to make it safer for kids with peanut allergies to attend. So why couldn't/shouldn't we do the same for diseases like measles, which have the potential to be deadly to an unvaccinated child. Unless a school is ultra-tiny, there will be a handful of children who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons.

[pnwmom]

16. No, I get the point. But they linked people with food allergies with anti-vaxxers

and they should have gotten their message across without doing that.

[uppityperson]

24. no, she linked parents of both groups, and responsibilities for others

Nice of you to keep kicking this though

[cab67]

31. No, they didn't.

The image was linking situations, not people. Removing peanuts to protect students allergic to them is the right thing to do. So, in my opinion, is taking steps to protect students unable to be vaccinated for legitimate health reasons.

It was spot on.

[TBF]

51. The message is that "community matters" -

it is tough explaining some of these concepts like "sharing", "caring for others", "thinking about others" to third way supporters. Why is it difficult? Because the third way is funded by folks like the Koch Bros - who are republican/libertarian and do not appear to care about anyone but themselves.

[Widget2000]

74. Hmm. Kinda how you "link" ecigarettes with unproven public health dangers

While being taken to task MANY MANY times about misreading the research.

[HappyMe]

13. You completely missed the point.

Completely.

Taking peanut stuff out of schools was for the common good. Getting your kids vaccinated is for the common good.
Nothing hurtful at all.

[pnwmom]

18. It was the "my kid" versus "your kid" part that separated kids with peanut allergies

from the larger group. "My kid" implicitly does NOT have peanut allergies, but "your kid" might.

[RiffRandell]

21. Huh? nt

[HappyMe]

27. What's so insulting about that?

My kids don't have peanut allergies, but someone else's (or your) kid might. Pretty much a statement of fact, nothing to do with your imagined slight.

[pnwmom]

34. The insult is in linking "your kid" to possible peanut allergies AND to not being vaccinated.

As the connection is explicitly made in post #14, with the same unpleasant looking mother.

[obxhead]

42. You're reading something into this that simply does not exist.

If people are forced to make concessions for children with food allergies, then people should be forced to not send their unvaxed kid to school.

This isn't a my kid is better than your kid post.

[randr]

47. And just how are non vaccinated children not life-threatening to others???

[pnwmom]

55. They are. But parents of children with peanut allergies are not like anti-vaccine people

who don't realize their kids can be a hazard to others.

[uppityperson]

59. it is comparing 2 situations in which behavior is modified for the safety of someone else's

child.

Anti-vx people don't realize their non-vaccinated child can catch and spread a deadly disease or be a hazard to others? Seriously?

[pnwmom]

63. Where did I ever say anything like that about anti-vaxx people?

What I object to is dragging families of people with peanut allergies into the vaccination insults.

[uppityperson]

65. here is the quote in the post I replied to.

.like anti-vaccine people who don't realize their kids can be a hazard to others

[randr]

75. I have a step daughter who is anti-vaccine

with a peanut allergic daughter. She goes out of her way to eliminate peanuts from school lunch programs etal, yet does not see the threat she is imposing with her antivac stand.
It is very frustrating to try and explain anything to her.

[RiffRandell]

78. How does she justify her anti-vaxx stance?

Just curious.

[randr]

79. Mostly thru denial and support of like minded friends.

To top it off my wife is a RN and she still will not take her advice.
She also does not hesitate to go for antibiotics at the merest sniffle.

[RiffRandell]

80. Ugh.

[Lancero]

14. One I saw this morning...

[img][/img]

[RiffRandell]

15. Uh oh...you're in trouble now!

Love it, btw!

[pnwmom]

23. You don't get it. Still. This is exactly what I was objecting to. THE SAME MOTHER

expects other children to cater to her child's peanut allergy and yet she won't vaccinate her children to protect others.

This is what I mean about conflating the two groups. Parents with peanut allergies are just as pro-vaccination as most parents. This cartoon and your ad are unfair to them.

[RiffRandell]

33. I believe you are reading way too much into it.

Not that I'm really interested, but do you have the statistics where parents with peanut allergies are just as pro-vaccination as most parents?

Not disputing you, but I wouldn't throw that out there without facts.

[pnwmom]

37. It is NONSENSE to think that children with peanut allergies -- a measurable physical condition --

are more likely to have parents who are anti-vax.

Peanut allergies are not the result of hysterical, irrational parents -- the kind who might be anti vax, in the opinion of most DUers.

If you believe the truth might be otherwise, then you should be providing the statistics.

[winter is coming]

40. I don't know whether any such statistics exist.

Last edited Tue Feb 17, 2015, 09:07 PM - Edit history (1)

I have a child who's severely allergic to peanuts, but when I encounter the parent of another allergic child, we don't talk about vaccinations. If we discuss our kid's health at all, it's usually about what a PITA it is to keep epipens neither too hot nor too cold. And yes, my kid's fully vaccinated. She's allergic to peanuts, not eggs.

[F4lconF16]

36. Agreed about this particular cartoon.

But I thought the OP was clear enough.

Difference of opinion?

Thanks for saying it anyways, I wasn't sure what you meant, but this cartoon helped.

Edit to add that this particular cartoon also seems (to me) to make the mother in the first panel "unreasonably" concerned, which helps make your point. I think there's a lot of subtlety there that affects the way the ads/cartoons are interpreted. I don't like this one, but the OP was fine to me, so...YMMV.

[winter is coming]

43. It's a cartoon. She's a symbolic figure, not a real person. n/t

[obxhead]

45. jeebus jumpin' h Christ.

Its a toon about hypocrisy, not conflating the differences.

Take a few minutes off and regroup.

[cwydro]

20. Maybe I'm missing something...

are the peanut allergic people also anti-vaxxers?

[pnwmom]

25. Thank you. You seem to be the first person who understood my point.

No, there is no evidence that they are. So this cartoon is mocking families of peanut allergic kids just to promote vaccines -- and there are plenty of other better ways to do that.

[cwydro]

54. Yeah, to me that cartoon linked the two together.

Oddly, I thought. Thought maybe I missed something here.

[obxhead]

71. You did

This was a toon about hypocrisy.

The parent that screams about making sure her child is safe from peanuts is perfectly fine with risking other children with serious life threatening diseases easily controlled with a single safe shot.

Remove "peanut" and insert ANYTHING else parents fear.

A toon that sums up the PROBLEM with America. I get mine, but I'll be damned if I do a damn thing to help you get yours.... AND it's my fucking right to get mine while I do nothing for you.

This toon, and this OP has absolutely nothing to do with peanuts, allergies, shots, men or women.

This toon (and OP) is about personal choice and how it changes a nation.

[RiffRandell]

70. That it absolutely incorrect.

It's not mocking children with allergies; it's showing an example of how people need to be and usually are mindful of them, unlike the anti-vaxx crowd. Sending your unvaccinated child to a daycare with babies too young to be vaccinated is wrong.

Most (probably all as the teachers have to monitor it too as if they don't have enough work) parents that I know, myself included, do not send their children to school with foods containing peanuts if there is a severely allergic child in the classroom. Letters get sent home at the beginning of each school year.

That is being a conscientious, responsible parent who cares about the well-being of others.

Not getting your child vaccinated for any other reason than they physically cannot is selfish, dangerous, the opposite of what I stated above, and there is no excuse for it.

[uppityperson]

32. No. it is comparing parents doing things to protect children other than own.

Don't bring pb to school to protect those who are allergic.
Vaccinate your kids to protect those who can't be vaccinated or have vx failure.

[cwydro]

68. I kinda get it.

But it seems overreaching.

Just a bit.

[HappyMe]

29. That's good.

[hopemountain]

17. what about children with auto-immune conditions

who do not receive immunizations because they weaken an already weakened immune system?
will these children now be excluded, ostracized and stigmatized from or at school or any public venue?

the fda needs to look at this issue more deeply and with a more open approach - and consider alternative methods of immunizing kids/people. the current methods have been chosen for monetary purposes & not just efficacy & without enough long term studies. i don't want to see any person suffer from measles or any of the other life threatening contagions - either - but common sense says there are safer alternatives out there - the government just hasn't put any research effort or studies in this direction.

[RiffRandell]

19. Not if all kids are vaccinated!

It's pretty simple.

[hopemountain]

22. please re-read my post.

children and adults with autoimmune conditions or weakened immune systems are discouraged from receiving vaccinations - and with good reason.

[RiffRandell]

26. I know that, which is why children who can get the vaccines should!

Like I said, it's pretty simple.

Common sense.

[uppityperson]

28. What safer alternatives that vaccinating against deadly diseases are there? No long term

studies? Seriously?

Common sense does not seen very common with arguments like "monetary purposes & not just efficacy" since they make a hell of a lot more money off treatments than vaccines.

[haele]

53. Children (and adults) with auto-immune conditions are already exempt -

And no one is asking them to be vaccinated if they can't be safely vaccinated. And you're only talking about, what - maybe a quarter of one percent of the children at any particular school and around half of one percent of adults under the age of 70 or so?
As for safer alternatives to vaccinations? I honestly can't think of anything natural that would work other than the methods that failed disastrously when I and my parents were children (calculated exposure/quarantine practices and hopefully universal medical care available for the five to ten percent of the time that fails...)- or some sort of anti-viral cocktail from Big Pharma, which sort of defeats the purpose of not being for monetary purposes.

As it is, common vaccines are loss-leaders for pharmaceuticals for the most part. If the government and other community health organizations didn't pay them to provide enough for school children and others, each vaccine would cost in the thousands under the current pharmaceutical mode - and then we'd be right back to where we were in 1966 when my friend in second grade went home with the measles - and they managed to save her infant brother's life by getting him to the hospital quickly enough, but he ended up deaf and had some obvious motor-damage from the brain damage getting the measles at five months old will cause.

Most anti-vaxxers that are not anti-vax for religious or medical reasons seem to ignore the damage these diseases did. I'm just 55 - and when I was a kid, we all knew and played with the kids who survived these diseases with few problems. We still quarentined houses for measles and mumps. As for the other kids who didn't so fare well after getting sick - well, we didn't usually play with them afterwards - they went to special classes, were home-schooled, were institutionalized - or were dead.

I'm sorry for those people who think there is some sort of alternative out there that is "safer", "more efficient", or "more natural" - even if this "government" owned by Big Pharma doesn't want to do the research on it, there are other countries and non-profit organizations with a bias towards real health rather than profits that are doing research into disease control who, so far as I've heard, haven't found anything yet. But, barring sort of underlying immune condition, I have no problems with my grandchild and any future grandchildren being vaccinated.
The risks I experienced as a child with "simple childhood diseases" like scarlet fever, both types of measles, diphtheria, pertussis, mumps due to the few vaccination options were magnitudes greater than any risk vaccination could give them.
I knew too many kids who were permanently damaged by these diseases. I knew of at least four families who lost children to these diseases, not to mention an uncle who never made it out of infancy back in the 1940's due to diphtheria.

Haele

[RiffRandell]

57. Excellent, thoughtful post. nt

[TBF]

62. Of course not - that is the point

if most are vaccinated the ones who cannot be vaccinated (allergies, on chemo - whatever) are protected by herd immunity. This isn't rocket science.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

38. Great cartoon n/t

[HERVEPA]

39. The two are totally unrelated and should not be conflated

[uppityperson]

44. Doing things, modifying behavior, to protect other kids is the point and holds true for both

situations.

[Orrex]

52. Fortunately, they aren't being conflated

Both components of the if/then construction refer to a policy outside of the control of either hypothetical parent.

It's not faulting the parent with the peanut-allergic child at all, nor is it blaming that parent for anti-vax nonsense. It's saying "if the school makes a reasonable concession on behalf of your child's legitimate health concern, then it is appropriate to make an equally reasonable concession on behalf of my child's legitmate concern."

[dilby]

46. As a parent whose daughter is deathly allergic to peanut butter.

I think it's stupid that schools ban peanut butter, the measles yeah you should not be bringing that. You can teach your child not to eat food from other people, you can't teach them to not catch the measles.

[wisechoice]

48. Not the same

If your kid is vaccinated, you shouldn't be worried about other kids bringing in diseases. That is the whole point of vaccination

[RiffRandell]

49. What about kids that are auto-immune or too young?

Your argument is false.

[wisechoice]

73. valid point

But still, I am not sure we should force someone to take vaccine.

[uppityperson]

50. Some kids can not be vaccinated and sometimes vaccines fail. Should parents protect other's kids by

not bringing pb to school so those who are allergic won't be exposed, and by vaccinating their kids so those who can't be vaccinated or whose vaccines fail will not be exposed?

[11 Bravo]

64. You don't seem to understand the concept of "herd immunity".

It's the reason that there had been no reported cases of measles in the US for years … until recently.

[Android3.14]

56. This is stupid.

I sent my kid with peanut butter sandwiches only two days ago. Where I live, peanut butter may be verboten in the lunch line, but take it out of a Spongebob Squarepants lunchbox, and it is just fine.

There are better ways to change people's attitudes about vaccinations.

[Orrex]

66. I know of no schools that operate that way

They send home a notice at the beginning of the year banning peanut products from snacks or lunches. This is true in my local district with hundreds of kids, only one of whom has a peanut allergy.

Either your particular school is lax in this regard, or your kid got lucky not to be found out.

[winter is coming]

69. My daughter's elementary school operated that way.

She often sat next to friends eating peanut butter. Even as a kindergartener, she knew not to take food from her classmates and I usually began each school year by sending her teacher a quick email reassuring them that her allergy was ingestion-only and that she was wary of unknown food.

[Android3.14]

72. In Maine, the schools/district will send a letter if a student has an allergy to peanuts

No kid with the allergy, no letter.

From what I understand, this is the case in most schools. It appears more schools are banning peanuts as the cases of peanut allergies increase, but it appears the bans have yet to become the norm.

If you have other information, I'd love to see it.

In the meantime, perhaps this Q&A from the American Academy of Asthma, Allergy and Immunology might be helpful.

[HockeyMom]

77. School where I worked had a separate peanut free table

up by the stage and away from the rest of the cafeteria. No the cafeteria did not sell BPJ sanwiches but the kids could bring in it from home.

[Warren DeMontague]

58. I got it.

Apparently the concepts contained therein are too complex for some.

[RiffRandell]

60. Yeah, like the movie Finding Nemo.

Shit, I got more upset when the Mom died.

[Warren DeMontague]

61. Indeed.

My wife cried at the end of the Iron Giant, too.

[uppityperson]

67. My community just got measles cases. Primary school has 24% exemption rate, 0 pb tolerance

Kids with peanut allergies are protected but those who are unable for medical or health reasons to get vxd or whose vxs failed are not.

There is no damn way 1/4 of the kids in this town have valid medical reasons for not getting vaccinated.

As you protect allergic kids by not exposing them to their allergen, you also should protect kids by not exposing them to these easily preventable diseases. My husband is of the age of first MMR vaccines, not sure if it was one of the bad years so is off to get a booster hoping to about being exposed in the meantime.


24%. Fuck.

[aikoaiko]

76. Are kids with measles allowed to attend school?

[Spider Jerusalem]

81. That's utter bullshit anyway

unless the risk is "someone feeding peanut butter to unsuspecting kid with peanut allergies", the mere proximity to peanut butter, or its odor, is not going to produce an allergic reaction. The presence of measles, though, will almost certainly result in any children who can't be vaccinated because of immune disorders or for other medical reasons getting measles (since measles has something like a 90% transmission rate).

[cab67]

82. It can.

Not all peanut allergies are that severe, but some people do indeed react when merely in the presence of peanuts, even if they never touch them.

I've been on airline flights where the flight attendants asked passengers to put peanut-bearing food away because a passenger had a severe peanut allergy. There are a few cases of flights making emergency landings because of a passenger going into anaphylactic shock when another passenger started eating peanuts.

[Spider Jerusalem]

84. No, it can't. There have been double-blind studies that prove it can't.

[cab67]

85. Can you point me toward them?

[laundry_queen]

86. Yeah I'd like to see those too

my brother has an anaphylactic allergy to fish. My parents could not cook fish in the house without him getting sick. Before you judge, remember this was over 35 years ago when people didn't understand the severity of anaphylaxis so my parents thought, "geez, it sucks he's allergic to fish, 'cause we love it. He'll just have to deal...". My parents figured they could cook it as long as my brother didn't eat it. He STILL got sick (swelling, vomiting). So, the next time they put him in his room with the door closed and the window open. That seemed to do the trick, as long as he didn't come out of the room until dinner was done. We didn't do it very often - but my dad grew up fishing with his dad, and loved fish so once or twice a year we would have fish and my brother would get a different dinner in his room.

Anyway, I'd like to see those studies.