Quote from: nameless on September 30, 2013, 12:40:11 PM

Quote from: Ra3chel on September 28, 2013, 12:43:28 AM
Gonna be a dissenting voice here and say--

Monogamy is irrelevant here--the issue is trust, boundaries, and disclosure. If she were as careful with multiple trusted partners as she is with her bf, that would be fine, too. 

YKW, FWIW, garlic can sometimes be a good metaphor for talking about foods and bodily fluids--you know how if someone eats a whooooole lot of garlic, you can smell it in their sweat? Pretty easy to use that as a basis for particles from foods showing up in non-digestive fluids, and generalize from there.

I think the title they used for her article was...a safe title...and didn't imply anything about promiscuity.

Meaning --- it might have been more aptly title, "Promiscuous Casual Encounters Isn't for Severe Food Allergic Individuals" --- where promiscuity means being casual and non-discriminate.  Folks will severe allergies have to be cautious (not casual) and be discriminate with who they kiss and etc.  Little to no impulsive actions with complete strangers (meaning...if you start to talk about allergies and ask about what they ate in the past 24 hours, they are not a complete stranger anymore).

I agree with Rachel, has nothing to do with monogamy.

Adrienne

Oh, I agree--just pointing out that monogamy vs. casual promiscuity is a false dichotomy, which nuance seemed to have been lost in both article and discussion.

Quote from: Ra3chel on September 28, 2013, 12:43:28 AM
Gonna be a dissenting voice here and say--

Monogamy is irrelevant here--the issue is trust, boundaries, and disclosure. If she were as careful with multiple trusted partners as she is with her bf, that would be fine, too. 

YKW, FWIW, garlic can sometimes be a good metaphor for talking about foods and bodily fluids--you know how if someone eats a whooooole lot of garlic, you can smell it in their sweat? Pretty easy to use that as a basis for particles from foods showing up in non-digestive fluids, and generalize from there.

I think the title they used for her article was...a safe title...and didn't imply anything about promiscuity.

Meaning --- it might have been more aptly title, "Promiscuous Casual Encounters Isn't for Severe Food Allergic Individuals" --- where promiscuity means being casual and non-discriminate.  Folks will severe allergies have to be cautious (not casual) and be discriminate with who they kiss and etc.  Little to no impulsive actions with complete strangers (meaning...if you start to talk about allergies and ask about what they ate in the past 24 hours, they are not a complete stranger anymore).

I agree with Rachel, has nothing to do with monogamy.

Adrienne

Quote from: SilverLining on September 28, 2013, 04:03:20 PM
Rachel, I think it's not just being careful. It's trusting more people with your life.

I love the garlic metaphor.

Yes--that's a given. But, again, not really linked to exclusivity, YK?

Rachel, I think it's not just being careful. It's trusting more people with your life.

I love the garlic metaphor.

Gonna be a dissenting voice here and say--

Monogamy is irrelevant here--the issue is trust, boundaries, and disclosure. If she were as careful with multiple trusted partners as she is with her bf, that would be fine, too. 

YKW, FWIW, garlic can sometimes be a good metaphor for talking about foods and bodily fluids--you know how if someone eats a whooooole lot of garlic, you can smell it in their sweat? Pretty easy to use that as a basis for particles from foods showing up in non-digestive fluids, and generalize from there.

Some of us don't need to lie.

And yes-- my plan is that I already have been cultivating some "go-to" people here that I think my DD is comfortable asking stuff of-- including stuff like that. 

I don't disagree with any of you.  I do think in some ways that kiss did play a part in her death.  But how many times have we been told that symptoms we saw with our own eyes or experienced ourselves were not possible?  Are we making this up for attention?  Heck no.

We know WAY more about allergies than the average person.  So while we can make assumptions in what played a role in her death, the average person just tells us we were stupid and she died of an asthma attack - see the coroner said so and you are just blowing this way out of proportion.

And ugh, I was tired the night that I initially posted the response so I see where you are coming from.  Do I think the peanutty kiss played a part, yeah more than likely.  But I also think she did MANY not so smart things that evening - having asthma and smoking pot or having asthma and being around cigarette smoke to begin with even. 

All the things we worry about at home when the kids are older (and have discussed with my older son as learning lessons) - certain things (ie drugs or alcohol) will lower your ability to think straight and make mistakes.  For kids with no food allergies, consequences can be bad and in some cases even deadly but for you, with your food allergies, it will probably be deadly. 

And how do I even begin to explain that mommy is well aware of when daddy eats/takes one of her allergens and she had to find out the hard way during an intimate moment    Really hoping another adult can share their experience with the boys because well, I will but I don't want to (and I am pretty sure both boys will just be fingers in the ears, you found me under a cabbage leaf and OMG you're my parents and you can't do that stuff).  I may make one of you guys lie for me - you would do that, right?

As do I-- even if I think that the coroner may have been a little overzealous and not-well-educated about food anaphylaxis in some important ways.  {ahem}

And I agree.

MC, to be clear; I absolutely believe kissing can cause not just a reaction, but it can cause anaphylaxis.  But, by saying a specific person died from a kiss, when the coroner very clearly and boldly stated otherwise, does a disservice to us all.

she was smoking pot, in a house full of people smoking cigarettes and pot.  I'm not sure if she was also smoking regular cigarettes.

This was not her home.  She was at a party.

SL I don't get your "which is more likely" question. I may not be remembering as much about the case. If you're saying Christina lived in a house with smokers and then smoked--I would actually wonder more if the asthma were from smoking.

But in bit here to argue how she really died--just wanted to point out that when the answer was "asthma," my thought was asthma as a sign of anaphylaxis. And how it would be difficult to tell between the two.

And I agree--as long as folks misstate what the official explantation is, it's not really helpful. But my friends do understand that the protein can be transmitted via kissing.

And the fact that my kiddo has had anaphylaxis from less protein and less directly than a kiss could be, it makes perfect sense to worry about a reaction on a date--no matter what the outcome of Christina's inquest was.

Quote from: Macabre on September 17, 2013, 10:30:51 PM

How do you distinguish asthma brought on from smoke versus asthma brought on by anaphylaxis? 

Which is more likely...a reaction from kissing, or not only being in a house with smokers but actually smoking yourself.

Either is definitely possible.  But which is more likely?

There is a test that can be done re anaphylaxis?  Was it done?  Would the result be the same for asthma from smoking?

~~~

I'm with YKW.  I know, without a doubt, that a kiss can cause anaphylaxis.  but, using that as the example makes us all look crazy. 

I am on another board that is not allergy related.  The major debates in the last few months have been about food bans in schools.  Many are naturally opposed to it and others think they are being helpful by bringing up that girl in Canada who died from the kiss.  Within three responses (yeah, I note timing) there is always the rebuttal article that says it was not the case.

Whether I believe it was anaphylaxsis due to a kiss or not, the medical report says it was not.  You and I have first hand knowledge that it is distinct possibility.  Your average person who does not deal with allergies think we are talking out of our butts, protecting our little precious snowflakes, don't know how they will handle the real world, do I need to go on?  I know you have seen the arguments.

I think her anectdotal story was enough.  It happened to her - she said it did.  There were no news reports to the contrary that disproved the theory.  Because once again, people will read further into the Canadian death and do their little eye roll.  BTDT.

Actually, I didn't quite buy that her death was necessarily due to that. I know that's what the report said. But that was like 7 years ago.

How do you distinguish asthma brought on from smoke versus asthma brought on by anaphylaxis? 

I've seen my kid have anaphylaxis that presents as asthma but did not respond to his inhaler. It, of course, did respond to Epi. And the biphasic reaction that came 8 hours later did, too. And his reaction wasn't from kissing but from handling a hockey stick in PE and the eating his snack. 

She may or may not have died from the kiss. But we've seen enough about kids having a reaction after being kisses by a parent who had had peanut (even 8 hours earlier) that I believe having a life threatening reaction after kissing someone is certainly in the realm of possibility.