Quote from: twinturbo on November 01, 2013, 12:05:00 AM
Yeah, in the same way they'd eventually drink sea water if lost on the open ocean. It'll go about as well.
Quote from: CMdeux on October 31, 2013, 10:31:20 PM
Oh, I think that it's FINE to say that you're allergic to whatever you please, really.
What isn't okay is to treat others like they are being "way over-sensitive about it" when they have a different set of management needs. You know, like-- er-- not eating anything at potlucks.
Just for example.
Quote from: twinturbo on October 31, 2013, 01:43:32 PM
They probably have larger thresholds. It doesn't mean they don't have big reactions just that it takes a decent amount compared to those of us with virtually no threshold. And let's face it: we all know anaphylaxis is dangerous but the quality of life for someone who has to eat a peanut (and only peanut) or two before reacting is going to have a totally different risk calculus than LTFA with multiple allergens who have a history of contact-to-ingestion or aerosol trigger.
Quote from: CMdeux on October 31, 2013, 11:30:31 AM
Wow-- pretty small sample size, there.
I'm also wondering about two additional factors that I know from experience play a HUGE role in determining QOL:
a) nature of the food allergen
b) reaction history-- especially as it pertains to threshold dose and past reaction severity.
When you take a ubiquitous allergen in a, and combine it with low threshold and severe reactions in b, you get MAJOR impairment in quality of life.
I was amazed at how much less stressful Europe was as compared to daily navigation of north America with a peanut allergy. It was sobering. VERY sobering.
So I don't think that a European study probably has a ton (or maybe a tonne) of bearing on life in North America, necessarily.
Paris would be a complete nightmare for a person with a hazelnut or dairy allergy, for example, but we didn't find it stressful at all.