Quote from: Hurra on November 24, 2014, 05:25:05 PM
I was looking for advice as to how serious someone with a severe peanut allergy takes one of these allergy statements on a food product. Is it a low risk to eat it or is it a high risk.

I don't think she is depressed or crying out. She seems mentally fine otherwise.

Thanks for the great replies, it helps.

That depends on the person.

That also depends upon the product.

That also depends upon... well, random and hard-to-reproduce factors like the individual's status at the moment (other allergy exposures, illness, stress, etc. etc) and also on the random nature of cross-contamination.

It's truly Russian Roulette. 

The only real question is whether or not a particular product has one chambered round out of 100, or one out of two.  The odds are different with some products relative to others, YK?  That doesn't mean that it is a GOOD idea to try the one that has a 1% chance of causing you a life-threatening reaction, of course.

What it does mean is that it's likely that once in a while, an allergic person would "get away with" the one, but not the other.

I have no idea with particular chocolate products which are labeled for contamination, because there is no way my family would take such a risk,  though I know that others do.

Some information about just how common (and severe) the problem of cross-contamination is:

http://www.food.gov.uk/science/research/allergy-research/fs241038

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691513005760

http://www.foodproductdesign.com/news/2010/08/study-says-consumers-don-t-trust-allergen-warning.aspx

http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749%2810%2900891-2/fulltext

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19440049.2013.804953?journalCode=tfac20#.VHS5FsnYd7E

---

That sampling of resources should give everyone a clear picture of the nature of this problem.

There are two groups of people with true, clinical allergies to foods here--

1.  Group that can avoid overt exposure and completely eliminate all chance of reactions (well, nearly so), and

2.  Group which is sensitive to ultra-trace amounts of the allergen-- reacts to contaminated surfaces, aerosolized sources, etc in addition to VERY tiny unintentional amounts present in foods that share production space with the allergen.

The second group must rely upon disclosure about shared production from manufacturers because without that info, they are subject to life-threatening reactions and are basically conducting food challenges every time they eat anything.  The former group frequently finds that disclosure annoying, because MOST cross-contaminated products are safe for them to actually eat, but of course once they KNOW that something is run on shared lines, then the question becomes "should I really be doing this??" regardless of how safe it has been in the past.


Hopefully this is a reasonably helpful explanation.  This is why, however, most people with food allergies use "shortcut" methods to explain their reasoning and risk-assessment practices.  It's just not easy.    

Honestly, I think a lot of pa people eat may contains. Some because they were never told how dangerous it is, and some because they don't feel it is a risk or feel they just aren't that sensitive.

Our first allergist told us that ds probably shouldn't eat peanuts. Never wrote for an epi-pen until I insisted. Never told us how to live with this allergy. Most of what I learned, I learned here or through my own research.

There are some items I really don't think are a risk but are just over labeled. And as others have mentioned, after talking to a manufacturer you may decide it isn't a risk.

I think several mentioned it--and I don't remember who. There were a few hours between he time I initially read the thread and posted and didn't reread. It was just that while reading, that's not a conclusion I came to.

I could be wrong--but having tested positive for peanuts and having several specific reactions I can trace to peanuts and then having not tested positive--I also know what it's like to be allergic, to say you're allergic and then to discover you're not (and without fanfare)--I understand what it's like to not feel comfortable saying you're not allergic. With ds' allergy, it can be easier for me to just keep up the idea that I have to avoid it, too. (With other people like at church). So it's a different situation than Hurra is describing, but I have an experience where I know I don't need counseling to deal with this, yk? 

NQ please.

Quote from: Macabre on November 24, 2014, 09:11:15 PM

I don't think this issue means you have problems with your marriage or that you need counseling. I think it's really hard to deal with this.

My comment about that related not just to the allergy stuff, but other comments not related to allergies at all.

We assume all chocolate is unsafe for my son with peanut allergy unless it's proven safe.  I've heard of a few people being allergic to chocolate, but I assume it's really peanuts--but I don't know.

I don't think this issue means you have problems with your marriage or that you need counseling. I think it's really hard to deal with this.

   Janelle- thank you.  That was exactly the mindset that I was getting at.

I'm not peanut allergic, my most severe food allergies are not things that you will find on a warning label.

That said, I sometimes really want something that is on the safe/unsafe line.  Like, want it enough to consider risking it.  Sometimes I'll look at things in the grocery store to see if the ingredients have magically changed or if the package says something different.

I can see where if my marriage was in trouble or there were other issues stressing me out, I might just do it.  Because it would 'probably maybe' be ok.  Allergy management can be exhausting.

And I can totally see putting the wrappers in the trash can or not telling the truth about it as well.  I kind of feel guilty and like a bad person for just posting here that I've thought about it, even though I haven't done it.

Often people with PA are not educated as well as they should be about cross contamination, so they don't understand the risk of ignoring warning labels.  Others justify ignoring the labels as them being there just as CYA - especially since any warning labels are voluntary and not regulated or standardized in any way.  However, studies have shown that about 20% of 'may contains' do contain, so it's essentially playing Russian roulette to ignore those labels.  If your wife truly reacts to PN just being in the room with her, her threshold must be pretty low and eating contaminated items is quite risky because a low-level contamination that might not be enough to illicit a reaction in some allergic people would cause an extremely sensitive person to react.  Therefore, usually those who are very sensitive will avoid 'may contains'.

I was looking for advice as to how serious someone with a severe peanut allergy takes one of these allergy statements on a food product. Is it a low risk to eat it or is it a high risk.

I don't think she is depressed or crying out. She seems mentally fine otherwise.

Thanks for the great replies, it helps.

I can think of at least 20 different explanations and that would not even be exhaustive list.  I'm not sure what OP is asking advice about.

In conjunction with that-- the other possibility that I hinted at above, I'll state more openly-- for someone with life-threatening food allergy, if you get to a place in your own head where you are so low emotionally that you seriously just DO NOT CARE what happens to you, um-- risk-taking takes on a whole new meaning.

Could be a sign of depression and/or a cry for help, too.  As expressions of existential distress go, it seems pretty weird, I know-- but knowing what it is like to live with a food allergy, I can definitely see it going that way under some circumstances.

I don't mean to pry, I mean REALLY not asking about your relationship there, OP.  But when you say you know what she's eating though she denies it I'm not imaginative enough to understand how this dietary outing is taking place. Or, why.

Oh, I also left out the other category of explanation-- which would explain how consumption didn't lead to some kind of overt or life-threatening reaction.


"I'm sick of this, F*** THIS, I'll eat what I damned well please today"


This is-- perhaps not surprisingly-- much more common in adolescents and adults when they are under a lot of other pressures (marital/family tensions definitely tend to push ME to risk-taking behaviors, I'll say that much).

Okay, so how is it that she has been "getting away with it" for so long?

Wellllll...

eating "may contains" that really DO mean what they say means maybe they DO contain, and maybe they don't, and so any 100 samples of that particular foodstuff might have just 10... or 40... or 5... that DO contain the allergen.  Depending upon threshold, maybe only 50% of those contain enough protein to cause a reaction on the best possible day... and maybe 75% of them do on the worst kind of day, in terms of how much one's "allergy cup" will hold without overflowing (causing a reaction).  That allergy cup thing, by the way, is something that physicians often use to describe what life is like with severe atopic conditions.  If your immune system is already stressed because of hormones, illness, etc. etc. then the cup is "fuller" to begin with, and you have less margin for error.

So could my peanut-allergic DD eat a Twix and get away with it?

Maybe.  If she got very very lucky, I mean.  I sincerely hope that she would never feel the need to do something so dangerous, personally.    For reference, she has experienced anaphylaxis from amounts of her nut-allergens that are small enough that we've NEVER been able to figure out how some of them occurred.  So she's extremely sensitive, with a low dose needed to elicit very severe reactions. 

My threshold for oranges, on the other hand, is high enough that I sometimes gamble with just picking slices off of a garnished restaurant plate.  I wouldn't dare try that with shellfish, though.  My threshold is too low.  On the other hand, I do occasionally risk some fish-- even though I know that there is cross-contact risk there.  Sometimes, dammit, it's just worth some degree (low) of risk-- to me.  If I were having reactions from that choice, I'd change my mind, for sure.

The greater concern, it sounds like, is whether or not your spouse is choosing to control others by exerting UNNECESSARY control over their food choices.   I mean, if she's willing to EAT chocolate which is clearly labeled for cross-contamination risk, then yeah... asking others to make their kitchens nut-free for her on the off chance that they put her at risk during a holiday meal...  mmmmmmmm...


seems a bit much.  Naturally, I'm basing that statement on what you've shared here, and so I don't have all of the detail to say for sure what I think of that.  On the other hand, you're sounding as though you're suspicious due to other behavior unrelated to food allergy, too, and it's at least possible that there is a rational explanation that does NOT involve any degree of deliberate obfuscation or misdirection. 

Quote from: Hurra on November 24, 2014, 11:35:28 AM
Thanks CM

The bar was a Twix bar if that matters.

Considered safe in some countries but not others.  I think they are safe in the UK.  My husband occasionally buys me imported candy that is not safe here, but is safe in the UK.  (I don't particularly care for Twix, but there are other candies.)

Quote

p.s. I also wanted to say I have learned to be very careful about what I eat, and what I buy for food. Sometimes I've been the one to catch an allergen in a food she is about to eat.

I've missed my allergen in a list of ingredients too.  Fortunately my husband or son saw it before I ate.

QuoteAnd I would never take a chance with some secret way to test her allergies.

Good.  Because, no matter what you suspect, if you intentionally feed someone a food they have told you they have a life-threatening allergy to....that is attempted murder. 

I concur with CM. It sounds like marriage counselling may be in order.

Marital issues aside, whatever they may be.  FALCPA covers the labeling laws.  The rest is manufacturing process and voluntary disclosures that have no consistency or requirements to contain specific language or be uniform in any way.

That's a lot of empty wrappers to rescue out of the trash with surprisingly intact labels.