M&Ms May Contain Peanuts

[RoboDude]

It has been said that close to 1% of people are allergic to peanuts. Out of this 1%, are all of them sensitive enough to have life-threatening reactions to microscopic traces of peanut molecules, or are they the exception?

Life is a tragedy for those who feel and a comedy for those who think.

[CanadianSue]

I have a severe allergy to nuts and have been lucky enough to live through two reactions. Im so careful when I go out, always asking at restaurants, always reading packages.

Its a terrifying feeling to have your tongue and throat swell up until you can’t breath and have your heart pumping like its going to literally jump right out of your body.

I was lucky. The first time I was near a clinic, the second time I had an epi. The reaction starts within about 20 seconds or less.

Twix chocolate bars contain nut particles in them and this wasnt reported on their packaging when they first came out, which is how I had my first reaction.

I’m not sure how it is anywhere else, but where I live even Baskin Robbins has a warning now. Companies don’t want to be responsible for anything happening because an ice cream scoop wasnt properly washed, etc.

---

We are, each of us angels with only one wing,and we can only fly by embracing one another

[system]

::sigh::

Evil Ghandi posts:

My involvement in this debate stems from my answer to Melin, where I Assert,

1 Peanut allergies don’t KILL suspectable people any more than other common allergies.

2 The problem is not as widespread as the hype would lead us to believe.

3 The measures being proposed constitute the typical save the children type over-reaction we have all come to know whenever a medicle journal publishes a study.

For (1) I didn’t have to look all that far, you own post seems to back my assertion.

::snip:: EG quotes one of the abstracts which demonstrated that some peanut-allergic individuals did not respond to a 50 mg dose of peanut protein, while others reacted to as little as 0.1 mg (= 100 mcg)

Note, all of these subjects were chosen because of their hypersensitivity to the protein, yet not one grabbed their chest and dropped dead immediatly upon consuming it. It would appear that the majority had exactly what we would expect to see, a typical allergic reaction with mild to severe discomfort. A few had no reaction at all.

If I lobbed a peanut grenade into a stadium crammed with 100,000 people I doubt the paramedics would be hauling out 1000 body bags.

(2) Kind of a moot point since we agree that a .7-1% figure is not unreasonable. Still I present a second cite, this time from the Mayo Clinic.

“Two out of five Americans believe they are allergic to specific foods. However, fewer than 1% have true food allergies.”

This cite adds some weight to my skepticisim of phone surveys but more importantly, it points out that the 1% being waved about is all food allergies. Peanut allergies will be a fraction of this percentage. Every source I checked listed the most common ones in this order.
Cows milk, egg whites, peanuts, wheat and soybeans. Mayo states these four are responsible for 90% of all food allergies. They go on to state “Many children outgrow these allergies by age six.” And, “70% of food allergies develop in persons under age 30”

So the total population hypersensitive to peanuts is a fraction of a percent. Even that small number is unlikely to have a fatal reaction upon exposure. (though it does happen)

(3) Is it an over-reaction? I think the phrase “Peanut Free Zone” sums that up.

As a side note, has no one stopped to consider what effect these wide spread bans may have on the peanut industry? Could we be seeing the National Peanut Council sueing Oprah in the near future?

1 From a can of Planter’s peanuts:
1 serving = 28 gm (35 pieces)
1 serving = 7 gm Protein

Thus 1 peanut = .8 gm = 800 mg, of which 200 mg (200,000 mcg) is protein. So under test conditions, some subjects did not react to eating the equivalent of 1/4 of a peanut. SO WHAT? Others, on the other hand, DID react to 1/2000th of a peanut. That doesn’t answer the question you ask, either, though.

Not that you asked… but if those same subjects were re-exposed to peanut protein within a week or so of that test, virtually all of them would have had a much stronger reaction and/or reacted to a much lower dose. Any exposure, whether it produces a noticeable reaction or not DOES cause an immune reaction, which resultant higher levels of IgE antibodies making future reactions both more likely & more severe.

From the Food Allergy Network site, maintained & reviewed by the AAAAI (American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology):
http://www.foodallergy.org/media.html

Food Allergy Basics:

• 2 to 2 1/2% of the general population suffers from food allergy, or between 6-7 million Americans. Up to 3 million Americans suffer from peanut or tree nut allergy.
• 8 foods account for 90% of the allergic reactions. They include peanuts, tree nuts (walnuts, pecans, etc.), fish, shellfish, eggs, milk, soy, and wheat.
• Peanuts are the leading cause of severe allergic reactions, followed by shellfish, fish, tree nuts, and eggs.
• Physicians are reporting an increase in the number of food-allergic patients in the country.
• Individuals with food allergies and asthma appear to be at an increased risk for severe allergic reaction.
• Most individuals that have had a reaction ate a food that they thought was safe.
• Food allergy is the leading cause of anaphylaxis outside the hospital setting.
• It is estimated that as many as 125 people die each year from food allergy-related reactions, approximately 50 people die from insect sting reactions.

SO…peanut allergies do kill susceptible patients more than other common allergens.

2From another Mayo site (note that I actually provide a link): http://www.mayohealth.org/mayo/9908/htm/foodal.htm

When the conversation turns to food allergies, you’ll hear lots of folk wisdom: “Food allergies are common.” “Many foods can cause allergic reactions.” “Don’t worry about food allergies — you just outgrow them.” “Food allergies are never serious.”

The facts contradict these common notions:

• Only about 1 percent of Americans have genuine food allergies. Even so, about 20 percent believe that they have such allergies.

• Ninety percent of food allergies involve just a few substances — proteins in cow’s milk, egg whites, peanuts, wheat or soybeans.

• It’s true that children are 10 times as likely as adults to have food allergies. And by age 6, children usually outgrow allergies to milk, wheat and eggs. But some allergies — including those to nuts and shellfish — can persist for a lifetime.

• Though uncommon, food allergies can lead to a life-threatening allergic response called anaphylaxis.

So, Peanut Allergy runs somewhere between 0.7% (your “CDC” site), some fraction of a 1.1% peanut + tree nut prevalence (prev. cited abstract), and some fraction of a 1% food allergy rate (Mayo) As we’ve both previously stated, these are all reasonably comparable figures. I think, however, that we see these figures very differently. You see these numbers as trivial; I see them as significant - no amount of debate or cites is going to change either of our perspectives. I consider any preventable death worth considering how we, as a society, can reasonably* prevent it.

3 *We also differ on what constitutes reasonable actions by society to prevent preventable deaths. I have previously said that the jury is still out on peanut bans at school. Here is a link from the FAN stating their rationale for NOT banning peanuts:
http://www.foodallergy.org/banningpeanuts.html

Essentially, they fear that if kids believe no peanut-containing products are being brought in, that that will lead to increased food-sharing & MORE likely accidental ingestion of “hidden” peanuts.

However, having parented 2 kids & cleaned up PB from places that defy description, I can only say that I think allowing the youngest (under 7 or 8) kids to bring in PBJs is likely to lead to accidental exposure. Allowing neat peanut-containing foods for all kids, and eliminating the restrictions on older kids seem reasonable to me, but I recognize that I have left the world of science, & there is room for other opinions.

• Sue

[system]

Evil Ghandi adds:

My last word on the subject.

One can hope

Source: Johns Hopkins,
They describe peanut allergies as,
A “sometimes life-threatening allergy that may affect one in every 200 children.”

They also state, “Nearly 100 people die from all food allergies each year”

Compared to this, “Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration compiled primarily from newspaper clippings for 1959-1990 identified an annual average of 93 deaths and 257 injuries attributable to lightning .”

Major health problem my ass.

You know, you ought to see a proctologist for that…

The problem, you see, with this “logic” is that lightning strikes are the proverbial “Act of God” - Largely unforeseeable, and thus largely unpreventable (underwire bras excepted :rolleyes: )

Peanut deaths, OTOH, can often be prevented. How best to do that & where to draw the line between one person’s right to a safe environment & another person’s “right” to eat peanuts, is a legitimate controversy. Trying to maintain a safe environment for all is not.

• Sue

[system]

Originally posted by RoboDude:
It has been said that close to 1% of people are allergic to peanuts. Out of this 1%, are all of them sensitive enough to have life-threatening reactions to microscopic traces of peanut molecules, or are they the exception?

Probably not, RD. BUT… no one yet knows which ones are sensitive enough to have a life-threatening reaction, and which ones aren’t. The severity of the past reaction(s) is unreliable in predicting the next one.

• Sue

[suiyobi]

not to treat the right to pb&j as the holiest of holies, but with the frightening consequences put before me, my hypothetical peanut-allergic child would have to go to school in a plastic bubble!
as posted above, kids don’t follow the rules 100% of the time-- just like the adults, btw-- so if i had a child with such a lethal allergy, he/she would indeed have to be in a “Peanut Free Zone” one way or another.
it makes me think of old novels and historical accounts of sickly children raised in asylums (asyli?), but not all children with handicaps are mainstreamed, so…
would it be wrong to arrange a “PFZ” school?
(aside from the false sense of security?)

[EvilGhandi]

Android queries,
“Should we ban epi-pens and stop treating people who have severe reactions? Maybe the figures would then have the desired impact.”

Android,

Sounds like a good way to push your agenda to me. Heck, you might even get the death toll to equal that of lightning. While you’re at it how about advocating a ban of protective vests for law enforcement? It would be a good way to “bump” the numbers for the gun ban lobby. Make a note, don’t taunt people smarter than you are.

Sue,
The trip to the proctologist is forthcoming, I can’t wait to dislodge these nuts from my ass.

I accept your evidence of peanuts being more likely to kill than other allergens. Even if only by a small margin.(+or- 100 food allergy deaths, 1/3-1/2 related to peanuts) The bee sting data was what really moved me over. (50 annually, very close to peanuts) Though I wager the dose of venonm is less than 50mg. I didn’t visit the Mayo website, I borrowed a cd. It didn’t include the death rate from bees (though I confess I didn’t really look, I concentrated on food allergies)

I have worked closely with a bee-allergic individual and know firsthand what the reaction can look like.

I do wonder if the fatality rate is because of the severity of the reaction or the mindset of the sufferer. Beesting=painfull threat of death vs Peanuts=natures little pellets of yumminess. Plus the fact few people ever receive “concealed” bee venonm.

Who can say? If this is indeed the case it could go a long way towards further reducing fatalities.

If you read my posts, and I’m sure you did, you will realize I am not at all “Pro peanut death”. Puffing a cigar with an asmatic is plain being an asshole. Same with demanding your “right” to munch nuts while the guy next to you is jamming an autoinjector in his arm to keep breathing.

My objection is to the hype and what I consider an hysterical “call to arms” by the ADA lobby and others. Labeling is a rational response as is being considerate towards a known sensitive by not exposing them. Cross the board bans are not.(and as you point out,could be counter productive) What purpose does banning accomplish if there is no one there to protect?

As I stated in my “supposed” last post, Your average Joe is about 3 times more likely to buy it from from being struck by lightning than he is from catching an errant peanut. (which I added to provide perspective, not to make a case about how god is unafraid of the ADA) This leaves me of the opinion that though peanuts are a health risk they are certainly not a major one.

[EvilGhandi]

I forgot to include that we will have to agree to disagree on my last sentence.

[EvilGhandi]

Last post my ass.

I am very fond of that phrase.

I forgot to thank SoMo for her data, (I did chase down the links). Though I don’t quite know what to make of that last paragraph. If it was a flame, it was certainly the most subtle one I have seen.