Hardly. But nut allergies are very real and can be life-threatening. However, most who are allergic know they are - so I see this as serious over-kill. In truth, it's just to prevent lawsuits.
hmmm, I wonder if they get to board first. I think I might have a peanut allergy...unless I need a note from my doctor.
The thread title is just overwhelming - it has rendered me nearly incapable of providing a coherent response... FROFLMFAO!!! :roflmao: Seriously though, considering "Together with its regional carriers, the airline operates on average more than 1,375 scheduled flights a day" (wiki) and the number of complaints (2, since 2006 according to the article cited in the OP), it would seem to be a very small incidence of complaints to warrant such a policy change. If you assume an average of 100 passengers per flight * 1,375 flights per day * 365 days per year * 3 years, that would equate to 150,562,500 passengers - out of which two people complained, and you would end up with 0.0000013% complaint ratio!! For this we install a "nut-free zone"? (Still can barely type that phrase... lol) It seems like an unprecedented change in such a large corporation's policy based on so small a number of affected people. Can anyone else think of any comparables? Talk about the power of the minority! This would mathematically equate to less than 5 people changing the policy of the entire USA government. (unless I've totally screwed the maths, it's a lot of 0's there...) Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Obviously, if implemented, there are going to be costs associated in order to accomodate the people with these allergies. These costs are going to have to be passed on to the rest of the passengers, of course. How does society go about protecting the few at the expense of the many? Hardly an original question, but the case at hand raises the issue again. I mean, 1 out of an estimated 75,281,250 passengers complaining? WTF?
Probably not. Lots of people have allergies. But some of those allergies probably wouldn't be on a plane. Like Dust or Mold.
I know right! My first thought was [deleted] Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Canada takes their nuts seriously. I think shorty said something about nuts not being allowed in their schools. Wouldn't want a kid to get nuts on their hands and then transfer that to their mouth.
It true this country bends over backwards for it's lowest common denominator. Air Canada fucking blows anyway. They treat you like shit. If you fly in Canada - fly "WestJet".
Think of it this way. Would you want to be on a flight with someone who died because they came into contact with peanut residue on a seat? Think of the incovenience to you as the flight would have to divert to get the individual immediate medical aid as they went into shock and their heart stopped. You would be late to your destination. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I cannot understand what the big deal is in this? How is providing safety for all passengers, 'bending over backward for its lowest common denominator'? You are acting as if their providing nut free seats is an inconvenience? How so? Do you think there is some hapless individual out there who can only get off if he sits in some particular seat, that has been designated as nut free, to eat his nuts? Are you aware that airlines also provide for people with lactose and wheat allergies, as well as for those who are vegetarians, amongst others? Maybe you should write to them and complain that they are 'bending over backwards for the lowest common denominator'..Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
IF you got peanut allergies - wear fucking gloves and put a paper bag over your head and live in shame for having the shiitiest genes on earth.
The severity of the consequence isn't the only factor here, though. The probability of it occurring is also important.
Come on, Orleander :bugeye: lol Do I have to correct you yet again? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
They could send on an employee with a severe nut allergy to test the seats. Kind of like one of those canaries coal miners used to take with them.
Yeah but you just know that people will spill or wipe their hands on the seats or the arm rests. People are acting as if they are somehow being deprived of something because there will be a couple seats on a plane that are reserved for anyone who may have a peanut allergy. I just don't understand why it is causing such a hang up. They aren't banning nuts from the plane. They are just going to have a couple of seats reserved just in case someone advises that they do have the allergy. It really is no big deal. You can still eat your peanuts. Just not in those reserved seats. Let me ask those who somehow find this offensive. Do you suffer a similar hang up knowing that the airlines also caters for vegetarians and people with lactose and wheat allergies? Or there's that.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I guess we could just kill them.
Maybe. But the chances of a death occurring because of it are pretty low, as evidenced by a previous poster pointing out that the airline has had only two complaints since 2006.
We don't kill them Bells, but the onus of their survival depends on THEM and their family, not the whole society. My cousin had the peanut(any nuts actually) allergy and he simply stayed away from them, at christmas time, he did not sit at the table that had a bowl of nuts. His intelligence overcame his weakness. It's a natural process human beings have been doing for at least 100000 years. Now we need to make the "world" safe for the lowest common denominator? No we don't.
Maybe they could get a pair of chimps on every flight and have them on standby to retrieve any nuts that a person might accidentally ingest.