She lacks a lot of things and should not be PTA president at all

She doesn't need to know any of this and I wouldn't have the conversation.

And, she should not pressure anyone for participation in OPTIONAL fundraisers in a PUBLIC school.  She lacks etiquette and should go to Miss Manners training.

Quote from: YouKnowWho on October 05, 2012, 09:06:12 AM

Quote from: twinturbo on October 04, 2012, 04:19:53 PM
Not disagreeing with the answers above but what I meant was entirely something different where the situation calls for making a hard decision between opposing allergen interests. Ideally I could avoid shared lines with all the kids known allergens but I have to pick products on a very case by case basis. There's just too many allegens for me to write off even shared lines for every product I buy. As is the case for which allergens we buy, serve, eat and how we eat it at home.

While I can make most meals safe for all people between all we have a long list of allergens and intolerences.  I cannot do shared lines with wheat, barley or oats for DS1 (oats are usually wheat contaminated and oddly enough, a common issue) unless it comes from just a few companies who clean and test appropriately.  I am looser on eggs in regards to shared as long as they are cooked egg as opposed to raw (ie salad dressings are an issue whereas Kinninnick baked products are not). 

I am lax with DS2 in regards to shared or may contains for tree nuts.  He does not react to tree nuts, only peanuts.  And I feel the risk is small enough for the minute tree nut to be contaminated with peanuts.  I am not lax (to the best of my knowledge) in regards to shared peanut lines.  Shared facilities I am okay with.  Though it has been pointed out that I have missed products with shared lines either due to old information or misinformation. 

We do have both kids allergens in the house and products are well labeled for each child and adult LOL  But yes, I understand your reasoning on having to go down the line and figure out the lesser of the evils.  It's like voting

The women is a total A$$  big hugs you have to deal with the crazy lady.

I completely get your oats problem. When my son was allergic to oats we had to avoid all wheats\glutens as well due to his reactions from the cross issues with oats. I was so tired that I had to explain why we avoided all wheats\glutens when he was only allergic to oats.

Bottom line people need to keep their noses to themselves. 

Lol@voting. So true.

Quote from: twinturbo on October 04, 2012, 04:19:53 PM
Not disagreeing with the answers above but what I meant was entirely something different where the situation calls for making a hard decision between opposing allergen interests. Ideally I could avoid shared lines with all the kids known allergens but I have to pick products on a very case by case basis. There's just too many allegens for me to write off even shared lines for every product I buy. As is the case for which allergens we buy, serve, eat and how we eat it at home.

While I can make most meals safe for all people between all we have a long list of allergens and intolerences.  I cannot do shared lines with wheat, barley or oats for DS1 (oats are usually wheat contaminated and oddly enough, a common issue) unless it comes from just a few companies who clean and test appropriately.  I am looser on eggs in regards to shared as long as they are cooked egg as opposed to raw (ie salad dressings are an issue whereas Kinninnick baked products are not). 

I am lax with DS2 in regards to shared or may contains for tree nuts.  He does not react to tree nuts, only peanuts.  And I feel the risk is small enough for the minute tree nut to be contaminated with peanuts.  I am not lax (to the best of my knowledge) in regards to shared peanut lines.  Shared facilities I am okay with.  Though it has been pointed out that I have missed products with shared lines either due to old information or misinformation. 

We do have both kids allergens in the house and products are well labeled for each child and adult LOL  But yes, I understand your reasoning on having to go down the line and figure out the lesser of the evils.  It's like voting

Quote from: Ra3chel on October 04, 2012, 01:22:13 PM

Quote from: twinturbo on October 03, 2012, 02:15:58 PM
There's no way to explain how you have to trade off risks between so many allergens. After getting FA sandbagged midway seemingly casual conversations I now never assume any conversation will be innocent even with good friends or family.

I've explained it successfully as an issue of degrees of separation relative to level of risk. I'm comfortable with two degrees of separation: for instance, I wouldn't eat a may-contain, but I'm comfortable kissing M after he has (obviously not the issue here!), or with someone else eating it in my kitchen.

This is my approach (though DD is too young to be kissing).  I have no problem with people in her class eating may contains in the classroom but I would never let her eat the item.  Her only anaphylactic reaction was to a may contain (as far as we can tell).  In fact, in the past few years, I've loosened my comfort zone and buy may contains for DH and I to eat (and for which DD gives me grief).

On a tangent, I did have to have a discussion with DD about kissing when she was in kindergarten because a boy in her day care class had kissed another girl in the class.  The likelihood that a kid that age had had peanut is very high. 

Quote from: twinturbo on October 04, 2012, 04:19:53 PM
Not disagreeing with the answers above but what I meant was entirely something different where the situation calls for making a hard decision between opposing allergen interests. Ideally I could avoid shared lines with all the kids known allergens but I have to pick products on a very case by case basis. There's just too many allegens for me to write off even shared lines for every product I buy. As is the case for which allergens we buy, serve, eat and how we eat it at home.

yes, separate issue, but yes-- also one that is nearly impossible for anyone with a single allergy concern to fully understand.

Some risks one has to live with the 'least worst' options and that's that.  It's not a comfortable way to live, but you have to do what you have to do, ultimately.

So-- for example, here, we knew that RiceDream was on shared lines with treenuts.  KNEW it.  But-- when you have a kid who is anaphylactic to peanut, egg, and milk... and allergic to soy and wheat...  well, what can you do?  They have to get calcium and vitamin D somehow.  KWIM?

Same thing with pastas.  We were often left choosing the lowest risk rather than having an option for which risk was actually where we wanted it to be. 

This post is helping me. I have two moms at school who seemingly try to understand the "may contain" issue -- but are really trying to trap me with it. really. And one of them is, in fact a bully. And she was very unhappy that she did not trap me and I had good answers for her. 

"may contain" is not a science, really. If your child eats a may contain, chances are good they will survive. It is that one time in 100 or 200 or a million that a significant amount of residue may cause a reaction. You can tell her that you appreciate her attention on the matter - but what you do is take calculated risks and a trace of a trace is one you ARE willing to take. Heck - a perfectly uncontaminated product -- who knows the factory worker may have had PB&J that day and not washed their hands before returning to work. No one can really guarantee a peanut free product --gotta eat. But you can pick odds in your favor.

It is a trap and she may be a bully -- but there is a chance that she may have helped pick this product and thought you'd be pleased it is peanut and treenut free. Someone behind the choices MAY have been thoughtful. I;d say how wonderful it is that they chose a nut free candy. how it goes a long way to ensuring safety if children eat the candy in school. It is just great -- but you will have to decline it for a food your child can use directly. You see, someone may also be looking for acknowledgement. Give it.

Not disagreeing with the answers above but what I meant was entirely something different where the situation calls for making a hard decision between opposing allergen interests. Ideally I could avoid shared lines with all the kids known allergens but I have to pick products on a very case by case basis. There's just too many allegens for me to write off even shared lines for every product I buy. As is the case for which allergens we buy, serve, eat and how we eat it at home.

Quote from: Ra3chel on October 04, 2012, 01:22:13 PM

Quote from: twinturbo on October 03, 2012, 02:15:58 PM
There's no way to explain how you have to trade off risks between so many allergens. After getting FA sandbagged midway seemingly casual conversations I now never assume any conversation will be innocent even with good friends or family.

I've explained it successfully as an issue of degrees of separation relative to level of risk. I'm comfortable with two degrees of separation: for instance, I wouldn't eat a may-contain, but I'm comfortable kissing M after he has (obviously not the issue here!), or with someone else eating it in my kitchen.

Perfectly phrased. 

This is why I'm okay with products which share lines with may-contains... but not those which share them with known allergens (because in my mind that IS a "may contain" rather than possibly cross-contaminated with one).

It's weird because I am always "that" parent that makes a big deal over food.  Apparently I have the most allergic kids in the school for based on what I have to fight for (which all of us know isn't necessarily true, I just have knowledge of what is right and wrong legally).

And really you have to question why I don't want certain candy in my house or why I make the decisions that I do?  Considering that I am the reason you got your butt handed to you on a silver platter?

Like I said, serious case of self doubt.  Which is odd for me allergy wise because I am generally pretty confident, right or wrong in decisions that I make for the household.

For some reason there is more disconnect with reality when you explain on behalf of kids, my best guess is it becomes conflated with how one parents as in overprotective.

Quote from: twinturbo on October 03, 2012, 02:15:58 PM
There's no way to explain how you have to trade off risks between so many allergens. After getting FA sandbagged midway seemingly casual conversations I now never assume any conversation will be innocent even with good friends or family.

I've explained it successfully as an issue of degrees of separation relative to level of risk. I'm comfortable with two degrees of separation: for instance, I wouldn't eat a may-contain, but I'm comfortable kissing M after he has (obviously not the issue here!), or with someone else eating it in my kitchen.

There's no way to explain how you have to trade off risks between so many allergens. After getting FA sandbagged midway seemingly casual conversations I now never assume any conversation will be innocent even with good friends or family.

I'm speechless!  Really?  Looking for you to submit your order?

Now I know why I stay away from all fundraisers!