<p>
</p>
<p>Everything’s a chemical, though :-)</p>
<p>I think you’re spot-on, though. Many people were sickly / invalids for years and no one ever knew why, and it might have been gluten issues or lactose intolerance that people were less aware of years ago. I’m never a fan of the “why have these things increased over time” skepticism, too. Autism diagnosis has increased over the years - that means we’re better at diagnosing these things. That’s a good thing IMO.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is why elementary schools that allow goodies for birthdays and the like often require them to be store-bought, so ingredient lines can be checked in a way that homemade treats can’t be. I love peanut butter, so I’d be majorly bummed if I had to ban it from my house :-).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is nothing radical about having an opinion.</p>
<p>
I think it’s fine to have an informed opinion. For instance, I think that reasonable minds can disagree about whether the Lesley settlement goes too far in accomodating a disability that, perhaps, can be accomodated with less cost and disruption. However, unless you’re making some kind of semantic point, it’s simply uninformed to state that serious food allergies don’t constitute a disability.</p>
<p>I believe the advances in medicine over the years have allowed us to put labels on things that we never knew before. Also, we become a more global society (by marriage and travel), items that do not exist in a culture’s diet become more plentiful and individual’s GI tracts can’t handle it. Some examples are Northern Europeans tend to be more gluten intolerant. Makes sense, their diets were more potato based. Asians and Africans have a higher incidence of lactose intolerance, as not as many dairy cows in their culture. </p>
<p>I look back at my diet and I tended to avoid gluten (pasta & breads) and beer always made me feel bad. Most people probably just lived with GI issues and felt that was normal. Same with ADHD - I remember several boys in elementary school that could never sit still. </p>
<p>The allergy issue has me stumped - possibly it’s a result of environmental factors or more processed foods or as an earlier posted mentioned, maybe early diagnosis has allowed them to live when in the past they may not have.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is not uninformed. It just doesn’t agree with your version of the world. People can be informed and come to a different conclusion than you do. Opinions do not have agree with yours in order to be informed opinions.</p>
<p>Proudpatriot, what does constitute a disability in your eyes? What aspects of the ADA do you find objectionable?</p>
<p>I work with two people who are “disabled” by almost everyone’s standards. One has low vision; the other is hard of hearing. Both do their jobs just fine with the aid of some special equipment and a little help from their colleagues. Neither is anywhere near as impaired as a person with severe food allergies. Certainly, neither is at risk of dying if accommodations aren’t made properly. </p>
<p>Would you consider my colleagues disabled? And if you do, why do you consider them disabled but a person with severe allergies not disabled?</p>
<p>I think the ruling is appropriate in the sense that it still (in my limited understanding) places the power with the person — it’s not saying every dining hall and school has to be peanut-free, it’s saying they ought to have an adequate plan in the event that a person requires/requests peanut-free dining. So my son would feel he requires a reliable gluten-free area in order to not starve, but someone who is simply observing a gluten-free diet for general health benefits might not want to go there and would either “eat around” the bad stuff, or bend their personal rules. </p>
<p>I think it’s too hard to expect one policy to cover all situations. I don’t think, however, it’s too much to ask for establishments to try and at least have enough information for people with food issues (pwfi!)to make educated choices. But pretty much we all seem to be in agreement here.</p>
<p>
Hey, I just call it as I see it. As I said, reasonable minds can disagree about a lot of things.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You also have to provide a system that enables them to obtain uncontaminated food.</p>
<p>I spent a week last summer at an on-campus program at a college with a typical serve-yourself buffet-style dining hall. There is no way that a person with a serious food allergy could eat the food that was available at the various stations in that dining hall because other patrons could have inadvertently cross-contaminated it. All it would take is for a serving utensil intended for a non-allergenic food to come into contact with an allergenic food already on a person’s plate. Or perhaps a serving utensil might be put back in the wrong dish. </p>
<p>The variety of foods available in this college dining hall was enormous. If it was just a matter of information, people with food allergies could easily find appropriate foods and put together nutritionally balanced meals. But there would have to be some way for them to get access to the foods before they get onto the buffet tables, where cross-contamination is almost inevitable.</p>
<p>“Why would a person without allergies or food conditions resent this ruling? What difference does it make to you?”</p>
<p>Cost. Most of us agree that the cost/benefit analysis comes down heavily in favor of accommodating the allergic. But there is a financial cost, which will be borne by everyone, so I do think it makes a difference to everyone.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Gluten is a protein in wheat and a few other grains.</p>
<p>A small percentage of people have [celiac</a> disease](<a href=“http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001280/]celiac”>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001280/), where gluten triggers an autoimmune reaction against one’s small intestine, resulting in poor nutrition.</p>
<p>The link to wheat was only discovered during a 1944 famine in the Netherlands *wheat products were scarce, but some sickly children improved), and the link to gluten specifically was only discovered in 1952.</p>
<p>There are some indications that celiac disease diagnosis is [url=<a href=“http://discoverysedge.mayo.edu/celiac-disease/index.cfm]rising[/url”>http://discoverysedge.mayo.edu/celiac-disease/index.cfm]rising[/url</a>].</p>
<p>However, it does seem trendy these days to go on gluten-free diets for reasons other than celiac disease or actual other food allergy type reasons (e.g. as a means of enforcing a low-carb diet). The increased market demand for gluten-free products can be welcome to those with celiac disease in stimulating food producers to offer more gluten-free products (and college dorms to take more care with food preparation to avoid cross contamination).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To me a disability is something that without accommodations prevents someone from living a normal life. There may be some food allergies that meet my definition (which is not the legal definition). However, most food allergies can be self managed without a need to impose regulations on every single food service institution in the country. </p>
<p>I have not eaten at every single college in the country. However, at the schools where I have eaten it seems that there is a pretty good variety of food offerings at most colleges. I have also noticed poor controls in preventing cross contamination. That is something that needs improvement.</p>
<p>The problem I have with the ADA is that enforcement of it has imposed rather large costs on the general population, while not improving much when it comes to the disabled. It was supposed to help the disabled obtain employment, yet employment of the disabled has not increased. All that has happened is that employers have to jump through hoops and spend money. Nothing has improved for anyone except the lawyers who make a living suing people because their mirror is half an inch to low. </p>
<p>The same thing will happen in colleges. Colleges will be required to spend a fortune acquiescing to the demands of unscrupulous lawyers but nothing will change for anyone. ADA is a great example of the law of unintended consequences.</p>
<p>Please do not respond by calling me uniformed. There is a great amount of literature, including academic research, detailing how little ADA has done for disabled people. Increasing the number of people covered by ADA will not make ADA a better law.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just as long as they don’t disagree with you?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My problem is with the enlargement of people covered by ADA. I really don’t resent anyone. What I have a problem with is that ADA is a law that has imposed large costs on the general public without any real improvement of the well being of those it was supposed to help. The only people who are better off after ADA are the lawyers. I do not want to see an enlargement of ADA because it really doesn’t help anyone.</p>
<p>There is quite a bit of research that suggests the wheat produced today contains more gluten that what was common 20 years ago. </p>
<p>The following article has a good Q&A with a UnivMD professor that is an expert on Celiac & gluten issues. I had not read this before, but he notes that humans do not digest gluten and celiac/gluten intolerance arises when the GI system mounts an attack against these invaders instead of just letting them pass harmlessly through the system. </p>
<p>[Q</a> & A with Alessio Fasano, MD - Living Without Article](<a href=“Web Page Under Construction”>Web Page Under Construction)</p>
<p>To understand what celiacs & people with gluten-intolerance go through, imagine having bloating, gas, diarhea, and/or constipation 24/7. That’s why we need to avoid it. (sorry to be graphic, but some people don’t understand that we are not part of a recent fad). </p>
<p>People with true allergies avoid buffets/salad bars. I had a former colleague that brought his own energy/power bars everywhere, as he would not trust any food that was not prepackaged.</p>
<p>I would add “severe abdominal pain” to your list, nj2011mom. </p>
<p>I find this discussion fascinating. Does a food allergy rise to the level of disability? And, one that hasn’t been mentioned, why are one person’s rights pre-emptive? Let’s face it, most people who suffer from food allergies are not a peanut away from death, so we really can’t couch all of this as a battle between my right to enjoy a pbj with your right to live. </p>
<p>I have a child with gluten issues. The doctor said all the testing for a definitive diagnosis would yield the same treatment plan (don’t eat gluten), so we may not feel the need to shell out $ for tests. She may have celiac’s. She may just have a food allergy or sensitivity. The college dining hall is pretty accommodating, but there are still days when there is nothing safe to eat. </p>
<p>The typical accommodation for this or any food issue has been a release from the requirement of on-campus students to have a meal plan. I do see where being asked to have whatever-free options available at every.single.meal would drive up costs for everyone else. Not sure that the accommodation that exists now (no meal plan) isn’t the most reasonable.</p>
<p>
I distinguish between people who disagree with me for philosophical reasons, and those who disagree with me because it appears to me they don’t really understand the facts.</p>
<p>
There is a slippery slope issue here–there is obviously a big difference between a life-threatening allergy and (for example) getting heartburn when you eat fried foods. Where do you draw the line in terms of requiring accomodations? The difficulty in drawing lines, however, doesn’t mean that you don’t draw lines.</p>
<p>This is a terrible idea. It’s immoral to support such an inefficiency as requiring every possible allergen be kept in separate areas to ensure no cross-contamination. Further, it wouldn’t even work. All it’ll do is make people assume things are safe that aren’t. This is a dangerously bad idea.</p>
<p>Im fine with colleges subsidizing costs of environment control by cutting football, by raising tuition for Oos & international students and by cutting stipends for grad students.
( personally, i know those things wont be done, but we have passed laws that must be enforced even if they arent funded)</p>
<p>This story is so sad to me, especially since in most areas washington state didnt enforce laws against marijuana use, and now it is legal for recreational use in Washington state.</p>
<p>*An arrest warrant for Michael Saffioti had been issued after he missed a court date. But after one night in jail, he was dead.
Now Snohomish County could face a lawsuit over a food allergy that may have been ignored. *
[Inmate</a> with dairy allergy dies after eating oat meal](<a href=“http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Inmate-michael-saffioti-with-dairy-allergy-dies-after-eating-oatmeal-174289031.html]Inmate”>http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Inmate-michael-saffioti-with-dairy-allergy-dies-after-eating-oatmeal-174289031.html)</p>