Health & Safety gone MAD!!

[alfablue]

in the botanic gardens, edinburgh, you used to be able to buy peanuts to feed the squirrels and pigeons (something enjoyed by kids for generations).

then along came "peanut allergy" so now the shop sells some sort of seeds that no squirrel in its right mind seems to want.

waste of time really, as all it means is that folk stop at morrisons on the way in for a bag of monkey nuts.

Unfortunately nut allergy is on the increase, and it can easily be lethal, people may be unaware they even have the allergy until they feed the squirrels. I know it sounds over the top but I know 2 people with this and even the merest contact requires instant adrenaline injections to prevent probably fatal anaphylaxis.[/quote]

i'm curious as to how a latent nut allergy in a child (let alone an adult) can stay undetected for long enough that the first time they encounter it is when they are old enough (by which i mean at least ambulent) to feed the squirrels.

would they be allergic to the outer shell of the money nut?[/quote]

With allergies it can take one or a few exposures before the body creates the antibodies to them (a bit like one tends to get immunity after first infection with a childhood disease). A severe reaction can then occur even if exposure has occurred before without adverse effects. Yes the allergy is likely to include the outside of the shells. Nut allergies can include just one type of nut or several.

 

[Tinkstheminks]

in the botanic gardens, edinburgh, you used to be able to buy peanuts to feed the squirrels and pigeons (something enjoyed by kids for generations).

then along came "peanut allergy" so now the shop sells some sort of seeds that no squirrel in its right mind seems to want.

waste of time really, as all it means is that folk stop at morrisons on the way in for a bag of monkey nuts.

Unfortunately nut allergy is on the increase, and it can easily be lethal, people may be unaware they even have the allergy until they feed the squirrels. I know it sounds over the top but I know 2 people with this and even the merest contact requires instant adrenaline injections to prevent probably fatal anaphylaxis.[/quote]

i'm curious as to how a latent nut allergy in a child (let alone an adult) can stay undetected for long enough that the first time they encounter it is when they are old enough (by which i mean at least ambulent) to feed the squirrels.

would they be allergic to the outer shell of the money nut?[/quote]

With allergies it can take one or a few exposures before the body creates the antibodies to them (a bit like one tends to get immunity after first infection with a childhood disease). A severe reaction can then occur even if exposure has occurred before without adverse effects. Yes the allergy is likely to include the outside of the shells. Nut allergies can include just one type of nut or several.[/QUOTE]

But to legislate for this you surely need to ban all nuts & ban the use of nuts or nut extract in all food etc?

OR

Do we actually take responsibility for ourselves and accept that accidents and allergic reactions is the price the human race has to pay to earn the right to survive this planet? (Ooh...almost a quote for the war of the worlds there!!)

 

[alfablue]

in the botanic gardens, edinburgh, you used to be able to buy peanuts to feed the squirrels and pigeons (something enjoyed by kids for generations).

then along came "peanut allergy" so now the shop sells some sort of seeds that no squirrel in its right mind seems to want.

waste of time really, as all it means is that folk stop at morrisons on the way in for a bag of monkey nuts.

Unfortunately nut allergy is on the increase, and it can easily be lethal, people may be unaware they even have the allergy until they feed the squirrels. I know it sounds over the top but I know 2 people with this and even the merest contact requires instant adrenaline injections to prevent probably fatal anaphylaxis.[/quote]

i'm curious as to how a latent nut allergy in a child (let alone an adult) can stay undetected for long enough that the first time they encounter it is when they are old enough (by which i mean at least ambulent) to feed the squirrels.

would they be allergic to the outer shell of the money nut?[/quote]

With allergies it can take one or a few exposures before the body creates the antibodies to them (a bit like one tends to get immunity after first infection with a childhood disease). A severe reaction can then occur even if exposure has occurred before without adverse effects. Yes the allergy is likely to include the outside of the shells. Nut allergies can include just one type of nut or several.[/quote]

But to legislate for this you surely need to ban all nuts & ban the use of nuts or nut extract in all food etc?

OR

Do we actually take responsibility for ourselves and accept that accidents and allergic reactions is the price the human race has to pay to earn the right to survive this planet? (Ooh...almost a quote for the war of the worlds there!!)[/quote]
Well, generally nut sellers package their nuts with helpful labels stating "may contain nuts" so consumers are well informed and can choose. I think the zoo in question is being cautious (arguably over-cautious) but I can't say I blame them - they wouldn't want a dreadful nut incident at their zoo would they? What would be going too far is if shops could no longer sell nuts, as for the squirrel feeding, I don't see the change of food is a big loss (I accept that squirrels may have different views on this).

 

[Cycling Naturalist]

ah, but he could be a non-welsh speaking welshman (they do exist).

Not only that, they are about 80% of the population and they live in fear of meeting English people who do speak it.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

in the botanic gardens, edinburgh, you used to be able to buy peanuts to feed the squirrels and pigeons (something enjoyed by kids for generations).

then along came "peanut allergy" so now the shop sells some sort of seeds that no squirrel in its right mind seems to want.

waste of time really, as all it means is that folk stop at morrisons on the way in for a bag of monkey nuts.

Unfortunately nut allergy is on the increase, and it can easily be lethal, people may be unaware they even have the allergy until they feed the squirrels. I know it sounds over the top but I know 2 people with this and even the merest contact requires instant adrenaline injections to prevent probably fatal anaphylaxis.[/quote]

i'm curious as to how a latent nut allergy in a child (let alone an adult) can stay undetected for long enough that the first time they encounter it is when they are old enough (by which i mean at least ambulent) to feed the squirrels.

would they be allergic to the outer shell of the money nut?[/quote]

With allergies it can take one or a few exposures before the body creates the antibodies to them (a bit like one tends to get immunity after first infection with a childhood disease). A severe reaction can then occur even if exposure has occurred before without adverse effects. Yes the allergy is likely to include the outside of the shells. Nut allergies can include just one type of nut or several.[/quote]

But to legislate for this you surely need to ban all nuts & ban the use of nuts or nut extract in all food etc?

OR

Do we actually take responsibility for ourselves and accept that accidents and allergic reactions is the price the human race has to pay to earn the right to survive this planet? (Ooh...almost a quote for the war of the worlds there!!)[/quote]
Well, generally nut sellers package their nuts with helpful labels stating "may contain nuts" so consumers are well informed and can choose. I think the zoo in question is being cautious (arguably over-cautious) but I can't say I blame them - they wouldn't want a dreadful nut incident at their zoo would they? What would be going too far is if shops could no longer sell nuts, as for the squirrel feeding, I don't see the change of food is a big loss (I accept that squirrels may have different views on this).[/QUOTE]

the point i was making was that the botanic garden no longer sells peanuts (due to fear of peanut allergy) but in no way discourages/prohibits people bringing their own nuts in. the whole thing smacks of arse covering, probably at the behest of either the council's h&s exec, or their legal team.

 

[alfablue]

yep, point taken, I don't see why they shoudn't cover their arse.

 

[Nortones2]

This sort of stuff occurs where the organisation doesn't really have a proper perspective on risk. So, the typical LA ignores road traffic risks imposed by its own stupid painted bike lanes, but majors on the trivial. Just to show they can do something, even if they bottle out of the more challenging issues.

 

[Tinkstheminks]

This sort of stuff occurs where the organisation doesn't really have a proper perspective on risk. So, the typical LA ignores road traffic risks imposed by its own stupid painted bike lanes, but majors on the trivial. Just to show they can do something, even if they bottle out of the more challenging issues.

I think that's because you will always get a "blagger" employed in every walk of working life!! I'm looking at one right now!!!!
They talk a good talk but give them a real challenge which requires a bit of application of person skill....and....they come out with stupid, out-landish, sarcastic comments, undermining anybody in their way!! (Who isn't present to knock their smug heads off!!)

Oohs!!! Sorry!!!!

 

[Domeo]

It's also apparently legal for an englishman to shoot a welshman who is in the act of riding from wales into england on a horse on the third friday of the month. Or something.
(But I think it has to be a bow and arrow, not sure a gun counts)

I have feeling that this only legal in Chester.

 

[HJ]

Just for a moment there I though this was going to be about some insisting on cyclist wearing helmets, now that is Health & Safety gone MAD!!

 

[twentysix by twentyfive]

Just for a moment there I though this was going to be about some insisting on cyclist wearing helmets, now that is Health & Safety gone MAD!!

I've done my risk assessment on that .
















I don't own a helmet

 

[Rhythm Thief]

Is it H&S gone mad or spin gone mad? I didn't see the story.

I'd quite understand the council wanting to check the safety of an elderly lady getting to the middle of a roundabout and back.

Paint it up H&S lingo and it does sound rather silly.

But what's it got to do with anyone but the old lady in question?

 

[Tinkstheminks]

[quote="Rhythm Thief;43130]

Is it H&S gone mad or spin gone mad? I didn't see the story.

I'd quite understand the council wanting to check the safety of an elderly lady getting to the middle of a roundabout and back.

Paint it up H&S lingo and it does sound rather silly.

But what's it got to do with anyone but the old lady in question?[/QUOTE]

Today it's the old Lady's problem....Tomorrow it will be yours when you want to cycle on the roads but HSE say that all bikes need to have an MOT cert to be able to ride on the roads! The rest of the non bike owning nation will say "what's it got to do with us?" and so on!!

 

[Arch]

I assumed RT meant, "If the old lady wants to do it, it's her risk, and why should anyone stick their nose in".

If the council were asking her to do the gardening, I can see they might have some responsibility for her safety, but she's presumably doing it entirely of her own free will, and taking her own risk crossing the road.

 

[jay clock]

strikes me as odd that the Daily Mail brigade who roll out the "H&S gone mad" stuff are the same ones who slag off other countries for their poor standards when little Johnny falls off a balcony in Turkey or rents a car in Spain no child seat available. The UK is a very safe place and all these (flower bed stories) are about an Americanisation of the legal system rather than H&S rules