How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
gluten was unless you were a baker?

> wrote in message
...
| How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
| a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
| intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
| gluten was unless you were a baker?

They died before they could tell you. Do you really care?

pavane

On Nov 17, 11:25*pm, " > wrote:
> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> gluten was unless you were a baker?

"yet alone"

let alone

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), "
> wrote:

> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> gluten was unless you were a baker?

As far as gluten intolerance goes, I've heard that wheat is bred with
more gluten in it now (I don't know why), so people who could tolerate
the wheat of back then can't tolerate it now. Think of it like
marijuana of the '60's vs. the marijuana of today. It's more
powerful.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

In article
>,
" > wrote:

> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanut_allergy

"about 150 people die annually from serious allergic food reactions.
That¹s the same number of people killed by bee stings and lightning
strikes combined. About 10,000 children are hospitalized annually with
traumatic brain injuries from sports, 2,000 children drown each year,
and about 1,300 die in gun accidents"

> no one was lactose
> intolerant,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactose_intolerance

"Lactose intolerance is the inability to metabolize lactose, because of
a lack of the required enzyme lactase in the digestive system. It is
estimated that 75% of adults worldwide show some decrease in lactase
activity during adulthood.[1] The frequency of decreased lactase
activity ranges from as little as 5% in northern Europe, up to 71% for
Sicily, to more than 90% in some African and Asian countries."

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:10:16 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article
> >,
> " > wrote:
>
>> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts,
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanut_allergy
>
> "about 150 people die annually from serious allergic food reactions.
> That¹s the same number of people killed by bee stings and lightning
> strikes combined.

This is the most credible explanation(s):

"However, there is an increasing body of medical opinion that,
while there definitely are food sensitivities, the dramatic uptick
in frequency of nut allergies and more particularly the measures
taken in response to the threat show elements of mass psychogenic
illness, hysterical reactions grossly out of proportion to the
level of danger:" (Modern day Salem Witch trials

Which compliments:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygiene_hypothesis

I once got a peanut stuck up my nose as a youngster (5 years old).
It was stuck in there pretty good requiring forceps. If that
didn't make me immune, nothing would.

-sw

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:

> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> gluten was unless you were a baker?

Because they didn't have the Internet. The world was much smaller.

Some mothers want their children to be "special' in some way or
another. I was allergic to shellfish and had to drink goat milk.
it those were real allergies at the time.

-sw

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>
>> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
>> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
>> gluten was unless you were a baker?
>
> Because they didn't have the Internet. The world was much smaller.
>
> Some mothers want their children to be "special' in some way or
> another. I was allergic to shellfish and had to drink goat milk.
> it those were real allergies at the time.

It is true that through the Internet and even TV, we know a lot more than we
used to. For instance, I now know that there are hoarders. Had I not seen
that show, I never would have known. I know that people buy abandoned
storage units and sometimes make a lot of money on them. I know what sorts
of things people pawn. I know about all sorts of sexual fetishes.

How would I have lived if I didn't know these things? I don't know.

My daughter's school has done away with books. Everything is done online
now. This can be a blessing and also a pain. I am relieved that she
doesn't have to carry a super heavy backpack. Just a heavy one. But it can
take a lot of time hunting through to pages looking for where to click to
access what she needs to access.

On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 23:57:45 -0800, Julie Bove wrote:

> It is true that through the Internet and even TV, we know a lot more than we
> used to. For instance, I now know that there are hoarders. Had I not seen
> that show, I never would have known. I know that people buy abandoned
> storage units and sometimes make a lot of money on them. I know what sorts
> of things people pawn. I know about all sorts of sexual fetishes.

I don't get much of that from Reel Sex. Assuming its a TV show,
what am I missing? (and even if it's not a TV show...). I think
I'm pretty much fetish free. But there's still a *lot* of ground
to cover.

> My daughter's school has done away with books. Everything is done online
> now. This can be a blessing and also a pain. I am relieved that she
> doesn't have to carry a super heavy backpack. Just a heavy one. But it can
> take a lot of time hunting through to pages looking for where to click to
> access what she needs to access.

Interesting. I never carried a backpack until I was older. I
never even carried a pen/pencil. I never even had a locker. I
came and left school empty handed all 3.5 years of high school
(well, not quite...but none of it school related) and still managed
to graduate a half-hear early.

But I would still miss books. I could remember every page of every
book I've read if you ask me to point something out. I can't
memorize bits and bytes as well.

-sw

In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>
> > How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> > a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> > intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> > gluten was unless you were a baker?
>
> Because they didn't have the Internet. The world was much smaller.
>
> Some mothers want their children to be "special' in some way or
> another. I was allergic to shellfish and had to drink goat milk.
> it those were real allergies at the time.
>
> -sw

LOL!! That's pretty much what I just wrote, too.

--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."
New York trip posted 11-13-2010; http://web.me.com/barbschaller

On Nov 18, 10:45*am, BlueBrooke > wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 01:01:45 -0600, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>
> >> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> >> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> >> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> >> gluten was unless you were a baker?
>
> Good question. *They didn't all have ADD back then, either. *

That's because kids who acted up suffered consequences. They
learned to discipline themselves and sit quietly when required to.

Cindy Hamilton

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:45:37 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:

> Our neighbors are like that. Their "asthmatic" daughter only seems to
> have these attacks when she's throwing a temper tantrum. Lots of
> coughing and spitting -- definitely not like the ones they have on TV.
> Being no expert on asthma, I suppose that's just how her's works. What
> I can't understand, though, is how she can be screaming and hollering
> so loudly for so long if she can't breathe?

How weird. We all know it's not asthma. The real questions are
how did it come to be known as an 'asthma' attack? Who else
besides themselves are buying that crap besides the kid and the
parents? It sounds like a convenient defense mechanism for oth the
parents and sadly, the child.

-sw

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:45:37 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:

> Good question. They didn't all have ADD back then, either.

Oh, and as for ADD, had it been "known" back then I would have
received a double dose. Of at least two medications.

But not because there was anything wrong with me. Which is most
often the case these days as well.

-sw

In article >,
BlueBrooke > wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 01:01:45 -0600, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
> >
> >> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> >> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> >> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> >> gluten was unless you were a baker?
>
> Good question. They didn't all have ADD back then, either.

Yes, they did. It just went untreated.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

In article >,
BlueBrooke > wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:15:22 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > BlueBrooke > wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 01:01:45 -0600, Sqwertz >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> >> >> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> >> >> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> >> >> gluten was unless you were a baker?
> >>
> >> Good question. They didn't all have ADD back then, either.
> >
> >Yes, they did. It just went untreated.
>
> Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> ratio that seems to be required now -- would have been war zones. They
> weren't. I think it was more a matter of requiring your children to
> behave, and teaching them that they were *not* the boss, than finding
> what drugs to medicate them with.
>
> Kids aren't required to behave anymore. Parents spend more time
> trying to convince everyone it isn't the kid's fault (and it isn't --
> lack of parenting is the adult's fault) than they do teaching their
> kids basic manners and responsibility.

Blah blah yackety schmackety. Nothing I haven't heard a hundred times,
and yet it changes nothing.

ADHD is a neurological deficit of the executive function. It's got
nothing to do with the amount of discipline a kid receives at home or at
school.

What you have with "well-behaved" ADHD people is people who've learned
coping mechanisms one way or another. The ADHD hasn't gone away, and
kids don't "grow out of it". They learn to manage it.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

In article >,
BlueBrooke > wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:51:05 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > BlueBrooke > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:15:22 +1300, Miche > wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article >,
> >> > BlueBrooke > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 01:01:45 -0600, Sqwertz >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> >> >> >> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> >> >> >> gluten was unless you were a baker?
> >> >>
> >> >> Good question. They didn't all have ADD back then, either.
> >> >
> >> >Yes, they did. It just went untreated.
> >>
> >> Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> >> -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> >> ratio that seems to be required now -- would have been war zones. They
> >> weren't. I think it was more a matter of requiring your children to
> >> behave, and teaching them that they were *not* the boss, than finding
> >> what drugs to medicate them with.
> >>
> >> Kids aren't required to behave anymore. Parents spend more time
> >> trying to convince everyone it isn't the kid's fault (and it isn't --
> >> lack of parenting is the adult's fault) than they do teaching their
> >> kids basic manners and responsibility.
> >
> >Blah blah yackety schmackety. Nothing I haven't heard a hundred times,
> >and yet it changes nothing.
> >
> >ADHD is a neurological deficit of the executive function. It's got
> >nothing to do with the amount of discipline a kid receives at home or at
> >school.
> >
> >What you have with "well-behaved" ADHD people is people who've learned
> >coping mechanisms one way or another. The ADHD hasn't gone away, and
> >kids don't "grow out of it". They learn to manage it.
>
> I'm not saying they're "well-behaved ADHD people." I'm not saying
> it's gone away or they've grown out of it.
>
> I'm saying they didn't have ADHD in the first place. I'm saying they
> didn't need to be medicated and put to sleep to make someone else's
> job easier. If you don't want to deal with kids, don't have kids, or
> don't take a job where you have to work with kids.
>
> I'm saying that ADHD is over-diagnosed because it's easier to live
> with a kid who is drugged up and doesn't rock the boat than it is to
> teach them responsibility and discipline. Or is it just a coincidence
> that parents stopped teaching their kids what "NO!" means and ADHD
> diagnosis skyrocketed?
>
> I've heard your "blah blah yackety schmackety" a hundred times and it,
> too, changes nothing. The ones I feel sorry for are the kids who are
> unnecessarily medicated and don't like the way it makes them feel. I
> honestly don't know how anyone can do that to a kid who doesn't need
> it. And I just don't believe that, all of a sudden, all these kids
> actually need that.

BTW, those kids who get ADHD drugs and don't have ADHD? It makes them
wired, not "drugged up and sleepy".

ADHD meds are stimulants, and one of the symptoms of ADHD is a
_paradoxical_ reaction to stimulants, meaning it calms them down and
helps them choose where to put their focus rather than having no
attention span and not being able to sit still.

What about those kids who do get "NO" and do get consequences and don't
get the medication _or any other treatment_ and STILL have ADHD?

We exist, and there are more of us than you think.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

Miche wrote:
> BlueBrooke > wrote:
>
>> I'm saying they didn't have ADHD in the first place. I'm saying they
>> didn't need to be medicated and put to sleep to make someone else's
>> job easier. If you don't want to deal with kids, don't have kids, or
>> don't take a job where you have to work with kids.
>>
>> I'm saying that ADHD is over-diagnosed because it's easier to live
>> with a kid who is drugged up and doesn't rock the boat than it is to
>> teach them responsibility and discipline. Or is it just a coincidence
>> that parents stopped teaching their kids what "NO!" means and ADHD
>> diagnosis skyrocketed?
>
> BTW, those kids who get ADHD drugs and don't have ADHD? It makes them
> wired, not "drugged up and sleepy".

On the one hand ADD/ADHD is now over diagnosed in my opinion.

> ADHD meds are stimulants, and one of the symptoms of ADHD is a
> _paradoxical_ reaction to stimulants, meaning it calms them down and
> helps them choose where to put their focus rather than having no
> attention span and not being able to sit still.

On the other hand if a kid is given stimulants and they calm the kid
down then the kid has ADD/ADHD and it is not misdiagnosed. I've never
been diagnosed and will avoid getting diagnosed but I use caffeine as a
calming agent. It does not wire me the way it does with non-ADD folks
and thus I do have ADD (ADD with hyperfocus in my case).

> What about those kids who do get "NO" and do get consequences and don't
> get the medication _or any other treatment_ and STILL have ADHD?
>
> We exist, and there are more of us than you think.

The gripping hand is that there are plenty of ADD folks who can manage
with coping strategies and no medication. Medicate everyone whose
reaction to stimulants is calming and you've medicated far too many
kids. Resist medicating as many as possible and you haven't medicated
enough kids. There's a balance in between somewhere.

I grew up in a time when 1 in 1500 was medicated. Way not enough and
the meds were insufficient for that one case. I've seen the droves of
kids getting medicated. Neither is a good approach. For myself I found
a career where borderline ADD symptoms are an advantage and I've done
well. It was stressful experimenting with my own career until I found
this work. Folk with less self direction might never do such
experimenting and end up miserable.

On food intolerances - There is speculation that a grain intolerance can
cause ADD. Something that parallels irritable bowel, leaky gut and
such. I don't know what to make of such speculations. I'm wheat
intolerant and mildly ADD but by the time I learned of it my ADD
symptoms did not reduce. Maybe they would if I went completely grain
free ...

In article >,
BlueBrooke > wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 21:55:25 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>
> >We exist, and there are more of us than you think.
>
> I'm not saying you don't exist. I'm saying there aren't as many as
> statistics would have us believe.
>
> If you want to see an ADHD kid in every other seat, that's up to you.
> I prefer not to find something wrong with every kid.

I graduated from high school in 1968. One of my best friends had seven
brothers. They were all on drugs. I didn't know the name back then,
but they were stimulants that acted like tranquilizers on them. They
all had the same body build, like toothpicks. Their behavior was a
little strange (although I didn't meet the two oldest, who were in the
military, but I saw their pictures). My friend also had seven sisters.
None were on drugs, and they all had normal body builds, and normal
behaviors.

> Sometimes, a kid is just a kid, not a "patient."

Their father was a respected doctor in town, the head of pathology for a
local hospital.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
BlueBrooke > wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 21:55:25 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>
> >We exist, and there are more of us than you think.
>
> I'm not saying you don't exist. I'm saying there aren't as many as
> statistics would have us believe.
>
> If you want to see an ADHD kid in every other seat, that's up to you.
> I prefer not to find something wrong with every kid.
>
> Sometimes, a kid is just a kid, not a "patient."

I'm not disputing that and I certainly don't see "an ADHD kid in every
other seat". In fact I tell parents with kids who show ADHD tendencies
not to get them tested _unless it's causing significant problems_.

I just can't help thinking how much better my life would have been if
I'd been diagnosed before my mid-30s.

I don't think "overdiagnosis" is the right word. I think the word to
use is "misdiagnosis". There are lot of kids who are being treated for
ADHD who aren't, sure (and there are other treatments besides
medication), but there are also a whole lot of kids who _do_ have ADHD
who _aren't_ being treated.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:58:43 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:15:22 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> BlueBrooke > wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 01:01:45 -0600, Sqwertz >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>>> >> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
>>> >> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
>>> >> gluten was unless you were a baker?
>>>
>>> Good question. They didn't all have ADD back then, either.
>>
>>Yes, they did. It just went untreated.
>>
>>Miche
>
> Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> ratio that seems to be required now --

um, where would this be? it might be thought a good thing, but i know of
no school system where it is 'required.' certainly not any public school.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:05:38 -0500, blake murphy
> wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:58:43 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:
>
> >
> > Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> > -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> > ratio that seems to be required now --
>
> um, where would this be? it might be thought a good thing, but i know of
> no school system where it is 'required.' certainly not any public school.
>
True, I haven't heard of that even for "needs improvement" schools.
Teachers may end up with a small class, but it's not that small by
mandate and the district packs them in as soon as possible. Umpteen
years ago the parents of a school friend of my daughter's moved to
Nevada because class size was 1 teacher to 18 students in elementary
at the time, but that's the lowest I've heard of for public school.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:58:43 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:15:22 +1300, Miche > wrote:
> >
> >>In article >,
> >> BlueBrooke > wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 01:01:45 -0600, Sqwertz >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> >>> >> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> >>> >> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> >>> >> gluten was unless you were a baker?
> >>>
> >>> Good question. They didn't all have ADD back then, either.
> >>
> >>Yes, they did. It just went untreated.
> >>
> >>Miche
> >
> > Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> > -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> > ratio that seems to be required now --
>
> um, where would this be? it might be thought a good thing, but i know of
> no school system where it is 'required.' certainly not any public school.

And guess what -- not all posters live in the USA.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 12:41:31 +1300, Miche wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:58:43 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:15:22 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article >,
>>>> BlueBrooke > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 01:01:45 -0600, Sqwertz >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:25:15 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>>>>> >> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
>>>>> >> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
>>>>> >> gluten was unless you were a baker?
>>>>>
>>>>> Good question. They didn't all have ADD back then, either.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, they did. It just went untreated.
>>>>
>>>>Miche
>>>
>>> Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
>>> -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
>>> ratio that seems to be required now --
>>
>> um, where would this be? it might be thought a good thing, but i know of
>> no school system where it is 'required.' certainly not any public school.
>
> And guess what -- not all posters live in the USA.
>
> Miche

o.k., where is the 1:15 ratio mandated outside the u.s.? i'm not being
sarcastic - it's probably a good idea that would never fly here.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 21:58:43 -0600, BlueBrooke wrote:

> > Sorry, but I'm not buying that. If that was the case, the classrooms
> > -- which had 30 or more students in them, not the 1:15 teacher:student
> > ratio that seems to be required now --
>
> um, where would this be? it might be thought a good thing, but i know of
> no school system where it is 'required.' certainly not any public school.

The State of California implemented a voluntary class size reduction
program for public schools some years ago. The State funded about 80%
of the cost of reducing class sizes in certain grades down to 20
students. This was great, but where were the local school districts
going to get the other 20% of the money? Most got it by increasing
class sizes! In our local school district, which is only K-6, class
sizes had been averaging about 29. The program was only for K-3. So
they upped class sizes for grades 4-6 to 32, and scraped up the rest of
the money, and reduced all classes in K-3 to 20 students.

Unfortunately, with the huge cuts in school funding in the State of
California, the program is being gutted.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:07:29 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

> The State of California implemented a voluntary class size reduction
> program for public schools some years ago. The State funded about 80%
> of the cost of reducing class sizes in certain grades down to 20
> students. This was great, but where were the local school districts
> going to get the other 20% of the money? Most got it by increasing
> class sizes! In our local school district, which is only K-6, class
> sizes had been averaging about 29. The program was only for K-3. So
> they upped class sizes for grades 4-6 to 32, and scraped up the rest of
> the money, and reduced all classes in K-3 to 20 students.
>
> Unfortunately, with the huge cuts in school funding in the State of
> California, the program is being gutted.

I don't know if I should laugh or cry!

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

> wrote in message
...
> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> gluten was unless you were a baker?

So let me get this straight. You are saying that when you were born in
1965, I never heard of food allergies? Actually I did. I was born in 1959.
I was allergic to milk. This came as no surprise to my mom because she
herself was allergic to milk (as well as other things) and some of her
brothers and sisters were as well.

My brother was born in 1962. When he was a toddler, he developed an allergy
to some cereal. It was either Quisp or Quake. I am not sure which. One
was corn and one was wheat. I do remember that. I was young enough not to
remember the particulars except that it was his favorite cereal and it upset
him not to get it. Eventually he was able to eat it again.

I also know that my parents do not understand food allergies. My mom knows
that she is allergic to eggs. So she does not eat eggs that are scrambled,
hard boiled or fried. But she does eat cake, waffles and other foods
containing eggs. She seems to think if she can not see them, they are not
there. She will eat the allergen and then wonder why she has gotten sick.
And lest you think she does not have life threatening allergies, I think she
does, to some things. We used to dine at a particular Mexican restaurant
and she said her throat close up when she drank their margaritas. But that
didn't stop her from drinking them. I haven't a clue what the problem would
have been with the margarita.

I also know that food allergies can change over time. I am no longer
allergic to dairy. Neither is my daughter. But we each developed new food
allergies.

Some people say that allergies are more prevalent now because we are too
clean. We use antibacterial things everywhere. I don't exactly know how
this relates to food but there is a theory along those lines.

Another thought is that we have better medical care than we used to. When
my parents were born, it was common to give birth at home. Few people could
afford to go to the hospital. Now most babies are born in the hospital
perhaps because there are more hospitals, more doctors and more people have
insurance. Was insurance even around when my parents were little? I don't
know.

I know that allergists were around when I was a kid. My parents went to
them on a regular basis for allergy shots.

I had an allergy test done at about age 16. It was done on the back and in
those days they put nasty scratches on the back then dabbed on the allergens
to see if there was a reaction. I was not tested for any foods. Only
inhalants. When I asked my mom about this she said in those days they did
not commonly test for food allergies. I do not think they even had Epi-Pens
in those days.

I do know that prior to having the allergy test done, I was stung by
something. I think it was a bee but I can't be sure. I was stung on the
heel, inside of my shoe and the insect was not in my shoe by the time I
limped home. I did have red swelling that extended up my leg onto my back.
The Dr. then told me I was allergic to bees. He gave me a cortisone shot,
told me to take some Benadryl and to carry Benadryl with me at all times.
If I ever was stung again, I was to take two of them and then go straight to
the hospital. He said I was lucky that the sting was as far from the heart
as possible.

After the allergy testing I took a series of shots that were eventually
supposed to make my allergies better. What the shots did do was lighten my
wallet and make my allergies worse. So I quit getting them.

A few years ago I went to another allergist for testing. What I learned was
that my food allergies are not IgE mediated. This is the potentially life
threading kind of allergy. I already knew that I had IgG allergies which
people sometimes refer to as sensitivities. In other words when you eat
whatever the offending food is, you get sick. But you don't have a
histamine response like you would with an IgE allergy. I also learned that
I am not allergic to bees. So either I outgrew that allergy or the insect
that stung me was not a bee. I went in for the testing because I *was*
stung by a bee and had only a slight reaction. It hurt and there was a
little swollen bump, but nothing like what had happened prior.

My daughter is allergic to peanuts (among other things). She has two
friends who are allergic to peanuts. I know a girl from her dance studio
who has a peanut allergy. And I know one adult who has a peanut allergy.

Were they actually less people who had peanut allergies back when I was a
kid? I don't know. Perhaps those people just died and we don't know why.
I don't know that we had testing for that in those days. Nor do I know that
we didn't have testing. I just don't know.

In article >,
"Julie Bove" > wrote:

> Were they actually less people who had peanut allergies back when I was a
> kid? I don't know. Perhaps those people just died and we don't know why.
> I don't know that we had testing for that in those days. Nor do I know that
> we didn't have testing. I just don't know.

More people; more and, presumably, more accurate testing; and more
widespread and faster dissemination of the information. I wonder if
the percentage of the population affected by allergies has changed
substantially.

http://www.npg.org/facts/us_historical_pops.htm
U.S. Population, July 1, 1965* 194,302,963

U.S. News & World Report article (the TinyURL is
http://tinyurl.com/27q72qw) says the U.S. Census bureau
estimates the start of 2010 at 308,400,408

JAT.
--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew; sometimes in a pickle."
New York trip posted 11-13-2010; http://web.me.com/barbschaller

Julie Bove wrote:
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> > How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
> > a single kid who was allergic to peanuts, no one was lactose
> > intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten, yet alone know what
> > gluten was unless you were a baker?
>
> So let me get this straight. You are saying that when you were born in
> 1965, I never heard of food allergies? Actually I did. I was born in 1959.
> I was allergic to milk. This came as no surprise to my mom because she
> herself was allergic to milk (as well as other things) and some of her
> brothers and sisters were as well.
>
> My brother was born in 1962. When he was a toddler, he developed an allergy
> to some cereal. It was either Quisp or Quake. I am not sure which. One
> was corn and one was wheat. I do remember that. I was young enough not to
> remember the particulars except that it was his favorite cereal and it upset
> him not to get it. Eventually he was able to eat it again.
>
> I also know that my parents do not understand food allergies. My mom knows
> that she is allergic to eggs. So she does not eat eggs that are scrambled,
> hard boiled or fried. But she does eat cake, waffles and other foods
> containing eggs. She seems to think if she can not see them, they are not
> there. She will eat the allergen and then wonder why she has gotten sick.
> And lest you think she does not have life threatening allergies, I think she
> does, to some things. We used to dine at a particular Mexican restaurant
> and she said her throat close up when she drank their margaritas. But that
> didn't stop her from drinking them. I haven't a clue what the problem would
> have been with the margarita.
>
> I also know that food allergies can change over time. I am no longer
> allergic to dairy. Neither is my daughter. But we each developed new food
> allergies.
>
> Some people say that allergies are more prevalent now because we are too
> clean. We use antibacterial things everywhere. I don't exactly know how
> this relates to food but there is a theory along those lines.
>
> Another thought is that we have better medical care than we used to. When
> my parents were born, it was common to give birth at home. Few people could
> afford to go to the hospital. Now most babies are born in the hospital
> perhaps because there are more hospitals, more doctors and more people have
> insurance. Was insurance even around when my parents were little? I don't
> know.
>
> I know that allergists were around when I was a kid. My parents went to
> them on a regular basis for allergy shots.
>
> I had an allergy test done at about age 16. It was done on the back and in
> those days they put nasty scratches on the back then dabbed on the allergens
> to see if there was a reaction. I was not tested for any foods. Only
> inhalants. When I asked my mom about this she said in those days they did
> not commonly test for food allergies. I do not think they even had Epi-Pens
> in those days.
>
> I do know that prior to having the allergy test done, I was stung by
> something. I think it was a bee but I can't be sure. I was stung on the
> heel, inside of my shoe and the insect was not in my shoe by the time I
> limped home. I did have red swelling that extended up my leg onto my back.
> The Dr. then told me I was allergic to bees. He gave me a cortisone shot,
> told me to take some Benadryl and to carry Benadryl with me at all times.
> If I ever was stung again, I was to take two of them and then go straight to
> the hospital. He said I was lucky that the sting was as far from the heart
> as possible.
>
> After the allergy testing I took a series of shots that were eventually
> supposed to make my allergies better. What the shots did do was lighten my
> wallet and make my allergies worse. So I quit getting them.
>
> A few years ago I went to another allergist for testing. What I learned was
> that my food allergies are not IgE mediated. This is the potentially life
> threading kind of allergy. I already knew that I had IgG allergies which
> people sometimes refer to as sensitivities. In other words when you eat
> whatever the offending food is, you get sick. But you don't have a
> histamine response like you would with an IgE allergy. I also learned that
> I am not allergic to bees. So either I outgrew that allergy or the insect
> that stung me was not a bee. I went in for the testing because I *was*
> stung by a bee and had only a slight reaction. It hurt and there was a
> little swollen bump, but nothing like what had happened prior.

I don't know about allergy testing and immunotherapy in the old days, I
only started going to an allergist in the last 5 years or so. I do know
that if you find a good allergist these days the treatments work
wonderfully.

I used to be (for decades) *very* allergic to cats. Of course I can't
stand dogs and love cats, so I just dealt with the allergy and
fortunately when I had a cat around all the time the allergy would taper
off a bit to more tolerable levels, but I'd still always be congested,
sneeze a lot, and if I got "cat" too close to my eyes they'd get all
swollen and itchy. After testing and a couple months of twice weekly
allergy shots my cat allergy is entirely gone. I can stuff my face in
"cat" can not have the slightest reaction, and any cat, not just mine.

My insurance covers the allergy testing and treatment 100% with just a
$25 office visit co-pay, and since I do self administered shots, that's
been only quarterly. Starting in January the are eliminating that co-pay
as well. The allergists say that immunotherapy works for 90%+ of people,
so it's well worth giving it a try.

Julie Bove wrote:
> > wrote:
>
>> How come when I was growing up, I was born in 1965, you never heard of
>> a single kid who was allergic to peanuts

There was a word for people with peanut allergies - Dead. Folks died
suddenly every so often. In this decade it has gotten rare enough that
cuases that once killed no longer do.

>> no one was lactose
>> intolerant, and no one was allergic to gluten

Plenty of people had digestion problems but they tracked what caused it
and stopped eating foods that made them sick. Somewhere along the line
folks lost the concept that foods can cause problems. Now the most
common prescriptions are for indigestion medications.

>> yet alone know what
>> gluten was unless you were a baker?

Some people have never been foodies.

> So let me get this straight. You are saying that when you were born in
> 1965, I never heard of food allergies? Actually I did. I was born in 1959.
> I was allergic to milk. This came as no surprise to my mom because she
> herself was allergic to milk (as well as other things) and some of her
> brothers and sisters were as well.

It's also true that certain traits have always run in families and no
one learned why. I used to have a smokers cough but I never used
tobacco. Several people in my family have had the same cough for their
entire lives. When I went wheat free as a side effect of starting
Atkins it went away. It took me months before trying wheat again and
sure enough the cough returned. So did the snoring, the indigestion and
other assorted traits that had been present my entire life. Knowing I
could make them go away by staying wheat free changed my idea of what
normal is.

Before I was not wheat intolerant I was just normal. After I am now
wheat intolerant and my normal is far better.

> I also know that my parents do not understand food allergies. My mom knows
> that she is allergic to eggs. So she does not eat eggs that are scrambled,
> hard boiled or fried. But she does eat cake, waffles and other foods
> containing eggs. She seems to think if she can not see them, they are not
> there. She will eat the allergen and then wonder why she has gotten sick.

If you track what you eat and how you react you learn your intolerances.
Few ever do that. Many state they don't have intolerances but they
have never tracked and thus make the statement based on lack of actual
data. If you have regular indigestion there's a cause. Taking meds can
never work as well as tracking what foods you ate and then dropping the
suspects.

> I also know that food allergies can change over time. I am no longer
> allergic to dairy. Neither is my daughter. But we each developed new food
> allergies.

My intolerance symptoms change intensity based on length of avoidance.

> Some people say that allergies are more prevalent now because we are too
> clean. We use antibacterial things everywhere. I don't exactly know how
> this relates to food but there is a theory along those lines.

I think it's because 1) we pay attention to the intolerances and 2) we
ignore that foods can cause problems so we eat a lot of potential
problem foods.

Julie Bove wrote:

>
> I also know that my parents do not understand food allergies. My mom knows
> that she is allergic to eggs. So she does not eat eggs that are scrambled,
> hard boiled or fried. But she does eat cake, waffles and other foods
> containing eggs. She seems to think if she can not see them, they are not
> there. She will eat the allergen and then wonder why she has gotten sick.
> And lest you think she does not have life threatening allergies, I think she
> does, to some things. We used to dine at a particular Mexican restaurant
> and she said her throat close up when she drank their margaritas. But that
> didn't stop her from drinking them. I haven't a clue what the problem would
> have been with the margarita.
>


My husband's late aunt was PhD in science (entomology) and decided in
her declining years that she could not go out in public because she was
afraid of getting the flu. She said she couldn't get a flu shot because
she was allergic to albumen (egg, on which the virus is cultured.) Yet
she ate eggs for breakfast every day for the last 30 years of her life,
at least as evidenced by her food diary and the stacks of egg cartons in
her garage.

You can't convince people who don't want to be convinced.

gloria p

"gloria.p" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> My husband's late aunt was PhD in science (entomology) and decided in her
> declining years that she could not go out in public because she was afraid
> of getting the flu. She said she couldn't get a flu shot because
> she was allergic to albumen (egg, on which the virus is cultured.) Yet
> she ate eggs for breakfast every day for the last 30 years of her life, at
> least as evidenced by her food diary and the stacks of egg cartons in her
> garage.
>
> You can't convince people who don't want to be convinced.
>
> gloria p

It is entirely possible to be allergic to flu shots and not to eating eggs.
I am. I can eat eggs and chicken with no problems at all. If I get a flu
shot I suffer for three days. I am allergic to feathers.


Ms P

On Nov 18, 2:52*am, "Julie Bove" > wrote:
>
> So let me get this straight. *You are saying that when you were born in
> 1965, I never heard of food allergies? *Actually I did. *I was born in 1959.
> I was allergic to milk. *This came as no surprise to my mom because she
> herself was allergic to milk (as well as other things) and some of her
> brothers and sisters were as well.


I'm not denying that people had food allergies back then. It just
wasn't as prevalent as it is today. Out of the hundreds of kids I
went through school with there was not one case of someone being
allergic to peanuts, soy, gluten, etc. If someone had died because of
it you would have known it.

I believe part of the problem today, and others have speculated this
too, is people are too clean. They've also abused antibiotics and
they're always coming out with some new vaccine to fight the next
epidemic that's certainly going to wipe out a good chunk of the
population. Your body's immune system needs something to fight. When
there aren't any germs for it to fight it finds something else to
fight, like peanut proteins for example.

I do believe for many people it has become a badge of honor to say
that their kid suffers from some sort of ailment, whether it be a food
allergy, ADHD, autism, or something else.

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:19:48 -0800 (PST), "
> wrote:

>On Nov 18, 2:52*am, "Julie Bove" > wrote:
>>
>> So let me get this straight. *You are saying that when you were born in
>> 1965, I never heard of food allergies? *Actually I did. *I was born in 1959.
>> I was allergic to milk. *This came as no surprise to my mom because she
>> herself was allergic to milk (as well as other things) and some of her
>> brothers and sisters were as well.
>
>
>I'm not denying that people had food allergies back then. It just
>wasn't as prevalent as it is today. Out of the hundreds of kids I
>went through school with there was not one case of someone being
>allergic to peanuts, soy, gluten, etc. If someone had died because of
>it you would have known it.

Peanuts and soy were not used in nearly as many products as they are
now, so people were just not exposed to these things with the
frequency they are these days. Allergies arise with increased exposure
to an allergen.

And I knew about celiacs at least from the mid to late1960s, about the
time I was grown up enough to even be aware of such things. You
probably did not know an allergy from an asshole when you were a kid
in school.
>
>I believe part of the problem today, and others have speculated this
>too, is people are too clean. They've also abused antibiotics and
>they're always coming out with some new vaccine to fight the next
>epidemic that's certainly going to wipe out a good chunk of the
>population. Your body's immune system needs something to fight. When
>there aren't any germs for it to fight it finds something else to
>fight, like peanut proteins for example.

I am not even going to take that paragraph apart. It is such a
mishmash of medical and scientific distortion that the few true grains
left are useless.
>
>I do believe for many people it has become a badge of honor to say
>that their kid suffers from some sort of ailment, whether it be a food
>allergy, ADHD, autism, or something else.

And I say you're full of shit. Seeing an anguished parent rush a kid
to the ER with an allergic reaction or suffer through raising a
troubled kid with ADHD, or watch one dealing with an autistic spectrum
child is not seeing anyone having a grand old time. Shame on you.
Really.

Boron

Boron Elgar wrote:

>
> Seeing an anguished parent rush a kid
> to the ER with an allergic reaction or suffer through raising a
> troubled kid with ADHD, or watch one dealing with an autistic spectrum
> child is not seeing anyone having a grand old time. Shame on you.
> Really.
>
> Boron


Thank you for that. There are many more kids with educational, physical
and emotional problems today than ever before and we don't know why. We
were told "sit down, shut up, and learn" and it worked for most of our
generation (but not all!) It just doesn't work for today's kids for a
wide variety of possible reasons.

gloria p

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 15:34:02 -0700, "gloria.p" >
wrote:

> Thank you for that. There are many more kids with educational, physical
> and emotional problems today than ever before and we don't know why.

People are now caring for their disabled children instead of putting
them in an orphanage or "a home". Remember that what the senior
Kennedy's did with their retarded child was common for the day. Those
who couldn't afford it, shut them away from society in their own homes
and never discussed the matter with anyone outside the family. It
just was another skeleton to be kept in the closet.



--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 22:00:56 -0600, Omelet >
wrote:

>Best cure for ADD in kids (imho) is regular recesses and LOTS of
>physical activity! Let them run off the excess energy that is perfectly
>normal for kids.
>
>Maybe we'd have fewer obese kids too...

An ADD kid sure doesn't have a problem sitting in front of a game
system for six hours at a time...concentrating!

On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 06:35:15 -0500, Mr. Bill > wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 22:00:56 -0600, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
> >Best cure for ADD in kids (imho) is regular recesses and LOTS of
> >physical activity! Let them run off the excess energy that is perfectly
> >normal for kids.
> >
> >Maybe we'd have fewer obese kids too...
>
> An ADD kid sure doesn't have a problem sitting in front of a game
> system for six hours at a time...concentrating!
>
The game is happening fast and that's just the way they like it. One
of my son's friends put his ADD to good use and is now a Marine pilot
(I think he was a colonel the last time I saw him) flying Harrier
jets. He's training to fly whatever the newest fighter is at some
airforce base in the US at the moment.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

Mr. Bill wrote:
> Omelet > wrote:
>
>>Best cure for ADD in kids (imho) is regular recesses and LOTS of
>>physical activity! Let them run off the excess energy that is perfectly
>>normal for kids.
>
> An ADD kid sure doesn't have a problem sitting in front of a game
> system for six hours at a time...concentrating!

It's not that we are deficit in attention. It's that you majority folks
are definicit in focus. It takes focus to do certain activities that
happen to include games and we have focus in abundance. There ya go.

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 22:00:56 -0600, Omelet wrote:

> In article
> >,
> " > wrote:
>
>> I do believe for many people it has become a badge of honor to say
>> that their kid suffers from some sort of ailment, whether it be a food
>> allergy, ADHD, autism, or something else.
>
> munchausen's syndrome anyone? ;-)
>
> Best cure for ADD in kids (imho) is regular recesses and LOTS of
> physical activity! Let them run off the excess energy that is perfectly
> normal for kids.
>
> Maybe we'd have fewer obese kids too...

what happened to you?

blake

"BlueBrooke" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:19:48 -0800 (PST), "
> > wrote:
>
>>I'm not denying that people had food allergies back then. It just
>>wasn't as prevalent as it is today. Out of the hundreds of kids I
>>went through school with there was not one case of someone being
>>allergic to peanuts, soy, gluten, etc. If someone had died because of
>>it you would have known it.
>>
>>I believe part of the problem today, and others have speculated this
>>too, is people are too clean. They've also abused antibiotics and
>>they're always coming out with some new vaccine to fight the next
>>epidemic that's certainly going to wipe out a good chunk of the
>>population. Your body's immune system needs something to fight. When
>>there aren't any germs for it to fight it finds something else to
>>fight, like peanut proteins for example.
>>
>>I do believe for many people it has become a badge of honor to say
>>that their kid suffers from some sort of ailment, whether it be a food
>>allergy, ADHD, autism, or something else.
>
> That is certainly how it works around here. You need a label for your
> kid, and "strong, healthy kid" isn't one of them. My son ate a lot of
> dirt. Maybe there is something to that. :-)

My kids played outside in the dirt. My oldest son has developed allergies
to all sorts of things as an adult. My youngest son doesn't even have hay
fever.

Ms P