|
Dave Smith > wrote:
>Derek Lyons wrote: > >> Dave Smith > wrote: >> >> >I used to bake stuff for the bake sale >> >at my son's school. Then I found out that the were selling the stuff for less than >> >it cost me to make them. Nuts to that. All I was doing was providing someone with >> >cheap baked goods and the school was getting the money. >> >> Um. That's the *point* of it. > >Sure, the point was for the school to get to money. They could have made a lot more if >they had charged what the stuff was worth, or at least as much as it cost to make. > More likely they'd have made less, or at best about the same... And had a whole of unsold baked goods at the end of the day. These aren't gourmet shops. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
>But isn't there a disconnect when a group of people
>donate items that cost them $10 and the organization >prices them at $2.50? > >gloria p When people choose to spend more on the product they donate ($10) then the prearranged selling price of that product ($2.50) that simply means that the pinhead's few remaining brain cells are what're disconnected. Normal brained folks are usually far better at reasoning than you are. Based on common knowlege and what has transpired previously regarding what people are usually willing to spend they would prearrange a selling price of $10, so would agree that no one spend more than $2.50 in assembling the products. Are you getting the drift or are you of some planet where decisions are made with no foreTHOUGHT whatsoever? ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
>But isn't there a disconnect when a group of people
>donate items that cost them $10 and the organization >prices them at $2.50? > >gloria p When people choose to spend more on the product they donate ($10) then the prearranged selling price of that product ($2.50) that simply means that the pinhead's few remaining brain cells are what're disconnected. Normal brained folks are usually far better at reasoning than you are. Based on common knowlege and what has transpired previously regarding what people are usually willing to spend they would prearrange a selling price of $10, so would agree that no one spend more than $2.50 in assembling the products. Are you getting the drift or are you of some planet where decisions are made with no foreTHOUGHT whatsoever? ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
> " RJ "
> >On 30 Oct 2004 13:21:13 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote: > >>>But isn't there a disconnect when a group of people >>>donate items that cost them $10 and the organization >>>prices them at $2.50? >>> >>>gloria p >> > > >Cost to PTA $0.00 >Sell Price $2.50 > >Profit $2.50 > >Whats the problem ? ><rj> I think Gloria was also concerned with the cost to the baker to bake the cake ($10), which is why I suggested the baker buy back their own cake = no loss... the baker gets their cake and eats it too. Of course only a pinhead would spend $10 to bake a cake they know in advance will sell for $2.50... imagine such a schmuck having their own restaurant.... porterhose steak dinners: $2.50 Duh! ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
> " RJ "
> >On 30 Oct 2004 13:21:13 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote: > >>>But isn't there a disconnect when a group of people >>>donate items that cost them $10 and the organization >>>prices them at $2.50? >>> >>>gloria p >> > > >Cost to PTA $0.00 >Sell Price $2.50 > >Profit $2.50 > >Whats the problem ? ><rj> I think Gloria was also concerned with the cost to the baker to bake the cake ($10), which is why I suggested the baker buy back their own cake = no loss... the baker gets their cake and eats it too. Of course only a pinhead would spend $10 to bake a cake they know in advance will sell for $2.50... imagine such a schmuck having their own restaurant.... porterhose steak dinners: $2.50 Duh! ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
"" wrote:
> > On 30 Oct 2004 13:21:13 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote: > > >>But isn't there a disconnect when a group of people > >>donate items that cost them $10 and the organization > >>prices them at $2.50? > >> > >>gloria p > > > > Cost to PTA $0.00 > Sell Price $2.50 > > Profit $2.50 > > Whats the problem ? > <rj> Cost to donor $10 Profit to PTA $2.50 Potential loss to PTA $7.50 Recommendation: ask donors for cash instead of cakes. gloria p |
"Derek Lyons" wrote:
> More likely they'd have made less, or at best about the same... And > had a whole of unsold baked goods at the end of the day. These aren't > gourmet shops. Precisely. These are fundraisers, not businesses. Over the last several months, I've participated in many bake sales to raise money for causes ranging from Alzheimer's Disease to Christmas gifts for nursing home residents to relief for a family whose son had just been killed. I baked AND I bought. I baked with knowledge that my effort was a means to a charitable end, and not toward breaking even. And when I bought, I knew that the items were packaged short and undersold to encourage more buying. Most providers and purchasers at bake sales know these things and realize that sometimes there is simply no return on an investment. Personally, there is nothing in it for me other than knowing that I've done what I can do. There's a peculiar mentality driving society these days... defining everything monetarily... <it sounds like a monstrous real-life C. Montgomery Burns, sometimes> |
"" wrote:
> > >>But isn't there a disconnect when a group of people > >>donate items that cost them $10 and the organization > >>prices them at $2.50? > >> > >>gloria p > > > > Cost to PTA $0.00 > Sell Price $2.50 > > Profit $2.50 > > Whats the problem ? For me the problem is the $10 the donor puts out so that the PTA can make $2.50. It would be much easier for the donor to just give the PTA a $2.50 donation than to spend the money on ingredients and do all the work. I would bet that if the PTA provided the ingredients and parents volunteered to do the baking they would want to make back more than they spent. |
Donna Rose wrote:
> Man, I don't know where y'all have been going to bake sales. My mom's > church has an annual ethnic food festival, which I've written about here > in the past (I do all the cooking for the Serbian booth). In addition to > all the wonderful home-cooked ethnic foods available, most of the women > (and a few of the men) of the parish donate fantastic baked goods for the > bakery sale. The entire church hall is used as the bakery during this > festival, there is so much donated. > > Cakes and pies that are cut are $2 and $3 per slice, and whole cakes go > for $25. Of course, this festival has been going on for 15 years, so > people know the quality of the goods they will see there. And most folks > understand that it takes a lot of time and in many cases expensive > ingredients in order to produce some of these fantastic desserts. > > Folks don't go there looking for bargains on home-baked goods, they go > there looking for the quality they've come to expect. And they realize > that it is, indeed, a fund raiser, and don't mind paying the price if > they are assured of getting quality goods. That is the way I think it should be. At bake sale that I was referring to they would sell the whole cake for $2-3 and cookies were selling for $1 per dozen. It was a great bargain for the people who went to get cheap baked goods. They would have made more money if they just got the bakers to donate the money they would have spent on ingredients and forget about the sale. |
Alex Rast wrote:
> >On the contrary, due diligence can be a defense in a law suit. Failure > >to do otherwise may be deemed to be negligence. > > If you follow that line of reasoning, you've already succumbed to the fear > of lawsuits. Spending time considering how a situation might best be > positioned legally in advance of actually having a lawsuit amounts to the > kind of paranoia I'm talking about, that leads to irrational behaviour. I only follow that line of reasoning because of the time I have spent in court rooms and listened to due diligence defences. If you want to conduct some sort of business venture that offers products or services that may result in injury, go ahead. There will be lots of lawyers lining up to extract as much money from you as they can. It is an unfortunate reality. > It's up to them to decide what pricing to attach to an item. Since they're > the ones running the sale, they're the ones who should make the final > decisions. The idea is - in contributing to a bake sale by providing baked > goods, you don't provide them with all sorts of restrictions placed on them > like how much they can charge for them or who to sell to or what tables > they must set them on. If you did, then it would become more your sale > instead of theirs, in which case, again, you're perfectly free to set up a > private bake sale and forward the proceeds on to them. But if you donate to > their sale, then what price they decide to set is up to them. Yes, it is there sale so they can price things however they want. However, after seeing that they considered my goods to be worth less than I paid for the ingredients it was the last time I bothered. > Well, if you'd feel parasitic in buying somebody else's stuff, then again, > the option of simply donating money is always there. But begrudging others > because they don't price according to what you would price is trying to > impose your will on somebody else's decisions. Yes, I could simply donate the money. And as I have suggested, they would have made more money if the donors had simply given the money they would have spent on ingredients and saved themselves the work. However, it would not have been much of a bake sale. It would be a different matter if it was a soup kitchen or some sort of food bank. > >As I said before, it is a bake sale, not a food bank. The idea was to > >raise money for the association. I expect that they would consider > >contributions to be on a value added basis. > > Just because their sale wasn't being operated in the "official" capacity of > a charity doesn't mean they can't price at rates that include more people > rather than fewer. If an organisation pursues activities that have an > unintentional quasi-charitable effect I think this is altogether for the > good. Why not have the maximum benefit come to the maximum number of > people? One good reason is that, as mentioned before, the people who go to the expense and effort to provide the goods are disappointed in and insulted by the value placed on their contribution and lose interest in participating. > One of the ways society operates is under the premise that there are some > people who will give freely of their time, effort, and resources in order > to help other individuals or institutions without expecting any physical > compensation in return. In this case, the Association trusts that there > will be a certain number of people who will gladly provide baked items > without asking to be paid for the items they provide. That's the whole way > by which these kinds of events make money. No one was asking to be paid for their contribution. I am sure that we all felt that we were offering something of value. Obviously, they did not value the contribution and out efforts were squandered. > > If you take the opposite viewpoint and require that everybody receive > compensation for their contributions, this is the pure free-market > capitalist economy, without any not-for-profit entities whatsoever. A pure > free-market economy is a model some people advocate, but this would make it > impossible (essentially, by definition) for Associations and other such > entities to operate. So such organisations assume from the start that there > will be those who will contribute unconditionally. Once again, no compensation was requested or expected. All I wanted was for them to charge at least as much for the goods as I spent to make them, and preferably a little more because it was supposed to be a fundraiser. |
Franfogel wrote:
> In all the years I've been on this planet I have never heard > of anyone getting sick from something they > bought at a school bake sale. It could easily happen. I got a case of food poisoning from teriyaki meat sold on skewers at some sort of Asian cultural festival. Granted that baked items are less likely to be dangerous than meat, but lots of seemingly intelligent so-called "adults" have surprisingly little understanding of food safety. They'll eat stuff that's been out of refrigeration for hours, put fresh herbs and garlic under oil, etc. If they're going to invite Darwinian selection, I'd prefer they did it with their own genes. In California it is illegal to sell stuff made in a residential kitchen. I'd have no problem with the state shutting down any bake sale that violated that law. > Am I off the beam here? What do you think? > > Fran Wow. I haven't heard the term "off the beam" in decades, and even then it was in a rerun of a TV show that was itself really old. That's a term with an interesting etymology. |
|
JeanineAlyse in 29 Palms wrote:
> > In part, unicate (Alexis Siefert) asks.... > >As consumers (and parents) how much > >would you be willing to pay for, say, a > >bag of 4 largish pieces of divinity? A > >pineapple cake? A coconut cake? A > >coffee-cake-strudel muffin? > Primarily because these are sold at a fund raiser, I would be quite okay > with paying $2 for the divinity bag, $3.50 for either cake, and $2 for > the single muffin, or even $5 for a packaged two of them, provided > they're rather big ones. > > Picky ~JA~ $2 for a muffin but only $3.50 for a cake which is at least 5-6 times the size/volume? Sounds wrong to me. gloria p |
JeanineAlyse in 29 Palms wrote:
> > In part, unicate (Alexis Siefert) asks.... > >As consumers (and parents) how much > >would you be willing to pay for, say, a > >bag of 4 largish pieces of divinity? A > >pineapple cake? A coconut cake? A > >coffee-cake-strudel muffin? > Primarily because these are sold at a fund raiser, I would be quite okay > with paying $2 for the divinity bag, $3.50 for either cake, and $2 for > the single muffin, or even $5 for a packaged two of them, provided > they're rather big ones. > > Picky ~JA~ $2 for a muffin but only $3.50 for a cake which is at least 5-6 times the size/volume? Sounds wrong to me. gloria p |
In article >, "D.Currie"
> wrote: > OR -- they've done these bake sales a dozen times and they know what > the market will pay for a home-baked cake. Consumers look at those > things and they really don't care if they buy a cake or not, they're > buying as a "donation" and they have no idea if it will be edible or > not, so there's a limit to what they'll pay. You know you used > quality ingredients and a good recipe and it's going to taste good, > but the person buying doesn't know that. It is probably a combination of the two. However, IME, they make more money if you don't price them, but leave the donation up to the buyer. Say it is a fundraiser, and that they receive some baked goods in exchange for their donation. People, in general, tend to give much more than we would have priced them. There are a couple people who will be cheapskates, but overall people are generous. Regards, Ranee -- Remove Do Not and Spam to email "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 See my Blog at: http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ |
In article >,
"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote: > Sounds like bake sales have gone the way of Halloween. Something I noticed is that our kids aren't as excited about Halloween as we were. I think it's because we no longer really go trick or treating in neighborhoods in packs of kids with parents. Our community does a harbor trick or treat where the businesses hand out the candy and it's fun and the whole community participates and you get to see everyone, but it's not the same. > Next thing ya know, having a pot luck supper at church or other venue > will require bringing frozen entrees. We are fortunate that our kids go to small enough private schools and our church is small enough that people don't worry about this nonsense. Our biggest worry is the one member of our church who makes the french fried green bean casserole and jello molds. Regards, Ranee -- Remove Do Not and Spam to email "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 See my Blog at: http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ |
In article >, maxine in ri
> wrote: > Probably for the nut allergies. That, and when my daughter was > in elementary school, the theme at the PTO meetings was that > noone had time to bake from scratch, or some of them didn't know > how! If it's for nut allergies, a store bought cake isn't any precaution. Almost all the bakeries have those labels that nuts have actually been in our building at one point so don't eat here or you'll die. Regards, Ranee (who wonders how all these severely allergic people can even survive a trip to the grocery store if a whiff of nuts is enough to send them to the hospital) -- Remove Do Not and Spam to email "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 See my Blog at: http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ |
>> $2 for the single muffin, or even $5 for a packaged two of them, provided
they're >> rather big ones. >> >> Picky ~JA~ > >which is at least 5-6 times the size/volume? Sounds wrong to me. > >gloria p Sounds right to me... provided those two rather big muffins are DD cups. ;) ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
In article >, "D.Currie"
> wrote: > It could be that there's some other issue at the school that hasn't > been made public. Maybe one parent who can't abide by "no peanuts" > rules -- I've seen that sort of thing before -- people who believe > that other people's health issues are imaginary, and if they don't > see it, it won't hurt them. The school can't embarrass or point out > the one nutcase in the group, so they change the rules for everyone. While I think it is ridiculous to say that my son can't have a pb & j in his own lunch box when they already have strictly enforced rules about no sharing, we don't send them. We also don't send cookies with nuts in them, even though they are better, and we don't send peanut butter cracker snacks (though that's what is in his earthquake kit, because it was before we were told about the rule). It is ridiculous to make your allergy my responsibility, beyond asking me to let you know that something might have nuts in it. If the person would really die from miniscule amounts of nut dust, then _anything_ from our home is unsafe, because we don't keep our baking stuff and nuts and peanut butter all encapsulated and sterile and segregated from everything else. I still wonder how all these people who are deathly allergic to nuts even manage to get through a grocery store or bakery alive. Regards, Ranee -- Remove Do Not and Spam to email "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 See my Blog at: http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ |
In article >,
ospam (DJS0302) wrote: > I asked the same question a year or so ago. What I want to know is > what's to stop someone from using a container from the grocery store > for their own homemade product? I'll occasionaly buy things such as > cakes or cookies from the bakery department at the grocery store and > I always save the containers for just such a use. Personally I > would boycott a bake sale that required bought items. They could > always ask the person bringing the item if it contains any nuts or > other common allergic ingredients. If on the otherhand if someone > who is allergic to chocolate is stupid enough to buy and eat a pan of > brownies then they deserve to get sick. Yes, I'm bad but I tell it > like it is. Exactly! Why do peanut M & M's have to have labelling that says they might contain nuts. I sure hope they do, that's why I bought them. If someone is too stupid to buy peanut something or cashew something and then sue because they went into the hospital because of their known nut allergy, it should be thrown out of court. I do think that the labelling on things that aren't obviously nut products is useful, but it has gotten insane. Regards, Ranee (who is allergic to abalone, so they shouldn't allow it at seafood restaurants) -- Remove Do Not and Spam to email "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 See my Blog at: http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ |
>I'm using miniature loaf pans, and can
>make about 10 cakes from a >normal-sized cake batter Puester, do remember what these cakes are said to be, size-wise. The miniture loaf pans I have in mind would equal an amount of cake that comes to less than two large muffins in size. Certainly one tenth of a "normal" cake being paid for at the $3.50 is rather generous, even considering probable packaging. Picky ~JA~ |
>I'm using miniature loaf pans, and can
>make about 10 cakes from a >normal-sized cake batter Puester, do remember what these cakes are said to be, size-wise. The miniture loaf pans I have in mind would equal an amount of cake that comes to less than two large muffins in size. Certainly one tenth of a "normal" cake being paid for at the $3.50 is rather generous, even considering probable packaging. Picky ~JA~ |
Ranee Mueller wrote: > While I think it is ridiculous to say that my son can't have a pb & j > in his own lunch box when they already have strictly enforced rules > about no sharing, we don't send them. We also don't send cookies with > nuts in them, even though they are better, and we don't send peanut > butter cracker snacks (though that's what is in his earthquake kit, > because it was before we were told about the rule). It is ridiculous to > make your allergy my responsibility, beyond asking me to let you know > that something might have nuts in it. If the person would really die > from miniscule amounts of nut dust, then _anything_ from our home is > unsafe, because we don't keep our baking stuff and nuts and peanut > butter all encapsulated and sterile and segregated from everything else. > I still wonder how all these people who are deathly allergic to nuts > even manage to get through a grocery store or bakery alive. > It seems that a peanut allergy has become almost "fashionable" for a kid to have - kind of like ADD. I'm not discounting that in fact some people have peanut allergies but yes, your allergy is not *my* responsibility, at least in the public realm. The onus to protect your kid or whoever is on you, not me... It has gotten to the point where peanut products are considered more "evil" than tobacco, fer cryin' out loud... -- Best Greg |
Mark Thorson wrote:
> In California it is illegal to sell stuff made in a residential > kitchen. I'd have no problem with the state shutting down > any bake sale that violated that law. Are there exceptions to that law for the boyscouts pancake breakfast or the church potluck supper where everyone brings a dish and then pays to get in? I recall that being the law in Florida and Louisiana, but then there were exceptions that struck me as common sense. It really would be hard to write the law in a way that was perfect for every situation. You want to keep the public safe while not telling people how to cook in their own kitchens. --Lia |
In article >,
(JeanineAlyse in 29 Palms) wrote: > In part, unicate (Alexis*Siefert) asks.... > >As consumers (and parents) how much > >would you be willing to pay for, say, a > >bag of 4 largish pieces of divinity? A > >pineapple cake? A coconut cake? A > >coffee-cake-strudel muffin? > Primarily because these are sold at a fund raiser, I would be quite okay > with paying $2 for the divinity bag, $3.50 for either cake, and $2 for > the single muffin, or even $5 for a packaged two of them, provided > they're rather big ones. > > Picky ~JA~ Perfect. Thank you. That was the range I had in mind. And yes, the size of the cakes are what you're thinking, although the Pineapple Upside Down cakes are slightly larger than the coconut. I use small pot-pie tins for the p.u.d cakes -- the "top" of the cake (when flipped over) is just slightly larger than the size of a pineapple ring. I can, iirc, make about eight of those cakes from each batch of batter. I make about 10 of the coconut cakes from each batch of batter, but they cost slightly more, overall, to make (due to the cost of the cream of coconut). I'll be using packaging that I already have on hand (plates, wrapping, etc). I know I spent money of those initially, but I buy them in such bulk for my classes that it's not much of a sacrifice to use them for this. Thanks! Alexis. |
"Gregory Morrow" wrote:
> It seems that a peanut allergy has become almost "fashionable" for a kid to > have - kind of like ADD. I'm not discounting that in fact some people have > peanut allergies but yes, your allergy is not *my* responsibility, at least > in the public realm. The onus to protect your kid or whoever is on you, not > me... > > It has gotten to the point where peanut products are considered more "evil" > than tobacco, fer cryin' out loud... Nearly so. Actually, true peanut allergy is fairly uncommon. But fashionably, exposure to peanuts can bring on widespread apoplexy and media hysteria. |
> Exactly! Why do peanut M & M's have to have labelling that says they
>might contain nuts. I sure hope they do, that's why I bought them. If >someone is too stupid to buy peanut something or cashew something and >then sue because they went into the hospital because of their known nut >allergy, it should be thrown out of court. I do think that the >labelling on things that aren't obviously nut products is useful, but it >has gotten insane. > > Regards, > Ranee (who is allergic to abalone, so they shouldn't allow it at >seafood restaurants) Have you looked at ingredient labels on bakery products lately? They'll list all the ingredients like they're suppose to and then right under it it'll say contains wheat, eggs, nuts, etc. Why do they have to put it on there twice. It's already listed in the ingredient label? Incidentally, my mom is allergic to salmon. So far she has managed to close down 3 Red Lobsters in our city because they wouldn't cater to her whims and remove salmon from the menu. (Just kidding on that last part.) |
>What's more, I'd like to know where all the people with these deadly
>allergies were in the '50s, '60s, '70s, '80s, and early '90s. I never >heard of allergies like these until recent years, although I knew >plenty of people allergic to dust, pollen, pet dander, wool, etc., and >I don't think anyone died from those. > >-- >Wayne in Phoenix From 1st grade to my last year of college I did not hear of one person in school having a peanut allergy. What's funny is when someone says they're allergic to all nuts. How can that be? Peanuts aren't even true nuts, they're peas. If someone is truly allergic to peanuts shouldn't they also be allergic to other legumes like peas or beans? |
>(DJS0302) writes:
> > >From 1st grade to my last year of college I did not hear of one person in >school having a peanut allergy. What's funny is when someone says they're >allergic to all nuts. How can that be? Peanuts aren't even true nuts, >they're >peas. If someone is truly allergic to peanuts shouldn't they also be >allergic >to other legumes like peas or beans? Botanical classification has little to do with food allergies; a person can be alergic to one part of a plant but not the rest, some parts of a plant can be deadly poisonous but not the rest of the plant. http://allergies.about.com/od/peanuts/ ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
DJS0302 wrote:
> From 1st grade to my last year of college I did not hear of one person in > school having a peanut allergy. What's funny is when someone says they're > allergic to all nuts. How can that be? Peanuts aren't even true nuts, they're > peas. If someone is truly allergic to peanuts shouldn't they also be allergic > to other legumes like peas or beans? I was wondering the same thing not too long ago on this very group. I did some web research. I'm still no expert so I won't try to sum up what I learned in any technical language or try to convince you, but I did learn that, for some reason, in the world of allergies, a person life-threateningly allegic to peanuts is more likely also to be allergic to sesame, walnuts and pecans than to closer relatives like soy or peas. The world of what's related to what in the nut world is more complicated than I thought. As for why the explosion in the number of people with these serious allergies, the doctors are wondering about that too. It doesn't mean that the allergies (many of them, anyway) aren't real. --Lia |
Alan, wrote:
> > On 31 Oct 2004 05:24:57 GMT, ospam (DJS0302) > wrote: > >From 1st grade to my last year of college I did not hear of one person in > >school having a peanut allergy. > > Me, neither! I wonder how much of a problem it actually is? > > And, why people who are allergic don't just read the labels, > they certainly are redundant! (laugh) Natural selection. nancy (brought peanut butter and jelly sandwiches to school all the time. didn't notice anyone dropping over dead) |
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 09:57:18 -0600, Alan wrote:
>On 31 Oct 2004 05:24:57 GMT, ospam (DJS0302) >wrote: > >>>What's more, I'd like to know where all the people with these deadly >>>allergies were in the '50s, '60s, '70s, '80s, and early '90s. I never >>>heard of allergies like these until recent years, although I knew >>>plenty of people allergic to dust, pollen, pet dander, wool, etc., and >>>I don't think anyone died from those. >>> >>>-- >>>Wayne in Phoenix It was becoming an issue in the 80s and 90s. It was an issue for one of my baby sister's classmates in 1984. A girl in Ottawa died from her allergy in June of this year. See http://www.cbc.ca/outfront/listen/2003/oct0603.html for the story and audio link. She did a piece about living with a deadly allergy the year before on CBC Radio One's Outfront series. Unfortunately, that piece is no longer available in the CBC Radio Outfront past show archive. There have been some ideas as to what is triggering development of deadly allergies, some pertaining to early exposure to peanut proteins in breast milk. http://www.cbc.ca/story/science/nati...gy010404.htmlI think the interesting part will be determining why it is an issue now, and not for earlier generations. See http://www.cbc.ca/story/science/nati...uts030710.html http://www.cbc.ca/story/science/nati...rgy030401.html http://www.cbc.ca/story/news/nationa...re_030310.html for more info. Shirley Hicks Toronto, Ontario TB "A liberal is a conservative who's been through treatment." - Garrison Keillor |
Gregory Morrow wrote:
> It seems that a peanut allergy has become almost "fashionable" for a kid to > have - kind of like ADD. I'm not discounting that in fact some people have > peanut allergies but yes, your allergy is not *my* responsibility, at least > in the public realm. I know someone who has to carry an epipen because of her allergy to peanuts, and because I have heard so much about it. But the jury is out for me on ADD and its variants. We had kids like that in school. I was one of them. We were called brats, and being raised in the 50's the treatment was a swat on the rear. In most cases it did some good. The rise in "ADD" is probably closely related to the elimination of corporal punishment. Luckily, there has been some progress in the treatment of this new syndrome. It involves concentration exercises. Basically, the kids are forced to pay attention. While it is not effective in all cases it has certainly helped to filter out those kids who are truly ADD and those who are just brats. > The onus to protect your kid or whoever is on you, not > me... I agree. |
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 03:49:12 GMT, Puester >
wrote: >I had the same experience with our high school PTO. The teachers >sponsor a huge craft sale in early Nov. with the booth rental $$$ >going to a scholarship fund for kids who want to major in education >in college. The PTO has a bake sale table and donates the proceeds >to the scholarship fund. Too many times I have made or seen cakes >that cost ~$8 or more to make being sold for $2.50. I'd rather donate >the cost of the ingredients. My church runs an "Alternative Christmas Market" every November, with charities such as Habitat for Humanity, Heifers, Int'l., a children's cancer charity, a local women's shelter, another couple of international crafts charities and our United Methodists Women's bake sale. The bake sale creamed every other booth. Methodists seem to travel on their stomachs... "If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner." -- Duncan Hines |
|
|
"-L. :" > wrote in message om... > ospam (DJS0302) wrote in message > >... >> >What's more, I'd like to know where all the people with these deadly >> >allergies were in the '50s, '60s, '70s, '80s, and early '90s. I never >> >heard of allergies like these until recent years, although I knew >> >plenty of people allergic to dust, pollen, pet dander, wool, etc., and >> >I don't think anyone died from those. >> > >> >-- >> >Wayne in Phoenix >> >> >> >> From 1st grade to my last year of college I did not hear of one person in >> school having a peanut allergy. What's funny is when someone says >> they're >> allergic to all nuts. How can that be? Peanuts aren't even true nuts, >> they're >> peas. If someone is truly allergic to peanuts shouldn't they also be >> allergic >> to other legumes like peas or beans? > > The allergen in peanuts is peanut agglutinin. Some people cross-react > with other agglutinins (such as from soybeans), others don't. > Agglutinins are pretty nasty proteins. > > As for why we see these allergies now and not before - it's merely > because the allergen has been identified. People probably died from > them before, but the causative agent was unknown. By the same token, I'd never known anyone with a milk allergy until my daughter was born. Considering we lived in an isolated community, I'm lucky that I decided to breastfeed because I'm sure had I bottle-fed she would have died before they figured out what was wrong. When she was 10 mo. old we were posted elsewhere and the doctor we got for her didn't believe she had a milk 'allergy' until she had a reaction to spilled milk while in the pediatric unit of the local hospital. Turns out this president of the province's Medical Society had never heard of a milk allergy though he was familiar with lactose intolerance. Gabby |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:43 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter