No Apples please: allergies and the (almost) adult

[Swordfish]

1 minute ago, Dr. Pepper said:

You could say that about any food.  You can't eliminate apple, egg, flour, etc residue without banning those foods on planes.  It's completely unreasonable.  Hence the need for an allergy sufferer to clean the surfaces they will be touching.  

Well, I haven't heard stories about people dying from exposure to eggs, flour, etc...  

Are you suggesting the risk is equal for all of these allergies?

 

Quote

There is scientific consensus about the topic, but unfortunately public consensus doesn't agree for whatever reason.  

And what does it tell us?

[Dr. Pepper]

1 minute ago, Swordfish said:

Well, I haven't heard stories about people dying from exposure to eggs, flour, etc...  

Are you suggesting the risk is equal for all of these allergies?

 

And what does it tell us?

Surely you know that people have all sorts of allergies, not just nuts.  One just needs to google various food or animal allergy and death and see that, yes, people do actually die from allergies other than nuts.  The OP is a story about someone so allergic to apples that the school has taken to banning people from so much as carrying an apple or a bottle of apple juice in their bags when near certain areas of campus. 

As for what it tells us, I've been pretty clear so no idea what you're asking.  It's not exactly unusual for the public to contradict science in the name of viral outrage.  I suppose it also tells us that perhaps healthcare providers aren't doing such a great job at teaching people how to manage their allergy when moving about the world.  

[Whitestripe]

7 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

The OP is a story about someone so allergic to apples that the school has taken to banning people from so much as carrying an apple or a bottle of apple juice in their bags when near certain areas of campus. 

 

At least we can assume it's a  severe apple allergy. The email to campus doesn't actually say. Who knows.   

[Dr. Pepper]

35 minutes ago, Whitestripe said:

At least we can assume it's a  severe apple allergy. The email to campus doesn't actually say. Who knows.   

Yeah, it's hard to know if it's severe or if the school is simply erring on the side of caution/typical legal advice.  I hope no one is trying to find out who the student is in order to harass them about it.  Though, I am curious what thoughts on campus are about it right now.  

[Whitestripe]

21 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Yeah, it's hard to know if it's severe or if the school is simply erring on the side of caution/typical legal advice.  I hope no one is trying to find out who the student is in order to harass them about it.  Though, I am curious what thoughts on campus are about it right now.  

At first people were confused and thought it was some sort of protest against Apple technology products. Then they thought it might be part of a psychology experiment on human behavior (most of the classrooms are in the fancy new science center). After that, it's been a non-issue, really. But people did scratch their heads and say "Really?!" Of course, I'm not often over on that side of campus so I don't know if people are indeed not bringing apples. There's a cafe in that building. I don't know if they are still selling apples. 

[Gertrude]

Maybe I'm assuming too much reasonableness on the part of both parties, but there are a couple of factors that would make me think the request and acquiescence is unreasonable. If the apple allergy is not a hospitalization-level of severity or if the request came with a strong-arm tactic (threat of legal action). This is not the same as the college deciding on their own that they need to cover their ass. I think the banning of things in bags that are not taken out might be going too far, but I don't know all the details. It might be that they decided to go a step further than necessary so that there is a buffer. I doubt there will be a search or any sort of consequence for people who do break rules other than confiscation and possibly a talking to.

Actually, I do have a question. Is there anything other than the ban in the e-mail? Like procedures on what to do if an apple situation happens? If there is a spill from a contraband juice box, are there instructions to report it for proper cleaning, does it just ask professors/students to clean it up, or is it not addressed? If it's not addressed, that might lead me to believe that the allergy is not as severe as a ban makes it seem. If that's the case, then an email requesting a voluntary ban for courtesy sake and awareness seems more appropriate.

eta: in reading the text of the email again, it doesn't actually ban them, just asks people from refraining to use them. Seems a polite enough request and not really something they plan to enforce in any way - just more of a general awareness thing. Is there more or is this the entirely of the text about apples?

[Theda Baratheon]

9 hours ago, Whitestripe said:

 Still not the same trigger warnings.  It's been a controversy at American colleges/universities for a while.  According to this article on The Atlantic Monthly it's a movement, driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense.  I brought it up in the OP because some may see it as another example of college kids (who may or may not be able to handle managing their own allergies) asking for special accommodations.

For example if your professors were told that they needed to use trigger warnings, then a class on The Iliad would need to have a disclaimer that the subject matter contained slavery, violence, and rape.

I mean...I'm an Ancient History grad lmao and before that I studied Classical Civilisations in College (college and uni not the same thing in the UK) I freakin love the Iliad and studied it in depth and it wouldn't have phased me one bit  at the start of the term in either College or Uni if an email or a disclaimer was mentioned like "this book contains slavery violence and rape" it's just a disclaimer. I mean, I'm personally fine with their being no disclaimer but then I don't know the personal lives of my classmates and what they've been through.

I fail to see how mental health and physical health are so different and why physical health (wet floor signs) is more legitimate than mental health.

Trigger warnigs have turned into a cruel joke online which I think is really unfair. It just seems a courtesy to me. 

It doesn't mean a student is never going to have to deal with a certain theme their whole lives and be coddled, they're just going to be given a small warning so they can be prepared. I'll have to dig up a good post I read about soemones personal experience with trigger warnings that I read the other day 

Anyway sorry to derail the thread a bit I just think ' my generation' are shit on quite a bit for being narcissistic, selfish, last, entitled and coddled and I just don't see it. And I get tired of it. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 hours ago, Theda Baratheon said:

I mean...I'm an Ancient History grad lmao and before that I studied Classical Civilisations in College (college and uni not the same thing in the UK) I freakin love the Iliad and studied it in depth and it wouldn't have phased me one bit  at the start of the term in either College or Uni if an email or a disclaimer was mentioned like "this book contains slavery violence and rape" it's just a disclaimer. I mean, I'm personally fine with their being no disclaimer but then I don't know the personal lives of my classmates and what they've been through.

I fail to see how mental health and physical health are so different and why physical health (wet floor signs) is more legitimate than mental health.

Trigger warnigs have turned into a cruel joke online which I think is really unfair. It just seems a courtesy to me. 

It doesn't mean a student is never going to have to deal with a certain theme their whole lives and be coddled, they're just going to be given a small warning so they can be prepared. I'll have to dig up a good post I read about soemones personal experience with trigger warnings that I read the other day 

Anyway sorry to derail the thread a bit I just think ' my generation' are shit on quite a bit for being narcissistic, selfish, last, entitled and coddled and I just don't see it. And I get tired of it. 

Theda,

In the article Whitestripe posted the authors make the point that tigger warnings were originally just a heads up about what students were going to see in the course material during the upcoming term.  The authors go on to say this has changed:

Quote

In an article published last year by Inside Higher Ed, seven humanities professors wrote that the trigger-warning movement was “already having a chilling effect on [their] teaching and pedagogy.” They reported their colleagues’ receiving “phone calls from deans and other administrators investigating student complaints that they have included ‘triggering’ material in their courses, with or without warnings.” A trigger warning, they wrote, “serves as a guarantee that students will not experience unexpected discomfort and implies that if they do, a contract has been broken.” When students come toexpect trigger warnings for any material that makes them uncomfortable, the easiest way for faculty to stay out of trouble is to avoid material that might upset the most sensitive student in the class.

 

 

That's much more than a mere heads up.  That is a desire to limit what may and may not be used for pedagogical purposes in a given class.  Now, this may be due to the more "customer friendly" attitude non-academic administrators are fostering in colleges today.  But without the inital desire from students to scrub all "triggering" materials from classes there wouldn't be a push back from administrators to faculty about "triggering" material.

The injtal desire for limitations on academic freedom is coming from students.

 

[Theda Baratheon]

I think this paranoia over trigger warnings is honestly one of the kit overblown things ever. I mean, in REALITY, how many proffessors have been fired for not including a trigger warning or have been told off? It seems to me its a case of a FEW anecdotal pieces of evidence and a lot of paranoia, defensiveness and misunderstanding. 

I see a trigger warning as just THAT, a WARNING, a DISCLAIMER and yet somehow so many people are it and think PROHIBITION and banning. I don't believe in banning books or reading material at Universities at all but I DON'T see a problem with a small disclaimer being used in the module catalogue for when students are picking their courses that get a small disclaimer of "contains: ______" there  is NOTHING in that hypothetical about BANNING reading material. 

I mean if you were really looking to play devils advocate you could point out I deem physical and mental health as just as important/significant as each other and so if I believed in not banning books I wouldn't believe in banning foods but youre not supposed to eat good in classrooms anyway  and you're not hugely depriving students of anything by asking them not to eat Apple's or drink Apple juice in class. Whereas banning books and reading material is a dystopian notion and frightening in terms of academia however...unlike a lot of people I don't see the term "trigger warning" and jump to the worst possible conclusion that this student wants to ban reading materials and get lecturers fired and usher in a reign of academia dystopia 

[Theda Baratheon]

I mean WARNING: CONTAINS NUTS is a freakin trigger warning!! It's a courtesy to those with but allergies to stay away from that product or consume at their own risk what is so different to 'contains extreme violence' (again...a TRIGGER WARNING) and 'this module will deal with the theme of rape' I mean it's just a courtesy, just a DISCLAIMER and offers the choice to the consumer/student about wheher they want to continue 

[Whitestripe]

8 hours ago, Gertrude said:

 

eta: in reading the text of the email again, it doesn't actually ban them, just asks people from refraining to use them. Seems a polite enough request and not really something they plan to enforce in any way - just more of a general awareness thing. Is there more or is this the entirely of the text about apples?

That, along with the list of classrooms/labs is pretty much it. So while technically not a ban, it really isn't that much different from an airline requesting passengers not eat their nuts during a flight. My question still remains, if one person feels it's a reasonable request for apples (and the adminstration agrees) why haven't we seen it for peanuts or other allergens? What happens if a kid in a science lab where everyone is required to wear gloves has a latex allergy? You would expect the college to supply (maybe?) non-latex gloves for that student, but do they have to provide them for the whole class in case s/he comes in contact with classmate's glove? 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Theda,

As the article points out this has gone well beyond mere "warnings".

[Theda Baratheon]

5 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Theda,

As the article points out this has gone well beyond mere "warnings".

That's one article. Here's another to say maybe this while thing has been blown totally out of proportion. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/08/trigger-warnings-arent-the-campus-censorship-woe-opponents-believe#comments

Sorry I'm on phone so can't really hyperlink/quote the key bits but it's an interesting counter piece. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Theda,

Based on that article they admit that attempts to suppress academic freedom are happening.  But they claim they aren't happening much so that makes the attempts at suppression based on Trigger Warning okay?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Theda,

Does a student, reading a trigger warning, and believing they will be triggered by a particular work give that student cause to not be required to read that work?

[Spockydog]

I always thought that one of the primary functions of university was to prepare students for the real world. That is, a world that does not revolve around them. At least, that was my own experience.

My nephew has been coddled to fuck. At 16, he is still forbidden to travel into Central London without a responsible adult. He is a snowflake, through no fault of his own, and I fear for him.

 

 

 

[Theda Baratheon]

29 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Theda,

Based on that article they admit that attempts to suppress academic freedom are happening.  But they claim they aren't happening much so that makes the attempts at suppression based on Trigger Warning okay?

Then the whole culture of it should be enforced/changed and universities shouldn't be such big babies and should make very clear, like I DID in my post what a trigger WARNING is. And that it isn't a prohibition. 

26 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Theda,

Does a student, reading a trigger warning, and believing they will be triggered by a particular work give that student cause to not be required to read that work?

No. Like I said in my post and I thought I made myself clear but obviously I'm even less articulate than I thought, they should be adult/mature enough to read a module catalogue (I'm sorry I'm not familiar with American colleges and how they do things) notice the warning and then DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES (again, have already said this) whether it not they want to proceed with that particular class. The choice is on THEM. And again, this stuff happens in real life all the time too. Every film and video game will have warnings of content. I keep repeating the word but I see it as a courtesy meant in good faith and if a student wants to kick up shit and try to ban a book then the problem lies with them. It isn't coddling or pandering to special snowflakes' to have a short disclaimer about a class. I'm sure that's been happening for years anyway by select profesors who are respectful that a book containing some nasty themes that the class is going to have to look IN DEPTH at and write ESSAYS on is NOT going to be compatible with everyone. Tell me when in real post-college world is a victim of rape going to have to write an essay on rape?? Unless for an articule of their own experience. It isn't treating people as weak to offer a small disclaimer on content and respect a person's mental health and also maturity enough to decide for themselves whether or not the class is for them. Just because professors are smart adults' doesn't mean that can't be paranoid and defensive just like everyone else and treat this thing as bigger than it should be. 

 

[Gertrude]

43 minutes ago, Whitestripe said:

My question still remains, if one person feels it's a reasonable request for apples (and the adminstration agrees) why haven't we seen it for peanuts or other allergens? What happens if a kid in a science lab where everyone is required to wear gloves has a latex allergy? You would expect the college to supply (maybe?) non-latex gloves for that student, but do they have to provide them for the whole class in case s/he comes in contact with classmate's glove? 

I can't answer these questions. Maybe no one thought to ask for a peanut ban/heads-up before? Maybe the student in question has important/rich parents? Is this a case of an allergy that is so swift and severe that it is difficult to treat effectively if triggered? Basically my stance is that it should be a case-by-case basis. Questions like how severe is the allergy, how difficult is it to get an outbreak under control, etc should be considered. Personally I don't think that bans like the one requested should happen unless there is some compelling health reason. Even then, it is ultimately on the person with the allergy to take adequate precautions, How you codify that, I have zero idea. All I know is that if  co-worker let me know of a similar allergy, I'd honor the request.

After thinking about this a little more, I think the request is probably on the line of too much. Like you said, you've not ever received a peanut ban and it is possible, but not likely that the apple allergy is worse than bees or peanuts. Then again, no one says you have to follow it.

[Tyria]

Yeah, I'm someone with a raw apple allergy. It's not life threatening, but it can be pretty scary when the inside of your mouth swells and itches like you've never itched before (and I've lived my whole life with eczema!). I also get the same reaction, but not as bad, to raw snow peas. According to my allergist, it's common in people who are allergic to birch pollen. I don't get the reaction from apple juice, I assume it's heated enough before it's bottled. I also don't have any reaction to raw apples near me. Maybe if someone was biting into one next to me and a chunk flew off and into my mouth. I get people being cautious though.

My worst allergy is to perfume/cologne. I know I'll get grief for it, but ban that shit on planes (and everywhere else while yer at it!)! Justify the necessity of that shit on planes or anywhere else. I'm not talking about the people who just put a dab behind the ears type of thing. That might give me the sniffles in a confined space, but not a full blown reaction. Nothing like being on an hours long flight with your face hidden down your shirt suffering a low level asthma attack, itchy skin/eyes/throat, and full of snot just so someone can think they smell pretty. Most of it smells like flowery cat pee!

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Theda,

I hear what you are saying.  Fundamentally, I believe there is a difference between the way something should be used and the way that it is used.  In the US when Trigger Warnings are combined with the "customer service" focus of non-academic college administrators terrified of kids transfering out of their schools you get over reactions and push back from administrators against faculty and academic freedom. 

I see this as a the two entirely different aspects of college life interacting and amplifying each other.  Students desireing warnings about "triggering" material in classes and administrators, who have never been academics or faculty members, desireing to make sure their "numbers" stay where they want them or for those numbers to improve.  When these to things amplify administrators use complaints about "triggering material" as an excuse to seek to remove such material from the courses themselves to try to prevent the complaints they see as problematic and that academics see as part of the learning experience. 

Therefore, while, as I said at the start of this post, I do see where you are coming from.  I think some of the unique problems that exist in US higher education today make "trigger warnings" dangerous to academic freedom.