Analysis Of The Peanut Allergies Animation Essay

Harmonizing to the British Nutrition Foundation, nutrient intolerance is the ‘general term used to depict a scope of inauspicious responses to nutrient including allergic reactions. Adverse reactions result from enzyme lacks, pharmacological reactions, and other non-defined responses. An allergic reaction to a nutrient can be described as an inappropriate reaction by the organic structure ‘s immune system to the consumption of a nutrient ( 2009 ) .

Nuts are one of the most common causes of nutrient allergic reactions in the universe. ( Metcalfe, 2001, pg. 890 ) . As there are over a 100 assortments of nuts it is ill-defined if all can do an allergic reaction. However if you have a nut allergic reaction, it is most likely that you react to peanuts or corner nuts ( Hourihane, 2002, pg. 39 ) . Tree nuts include Prunus dulciss, pecans, walnuts, hazelnuts and Anacardium occidentales. Peanutss are normally known as Indian potatos or monkey nuts but have a assortment of different names in a assortment of linguistic communications ( see appendix 1 ) . They are non really nuts but come from the Leguminosae works household. This household contains over 30 different species of works. Abbreviated to leguminous plants, peas, beans, lentils, soya beans, algarroba bean and licorice all come from the same works species ; unlike tree nuts, leguminous plants grow underground ( Pescatore, 2003, pg. 142 ) .

It is possible to develop an allergic reaction to nuts at any age. The figure of people affected by peanut allergic reactions has increased dramatically since the 1970 ‘s and now affect up to one tierce of the population in industrialized states ( Wright 2001 ) . Research provided by the University Hospital of South Manchester ( no day of the month ) states that approximately 1 in 200 kids ( 0.5 % ) have a reaction to peanuts by the age of five old ages.

It is non known precisely how many people in the UK have a nutrient allergic reaction. Population surveies in the UK suggest that between 1 and 2 people in 100 ( 1-2 % ) have a nutrient allergic reaction that can be diagnosed reproducibly, whereas every bit many as 30 in 100 ( 20-30 % ) believe themselves to be allergic or intolerant to one or more nutrients ( 2009 ) . Harmonizing to ( no day of the month ) about 1 in 200 in the UK ( 0.5 % ) people has an allergic reaction to corner nuts. A study from the USA has found that 5 % of kids studied who had a reaction to one leguminous plant had symptoms with other leguminous plants ( Wright 2001 ) . This suggests the thought that leguminous plants are a common cause of allergic reaction. Further to this, harmonizing to the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, peanut allergic reactions in kids have ‘increased twofold from 1997 to 2002 ‘ ( Lalanilla, 2005 ) . This shows the Numberss of people with insignificant allergic reactions are continuously turning.

There is no consensus position at nowadays for why some people develop an allergic reaction for nuts and others do n’t. One interesting position is given by McEwen ( 1996 ) who studied patients with and without nut allergic reactions and found kids who were given nut based or whole nut merchandises from a immature age were more likely to develop an allergic reaction to them in subsequently, or adolescent life.

Nut allergic reactions were one time considered to be a life-long status and it is thought 80 % of kids with peanut allergic reaction under 5 old ages of age, will hold the allergic reaction into subsequently childhood.

An allergic reaction can be caused by many different factors. Harmonizing to Roux, Sathe and Sharma ( 2009, pg. 69 ) the most common factor is ingestion ( 88 % ) , followed by tegument contact ( 9 % ) and eventually airborne exposure ( 3 % ) . Airborne exposure involves cross-contamination through the transportation of nut partials from one merchandise to another or inhaling in the allergens from the dust used in the readying of nut based merchandises.

There are many different ways in which nut allergic reactions affect people. It is about ever an immediate reaction nevertheless the badness of the reaction may differ between sick persons. The most common reactions include a roseola, prickling esthesis around oral cavity and lips, antsy tegument, shortness of breath, purging and tummy spasms ( Escott-Stump, 2008, pg. 118 ) . More serious reactions include swelling of the lingua, giddiness, swelling of the face and lips and bottleneck of the pharynx ensuing in trouble in external respiration.

In the more utmost instances of allergic reactions, the individual may endure from anaphylaxis daze. This is when the air passages from the lungs become constrict doing take a breathing hard. Through the scrutiny of patients who have an allergic reaction there is likely to besides be an addition in bosom rate and a bead in blood force per unit area doing the patient to go unconscious or even decease ( Carpenito-Moyet, 2008, pg. 872 ) . Due to the badness of the reactions caused by allergic reactions, this creates a job when covering with eating houses and kitchens who serve nutrient to peanut allergic clients.

Peoples who suffer from terrible allergic reaction which has the possible to do anaphylaxis, may be prescribed adrenaline ( Chapel, Haeney, Misbah and Snowden, 1999, pg. 87 ) . Adrenaline is a endocrine which is a chemical of course found in the organic structure that relaxes all musculuss, assisting to cut down any puffiness and do external respiration easier. As allergic reactions are largely instantly after exposure, many suffers will transport a individual dosage of epinephrine in the signifier of an EpiPen ( Mu & A ; ntilde ; oz-Furlong and Sampson, 2003, pg. 412 ) . This is a syringe full of epinephrine that can be used in a affair of seconds with the possible to salvage the sick persons life. Sick persons may besides have on or keep some signifier of medical designation. I would urge a watchband or a recognition sized card to be kept in a billfold or bag. The information held on these points should dwell of inside informations of the allergic reaction and an exigency contact figure.

This highlights a quandary within the cordial reception environment. If a client appears to hold an allergic reaction, should one of the staff members assist and administer the EpiPen for them and what happens if they administer this incorrect? As at that place has non yet been a instance it is ill-defined whether the employee or constitution would be prosecuted. Another illustration is if the client was holding a bosom onslaught alternatively of an allergic reaction ( there are similar symptoms ) and an EpiPen is administered, this has the possible to do serious injury ( Hearnes, 2003, pg. 177 ) . As mentioned above it is ill-defined to what the regulations and ordinances around such fortunes are but brings to life the outrageousness of the state of affairs and the demand to guarantee the cordial reception industry is good trained and equipped in covering with these life endangering allergic reactions.

It is besides vitally of import for nut allergic reaction sick persons to look into the packaging of nutrient carefully to guarantee it does non incorporate nuts. In 2005 a statute law was introduced which required for all pre-packed nutrient sold in the UK and EU to province on the label whether the ingredients contain nuts ( Food Standards Agency, no day of the month ) . One of the biggest quandary for sick persons of nut allergic reactions is although nutrient may non incorporate nuts it may hold been produced in a kitchen or mill which may hold hints of nuts during other productions. Normally the label will province ‘may contain nut hints ‘ . Many of the taking trade names will province this on their merchandises although this is non a legal demand in the United Kingdom. It is of import to understand that allergens in nuts and peanuts are non destroyed when heated at high temperatures. Lawley et Al ( 2008 ) argues roasting peanuts may really increase their allergenicties.

Something every bit simple as a plane journey may look like everyday to many but for allergy sick persons it provides a hazard to an allergic reaction. Although there is no factual grounds, it is argued that sick persons are more likely to sufferer an allergic reaction whilst going by plane than any other manner of conveyance. The most likely cause of a reaction on a plane would be person on board eating nuts or eating a repast that has been produced near nuts ( Freund and Rejaunier, 2003, pg. 179 ) . Many sick persons will take safeguards and order particular repasts before the flight, or even taking to take their ain repast. Unfortunately person on board could hold been eating nuts, which in utmost fortunes can do a reaction. This could be through riders touching surfaces on the plane and go forthing allergens behind. ( Freund and Rejaunier, 2003, pg. 179 ) Due to this hazard the air hose may set up for nuts non to be served on the flight. Many air hoses will non offer nut free flights but merely offer nut free nutrient. For illustration Singapore Airlines ( ) will offer a nut free option to the in-flight repast but will non offer a ‘nut free flight ‘ as many of the dishes served on board contain nuts and they are non able to command what nutrient other riders may take on board.

It is besides of import for nut allergic reaction suffers to be careful when eating out. To avoid complications it is of import to cognize what the eating house serves and the manner of cooking they use. I would besides rede sick persons to see the same eating houses on a regular basis as so the constitutions get to cognize them and go familiar with their demands. The clip you book a tabular array may look of little significance but this could assist with guaranting all dishes are prepared to the right specifications, as during busy periods a peanut sick persons demands may be accidentally overlooked. By supplying the chef written guidelines in progress about certain demands this can cut down the hazard of an allergic reaction. I would rede the sick person to take a transcript every clip they eat out. Equally good as giving written guidelines it may besides be good to telephone in front giving the chef clip to fix a separate repast in progress.

It is of import to understand that although allergic reaction sick persons have grown dramatically over the past 40 old ages there are no set guidelines from the authorities on how an constitution should suit an allergy sick persons demands. Under Section 14 of the Food Safety Act 1990 ( Appendix 2 ) concerns must non ‘sell to the buyer ‘s bias any nutrient which is non of the nature, substance or quality demanded by the buyer ‘ and under Section 15 of the same act, concerns must non falsely depict or show nutrient ( Office of Public Sector Information, 2009 ) . This means that concerns must supply nutrient that is fit for ingestion and in conformity to the client ‘s outlooks.

One of the biggest trials in a kitchen is the possibility of cross-contamination. This is when allergens are transferred from one nutrient or nutrient ingredients to another ( Trickett, 2001, pg. 20 ) . This would ensue in antecedently safe nutrient going harmful. The outrageousness of the state of affairs merely becomes evident when you take into consideration factors such as utensils and work surfaces in a kitchen which may hold at some point come into contact with peanuts, every bit good as containers which are difficult to clean, ovens with burnt on nutrient which had leaked out of dishes, cooking oils used during the cooking phase but besides which have been used by the industry to do the merchandise to be sold to the kitchens every bit good as flour.

I believe the kitchen will hold to utilize common sense when covering with insignificant allergic clients and may follow some of these processs, If they think the controls put in topographic point to understate the hazard of cross-contamination are non traveling to be effectual plenty for a individual with a terrible nutrient allergic reaction, they must guarantee this is communicated to the client. They may see seting up a notice ask foring clients to speak to staff about their specific demands. ( no day of the month ) offer utile tips for kitchen staff to follow such as ;

  • If you offer nut-free options, fix them foremost and pre-wrap them for extra safeguard.
  • Always clean the work country, utensils, custodies, and perchance aprons after managing cardinal allergens and before fixing other nutrients, which do n’t incorporate them. Soap and hot H2O have been shown to be the most effectual in taking allergen hints.
  • Keep certain readyings countries nut-free
  • Never usage major allergens as insouciant permutations for a given dish ( e.g. make non replace olive oil with walnut oil in your salad dressings )
  • Do n’t allow nuts touch nutrient that do non hold those ingredients
  • Think before cooking with oils that have been used to cook other nutrients

For farther information see Appendix 3.

There has been no statute law passed to state that a eating house can non decline a client who suffers from an allergic reaction and hence there is small mentioned on this subject. It would look common sense that if an constitution did non experience they could aptly function a invitee with a peanut allergic reaction so they should non. A recommendation would be to convey in an allergic reaction safety squad to inspect premises guaranting that all constitutions can provide for such demands, whilst being able to develop and reply inquiries onsite. A strategy has been launched in Wales ( Worsfold, 2008 ) where constitutions will be inspected on how safe they are for allergen clients merely like when they are inspected by nutrient safety officers ( Appendix 4 ) .

It is evident most confusion comes down to a deficiency of developing in such industries. Recommendations would propose such standards as who should be trained, what kind of preparation, and the cost of preparation and a set of guidelines from the authorities would necessitate to be outlined. There are many pilot strategies which are trialing the most effectual manner of doing companies more cognizant of this subject but at present there is no consensus. I think there should be one individual from forepart of house and one from dorsum of house at all times who are trained in covering with insignificant allergic reactions and how to cover with diagnosis and handling an allergic reaction. I think the preparation should be included in the nutrient hygiene class. A failing of this is cost. For big constitutions it would be dearly-won to develop all employees but would be executable. However for smaller and independent constitutions, they may non hold entree to the fundss in order to pay for preparation.

It has become evident from all the above research, beginnings and information provided ( largely internet beginnings as to maintain up to day of the month with the latest developments and intelligence ) to the general populace there is still really small know about peanut allergic reactions. It seems evident that all the research around this subject has been focused on how to cover with person who has an allergic reaction instead than forestalling it in the first topographic point. The North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University announced in 2007 that one scientist, Dr. Mohamed Ahmedna, had developed a procedure to do allergen-free peanuts. Primary trials produced a inactivation of peanut allergens in roasted meats ( Science Daily, 2007 ) . The procedure is still yet to be commercially used whilst more surveies are undertaken. In decision I feel that there needs to be a greater accent on the bar of an allergic reaction. There is a spread in the preparation processs within constitutions which I think the above recommendations should be taken into history.


  • British Nutrition Foundation ( no day of the month ) What is Food Allergy and Intolerance? Retrieved on 10th November 2009 from the World Wide Web: hypertext transfer protocol: //
  • Carpenito-Moyet, L. J. ( 2007 ) Nursing Diagnosis: Application to Clinical Practice, 12th edn, Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & A ; Wilkins.
  • Providing For Allergy ( no day of the month ) Foods Supplied To You, Retrieved on 15th November 2009 from the World Wide Web: hypertext transfer protocol: //
  • Chapel, H. , Mansel, H. , Misbeth, S. and Snowdon, N. ( 1999 ) Necessities of Clinical Immunology, 4th edn, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
  • Escott-Stump, S. ( 2008 ) Nutrition and Diagnosis Related Care, 6th edn, Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & A ; Wilkins.
  • Freund, L. H. and Rejaunier, J. ( 2003 ) The Complete Idiots Guide to Food Allergies, Indianopolis: Alphabooks.
  • Hearn, S. ( 2003 ) Remote Medical Emergencies, in: Anderson, S. and Warrell, D. ( ed. ) Royal Geographical Society: Expedition Medicine with the Institute of British Geographers, Florida: Taylor and Francis Group, pg. 171 – 181.
  • Hourihane, J. ( 2002 ) Peanut and Treenut Allergy: Why so chilling, in: Emerton, V. ( ed. ) Food Allergy and Intolerance: Current issues and concerns, Leatherhead: Leatherhead Publishing, pg. 39 – 50.
  • Lallanilla, M. ( 2005 ) Are Food Allergies a Turning Threat? Retrieved on 15th November 2009 from the World Wide Web: hypertext transfer protocol: // id=1355795.
  • Curtis, L. , Davis, J. and Lawley, J. ( 2008 ) The Food Safety Hazard Guidebook, Cambridge: RSC Publishing.
  • Metcalfe, D. D. ( 2001 ) Allergic Reactions To Foods, in: Atkinson, J. P. , Austen, K. F. , Cantor, H. and Frank, M. M. ( ed. ) Samter ‘s Immunologic Diseases, Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & A ; Wilkins, pg. 890 – 897.
  • Metcalfe, D. D. , Sampson, H. A. and Ronald, S. A. ( 2003 ) Food Allergy, Adversary Actions to Food and Food Additives, in: Munoz-Furlong, A. and Sampson, H. A. ( ed. ) Management of Food Allergy, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, pg. 408 – 425.
  • No Author ( no day of the month ) The Food Safety Act 1990, Retrieved on 15th November 2009 from the World Wide Web: hypertext transfer protocol: // q=section+14+of+the+Food+Safety+Act+1990 & A ; btnG=Search & A ; output=xml_no_dtd & A ; client=opsisearch_semaphore & A ; proxystylesheet=opsisearch_semaphore & A ; site=opsi_collection
  • Patient UK ( No day of the month ) Nut Allergy, Retrieved on 12th November 2009 from the World Wide Web: hypertext transfer protocol: //
  • Pescatore, F. ( 2003 ) The Allergy and Asthma Core, New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
  • Roux, K. H. , Sharma, G. M. and Sathe, S. K. ( 2009 ) Tree Nut Allergens, in: Alasalvar, C. and Shahidi, F. ( ed. ) Tree Nut: Composition, Phytochemicals, and Health Effects, Florida: Taylor and Francis Group, pg. 69 – 84.
  • Sampson H.A. ( 1996 ) Pull offing peanut allergic reaction in: British medical diary, Apr 27, Vol 3 ( 12 ) , pg. 1050-1051
  • Science Daily ( 2007 ) Food Scientist Develops For Allergen-Free Peanuts, Harmonizing to Lab, Retrieved on 20th November 2009 from the World Wide Web: hypertext transfer protocol: //
  • Trickett, J. ( 2001 ) The Prevention of Food Poisoning, 4th edn, Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes Ltd.
  • University Hospital South Manchester ( no day of the month ) Peanut and Tree Nut Allergy, Retrieved on 12th November from the World Wide Web: hypertext transfer protocol: // % 20Documents/Peanut % 20and % 20Tree % 20Nut % 20Allergy % 20Information % 20for % 20Parents.pdf.
  • Worsfold, D. ( 2008 ) Raising nutrient allergy consciousness of caterers in Wales, in: Nutrition and Food Science, Vol 38 ( 5 ) , Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pg. 417 – 421.