Warning: Contains nuts*
-
..
-
@otter He's fine with peanuts. Dairy is what will quickly and efficiently kill him without treatment.
-
@FrostCat said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
Man, everyone should just put "warning: may contain allergens. Read the ingredient list" on everything.
Doesn't cover everything.
@otter said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
If any of you ever come visit Brazil for the olympic games or something, there isn't warnings about peanut alergens here.
Zika, on the other hand...
-
@all_users
'dAlso, stevia is a
to 
s
-
@bb36e said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@anotherusername aren't our actions part of evolution?
I dunno. Ask the guy who maintains the list of all the endangered critters.
-
@Fox Sounds like everybody wins!
-
@FrostCat Well, then he stays in the hospital for like three or four days recovering, and I don't even know how much that costs him, so there's that.
-
@all_users said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
Doesn't cover everything.
In that context I would consider allergen information part of the ingredient list, or at least close enough I wouldn't put "read the ingredient list and allergen information". I might put "read the ingredients etc". That way when next year some new regulation comes in that changes the mandated wording from "allergen information" to something else (or someone forces them to put a trigger warning) my wording won't have to be changed.
-
@Fox I'm hearing "vacation paid for by workman's compensation." "Getting stabbed by your cow-orker" is the very epitome of "workplace injury".
-
@FrostCat True.
-
@Fox said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@FrostCat said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
Man, everyone should just put "warning: may contain allergens. Read the ingredient list" on everything.
One of my coworkers can't even have anything which comes into contact with the same machinery that deals with dairy products. A bag of peanuts won't list chocolate in the ingredients, but it's processed and packaged on the same machinery which deals with chocolate-covered nuts, so it's possible for there to be trace amounts of chocolate in the bag, which would be enough to
kill himgive one of my other coworkers the opportunity to finally stab him with his adrenaline needle, an occasion for which some of them have been waiting years.Tell him to talk to an allergist about allergy shots. It's possible for them to dramatically reduce sensitivity for even highly severe cases.
A friend of mine is a highly severe case, so much so that the first allergist took one look at the data and said "we can't give you these shots or the reaction might kill you!" But the second allergist said "we can probably make this work if we start the doses out reeeeeeally small," and that's what they did. That was almost a year ago. She made it through this spring barely noticing the pollen that was almost crippling for the last several years.
-
@masonwheeler said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
almost crippling
That's a biiiiiiit less severe than my coworker, who will literally die if he consumes dairy and goes without treatment for a short period of time.
-
..
-
@accalia said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@FrostCat said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@flabdablet Man, everyone should just put "warning: may contain allergens. Read the ingredient list" on everything.
my chem teacher in HS had a jar of "cyanide" that she had labeled with: "Contains no allergens. Instead will just kill you outright."
to this day i highly suspect the "cyanide" was just tab water because seriously?! it's highschool. you don't keep cyanide around highschoolers! that's just asking for trouble.
It isn't that hard to obtain cyanide but the dose makes the poison.
Are Apple Seeds Poisonous?
We've had folks fret that ingesting as few as three apple seeds could poison someone.
-
@Fox said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
That's a biiiiiiit less severe than my coworker, who will literally die if he consumes dairy and goes without treatment for a short period of time.
Well now. It may not be possible for your coworker but he'll never know if he never checks.
Also, there is actually a doctor present[1] when you get the shots, so at least if he does have a bad reaction, he'll be in the best place he could be short of an ER.
[1] I assume.
-
@FrostCat True. But I'm reasonably certain he's already checked. I'll have to find some tactful way to find out sometime.
-
@Fox said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
coworker, who will literally die if he consumes dairy
Please tell me your cow-orker hasn't passed his genetic defect on to another generation.
-
@HardwareGeek I'm reasonably certain he has no children, though he does have a girlfriend. Or did, last I heard.
-
@Fox said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
But I'm reasonably certain he's already checked.
Could be. But at the same time, whoever I quoted above said his friend had to see two specialists. It's not as if all doctors are cut from the same cloth.
-
@all_users THIS PRODUCT IS PROCESSED IN A FACILITY THAT ALSO PROCESSES FOOD CONTAINING MOLECULES. DO NOT USE IF YOU ARE ALLERGIC TO ANY MOLECULES.
-
-
@masonwheeler said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
At no point did the professor ever give us any warnings about the nature of the stuff we were working with, beyond the standard "be careful with chemicals and make sure to use the fume hood and not spill any on yourself" stuff.
No one got hurt, but I'm honestly a bit surprised by that, especially since some of the plastic bottles containing the HF had rubber stoppers that were showing visible signs of corrosion from the fumes within...
Or have hurt already but not known yet.
Just "not spill any on yourself" is not safe enough.
This is the main reason why the semiconductor industry is moving away from cleaning processes that uses HF and use more expensive ones instead.
-
@FrostCat said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@all_users said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
Doesn't cover everything.
In that context I would consider allergen information part of the ingredient list, or at least close enough I wouldn't put "read the ingredient list and allergen information". I might put "read the ingredients etc". That way when next year some new regulation comes in that changes the mandated wording from "allergen information" to something else (or someone forces them to put a trigger warning) my wording won't have to be changed.
The law won't allow that because sometimes the ingradient may contain names that should bring their attention but they don't recognize.
For example, look at the list of food that contains gluten and see how many of them you don't recognize.
-
Why hasn't there been a recall of the TDWTF forum? It doesn't even have an ingredient list, much less a warning label, and it's full of nuts.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
Why hasn't there been a recall of the TDWTF forum? It doesn't even have an ingredient list, much less a warning label, and it's full of nuts.
I suspect it's due to the lack of any reported cases of allergic reactions caused by contact with the nuts on the forum. Once that happens though, we'll have warning labels everywhere...
-
@sloosecannon said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
the lack of any reported cases of allergic reactions caused by contact with the nuts on the forum.
What about the cases of allergic reactions caused by contact with Jeff?
-
@HardwareGeek we tried reporting those, but apparently we're "no longer welcome" in relevant publications.
-
Processed on equipment that also handles Jeff
-
@FrostCat said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
Also, there is actually a doctor present when you get the shots, so at least if he does have a bad reaction, he'll be in the best place he could be short of an ER.
Likely better. The doctor will know what is going on and have the most likely treatment ready, whereas the ER would spend time floundering around.
-
@Magus said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
I wouldn't know about that, but I did once know a guy who had bad peanut allergies. He had an episode one time, and he was out of work for two days, and when he came back to the office, he looked less healthy than dead people.
What sort of dead look? A friend of mine went to visit family in India once, and came back a month later at around half his body weight, jaundiced to a very very yellow color, and told us he'd gotten hepatitis or something. Most dramatic change caused by a sickness I've ever seen.
More like he was aiming to be an extra for the enemy side of a zombie-apocalypse type film, but they rejected him because he didn't look healthy enough.
The problem with my comment is that I've only ever actually seen one dead person up close (my wife, after she succumbed to a kidney cancer), and the body didn't really look unhealthy.
-
@all_users said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
Zika, on the other hand...
Really not dangerous unless you're pregnant. To the extent that people often don't know they have it
-
@FrostCat said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@flabdablet Man, everyone should just put "warning: may contain allergens. Read the ingredient list" on everything.
there's some restaurants here in my country that did something similar, they had a text on their menu stating:
"Warning! All our foods contain all the alergens.
(This is obviously not true, but idiotic EU laws require us to warn about allergens which our chef doesn't like because he believes our customers are smart enough to figure out what is safe for them and what is not. If you're not sure, ask the waiter for specifics.)"
-
@cheong said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@FrostCat said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@all_users said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
Doesn't cover everything.
In that context I would consider allergen information part of the ingredient list, or at least close enough I wouldn't put "read the ingredient list and allergen information". I might put "read the ingredients etc". That way when next year some new regulation comes in that changes the mandated wording from "allergen information" to something else (or someone forces them to put a trigger warning) my wording won't have to be changed.
The law won't allow that because sometimes the ingradient may contain names that should bring their attention but they don't recognize.
For example, look at the list of food that contains gluten and see how many of them you don't recognize.
I like the part where they tell people who don't have the disease that they should go gluten free if they think they have symptoms.
However, tests for gluten intolerance often come back negative. This may cause you to believe it’s okay to eat gluten, even though it may lead to symptoms such as fatigue or irritability.
It's nice to know the placebo effect is still working so well.
-
@anotherusername What evidence do you have that irritability and fatigue ascribed to gluten consumption in people with a negative blood test result for gluten intolerance is in fact nothing more than some kind of nocebo effect?
Are there double-blind studies whose results you can cite in support of your position?
-
@flabdablet said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
What evidence do you have that irritability and fatigue ascribed to gluten consumption in people with a negative blood test result for gluten intolerance is in fact nothing more than some kind of nocebo effect?
What evidence
negative blood test result for gluten intolerance
I just love it when people answer their own questions for me.
Are there double-blind studies whose results you can cite in support of your position?
Are there double-blind studies whose results they can cite in support of their position? Since their position is "I'm allergic to gluten even though all of the medical evidence says I'm not", I think the burden lies on them to prove it.
-
@flabdablet Also, yes. I do have.
37 subjects took part, all confirmed not to have celiac disease but whose gastrointestinal symptoms improved on a gluten-free diet, thus fulfilling the diagnostic criteria for non-celiac gluten sensitivity. ... each treatment diet, whether it included gluten or not, prompted subjects to report a worsening of gastrointestinal symptoms to similar degrees.
The data clearly indicated that a nocebo effect, the same reaction that prompts some people to get sick from wind turbines and wireless internet, was at work here. Patients reported gastrointestinal distress without any apparent physical cause. Gluten wasn't the culprit; the cause was likely psychological. Participants expected the diets to make them sick, and so they did.
And this is coming from the same researcher who'd previously found that there might be such a thing as non-celiac gluten sensitivity.
“In contrast to our first study… we could find absolutely no specific response to gluten."
Instead, as RCS reported last week, FODMAPS are a far more likely cause of the gastrointestinal problems attributed to gluten intolerance.
-
-
@masonwheeler That is all kinds of wrong.
In my college level chem labs we didn't even look at HF. I doubt we even stocked it.
In organic chemistry we did deal with lots and lots of stuff like Diethyl Ether (will blow up if somebody makes a spark in the next county, or the next room that somebody was using a bunsen burner in), Acetone (might crystallize and blow up if you look at it the wrong way), lots and lots of stuff that will react violently with water, burn you badly, take your skin apart, or just outright poison you.
The standing rule in the lab was: If the professor said "Get out of the lab," you got out. Right away. No questions, nothing, you bailed out. This rule was invoked once when the professor noticed a student's reaction starting to produce orange fumes. In case you aren't familiar with why this was an issue, check out the Wikipedia article on Nitrogen Dioxide. When we heard the rule invoked (twice, the first got our attention, the second we responded to), everybody ran out the exits as fast as we could. The professor put the whole thing in a fume hood until the reaction stopped.
I was not a fan of that lab, especially after one accident (ugly green toluene derivative overboiled in a flask and sprayed all over me and could have blinded my professor) and one big scare (nearly blew up a fume hood when I got a bottle of sodium wet).
-
@anotherusername Thank you, that's useful and will probably win me several ongoing arguments.
-
-
@all_users It didn't say "No mention on the packaging", it said "No mention on the label". You have not shown the label. The label is a legally defined entity that (should) contain a list of ingredients in which potential allergens must be differentiated from non-allergens.
For example: Peanuts, Honey, Salt
-
@Maciejasjmj said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
WTF
The Thong of the Day thread already has that, ah, covered, at least with two of the pictures, one of which would indeed need a warning label if @polygeekery had any say in the matter.
-
@J_T said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@masonwheeler That is all kinds of wrong.
In my college level chem labs we didn't even look at HF. I doubt we even stocked it.
In organic chemistry we did deal with lots and lots of stuff like Diethyl Ether (will blow up if somebody makes a spark in the next county, or the next room that somebody was using a bunsen burner in), Acetone (might crystallize and blow up if you look at it the wrong way), lots and lots of stuff that will react violently with water, burn you badly, take your skin apart, or just outright poison you.
The standing rule in the lab was: If the professor said "Get out of the lab," you got out. Right away. No questions, nothing, you bailed out. This rule was invoked once when the professor noticed a student's reaction starting to produce orange fumes. In case you aren't familiar with why this was an issue, check out the Wikipedia article on Nitrogen Dioxide. When we heard the rule invoked (twice, the first got our attention, the second we responded to), everybody ran out the exits as fast as we could. The professor put the whole thing in a fume hood until the reaction stopped.
I was not a fan of that lab, especially after one accident (ugly green toluene derivative overboiled in a flask and sprayed all over me and could have blinded my professor) and one big scare (nearly blew up a fume hood when I got a bottle of sodium wet).
I accidently inhaled HCl in in either Gen Chem lab or Org Chem lab. I asked the TA, "how bad is this for me?" I don't think I got a straight answer as his English wasn't great.
-
@Karla said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
I asked the TA, "how bad is this for me?"
HCl damages you by dissociating into hydrochloric acid on contact with water, directly burning your flesh. It's not a long-term systemic toxin (hell, your stomach makes the stuff).
Given that you were still capable of speech post-inhalation, the correct answer is probably "not bad enough to worry about, but try not to do that again; next time you might not be so lucky".
-
@flabdablet said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@Karla said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
I asked the TA, "how bad is this for me?"
HCl damages you by dissociating into hydrochloric acid on contact with water, directly burning your flesh. It's not a long-term systemic toxin (hell, your stomach makes the stuff).
Given that you were still capable of speech post-inhalation, the correct answer is probably "not bad enough to worry about, but try not to do that again; next time you might not be so lucky".
Yeah, that's kind of what I figured. I was a bio major so I know about HCl in stomach.
I just tend to be irritated by strong scents in general. I can't use bleach to clean because I can't take the smell. That and other cleaning supplies can leave me in coughing fits. Apparently, I'm allergic to house cleaning.
I have a coworker who wears way too much perfume that I bought an air filter and moved my fan to blow it away.
-
@Karla said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
I have a coworker who wears way too much perfume that I bought an air filter and moved my fan to blow it away.
Feeling that.
The ones I hate are Axe/Lynx and practically anything from Rexona; those fucking things should be pulled from the market on the grounds of being chemical weapons. The shit just sticks to your hair and clothes, even after the inconsiderate goon wearing it has been gone for half an hour. Gives me itchy eyes, runny nose, wheezing, and impotent rage.
-
@flabdablet said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
@Karla said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
I have a coworker who wears way too much perfume that I bought an air filter and moved my fan to blow it away.
Feeling that.
The ones I hate are Axe/Lynx and practically anything from Rexona; those fucking things should be pulled from the market on the grounds of being chemical weapons. The shit just sticks to your hair and clothes, even after the inconsiderate goon wearing it has been gone for half an hour. Gives me itchy eyes, runny nose, wheezing, and impotent rage.
Yes. I hate Axe.
I remembering loving some colognes on guys when I was younger, so much that I had some of my own so I could just smell them (the popular ones Obsession, PoloSport, there were probably a few others).
-
-
@flabdablet @Karla there's nothing wrong with Axe. There's something wrong with the juvenile idiots who use about gallon of it.
-
@Karla said in Warning: Contains nuts*:
I remembering loving some colognes on guys when I was younger, so much that I had some of my own so I could just smell them (the popular ones Obsession, PoloSport, there were probably a few others).
Back in high school, in Senior year I used to catch a ride to school with a friend of mine. He'd also drive his little brother and little sister, and one of her friends, all of whom went to the same high school as us.
For whatever reason, the sister thought it was really funny, anytime I'd sit up front, to get up behind me and spritz me with a spray or two of perfume, and she and her friend would bust up in gigglefits every time.
After suffering through this indignity one time too many, I came prepared, and the next time they tried it, I pulled out a bottle of cologne, turned around in the seat, and sprayed both of them with a rather liberal dose of it.
"Wait, Mason, why do you have perf-- *sniff* EEEEEEK! IT'S COLOGNE!!!" Cue freakout.
They never did that again after that day.
Well, Google says so...
