The Minnesota Twins Fear For Your Life

While you may not be aware of it, 8% of children today have severe allergies which could potentially be life threatening. This is a significant increase from when I was a child or even just 10 years ago.

The loss revenues that stadiums have because those children do not go to "live" games is significant and Baseball is losing more than just that games revenues for it is often when we are children that we become fans and Baseball is potentailly losing capturing revenues for the life time of that child....

So the question is, if Baseball banned peanuts how many customers would they loose? Would you not go to a game because they do not have peanuts? I can tell you factually they absolutely lose revenues because of those with peanut allergies do not go.

So even though you seem unsympathetic or more likely uneducated about the incredible danger and amount of children with life threatening allergies, the fact is the Government bans all kind of substances that are harmful to people, second hand smoke, drugs, weapons, drinking for under age children. If 8% of newborn children have the potential for this type of death, should we not a society try to protect them? If you new that a lighting strike was going to hit the seat next to you in a ballpark, would you not remove the person from that seat? Don’t we have an obligation to protect the sanctity of life? Is not the removal of peanuts, second hand smoke, drinking and driving, AK 47s, hard drugs and other items too much of a sacrifice in order to save lives. Is your desire to eat peanuts at a ball game more important the saving the life on an innocent child?

Regardless of your true opinion on this, it is just good Business for Baseball to get more educated on life threatening allergies and figure out how to increase their customer base for both their business reasons as well for moral reasons.

Reply

Well said, Lia, and while we're on the subject, did you know that car accidents are the leading cause of death for 10-19 year olds and the 2nd leading cause of death for infants to 10-year olds?

This is a horrible problem and I think Major League Baseball should own up to its moral responsibility and refuse to allow spectators to attend any ball games.

Before folks get all worked up, remember, people can still watch the games on TV, so what's the big deal?

This way, children and their parents will be able to enjoy our national pastime while being spared the possibility of being injured or killed in a traffic accident. Some would claim that's going too far but, like Lia said, is that too much of a sacrifice in order to save lives? Is someone's desire to go to a ball game more important than saving the life of an innocent child?

Reply

What a silly, silly post. Peanut allergies are real. I'll cut you a little slack because you don't have kids, but if you did you'd know the issue is quite real -- any elementary-school teacher will tell you virtually every class has at least one child with a moderate allergy.

In addition, there's a long tradition of minor-league teams holding peanut-free nights in order to cater to these families; the cross-town rivals St. Paul Saints have done so for many years. They are a huge pain in the butt: inventory must be put away, peanut oil must be drained, and the seating areas must be washed down. This isn't some sort of casual exercise. The Twins are far from alone in holding peanut-free nights in the baseball world.

What a silly, silly post.

Reply

Hey Tom,
This is a really funny and insightful post. I just love how unashamed you are of being an ignorant clod.

People like you are exactly why peanut allergies are so dangerous. Hey, it doesn't bother you, so why should you care if a few kids stop breathing because their throats close? They should just stay home.

Reply

Lighten up people

Reply

Tweets, you write, "People like you are exactly why peanut allergies are so dangerous."

Really? People like this blogger are why peanut alergies are so dangerous?

This will come as news to the Mayo Clinic and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Cuz I just read about about thirty articles on this subject and you know what every single one of them says about why kids have peanut allergies?

While there's some debate about environmental toxins, this much everyone agrees on: it's cuz of the peanuts THEIR MOTHER ate while the child was in the womb, creams containing peanut oil that THEIR PARENTS put their skin, and the peanut butter THEIR PARENTS fed them before the age of five.

So, how about putting all this self-righteous energy into educating yourself and other parents about the (non)actions that could prevent the problem IN THE FIRST PLACE.

And by the way, what about those of us who are highly allergic to people who have no sense of humor? Do our lives count? For the sake of my life, Tweets, try getting one.

Reply

Hey Modest Proposal, your knowledge of how peanut allergies are caused is truly terrific for most of the top doctors on the subject don't agree. If it is true that it is caused by mother eating peanuts while with child, cream lotions or early intoduction ot it to child is the cause, then why is this happeing at an ever increasing rate. 20 years ago this would be rare, 10 years ago it started showing up, today it effects a real % of all children. Are you suggesting that somehow these activities have increased over the last couple of years and in the past no one ate peanuts, no one used lotions and children absolutely avoided peanuts until the were teenages...Something has to be causing the DRAMATIC increase that you your factual statement seems to ignore

Reply

Ignorant Clod, much of this discussion is because of the newness of prevalence of severe allergies and most people are simply not educated on the subject and thus they make absurd arguments such as yours.

Most allergies do not cause anaphylactic shock. Thus the person allergic to grass probably does not die by the simple smell of grass. Alcoholics do not get drunk by simply sitting next to a person that is drinking alcohol. Peanut allergies are different in that it can cause anaphylactic shock and kill. The other big difference is that most children are advised to avoid peanuts until you get a little older. Thus many small children that may have a severe allergy to peanuts may not know it.

Thus unlike your absurd assertions to eliminate driving or eliminate grass from the world, would the removal of peanuts from public stadiums really be the big of a deal? Honestly, would you not go to a Baseball game simply because they did not serve peanuts?

Reply

Lia,
Bees also cause anaphylactic shock. Should we move all games to domes. BTW, if these allergies were non-existent 20 years ago, then we are doing something different. People did not eat peanuts 20 years ago like they do now. They didn't use peanut lotions. Yes they did use lotion, but I doubt we had these ridiculous lotions that we have now.
Before any yells at me for being an ignorant clod, I have a niece with severe allergies, including peanuts, also mustard. Should we ban mustard at ballparks, because the vendor might get a little bit of mustard on his gloves, or should the parents exercise a little responsibility and watch out for their kids.

Reply

Jon,

Again, I think you miss the point.

There is not a tremendous amount of people that will have anaphylactic reaction to mustard. Also, mustard does not really move in the air as peanut dust does.

As for Bees, I notice that ballbarks do not release tons of bees in the ballbark probably for this and other reasons.

The difference between your arguments about mustard and bees, and Ignorant Clods' argument about grass and alcohol is that:

1) is that a large population has this issue, today they say 8% of all children have severe allergic reactions with peanuts being #1. This is not the case where this is a "rare" thing such as with the examples of "mustard" or "grass" or "alchohol". In fact I never heard of a child dying from an anaphalatic shock from any of these substances.

2) Second, most small children are told to avoid peanuts until they get bigger. So many of those children that are allergic do not know it yet..thus it has nothing to do with better parent. It is the role of the parent and society to create a safer place for what is an reasonably avoidable trajedy.

3) Peanuts can be airborne and cause the reaction. Mustard, Grass and Alchohol does not have this characteristic.

So the point is that making analogies to other items is not useful for they do not have the same danger and the danger is not created in the same way. I just do not understand the "love" of the peanut. Unlike the suggestions to create domes, give up live baseball, etc.. the simple removal of peanuts from live sporting event does not seem like an that much of an accommodation versus the accidental exposure to an innocent child that dies from it.

Reply

Jon, I think you miss the point too.

There is not a tremendous amount of people that will have anaphylactic reaction to mustard. Also, mustard does not move in the air as peanut dust does.

As for Bees, I notice that ballparks do not release tons of bees in the ballpark probably for this and other good reasons.

The difference between your arguments about mustard and bees, and Ignorant Clods' argument about grass and alcohol is that:

1) Peanuts effect a large population, today they say 8% of all children have severe allergic reactions with peanuts being #1. This is not the case of a "rare" reaction such as with the examples of "mustard" or "grass" or "alcohol". In fact I never heard of a child dying from an anaphylactic shock from any of these substances.

2) Second, most small children are told to avoid peanuts until they get bigger. So many children that are allergic do not know it yet..thus it has nothing to do with being a better parent. It is the role of the parent and society to create a safer place for what is a reasonably avoidable tragedy.

3) Peanuts can be airborne and cause the reaction. Mustard, Grass and Alcohol and even Bees do not have this characteristic.

So the point is that making analogies to other items is not useful for they do not have the same danger and the danger is not created in the same way. I just do not understand the "love" of the peanut. Unlike the suggestions to create domes and/or give up live baseball, etc.. The simple removal of peanuts from live sporting event does not seem like that much of an accommodation versus the accidental exposure to an innocent child form, which they can die.

Reply

You guys seen the game, unbelievable, Twins is my best team in the MLB. I wish I could go to watch all their games but ticket prices this season are getting very pricy. Brokers made the game hard to attend. Well talking about Brokers. I found a new web site where you can compare Minnesota Twins ticket brokers, the site is Minnesota Twins tickets
http://www.ticketwood.com/mlb/Minnesota-Twins-Tickets/index.php . Well I hope this will be helpful for you guys. Go Go Twins. Keep me updated Great blog!!!

Reply

For those of you opposed to the special "Peanut-free" sections at just a FEW games this year, I say, "For once, walk in someone else's shoes that is less fortunate than you." Maybe that's hard for you to do, but you should give it a try. It's not easy. Maybe then you'd have some compassion for what these children/adults go through each day.

I am a mother to an amazing pre-teen girl who is so allergic to peanuts and their by-products that the mere scent or touch of peanuts can cause her to go into anaphylactic shock, which could lead to death in minutes if left untreated. My husband and I can lose our child to the scent or touch of a peanut butter sandwich or a bag of peanuts at a baseball game. It's hard to believe but it's true. We can NEVER take her to a baseball game because of the presence of peanuts. We're NOT asking that peanuts be banned from baseball games, but it would be great if our child could enjoy a game like others, and right now she cannot. SO, I say that if the White Sox are taking this proactive step and carving out a few games for kids like mine to enjoy a game, WHY NOT? Is it really inconveniencing any of you????!!! How about some compassion for these kids/adults? Why is it such a big deal? Do you realize how hard it is for anyone with a very severe peanut allergy (I'm not talking about the people who sneeze a little after being exposed to peanuts) - ones who could die from the exposure, to just go out to dinner at a restaurant, or to kiss their family without drilling them about what they just ate, or to be a kid and enjoy a birthday cake with their friends (which kids with severe peanut allergies can never do because of the cross-contamination issues at most bakeries/grocery stores where cakes are purchased)?

I must say that until I had a child severely affected by a life-threatening food allergy, I truly didn't understand it. It's hard to believe that someone could DIE from a peanut, but they can. Trust me, we almost lost our daughter once already. . . PLEASE, please, be a little more compassionate for anyone with a disability. Let them have a day or two to enjoy a baseball game without fearing for their lives!

Thanks for letting me express my feelings. My daughter and others affected by food allergies deserve the same opportunities everyone else has.

Reply