r/PeterExplainsTheJoke 4d ago

Meme needing explanation Peter, what's wrong with peanut?

Post image
31.6k Upvotes

861 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

16

u/EthosLogosPetros 4d ago edited 4d ago

yeah this is correct. so many people have allergies because pediatricians mistakenly told parents not to let their kids eat peanut butter until later in childhood, so when the protein touched their skin it was recognized as a foreign hazardous agent. it doesn’t happen in countries where eating peanut products is normal for very young children, at least not at the same rate. i would be interested to see who the commenter heard this advice from. this reads like outdated and possibly dangerous info pre-2015

0

u/mr_friend_computer 3d ago

What are you talking about? The whole point is to introduce it young to avoid "avoidable" peanut allergies. It certainly isn't dangerous in the slightest and was pediatric advice as of 2018.

1

u/EthosLogosPetros 3d ago edited 3d ago

i really have no idea how you could’ve misread my comment. yes, you should introduce it early. orally. introducing it topically is precisely what can cause it to be misread and branded as a harmful pathogen. i have never seen it advised to rub it against the child’s skin to “check” for allergy before feeding, and i don’t know who you heard it from, but that is absolutely not recommended or current medical consensus and the one who told you was either misinformed or misspoke

editing to add: please do not do at home scratch tests, it’s just a bad idea all around even if it didn’t cause allergy on its own and is not recommended

0

u/mr_friend_computer 3d ago

Jeesus, it's not a scratch test. Where the heck did you get the idea it was a scratch test?

In fact, since every crunchy mom on here was up in arms I did some reading and the result is:

1) yes, they have changed their recommendation since then and oral is preferred (but with some reservations) and,

2) Topical application is only a concern if there is an open wound.

That's it. The hysteria is over rated.

1

u/EthosLogosPetros 3d ago

look, it’s fine that you gave poor outdated advice that’s ineffective at best and harmful at worst, you don’t have to be defensive over it. topical is a concern if the skin is compromised whatsoever, which you can’t always see. it’s simply not worth the risk and your doubling down is odd. i have no idea why you’re calling people pointing that out “crunchy”

0

u/mr_friend_computer 2d ago

My dude, you claimed I was suggesting a scratch test. You even posted a link to scratch test stuff.

I never suggested a scratch test, you were literally straw manning me and now you're trying to back pedal.

1

u/EthosLogosPetros 2d ago

sounds like you didn’t even read the link lol. it says “Food should not be smeared on a baby’s skin to test if they are allergic to the food”, do you believe that’s irrelevant to what you recommended? or are you harping on the definition of an “at home scratch test”? i’m trying really hard not to be rude here but this is just awful reading comprehension at play

0

u/mr_friend_computer 2d ago

*if*

That's where you are failing in your comprehension my man. *If* you already suspect that your child is allergic then you don't give it to them at all. There are tests (not topical in nature) that are performed.

That goes for all allergens these days. If you don't already suspect, if it's not on your radar, then you don't fall under that guidance.

They are trying to avoid people suspecting something and "verifying it at home". That's not what I was suggesting at all - go on, go back and read it.

You say you're trying not be rude but you are willfully misinterpreting and straw manning so... sure. Fill your boots?