Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: dinoparty

No, but it’s far more likely that you, naturally protective of your own child, overestimated the severity of the reaction (if there was any). I say that because the most logical answer is that the mechanical properties of peanut butter coupled with the general inability of infants to do anything are far more likely to cause choking and red-faced swelling than an extremely rare life-threatening allergy.


50 posted on 10/15/2013 7:40:54 AM PDT by flintsilver7 (Honest reporting hasn't caught on in the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: flintsilver7

“If there was any” ... couldn’t resist could you?

All, the point is that the proper (and most effective) argument against the restrictive rules is NOT to question the legitimacy of the condition. Rather question the need to inconvenience many other people for the sake of the few. That makes some logical sense. But when you question the legitimacy of the condition not only does it make you look dumb, it also makes it look like you are irrationally taking out your frustrations by attacking those of us who have seen it with our own eyes.


55 posted on 10/15/2013 8:08:13 AM PDT by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson