Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 382 posts

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#371

Post by jjulius »

kqr wrote: post #352
jjulius wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuinely curious, not trying to criticize, am parent of littles myself. You mentioned your wife is allergic but you're not, and talked about the difficulty you've had finding friends/family to expose them to it. I don't see mention of you being the one to expose them to it in a setting a safe distance away from your wife, and I guess I'm just curious! Hummus as a snack when you're at a park, or something? Like I sai…

Admittedly this may be a smaller problem with the children, but our rule when it comes to myself is that I also avoid sesame unless I'm not going to see my wife for a day or two. Our concern is that some of it would stick to teeth despite careful brushing, and then get transferred by intimacy. (She is extremely allergic.) And truth is our children and myself have not been away from my wife for more than a few hours a…

Aha, I gotcha. I guess that's my ignorance at play, not knowing to what degree an allergen can stick around, for how long, and how complicated that can all be!

Thanks for the insight. :)

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#372

Post by soperj »

rabidonrails wrote: post #300
soperj wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But that's exactly why this is so interesting. You take a set of people with extremely similar genetics but somehow have very different reactions. Or it's based on a hundred different other things than when they first tried peanut butter.

Your point of anything is possible is always and forever true. The point here is that there seems to be a strong correlation between people eating Bamba and no peanut allergy. How can we develop a control group? Oh wait, there is a group of people that have the same genetics but doesn't consistently eat this...perhaps there's a connection. The goal is to see if we can show a correlation/causation.

As always, correlation is not causation, and when you have a large group of people who actually changes their behaviour and starts to feed their children peanut butter early and it has no effect whatsoever you can begin to rule out the theory that was based on a small sample size of a distinct population.

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#373

Post by heywhatupboys »

varenc wrote: post #308
heywhatupboys wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I started giving my own child chewed up food I was eating at about 2.5 months You gave a TWO AND A HALF MONTH OLD CHILD chicken??? this is so incredibly careless that I HAVE to call out this crazy misinformation on HN. DO not ever replicate this please, everyone else.

What's the risk exactly? Googling around mentions the choking risk and the correlation behind obesity and early life introduction of solid foods. But if a small amount of chicken is pre-chewed by the parent and given as a rare one-off under observation those risks seem to be mitigated. Based on your strong reaction though I'm guessing there's risks? Inability to digest the chicken perhaps? Just curious

it is extremely bad for the child's digestive system etc. not everything is a "life or death thing"

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#374

Post by philistine »

illumego wrote: post #328
fsckboy wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you say it like it's a sort of corporate slut-shaming, but it's not. If you build a factory big enough to make 1/2 the cheese puffs in the world, there's an incentive to make it bigger and make all the cheese puffs in the world. Going from small batch bake/frying to assembly line flow is the 1st step, but once you're over that hurdle, you might as well go big, as long as you can handle the risk of being stuck with th…

> That type of cooking is a natural monopoly. Should bulk cheese puffs be state owned?

Seize the means of cheese puff production!

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#375

Post by gsinclair »

silversmith wrote: post #203
skrbjc wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many many people put their kids into daycare at 3 months of age since that’s all they get for maternity leave.

I knew this before, as a fact like any other. Now that I've recently become a parent, it's... it's shocking. The idea of handing someone that young and helpless off to strangers raises a strong "NO!" reaction, right from the gut instead of the brain. In my neck of the woods we get 1.5 years maternity leave, and experiencing it myself I'm honestly not sure even that is enough.

Strong agree. My son is nine months old now and if we had to put him in day care tomorrow, I wouldn’t mind. It takes a village and all that. Happy to delay that a little while longer, though.

But three months is just unthinkable.

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#376

Post by the_mar »

kbenson wrote: post #346
the_mar wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many years ago I worked at a candy company. I tell you more. MOST of "private label" stuff is actually manufactured by the same company as the "name brand", what is more companies routinely manufacture stuff for each other depending on the factory loads, e.g. our plant would manufacture Reese's despite having no relation to the brand and it's a very common practice.

That sounds like an industry where a few large players have gobbled up everyone else and entrenched themselves, and they're all relatively happy with their market share (i.e. they aren't competing), and are thus happy to help "competitors" because what they want more than anything else is stability, and to keep new entrants from the market that actually might change things. You know, collusion. Or emergent behavior t…

it's not really all that sinister. It's just you have a factory and you have workers and sometimes you need more work for them than your company can provide. Just because you can manufacture items for your competitor does not mean you are colluding. I'll tell you more, a lot of competitors use the same suppliers, like for example Ford and GM, will use LG for a lot of components. LG then can't share any tech they developed for GM when working with Ford, but it's not like they get a lobotomy.

People who work at Apple use AWS and people at Amazon use MacBooks. It's all complicated, but not sinister.

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#377

Post by the_mar »

fuzzfactor wrote: post #359
eulgro wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked for a cookie company. Sometimes we would just swap the boxes for the name brand in the packaging machine while the line was running. The funny thing is, one box said it had some ingredient in it (it didn't) and the other one didn't. Also at some point one company asked the cookie company to create a recipe to imitate some other product so they could compete. Except the cookie company was the one making that…

>we would just swap the boxes for the name brand in the packaging machine while the line was running. Any difference in consumer price of the identical product would be largely due to advertising.

Wait until you hear about designer handbags.

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#378

Post by schwartzworld »

ortusdux wrote: post #107
vorpalhex wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bamba is also delicious. The fat content from the peanut butter gives it a good body, like a cheese puff. If you decide to get some for your kid, get some extra for yourself.

TJ's also sold some that were dipped in dark chocolate. They are the unholy hybrid of vanishing caloric density and a peanut butter cup.

TJs also sells Nutella filled bamba

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#379

Post by fuzzfactor »

the_mar wrote: post #377
fuzzfactor wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>we would just swap the boxes for the name brand in the packaging machine while the line was running. Any difference in consumer price of the identical product would be largely due to advertising.

Wait until you hear about designer handbags.

From what I hear, the top designers there don't actually need advertising.

Re: Give babies peanut butter to cut peanut allergies, study says

#380

Post by bombcar »

the_mar wrote: post #376
kbenson wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like an industry where a few large players have gobbled up everyone else and entrenched themselves, and they're all relatively happy with their market share (i.e. they aren't competing), and are thus happy to help "competitors" because what they want more than anything else is stability, and to keep new entrants from the market that actually might change things. You know, collusion. Or emergent behavior t…

it's not really all that sinister. It's just you have a factory and you have workers and sometimes you need more work for them than your company can provide. Just because you can manufacture items for your competitor does not mean you are colluding. I'll tell you more, a lot of competitors use the same suppliers, like for example Ford and GM, will use LG for a lot of components. LG then can't share any tech they deve…

Similar things happen in the tech world - lots of various products are manufactured by a few; TVs being a really good example. There are only a few panel manufacturers out there.
Post reply on HN