THE CLAIM
In a video entitled “Special chuffing dietary requirement mentalists”, Katie Hopkins complains about airline passengers with nut allergies.
She describes being prevented from eating the packet of KP peanuts she carries in her hand luggage because another passenger has a nut allergy.
Hopkins says:
“Because Belinda in seat 23C has got a nut allergy”
and:
“I travel with a special packet of KP peanuts in my bag, on my carry-on for down to see Belinda in 23C with a nut allergy that stops me having a nut.”
She then imagines going to find the passenger:
“So I go to 23C to find Belinda.”
Hopkins follows this with a joke about the imagined passenger’s weight:
“Clearly not allergic to any other major food group. Maybe salad.”
WATCH THE ORIGINAL VIDEO
Katie Hopkins’ original video can be watched here:
WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS WHEN A PASSENGER HAS A NUT ALLERGY?
A serious nut allergy is not simply a dietary preference.
Food allergy can cause anaphylaxis, a severe allergic reaction which can be life-threatening.
Airlines may therefore take precautions when they are informed that a passenger has a serious allergy. These can include making announcements asking other passengers not to eat particular foods.
That does not mean other passengers are normally entitled to be told who the allergic passenger is or where that person is sitting.
Hopkins’ “Belinda in seat 23C” scenario should therefore not be confused with evidence that an airline actually identified an allergic passenger and disclosed their seat number.
WOULD EATING PEANUTS ON AN AIRCRAFT ENDANGER AN ALLERGIC PASSENGER?
There is an important piece of nuance here.
The evidence does not support the idea that simply opening a packet of peanuts anywhere on an aircraft will necessarily cause a severe allergic reaction in another passenger.
Research indicates that significant reactions from airborne peanut particles are uncommon.
However, that does not make severe nut allergies imaginary or trivial.
Contact with allergens and contaminated surfaces can present a risk, and ingestion of an allergen by somebody with a severe allergy can cause anaphylaxis.
Airlines and passengers therefore have good reason to take sensible precautions.
If somebody knew where a severely allergic passenger was sitting and deliberately approached that person with the allergen specifically to expose them to it, that would be very different from simply eating peanuts elsewhere on an aircraft.
It would be potentially dangerous and reckless.
There is no need to speculate about whether such hypothetical behaviour would constitute a particular criminal offence. The important point is that a serious food allergy is a medical condition, not merely a lifestyle choice.
WHAT ABOUT THE JOKE ABOUT THE PASSENGER’S WEIGHT?
Hopkins then imagines that the passenger with the nut allergy is overweight and says:
“Clearly not allergic to any other major food group. Maybe salad.”
There is no sound basis for looking at someone’s body size and determining whether they have a nut allergy, how serious that allergy is, or whether they have other food allergies.
A person’s appearance cannot tell you whether they are at risk of anaphylaxis.
The joke therefore tells us nothing about the validity of the passenger’s allergy.
DO NUTS MAKE PEOPLE FAT?
There is another problem with the implication behind the joke.
Scientific research does not support the simplistic idea that eating nuts causes obesity.
A large systematic review and meta-analysis found that nut consumption did not adversely affect body weight. Prospective research included in the review actually associated nut consumption with a lower incidence of overweight and obesity.
That does not mean nuts cause weight loss.
It does demonstrate why someone’s weight provides no sensible basis for ridiculing their nut allergy or making assumptions about what they eat.
CONCLUSION
Katie Hopkins is entitled to dislike airline restrictions on eating nuts and to make jokes about them.
There is also legitimate scientific debate about exactly how much risk airborne peanut exposure presents inside an aircraft. The available evidence suggests that this particular risk is low.
But that is very different from suggesting that serious nut allergies are simply unreasonable “special dietary requirements”.
Food allergies can cause life-threatening anaphylaxis.
Nor is there a factual basis for assuming that an allergic passenger is overweight, that their weight somehow undermines their allergy, or that their appearance tells us what other foods they can eat.
The evidence supports sensible, proportionate precautions for passengers with serious allergies — not ridicule of the medical condition.
VERDICT: MISLEADING AND UNSUPPORTED
SOURCES
Anaphylaxis UK — Peanut and Tree Nut Allergy
Anaphylaxis UK — Navigating Allergens on Airlines: Safety Precautions and Passenger Rights
Systematic review and meta-analysis — Nut consumption and body weight
ORIGINAL VIDEO
Katie Hopkins — “Special chuffing dietary requirement mentalists”
Batshit Bonkers Katie Hopkins 