Flying While Food-Allergic Is Probably Not as Dangerous as You Think It Is

A large passenger aeroplane seen from a low angle flying under a blue sky with puffy white and grey clouds behind it.

This page will answer the following questions:

Table Of Contents

Flying While Food-Allergic Is Probably Not as Dangerous as You Think It Is

What’s the story?

Aeroplanes are flying death-traps for the food-allergic, especially people with nut allergies. Just one whiff of the protein bar that the excessively enthusiastic fitness influencer is munching on in business class and it won’t be long before the peanut-allergic individual flying economy is saying hello to their dead ancestors. Those flying metal coffins may as well have ‘Abandon all hope, all ye immune-compromised who enter here’ stencilled above their doorways.

So, how dangerous is flying with a food allergy?

Over the last three decades or so, a smattering of surveys, mostly of people with (pea)nut or seed allergies have found that between 10% and 20% report having had an allergic reaction while on a plane.

Unsurprisingly, then, a global survey of 4,704 food allergy sufferers and their caregivers published in 2024 revealed that 98% felt anxious when they had to catch a flight.

But the situation is not as bad it it seems. For a start, the people who were approached for those surveys were members of nut allergy registries or allergy advocacy organisations, and thus more likely to have severe allergies, and those who filled in the surveys were more likely to have a reaction to report.

And it pays to remember that, although around 5 billion people fly each year, in-flight medical emergencies are rare events, occurring on around 1 in every 604 flights. Of those medical emergencies, between 2% to 4% are allergic reactions, most of which are triggered by peanuts, tree nuts or seafood, and most of which are not serious.

A review of just under 2 years’ worth of medical events occurring in the under-19s reported to a ground-based medical centre that supports 77 international airlines reported that 5.5% of them were allergic reactions, the vast majority of which were dealt with on board the plane and didn’t require additional care at destination.

You’re much more likely to suffer a serious food-related injury by being burned by your in-flight meal, especially if you sit in an aisle seat and encounter turbulence while the food or hot beverages are being served.

A 2023 meta-analysis of research results to date commissioned by the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) revealed that allergic reactions are 10 to 100 times less likely to happen on a plane than they are in everyday life. The researchers estimated a likelihood of 1 accidental reaction per 3,600 food-allergic fliers in any 1-year period.

Importantly, the rate of allergic reactions on planes—approximately 1 allergic reaction for every 1 and a half million passengers—has remained stable over the past 30 years, despite both increasing numbers of plane passengers and people with food allergies (although a lot of the credit for these great stats should probably go to food-allergic passengers who take the right precautions when they fly, more on those later).

A woman in a jacket with a fur-lined hood wearing a woollen hat smells a pile of frosted biscuits she is holding in her gloved hand.

Is reacting to inhaled food allergens a common problem?

No. In fact, it’s extremely rare.

There’s a popular perception that allergic reactions on planes happen because people breathe in dust or vapours from peanuts or other trigger foods—a belief that’s shared by the people having said reactions.

However, the food allergic flier should rest easy, because research carried out over the past couple of decades has consistently shown that people rarely ever react to aerosolised food. People with hazardous legume allergies might also take comfort from knowing that peanut dust does not easily become airborne, nor does it manage to stay airborne for long.

In probably the earliest study of its kind, researchers attempted to measure the amount of peanut protein in the air near people eating peanut butter sandwiches (to simulate a school cafeteria setting), people shelling and eating roasted peanuts and walking on discarded peanut shells (to simulate being at a sporting event) and people opening and eating 15 small bags of unshelled peanuts (to simulate the environment on a remarkably generous commercial airliner).

Air samples were collected from personal air monitors worn by the people eating the peanut product, from people sitting next to the peanut eater and by air filters situated 5 to 10 feet away from the eater. Area samples were also taken 2 inches above open peanut butter jars.

In all of these cases, airborne peanut allergen was undetectable, although the technology being used might not have been able to detect the infinitesimally small amount of allergen that was probably in the air. That said, the study included situations that were worse than those a typical peanut-allergic person would encounter in real life, such as sitting in a small room with bad ventilation while multiple people simultaneously trample on peanut shells, so the likelihood that there was enough peanut protein circulating in the air to provoke a reaction in anyone but the most exquisitely sensitive individual was as infinitesimal as the amount of allergen that couldn’t be detected by the researchers.

Later experiments that used more sensitive technology confirmed that de-shelling peanuts does produces tiny but detectable amounts of peanut allergen in the air, but only directly above the peanuts and only briefly during the actual de-shelling, implying that peanut dust is more likely to settle than to circulate in the air under normal conditions.

In one such experiment, researchers measured the amount of peanut allergen in the air above an open jar of peanut butter, over a pan of simmering peanut sauce, near someone eating peanuts and above peanuts that were being de-shelled.

Air samplers that were run for 22 hours were only able to detect minute amounts of peanut allergen above the peanuts that were being de-shelled (330.9 μg/m3 at 1 cm above, and 4.8 μg/m3 at 1 metre above. That’s 330.9 micrograms per metres cubed, or 0.000,330,9 grams of peanut protein per 1,000,000 cubic centimetres of air at 1 cm centimetre above the shelled peanut. The allergen immediately became undetectable at both heights as soon as the peanuts stopped being de-shelled.

The potential of airborne peanut allergen to cause reactions was tested in 2021 by a team of Swedish researchers who placed 300g of roasted peanuts in a bowl about 50 cm away from 84 peanut-allergic children sitting in a small room and waited to see how many of them would react. Two developed mild hay fever-like symptoms that did not require treatment. Trace amounts of peanut allergen were detected in the air within 50 cms of the bowl of peanuts, at levels that were deemed too small to cause a moderate or severe allergic reaction. (For the record, those levels were 166 nanograms per millilitre for dry-roasted peanuts and 33 nanograms per millilitre for roasted peanuts. In the former case, that would be 0.000,000,166 grams of peanut protein per millilitre of air, or 0.000,166 grams per litre).

The likelihood of coming into contact with airborne peanut allergen on a plane was tested by a team of researchers who took air samples from 7 filters placed around someone who was eating peanuts during a commercial flight. The only air sample that contained any peanut allergen was the one taken directly below the person’s mouth while they ate, and it contained a very small amount; around 1 to 2 nanograms—that’s 0.000,000,001 to 0.000,000,002 grams—of peanut per 500 cubic centimetres of air.

For reference, researchers have calculated that the lowest threshold dose of protein needed to produce a reaction in 1% of the population allergic to peanut is 0.2 mg. That’s about 100,000 times to 200,000 less than the amount detected in the previous experiment.

All in all, research to date suggests that ‘There is little risk posed from non-oral exposure to peanut in the environment, from casual contact, proximity, or inhalation.’

As for peanut being the scariest of all allergens, research shows that milk is more likely to cause severe or fatal anaphylaxis in both school-aged children and European adults.

And, when it comes to inhalation reactions, the most problematic foods seem to be fish, shellfish and wheat—all of which are more likely to cause problems for people who work with them every day and become sensitised via airborne allergens present at their workplaces. That said, it’s not unusual for fish and shellfish to provoke reactions in people who don’t work with seafood but still react to it when they breathe in the cooking vapours.

Photo of the inside of a plane taken from the back of the economy cabin showing the back of several rows of seats.

Surely the risk if greater if I’m stuck on a plane?

Also, no. Because of the way air is circulated around the cabin and the high-efficiency filters that it passes through, food allergens are very unlikely to be the cause of inhalation reactions.

Aircraft have environmental control systems (ECS) which manage cabin air supply, pressure and temperature (for an eye-watering amount of detail, go here).

When it’s parked at a terminal, fresh air from outside is supplied to the plane by auxiliary power units. During flight, most commercial aircraft recycle half of of the air from the passenger cabin (to effectively control circulation and humidity and maximise fuel efficiency). The rest is fresh air from outside the plane which is thought to be sterile at typical cruising altitudes. This air passes through the engine and its compressors which heat, compress, cool and then pass the air into the cabin to be circulated by the ventilation system.

Standard air circulation patterns on passenger aircraft go from side-to-side: air enters the cabin through overhead distribution outlets located in the middle of the cabin, flows to each side and is extracted through vents at floor level. This means that the air circulates across the cabin rather than from front to back, minimising the potential for passenger-generated contaminants (like peanut dust or viruses) to spread through the cabin.

The aircraft cabin ventilation systems are also designed to remove carbon dioxide, smells and airborne contaminants like pathogens from the air. This requires high airflow rates and excellent filters. In fact, the air in the cabin is completely exchanged every 3 to 4 minutes (which is faster than the airflow in typical office buildings and even in hospital rooms).

In modern large commercial aircraft, the air that is extracted from the cabin is passed through high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters. These HEPA filters have a particle-removing efficiency of 99·97% at 0·3 µm, which effectively removes dust, vapours, pathogens and the vast majority of aerosolised food particles (the typical particle sizes for peanut dust range from 2 to 30 µm, so no peanut dust should make its way back into the cabin once it’s been extracted).

One research team has detected peanut allergens in the filtering systems of two commercial airliners at the time of their annual replacement (after approximately 5000 flight hours), thus confirming that peanut allergen can become airborne in plane cabins. Of course, the levels found were incredibly low—between 167 and 315 times less than the concentration of peanut protein in standard crude peanut extract.

So, while it is theoretically possible that someone considered high risk—e.g. someone with poorly controlled asthma or previous inhalation reactions—could have an allergic reaction due to breathing in dust from peanuts being eaten during a flight, the efficiency of the HEPA filters and the frequency of complete cabin air exchange (15–20 times an hour) make this highly unlikely.

Close-up of a hand with its index finger outstretched, touching an almond in a pile of almonds against a white background.

So, why do people have allergic reactions on flights?

Researchers think that most of the reactions that occur on planes are either due to people accidentally eating their trigger food, perhaps because it’s hidden in their in-flight meal, or touching a contaminated surface and touching their mouths and then, because they can’t identify the source of the problem, thinking that they must have inhaled something. And some reactions could simply be brought on by anxiety.

Of course, just because one thing is more likely than another thing that is almost impossible still doesn’t make the former very probable, and that’s the case for contact reactions, or serious ones at least.

In one study, a team of American researchers recruited 30 highly sensitive, peanut-allergic children—most of whom who had a history of skin contact and inhalation reactions—and pressed a small amount of peanut butter (0.2 mL) against their skin for 1 minute and had them inhale the vapours from a patch of peanut butter placed 12 inches from their faces for 10 minutes.

A few of the children experienced a small, localised contact reaction; 3 developed red skin, 5 experienced itchy skin and 2 had a weal-and-flare reaction where their skin touched the peanut butter. 5 of the children also developed red skin after touching the control (soy) butter, effectively demonstrating that butter touching the skin can cause mild irritation. None experienced serious symptoms. The researchers declared that at least 9 out of 10 children with severe peanut allergy would very probably be fine after either touching peanut butter or breathing in its aroma.

In an Australian study, 281 peanut-sensitised children had one gram of peanut butter left on their skin for 15 minutes. As in the previous experiment, only a minority of them developed a skin reaction (hives) at the point of contact. None of them developed a generalised reaction, including those who experienced systemic reactions during a subsequent food challenge.

A swing-top glass jar of walnuts stands towards the right of the shot on a white surface against a white background.

Wouldn’t it just be better to make flights nut-free?

All the evidence gathered so far suggests that nut bans on planes are unlikely to be effective.

For one, even if an airline asks people not to eat nuts and doesn’t serve any, it cannot guarantee that passengers won’t bring nut-containing food products on board. As one reviewer notes, although the past couple of decades has seen a significant rise in the number of low-cost carriers who don’t provide snacks as well as a drop in the number of airlines that serve peanuts, there has not been a corresponding decrease in allergic reactions, which may be due to passengers bringing their own nut-based snacks with them when they travel.

Secondly, although it seems reasonable to think think that if carriers don’t provide free peanuts with their in-flight service, there will be a lower risk to peanut-allergic passengers, that is not a valid assumption: studies have shown that there is no difference in the amount of peanut allergen present in homes where peanut is banned and homes where it is not, and no difference in the number of times adrenaline has to be administered in schools that are ‘peanut-free’ and those that are not.

And this applies to planes too; when a team of researchers measured the amount of peanut protein present in surface swabs taken from tray tables and seats on a flight during which peanut was eaten and a ‘no nuts’ flight, they found peanut protein in the swabs taken on both flights.

Ultimately, asking passengers to refrain from eating nuts on a certain flight is unlikely to protect the nut-allergic on that flight because they run a bigger risk of reacting to the peanut residue already present in the aircraft cabin from the peanuts eaten on the previous flight than to the negligible amount that will be briefly floating in the air right next to a person eating nuts on their flight, especially if that person is sitting in another row.

Research also suggests that nut bans may provide false sense of security and might make the peanut-allergic less likely to carry their adrenaline auto-injectors, which is one of the most important things that they can actually do to protect themselves.

A blank to do list and a pen lie centre left against a black background.

What can I do to make my plane trip safer?

Although allergic reactions on planes are not as common as people might think they are, that doesn’t mean that people with food allergies shouldn’t be wary on planes, especially those with a higher risk of having a (more severe) reaction on a plane, including:

older people
people who feel stressed or anxious
people who have been drinking or taking drugs
people who are tired
people with pre-existing medical conditions
people with multiple food allergies and asthma

Some of these factors—like being tired or stressed, drinking or taking certain medications— are known as cofactors, and they can either make a person more likely to have allergic reactions by lowering their allergen threshold—i.e. less food is needed to provoke a reaction—or make the symptoms of an allergic reaction worse.

The plane cabin pressurisation—equivalent to an altitude of between 5,000 to 8,000 feet during flight—also exposes passengers to a partial pressure of oxygen (25% to 30% lower than at sea level) which results in a slight fall in oxygen blood saturation (92% to 95% saturation) and the need to breathe and pump blood around the body a little faster. This poses a problem for people with existing heart problems and could theoretically increase the risk of experiencing more severe anaphylaxis.

The low humidity in the cabin (around 6% to 18%) can also irritate the mucous membranes of the mouth, nose and throat, which is not helpful to people with breathing problems, and it can cause dehydration, which is not helpful to anyone.

While these factors may work to make an allergic reaction worse, there are things that you can do to avoid having one in the first place (and to make your journey go more smoothly).

The must-dos

There are a couple of things that the severely food-allergic have to do when they fly.

Inform the airline of your (child’s) allergies.

Most airlines explicitly require passengers to inform them in advance about serious allergies. In the European Union, the air passenger rights even stipulate that a passenger can be denied boarding for health and safety reasons if they have not done so.

How and when this should be done varies widely; you may have to get a medical clearance certificate or fill out a preprinted form. Sometimes, clearance certificates are only accepted if pre-formulated sentences are used. Check with your chosen carrier!

Bring your own medication, especially if you have adrenaline auto-injectors.

Most airlines are not required to carry emergency medication for allergic passengers, although many large international carriers do, and the US passed legislation in 2024 requiring that updated emergency kits on American passenger planes contain treatments for anaphylaxis and the crew is trained to use them.

While airlines do carry adrenaline in their emergency medical kits, it’s in vial form and intended for people having cardiac emergencies which means that, although it can be used to help someone suffering from anaphylaxis, having to fiddle around with an ampoule and syringe will add an extra hurdle to the possibility of anyone actually using it.

What this means is that you should not assume that an adrenaline auto-injector will be available or that the crew will be able to help you administer adrenaline in an emergency (in some cases, regulations may not permit them to).

So you must bring your own medication with you in your hand luggage (not placed in the hold), especially if you’ve been prescribed 1 or 2 autoinjectors for a severe allergy. And you should be prepared to use it—the fact that most people do not administer adrenaline in an emergency is lamented far and wide by allergy experts because it’s the only medication that will help in cases of anaphylaxis.

Contact the airline in advance to ask for their advice on carrying the auto-injector(s). Medications carried in hand luggage typically needs to be declared and approved, and that may include medication in liquid form that exceeds the 100ml limit. Paperwork—e.g. a copy of your prescription or letter from your doctor—generally has to be provided in English. Let both airport security and the cabin crew know that you are carrying the auto-injector for medical purposes, and let the cabin crew know where to find it.

Also, if you have one, carry your emergency action plan with you.

The 7 habits of highly effective nonreactors

Researchers have asked nut-allergic flyers about the measures that they take to reduce the risk of reacting when they fly and have found 7 actions associated with problem-free travel.

For a start, requesting any kind of accommodation by the airline was significantly associated with a smaller chance of experiencing a reaction during a flight. Which is a good time to mention that all of the things that were requested for didn’t necessarily lower a person’s risk of reacting, it was the fact that they asked for them in the first place that indicated that the person was cautious and well-prepared and this is what probably ensured them a smooth flight.

The specific (6) actions taken by these careful people were:

1. Requesting a nut-free flight

In practice, this probably won’t reduce your risk of having a reaction since the main risk to food-allergic travellers seems to be the presence of trace allergen residues on surfaces. It’s also a risky move that might get you kicked off a flight, so be sure to check out airline policies to see which carriers flying to your destination explicitly state that they are willing to serve only allergen-free meals or snacks and will make an announcement to ask other passengers to refrain from eating nuts.

2. Requesting a nut–free meal

Special meal requests typically need to be made 24 to 48 hours before a flight.

3. Requesting a buffer zone

Quite a few carriers offer to create a buffer zone, which means that flight crew will request that passengers in your immediate vicinity do not open or consume products containing your food trigger. The size of the buffer zone depends on the type of aircraft and cabin size and will typically comprise the row that you’re sitting in and maybe the seats in front of and/or behind you.

Whether buffer zones actually work is a matter of debate but, in theory, if you’re sitting next to someone who is eating something you’re allergic to, some airborne particles might be able to get to you before either sticking to the tray table or being extracted through the environmental control system, so if you’re very allergic to a food, it certainly doesn’t hurt to ask for one.

Importantly, a buffer zone provides reassurance and, if you’re an anxious food-allergic traveller, the more you can do to avoid stress, the better.

You should note, however, that a buffer zone cannot protect you from, for example, walking through unprotected areas to get to the bathroom and then touching peanut residue on the door handle—traces of peanut have been shown to linger on a person’s hands up to 3 hours after they’ve eaten peanuts.

Air Canada, incidentally, is the only airline that has been directed by a government to provide a (pea)nut-free buffer zone on request. It requires 48 hours notice for medical review and approval. It has also stopped serving peanut-containing snacks. The Japanese airline ANA/All Nippon Airways goes one step further and also uses special cleaning techniques to prepare the area for you. Should you want to go to (and from) a destination they fly to.

4. Wiping down everything in the seating area

There is plenty of research to support the idea that wiping surfaces in your seating area—the arm rest, the seat belt, the tray table, the entertainment system—will reduce your risk of accidentally coming into contact with trace amounts of your trigger food. This is especially important when you are flying with a low-cost carrier with a very short turnaround time that prevents the cleaning crew from doing a thorough job.

Research has also shown that commercial cleaners—notably Lysol sanitising wipes and Wet Ones and Formula 409—do the job well, and they do it better than alcohol-based disinfectants.

Note that seatback pockets are a convenient storage area for food and drink, so don’t stick your hands in them without having a wet wipe handy. And you might want to wipe down the emergency booklets and airline magazines stored in there prior to handling them.

Researchers have also detected peanut allergen in dust—up to 600 mg total peanut protein per gram of dust—collected from the cabin carpet and seats during routine aircraft cleaning of planes used for short-haul and medium-haul flights.

The fact is, food allergens can get anywhere. They have been found in carpeting, mattresses, furniture, soft toys and anything that acts as a ‘dust and allergen reservoir’, and being in a relatively small environment in which food is served makes the presence of food allergens in furnishings pretty unavoidable. Although wiping the seat upholstery should do to trick, anyone with a history of severe reactions to tiny amounts of allergen may want to see whether they can bring a mini vacuum cleaner with them to vacuum their seat, just in case.

You should be able to ask the airline to board early to do your cleaning. Airlines generally state whether or not they allow this in their policy and, even if they don’t, they are much more likely to accommodate this request than asking all of their passengers not to eat your trigger food. And it’s probably more useful.

5. Bringing homemade food

Bearing in mind that the airline cannot guarantee that their allergen-free meal is, in fact, free of allergens, people with food allergies are generally better off not eating airline food. Or buying food in the duty-free to eat on board, according to one study that followed 498 children over a year and reported 5 in-flight allergic reactions, 3 of which were due to the trigger allergen being in the food the family had bought prior to boarding.

Also note that food allergen labelling laws on planes are not standardised. On American carriers, for example, food that is not pre-packaged—i.e. most of the contents of your in-flight meal—does not have to list any allergens; like American restaurants, these meals that are served in a restaurant-like fashion are exempt from labelling laws, and the flight crew will not be able to guarantee that they are allergen-free.

And if you’re taking a chance on buying something at the airport, remember that different countries have different labelling laws. So if you’re allergic to celery and you board in Amsterdam to fly to Bangkok, for example, a pre-packaged sandwich that contains celery will be clearly labelled in on your way out, but not on your way back.

Also bear in mind that some countries—like Australia—have very strict rules regarding what food you can travel with. Allergy & Anaphylaxis Australia (A&AA), a font of valuable travel resources for people with allergies, provides food ideas and tips for long flights, including how to make dehydrated food.

6. Avoiding airline pillows or blankets

Machine washing does not always get rid of food allergens (especially peanut) and pillows are another example of a ‘dust and allergen reservoir’.

Other precautions that you can take

Think about your time of travel; if you’re travelling with a domestic airline, booking the first flight of the day may help to reduce your risk. An aircraft that has been parked overnight has probably been cleaned more efficiently than a mid-day flight. If you have a milk or egg allergy, a short-haul flight that avoids breakfast may reduce your risk of a reaction.

Think about your seat location; although the airflow an aircraft cabin is lateral, research has shown that someone walking down the aisle can drag contaminants in their wake. Although this type of research has been carried out to show the possible spread of viruses, which are even smaller and thus more mobile than food particles, this theoretically means that a person walking past you could drag some food allergen in their wake. However, the same research also shows that the spread of contaminants is confined to the aisle area, so people with severe food allergies can probably avoid this problem (and being hit by hot food or drink) by taking a window seat.

People with a history of reacting to vapours from seafood dishes should try to get a seat as far away as possible from the galley where the in-flights meals are heated.

When making your reservation, ask the airline how they deal with food-allergic passengers and ask them to issue you with confirmation of any arrangements you have discussed—e.g in-flight meal, pre-boarding to clean, buffer zone—so that you can present it when you check-in to avoid any confusion and potentially being denied boarding because someone says you didn’t inform the airline about your (child’s) allergy on time.

If you take out travel health insurance, ask the insurance company if you are covered in case of severe allergic reactions and consider taking out travel cancellation and travel interruption insurance.

Inform your physician of your intention to travel so that they can check that your emergency kit is complete, up to date and contains sufficient dose(s).

Consider taking snapshots of all the important information—emergency action plans, travel insurance documents—on your phone for easy access.

On your day of travel, give yourself plenty of time to go over special arrangements with airline staff at the check-in desk and to declare your medications—notably your adrenaline autoinjectors— with the security personnel.

Notify the lead flight attendant of your allergen when you board. A friendly approach will probably be more effective than a demanding one. Remember that they are not required to accommodate all of your needs, and that you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar (which, while factually wrong is good proverbial advice).

Resources

There are several websites out there with handy resources and tips for food-allergic travellers.

Allergy & Anaphylaxis Australia (A&AA) is a great site packed with useful information for food allergic travellers and flyers, including a downloadable summary of the policies of various airlines

Allergy UK provides tips, links to airline policies and the possibility to buy allergy translation cards and Anaphylaxis UK provides travel tips and a page informing you of the passenger rights of European flyers and travel tips.

Food Allergy Research & Education (FARE) provides travel tips and a summary report detailing the pros and cons of several airlines, and Allergic living also provides a summary of the policies of a few airlines, while Upgraded points provides you with travel tips and links to the policies of 60 airlines.

Kids With Food Allergies (KFA) provides links to resources for American flyers including where to file a complaint the US Department of Transportation, and you can also find airlines reviews at The Allergy Table and Spokin, a food allergy app that fronts a global social network of food-allergic individuals with opinions and handy tips.

A man wearing a pink jumper stands in front a sky blue background shouting into a large megaphone.

What does this all mean?

According to scientific evidence, the average food-allergic flyer has very little chance of having a reaction on a plane because they breathed in some food particles. The danger is much more likely to come from food triggers hidden in in-flight meals or sandwiches bought at the duty free shop, or from food particles stuck to surfaces in the seating area.

Happily, these risks can be reduced, and those risk-mitigating measures are worth taking, if only to alleviate your anxiety; as a worrier myself, I know I always feel much better when I have a Plan.

And if you have a bad experience, complain!

If there’s a common finding in the surveys that have been carried out on this topic, it’s that many reactions, often the majority, go unreported, even when those reactions have been severe and have resulted in a trip to hospital.

And if there’s a common complaint among food-allergic passengers, it’s that many airlines do not seem to take the threat of allergic reactions that seriously and, as a result, do not treat food-allergic passengers with either compassion or understanding. The behaviour of airport and airline staff can range from the casually insensitive to the unintentionally dangerous and disagreements can end up in forced disembarkment.

In the US, Department of Transportation legislation (Public Law 106–69, section 346) actually prevents the use of public funds to implement or enforce any law that would require any airline to enforce buffer-zones or peanut-free flights until there is scientific evidence proving that circulating peanut allergen poses a risk to passengers with allergy.

But understanding is unlikely to materialise and evidence is unlikely to be searched for if people with allergies don’t speak up about their experiences.

So, complain. Complain as if your life depended on it. At the very least, others can learn from your experience and you may feel better after getting it off your chest. At the very most, you may succeed in making policy change. You may even end up saving someone else’s life.

Although it’s best to report your complaints and/or reactions to the airline, it’s also understandable if you don’t want to add to your travel trauma. But you can complain later and elsewhere.

British travellers can get in touch (at the bottom of this page) with the Safer Tourism Foundation, an independent charity working to make travel safer for people with food allergies.

American travellers can complain here (after registering a complaint with the Department of Transportation) at the No Nut Traveler, an advocacy website with the goal of increasing awareness of the problems faced by food allergic flyers, and they can read other people’s stories here.

And English-speaking flyers with food allergies and iPhones anywhere in the world can leave reviews about their experiences with airlines (and anything else) in the Spokin app.

When all is said and done, it’s important to remember that it’s only the unlucky few who have to complain; there are quite a few airlines out there which are prepared to accommodate you, and they’re not necessarily expensive—easyJet and JetBlue, for example, get some of the best ratings—and a few simple precautions are all that most people will need to ensure blissfully uneventful travel.

So, take the necessary steps you need to protect yourself and/or your loved ones and then try to relax, knowing that you have done everything you can. And have a safe trip.

A plane silhouetted against a slightly cloudy sunset sky.