-10

In this forum theree is a question originally about lactose intolerance later in the title changed to allergy.
The answers contain a lot of misconceptions about the problem, especially the most voted spreads misconceptions that on the long term can be damaging for people health. I tried and add some warning and explanations in comments, but the moderators intervened removing all the comments and leaving the question locked in a form that leaves a dangerous disinformation. Ignore the answers posted to this question.

Update: The absurdity of this story is that not only the moderators keep removing my warnings, but also the highly voted answers to this question repeat the same misconceptions. Sadly I note that such obtuse repetition can only be the result of a widespread disinformation.

First of all. There is not a fixed certain amount of lactose that a person with lactose intolerance can tolerate. Irritable Bowel Syndrome is very common among people with food intolerances and also temporary irritations can worsen the reaction to a wrong meal. The way poeple react to the food that causes the intolerance changes with the current medical conditions the assumption that a fixed amount can be tolerated often leads to underestimate the problem.

Second. When the medical conditions are bad a tiny amount of lactose can cause severe reactions. The distinction between allergy and intolerance is a dangerous assumption. Allergy conditions are rare and only after a tourough medical examination they can be determined. Someone who, without any knowledge of the condition of a person, tells them that they are probably allergic is abusing the medical profession in a grossly negligent manner.

11
  • Does this answer your question? Where can people allergic to dairy eat when travelling in France? May 30 at 19:04
  • 1
    @Willeke why are you putting forum rules over people health?
    – FluidCode
    May 30 at 19:17
  • 7
    If an answer to an existing question is incorrect, you can post a competing answer, and you can put a comments on existing answers that explain why they are incorrect. But your message here is vague and unspecific. It's impossible to determine whether your concerns are credible. If you want to put something right, you should say precisely what statements are wrong and why they are wrong. You should also offer correct statements in their place. "Ignore this" is potentially just as damaging as incorrect information.
    – phoog
    May 30 at 19:36
  • 1
    @phoog: Normally so, but in this case the previous question has been locked, so competing answers and comments cannot be added to it. I am not sure that was a good idea. May 30 at 19:39
  • 1
    @phoog "you can put a comment on existing answers [...] But your message here is vague" Why is it not clear that I actually put the comments you suggest, but they were removed by a moderator?
    – FluidCode
    May 30 at 19:40
  • 3
    @FluidCode it's not clear because I don't know what those comments actually said. This post doesn't say anything specific so I suppose that the comments might not have said anything specific either.
    – phoog
    May 30 at 20:01
  • It is also not clear to me for the very same reasons. May 30 at 20:02
  • @NateEldredge I suppose you're right about that. It's difficult to discuss without knowing what the deleted comments actually said. I agree with Mark Johnson that [meta] would be a better venue for the discussion.
    – phoog
    May 30 at 20:03
  • This question, as it presently is, doesn't go into detail why certain answers are not correct. A reader, who is not knowable in this topic, cannot make heads or tails of the problem. For me (who am not knowledgeable in the area), the answers look reasonable. You should also add a link in your original question to make others aware that this is being discussed here. May 30 at 20:24
  • 6
    Note that Stack Exchange sites like Travel SE are NOT forums, they are Question/Answer sites, that is why this question makes no sense in this context.
    – Dr. Snoopy
    May 30 at 20:52
  • 6
    We're not medical professionals and the questions here aren't about individual medical advice. Some people will want to reduce their consumption of dairy, while others will want or need to avoid consuming even minute amounts and may even avoid all forms of casein. That's an individual decision that people need to make after consultation with a doctor, and it sounds like the OP of the post you're talking about should do that given the severity of their symptoms. But I'm not sure what you want from us here? May 30 at 23:38
12

The answers contain a lot of misconceptions about the problem, especially the most voted spreads misconceptions that on the long term can be damaging for people health.

The (presently) most voted answer contains 19 votes. This answer tries to distinguish between lactose intolerant and allergies. This led the original OP to change the base of their original question (Where can people allergic to dairy food eat when travelling in France?) to being allergic to dairy foods

  • this seems to me, therefore, to be an useful answer

The fact that the original OP falsely classified their own situation (lactose intolerant instead of lactose allergy) is not the fault of the answers author. The author, after the true situation was clarified, added for the benifit of new readers, that extra information.

  • I can find no fault in the quality of this answer that warrants a warning on your part (as someone who is not the original OP) that it spreads misconceptions, without any hints as to which parts of the answer may be misleading

The second highest answer (presently 10 votes) goes into great detail, useful for a traveler, of the regional differences of cooking inside France and points out that more care must be taken in northwestern France where dairy products are more heavily used.

This answer also points out lactose intolerance is also a problem in France. It also clarifies that an allergy is a different situation (which the original OP acknowledged in a comment)

  • this seems to me, therefore, also to be an useful answer

The third highest answer (presently 7 votes) points out that most menus contain information that assists persons with this problem in making their choice. It also includes French terminology often used in such cases, which is useful for the traveler unfamiliar with the French language.

  • this seems to me, therefore, also to be an useful answer

The fourth highest answer, written after your 'warning', (presently 6 votes) gives advice how to avoid the problem all together (Kosher restaurants serving meat without any dairy products), pointing out that such restaurants are only found in larger cities.

  • this seems to me, therefore, also to be an useful answer

I tried and add some warning and explanations in comments, but the moderators intervened removing all the comments and leaving the question locked in a form that leaves a dangerous disinformation. Ignore the answers posted to this question.

This situation came about because the original OP incorrectly described their situation in the original version of the question. Most of the answers, however, took both conditions into consideration. Your objections, as someone other than the original OP, are totally unclear.

Your comment why are you putting forum rules over people health? is truly not useful.


Conclusions:
Overall all the answers, taken together, give a useful summary of tips for a traveler that are afflicted with either lactose intolerant or lactose allergy.

For me (who am not knowledgeable in this area), the answers look reasonable.

Your 'warning' is inappropriate since it doesn't go into detail why certain answers are not correct. Any future reader, who is not knowledgeable in this topic, cannot make heads or tails of the reasons you think they are misleading, since you failed to give any within the 'question', which in itself is not a question at all.

9
  • I think we have two different people, OP of the original question and OP of the question now in meta. If it is the same person using two different accounts they should have mentionsed that.
    – Willeke Mod
    May 31 at 8:11
  • @Willeke Yes, indeed we do. Even more strange. I'll adapt the answer. May 31 at 8:14
  • Please read the second point in my update. About the distinction between intolerance and allergy.
    – FluidCode
    Jun 1 at 10:34
  • @FluidCode My impression is still that xngtng answer is very much aware of the problematic and advices not to rely solely on the information of the restaurant but to also take the persons situation into account. So it is still not clear why you consider that answer a 'misconception`. Jun 1 at 11:57
  • @FluidCode In a Meta forum (as apposed to the normal forum), you can give separate answers, explaining in detail why for a specific answer, the answer is incorrect (quoting the relevant part). This would be a better approach that writing comments. (At least in History Meta this sometimes done in complicated situations) Jun 1 at 11:57
  • @MarkJohnson Is it a joke? Removing the comments in detail where they point to the problem and ask later to rewrite them all where nobody will read them? No wonder there is such misinformation around.
    – FluidCode
    Jun 1 at 12:13
  • 2
    No, it is not a joke. The main purpose of the meta forum is to resolve problems that occur in the main forum. This is where you should have reported it in the first place. Adding the authors users name will make them aware that this is being discussed and if they agree they could then adapt their answer accordingly. If a moderator comes to the conclusion that the answer is wrong, then they can undertake an appropriate action. This is the due process here. Jun 1 at 12:27
  • " Adding the authors users name will make them aware that this is being discussed and if they agree they could then adapt their answer accordingly" The authors disagreed immediately when they saw the first comments. Claiming that they would fix their answer now seems quite preposterous.
    – FluidCode
    Jun 1 at 12:53
  • @FluidCode Be aware that I haven't seen the removed comments, so I can't judge that. Jun 1 at 13:22
10

We are a travel site, not a health site.
The question asked where to eat with a lactose intolerance, and was answered as such. Lactose intolerance runs from very mild reaction to quite severe reactions and the answers reflected that whole range.

Then someone came in, posted a series of comments, insulting those who answered as 'you do not know what you talk about' only considering the most severe end of lactose intolerance and/or an allergy as valid.

As moderator I have brought the comments back to what fits our travel site, answering the question.

The comments on the question are moved to a chatroom and can still be added to. Answers to the question can still be posted, only comments are locked.

Several of the answers warn OP to be very carefull and how to avoid more milk based foodstuffs than just lactose and to get tested to find out what he is allegic to.

I do not see any lack in our care to fellow humans who see the question now or in the future.

11
  • 2
    In other words, the comments were not removed (as claimed by the OP), but moved to the chat room? May 31 at 4:16
  • Part of the comments were removed but most on the question were moved and are still accessible.
    – Willeke Mod
    May 31 at 4:18
  • A link to the chat room into which the comments were moved might be useful here. May 31 at 10:13
  • 1
    You can find that room on the original question, which in turn is linked to in the first comment.
    – Willeke Mod
    May 31 at 10:15
  • "the answers reflected that whole range" that is false. The most voted answer writes down fixed amounts of lactose that an intolerant people can tolerate which is a dangerous misconception. See first point in the update.
    – FluidCode
    Jun 1 at 10:51
  • Take off your blinkers and read those answers. They do include the whole range. Your point of view ignores many lactose intollerant people. For most it is not as serious as you indicate.
    – Willeke Mod
    Jun 1 at 14:12
  • @Willeke "For most it is not as serious as you indicate." You keep denying that seriousness may change day by day. Someone who could tolerate a certain amount one day could get worse and become reactive later. I already explained it in the comments you removed. If you don't understand it means you don't want to understand.
    – FluidCode
    Jun 1 at 14:41
  • 1
    @FluidCode Everyone's medical situation is different. The top-most answer covers a continuum from severe and highly dangerous allergy to mild intolerance. If someone doesn't know where they fit on that continuum or finds that it may change day from day to day, they need to consult a medical professional (particularly as failure to deal with a serious allergy could be deadly). What is your view exactly? No continuum? You'd say someone who once has a mild stomachache after eating ice cream must avoid even food sauteed in a little butter for life lest they "become reactive later?" Jun 2 at 6:50
  • @ZachLipton Poorly made straw man argument.
    – FluidCode
    Jun 5 at 12:14
  • @FluidCode So what is your position? Are you arguing that it's irresponsible to tell someone anything other than "you must avoid absolutely all dairy and dairy-related allergens" when you don't know anything about the severity of their condition and simply believe they have some degree of "intolerance?" You're very upset about the situation, but I don't understand what answer you'd even consider acceptable. Jun 5 at 16:59
  • @ZachLipton It's a waste of time to discuss with someone who keeps distorting what you said.
    – FluidCode
    Jun 9 at 10:50
0

Unfortunately, the mentioned question and the rant above are something, that I'm observing quite often. People too lazy to read the guidelines and to try to understand the concept of the site post a question without researching, and when they find out, that the answers are not matching their needs because they've asked the wrong question, instead of accepting their failure and ask another question, edit the original question, often to the extent that makes posted answer invalid. It's disrespectful to the people volunteering to help and should be considered vandalism.

The worst thing is, when people investing their time in writing good answers are punished with downvotes because the OP is too lazy to post another question. And calling the answers wrong only because the question was edited to the extend it shouldn't be allowed is utterly rude.

Honestly, the edit to the question should be reverted by mods and the question should be locked before it's too late. Now the new answers were posted and existing adapted it's too late. It's a pity the posters of first answers will now get comments saying that their work doesn't answer the question.

3
  • 1
    I think calling it vandalism is too extreme. Sometimes people genuinely don't know the best way to frame their questions and might come to find they've asked the wrong question after some back-and-forth, and sometimes language differences may muddle the interpretation of a question until it's clarified. I do agree that the best thing to do when the question has changed significantly enough to invalidate answers is to ask a new question, and we can even do that for the OP in some cases. Jun 1 at 23:40
  • 2
    My impression was that most of the original answers delt with both aspects of the question. The original OP acknowledged this politely. This, for me, is a sign that the original OP benefited from the answers. It was a 3rd party (the author of this question) that has been making the objections for reasons I have failed to understand up to now. Jun 2 at 3:15
  • I feel that OP of this question knows about an allergy and thinks that is called intolerance and does not accept the more generally accepted meaning of intolerance. The OP of the original question did, in comments, agree with the answers and the change of his position in respect to intolerance and allergy.
    – Willeke Mod
    Jun 5 at 12:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .