Nuts about Risk

March 6, 2017

Greetings from the risk-taker,

One thing I know for certain, any time someone says to me “Don’t take this the wrong way.” I am about to hear something I will not enjoy, which in all likelihood I am going to take exactly how it was intended. 

Some time ago I was in a fast food outlet, which in order to avoid possible legal issues we will call ‘Windy’s’.  I ordered the only healthy thing I could identify, other than water, which was their Apple Pecan Chicken Salad.  I noticed that on the menu there was an asterisk which referred to some fine print below.  The fine print said: “This menu item contains nuts.”

I will pause here to say that I was not deterred by this.  In fact I was encouraged.  I think that when a restaurant names something Apple Pecan Chicken Salad, it is refreshing to find out that at least one of the nouns used to describe the product is contained in the ingredients.

However when I sat down to eat my Apple Pecan Chicken Salad there was no nuts in it.  There was apple and there was chicken, neither of which was mentioned in the fine print, but no pecans, or other representatives of the nut family, previously alluded to.  When I returned to the counter to point this out, the helpful person there informed me that I have to intentionally and specifically ask for the pecans.  For safety reasons.

What is already obvious to everyone is that ‘Windy’s’ is protecting people with nut allergies, or more precisely, protecting ‘Windy’s’ from people with nut allergies from suing them.  I just got caught in the crossfire.

According to experts, there are approximately 3 million people in the country with nut allergies.  Here is a model demonstrating that number; if 120 people lined up at ‘Windy’s’ to order an Apple Pecan Chicken Salad, it is possible 1 of them has a nut allergy.  Side note: 32 million people in the U.S. cannot read, which is approximately 10 people in this very long line at ‘Windy’s’.  Statistically speaking it is possible that the person who cannot eat nuts also cannot read the fine print on the menu.  Which makes ‘Windy’s’ policy perfectly logical.

I know what approximately .8% of you are thinking.  Before you jump to what is probably the right conclusion, let me say this: don’t take this the wrong way.  I am all for protecting people from life threatening allergies, especially children who don’t know better.  Moreover, this is not a rant decrying the need for warning labels on anything that might have the most infinitesimal possibility of harming us.  That will be another time.

In the news this week I noticed that SpaceX, the privately funded space exploration company, announced they have two people who have put down deposits on a trip that will orbit the moon next year.  The CEO of SpaceX, Elon Musk, no doubt concerned about liability, made a statement: "They are entering this with their eyes open, knowing there is some risk," Musk said, adding that the company's success rate was still "quite high."  Which was a casual reference to the recent SpaceX launch that started and ended in a huge fireball within the confines of gravity’s pull. 

I imagine that somewhere on the two tickets to the moon there is some fine print that says something like: ‘Don’t take this the wrong way, but you do know that this trip is more dangerous than standing in line at Windy’s, right?’

It is interesting to me that in the same world where we fight so hard to make everything risk free, there is still a contingent of humanity who will buy a parachute and jump out of a perfectly good airplane.  There are people who buy slacklines and balance between trees, and climb perilous cliffs, and dive deep beneath the sea to touch sharks.  There are people who hike across deserts and through jungles and over arctic wastelands just to see what there is to see.  There are folks who drive with no seatbelt, climb on ladders, and run with scissors.  There are probably percentages on these people, but we’ve had enough numbers for one essay.

You might point out that risk takers who choose to fly into space are not the same as people who are at risk for peanut allergies, and I get that.  I’m glad we are in a society that cares about the little boy with the epi-pen and does what it can to accommodate him.  Most of these accommodations and others like them catch all of us in the same net.   So once in a while, fast food places say things that sound like: “Don’t take this the wrong way, stupid, but these pecans contain nuts.”

Being able to see human beings at both ends of this risk spectrum, and how we treat one another, is encouraging to me.  In spite of my snarky comments on being in this world, which I fully expect you to take the wrong way, I am impressed by it. 

I know a little boy who has a nut allergy.  He is curious and open and like all little boys interested in exploring the world around him.  I have no doubt that he will grow up to be a significant force as an adult, wherever his adventures take him.  I’m also glad that he will have that opportunity because we are aware of his allergy.

It is possible that in his lifetime there will be regular trips into space, where one can circle earth or the moon or maybe spin off to Mars.  It’s possible that Delta or SpaceX or whoever is running these flights will feature snacks on the trip.   I hope by then he can eat them without risk of enduring a condescending warning.

Hope this finds you taking it the right way,

David