Death by curry.
Discussion
Peanut curry death: Restaurant owner Mohammed Zaman jailed
beeb said:
A "reckless" restaurant owner has been jailed for six years for the manslaughter of a customer who had an allergic reaction to a curry.
Paul Wilson, 38, suffered a severe anaphylactic shock in January 2014 after eating a takeaway containing peanuts from the Indian Garden in Easingwold, North Yorkshire.
Mohammed Zaman, 52, was found guilty at Teesside Crown Court.
The court heard he cut corners by using cheaper ingredients containing peanuts.
In what is thought to be a landmark trial, Zaman, of Aylesham Court, Huntington, denied he was responsible but a jury was told he switched almond powder for a cheaper ground nut mix, which contained peanuts.
Mr Wilson, a bar manager from Helperby, North Yorkshire, specified "no nuts" when he ordered a chicken tikka masala - an instruction which was written on his order and on the lid of his takeaway, the court heard.
Paul Wilson, 38, suffered a severe anaphylactic shock in January 2014 after eating a takeaway containing peanuts from the Indian Garden in Easingwold, North Yorkshire.
Mohammed Zaman, 52, was found guilty at Teesside Crown Court.
The court heard he cut corners by using cheaper ingredients containing peanuts.
In what is thought to be a landmark trial, Zaman, of Aylesham Court, Huntington, denied he was responsible but a jury was told he switched almond powder for a cheaper ground nut mix, which contained peanuts.
Mr Wilson, a bar manager from Helperby, North Yorkshire, specified "no nuts" when he ordered a chicken tikka masala - an instruction which was written on his order and on the lid of his takeaway, the court heard.
beeb said:
Sentencing him, Judge Simon Bourne-Arton, the Recorder of Middlesbrough, said Zaman had remained "in complete and utter denial" and ignored warnings from officials after 17-year-old Ruby Scott suffered a reaction to a curry, three weeks before Mr Wilson's death.
He said he had thrown away his successful business and property portfolio worth £2m "in pursuit of profit"
He said he had thrown away his successful business and property portfolio worth £2m "in pursuit of profit"
Sump said:
Lesson to everyone. Make it clear dishes contain nuts and don't serve anyone with allergies by telling them all tables are fully booked.
He asked for a Nut free meal. Was told it was Nut Free and Written on the Lid was "Nut Free". The owner substituted Almond Paste with Peanut oil to save money. That's why the sentence was as high as it was.Being involved with food as my job this was something I saw a few days back and have thought about.
At what point would it have ever been a nut free meal if he was originally using almonds?
He's not guilty of substituting peanut for almond, just serving a meal containing nuts to someone who requested a nut free meal.
Still just as guilty anyway but the media seem to not understand what has happened here.
RIP to the poor guy who died but a salutatory tale is not to order food that relies heavily on something you are severely allergic too. Even with the best will in the world it would be easy for this to have been accidental through cross contamination in an Indian kitchen.
At what point would it have ever been a nut free meal if he was originally using almonds?
He's not guilty of substituting peanut for almond, just serving a meal containing nuts to someone who requested a nut free meal.
Still just as guilty anyway but the media seem to not understand what has happened here.
RIP to the poor guy who died but a salutatory tale is not to order food that relies heavily on something you are severely allergic too. Even with the best will in the world it would be easy for this to have been accidental through cross contamination in an Indian kitchen.
21TonyK said:
Being involved with food as my job this was something I saw a few days back and have thought about.
At what point would it have ever been a nut free meal if he was originally using almonds?
He's not guilty of substituting peanut for almond, just serving a meal containing nuts to someone who requested a nut free meal.
Still just as guilty anyway but the media seem to not understand what has happened here.
RIP to the poor guy who died but a salutatory tale is not to order food that relies heavily on something you are severely allergic too. Even with the best will in the world it would be easy for this to have been accidental through cross contamination in an Indian kitchen.
Good post.At what point would it have ever been a nut free meal if he was originally using almonds?
He's not guilty of substituting peanut for almond, just serving a meal containing nuts to someone who requested a nut free meal.
Still just as guilty anyway but the media seem to not understand what has happened here.
RIP to the poor guy who died but a salutatory tale is not to order food that relies heavily on something you are severely allergic too. Even with the best will in the world it would be easy for this to have been accidental through cross contamination in an Indian kitchen.
Peanuts aren't actually nuts, they belong to the legume family, like peas and beans. So you can actually be allergic to peanuts but not tree nuts and vice-versa. Although I believe they both contain similar proteins and you can be allergic to both. Incidentally this is also why you see 'warning, may contain nuts' on bags of peanuts as they're both handled in the same factories.
Fugazi said:
Peanuts aren't actually nuts, they belong to the legume family, like peas and beans. So you can actually be allergic to peanuts but not tree nuts and vice-versa. Although I believe they both contain similar proteins and you can be allergic to both. Incidentally this is also why you see 'warning, may contain nuts' on bags of peanuts as they're both handled in the same factories.
Interesting points.According to some studies "25 to 40 percent of people who have a peanut allergy are also allergic to tree nuts".
I suppose it depends on what the customer actually said, Was it "no nuts please" or "no peanuts please". All the media reports state that he said “no nuts”.
article said:
In a survey study published in the December 2003 issue of "The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology," researchers at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine compared the results of peanut and tree-nut allergy surveys taken in 2002 to estimates obtained five years earlier. They concluded that reported peanut allergies doubled among children from 1997 to 2002. The same researchers repeated the survey method to compare the occurrence of peanut, tree-nut and sesame allergies in 2008 to their occurrence in surveys conducted in 1997 and 2002. Their findings, published in the June 2010 issue of the "The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology," indicate that greater than 1 percent of the U.S. population, including an increased number of children, report peanut, tree-nut or both allergies. Sesame allergy is reported much less commonly. Based on these survey studies, researchers estimate that 25 to 40 percent of people who have a peanut allergy are also allergic to tree nuts
http://www.livestrong.com/article/530128-can-i-eat-almonds-if-i-have-peanut-allergies/Galsia said:
If you're that allergic to peanuts you should assume that everything that you don't cook has them in it.
My initial thought was that if you've specifically asked for a meal to be freshly prepared without nuts or nut related products, then you should be able to have a reasonable expectation that the meal is indeed nut-free.But, as you say, if one of the potential consequences of consuming a meal containing nuts is death, then I think I'd stick to preparing all my own food.
Just listened to the BBC report and its not quite as the written piece on the site.
Basically the guy who died was chef himself and was allergic to nuts, not peanuts, nuts.
The restaurateur changed from using ground almonds to "ground nuts" which contained ground peanuts, it was not "ground groundnuts/peanuts" as I interpreted it to be.
So essentially the switching of ground almonds to ground nuts is completely immaterial, both contain nuts and the latter peanuts as well so a double allergen.
In the case of the guy in the story the restaurateur was simply guilty of failing to supply the meal as requested, "nut free". Along with the previous case and warnings which he ignored.
Basically the guy who died was chef himself and was allergic to nuts, not peanuts, nuts.
The restaurateur changed from using ground almonds to "ground nuts" which contained ground peanuts, it was not "ground groundnuts/peanuts" as I interpreted it to be.
So essentially the switching of ground almonds to ground nuts is completely immaterial, both contain nuts and the latter peanuts as well so a double allergen.
In the case of the guy in the story the restaurateur was simply guilty of failing to supply the meal as requested, "nut free". Along with the previous case and warnings which he ignored.
21TonyK said:
Being involved with food as my job this was something I saw a few days back and have thought about.
At what point would it have ever been a nut free meal if he was originally using almonds?
He's not guilty of substituting peanut for almond, just serving a meal containing nuts to someone who requested a nut free meal.
Still just as guilty anyway but the media seem to not understand what has happened here.
RIP to the poor guy who died but a salutatory tale is not to order food that relies heavily on something you are severely allergic too. Even with the best will in the world it would be easy for this to have been accidental through cross contamination in an Indian kitchen.
Glad you raised that anomaly. I wondered what kind of nut an almond was if not the nutty kind! In fact peanuts aren't really nuts but legumes.At what point would it have ever been a nut free meal if he was originally using almonds?
He's not guilty of substituting peanut for almond, just serving a meal containing nuts to someone who requested a nut free meal.
Still just as guilty anyway but the media seem to not understand what has happened here.
RIP to the poor guy who died but a salutatory tale is not to order food that relies heavily on something you are severely allergic too. Even with the best will in the world it would be easy for this to have been accidental through cross contamination in an Indian kitchen.
BlackLabel said:
I suppose it depends on what the customer actually said, Was it "no nuts please" or "no peanuts please". All the media reports state that he said “no nuts”.
Even if he had said no peanuts, the mix they used contained peanuts. Lose either way.
dudleybloke said:
Did he carry an autoinjector/epipen thingy with him? I know someone with a mild peanut allergy who always carries one just in case
Doesn't always work in the case of a severe anaphylactic shock. I knew someone who died a couple years ago from peanut reaction from a takeaway that he didn't realise had nuts in it. There was nothing his friends, and my ex-girlfriend, who where there at the time could do despite using the pen and doing CPR until the ambulance arrived shortly after.I have no idea whether the family/police followed the case up.
But I can tell you it isn't a pleasant way to go.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff