Actually, the US is typically the worst in terms of awareness. Europe is significantly better because they generally have a much better understanding of celiac disease.
So, it still remains a crap shoot as to whether I can find food to eat onsite and thus far that's been a rarity for lunch and in general not possible for many breaks. Per my original email, only one of the requirements is met (and again, this document has been around for 10 years). And, it's at the same level of consideration for people having access to alcohol and a place to informally meet.
My document talks about all the things you mention with regards to outside food etc. The challenge there is that there must be a nearby grocery store (and not just a quick food store that has processed food products). Again, I can manage and I've learned the words for the bad stuff in European countries, in particular in Europe everything is labeled with multiple languages. But, in Japan for example, I had to guess. For food, Singapore was fine because they had the Western grocery store with a lot of European products.
I've beat this to death with meeting venue and this ended up that we should have which isn't in the mandatory section - i.e., it's criteria to consider and can be dropped should the meeting selection folks feel a venue is otherwise satisfactory, so with that criteria, meeting at a country club outside Dublin is still a possibility:
The Facility environs, which includes both onsite, as well as
areas within a reasonable walking distance or conveniently
accessible by a short taxi ride or by local public transportation,
have convenient and inexpensive choices for meals that can
accommodate a wide range of dietary requirements.
o A range of attendee's health-related and religion-related dietary
requirements can be satisfied with robust and flexible onsite
service or through access to an adequate grocery.
o The Facility environs include grocery shopping that will
accommodate a wide range of dietary requirements, within a
reasonable walking distance, or conveniently accessible by a short
taxi, bus, or subway ride, from the Facility and IETF Hotels.That puts the entire burden on the individual (hoping at least the market has food and that you have access to a refrigerator), yet here with the photography, it seems we are being extra sensitive because we don't want to put the burden on the individual but rather we're asking the community to respect the fact that someone might not want to tell someone not to take their picture. Whereas, the community still seems to think that those with restrictions can just "tough it out" and just make due, when it comes to being able to get food to eat. I just have a hard time with that and that's the very reason why there are laws that categorize celiac disease as an invisible disability as it impacts the ability to take part in a very normal daily activity. So, we ended up with access for those with disabilities as mandatory. But, dietary restrictions aren't included in that. I have a hard time understanding why folks can't seem to get their head around what it's like to have a whole offering of food around you, but not being able to eat *anything* because you could get sick or in some cases die from anaphylaxis. Again, I would love the experiment of not having cookies at one of the afternoon breaks - there would be near mutiny. I can chalk this up to the empathy thing (and I guess my personal deficit and not being willing to pack a whole extra suitcase of contraband food products just in case there isn't sufficient food). But, somehow, the whole photography thing is intended to address individual's sensitivities to something that won't physically impact them, although I do understand the perhaps emotional impact for some. I'm fine if the community wants to become kinder and gentler and I just remain perplexed that it doesn't apply to other very real issues.
We already have people that don't come to IETF meetings because of the food issue, yet we're worried about hypothetical people that might choose not to come to IETF because they don't want their picture taken? And, most particularly because we have meetings that are fully video recorded.
Regards,
Mary.
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:18 PM, Toerless Eckert <tte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I forgot the exact name of the mailing list, but this is probably better
discussed on that "meetings" mailing list ?!:
If i remember correctly, there is all type of stupid meeting venues
pricing isues, whereby they force you to buy their potentially crappy
overpriced food and food service if you want to have a meeting.
Maybe at least in countries like the USA with more awarness, threre
is a way for participants/IETF to force at least better labelling or
other improvements by figuring out how to maybe better apply existing
laws (like for labelling) to the food.
IMHO, dietary restrictions would also be the most easy way for the IETF
to try to negotiate at least the ability to bring in food yourself int the
venue and consume it in public spaces. Usually, many social gathering
options in these venues disallows this, and that can be highly irritating
when yo have food restrictions.
Cheers
Toerless
--
On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 12:52:26PM -0500, Keith Moore wrote:
> On Mar 4, 2018, at 11:12 AM, Mary B wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I know it was OT, but the food issue was in my face when I clicked on the website to read another organizations photography policy and right below that is how they handle allergies and they have the statement about providing an at venue contact. The photography issue was justified as getting us inline with how other conferences do it to be more female friendly. So, it was in my face, that after 10 years, I still can't eat snacks at breaks most times. I clearly have managed over the years, but it's a little irksome that we are becoming sensitive to other concerns (which are certainly valid), yet we don't consider it of concern that people can eat the food provided at meetings, which is partly covered (in a complex way since different hotels have different of charging for things - e.g., free rooms with X $s of food) by the roughly $120/day meeting fee.
>
> Yes, this is a huge insult to every IETF participant with dietary restrictions. And it has gone on far too long.
>
> Keith
>
>
---
tte@xxxxxxxxx
