The Next Public Safety Mandate: Why Epinephrine Is Becoming Infrastructure

TORONTO, ON – June 16, 2026 – A quiet, powerful shift is underway in our collective definition of public safety. It’s not about policing or surveillance, but about embedding life-saving tools directly into the fabric of our communities. Decades ago, we saw it with fire extinguishers, then with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) mounted in arenas and airports. Now, the next logical evolution of this public safety infrastructure is coming into sharp focus: epinephrine.

A landmark national survey reveals a Canadian public that is no longer content to leave the response to severe allergic reactions to chance. The data, commissioned by Food Allergy Canada, suggests an overwhelming consensus that life-saving epinephrine devices should be as common and accessible as the now-familiar AEDs. This groundswell of public opinion is not merely a response to a growing health concern; it's a structural demand to re-engineer our shared spaces—schools, community centres, and restaurants—into environments with a built-in capacity for emergency response. The question is no longer if we should build this safety net, but how we can accelerate its construction.

A Mandate for Change

The numbers from the Leger survey are unequivocal. A staggering 83% of Canadians agree that treatments for anaphylaxis should be easily accessible in public, mirroring the AED model. This isn't a fringe opinion; it's a national consensus that cuts across demographics. The support becomes a near-unanimous demand in places where children gather, with 90% of respondents calling for epinephrine to be on hand in schools. Strong backing follows for community centres (79%), sports venues (76%), and restaurants (75%).

"Canadians are telling us they want life-saving treatment to be available in the places where people learn, gather and participate in community life," said Jennifer Gerdts, executive director of Food Allergy Canada. "Expanding access to epinephrine devices in public spaces is a practical step that can help save lives."

This call to action is rooted in the recognition that food allergy is a serious medical condition, a view shared by nearly four in five Canadians. The logic is simple: anaphylaxis can happen anywhere, to anyone, and it can become fatal within minutes. The survey highlights a particular urgency for rural and remote communities, where longer distances to emergency care make immediate, on-site intervention a matter of life and death. As Gerdts notes, this access "becomes even more critical in rural or remote settings where emergency care may not be easily available."

The Reality Gap: Perception vs. Preparedness

The public’s desire for a robust safety net is clear, but the survey also exposes a dangerous gap between expectation and reality. While the public assumes help is always at the ready, the system itself is riddled with inconsistencies and a lack of public readiness.

Consider the assumptions about first responders. While 91% of Canadians correctly believe paramedics are equipped to treat anaphylaxis, that confidence plummets to 64% for firefighters and a mere 40% for police. The truth is that firefighters and police are often first on the scene, but many of their services do not universally equip them with epinephrine. This disconnect means the person arriving first may not have the tool to save a life.

Furthermore, there is a troubling confidence gap among the public itself. While 63% of people feel they could recognize the signs of a severe allergic reaction, only 21% feel strongly confident. That hesitation matters when every second counts. "Anaphylaxis can become life-threatening within minutes," warned Dr. Harold Kim, an allergist and clinical immunologist. "It's important to note that not everyone who has a severe reaction has a prior diagnosis or device on them. For some, a severe first-time reaction is how they learn of an allergy."

This reveals a two-part system failure: the tools are not where they need to be, and the people who could use them lack the confidence and training to act decisively. The public expects venue staff (59%) and even bystanders (36%) to step in, yet the infrastructure to empower them is largely absent.

Blueprints for a Safer System

Creating a national network of publicly accessible epinephrine is not an insurmountable challenge. The blueprints for such a system already exist, proven effective at provincial and municipal levels. Ontario's "Sabrina's Law," enacted in 2006, was a global first, mandating anaphylaxis policies in schools. Alberta followed suit in 2020 with its own legislation requiring schools to maintain stock epinephrine and conduct mandatory staff training. These laws have not only saved lives but have also served as powerful catalysts for education and awareness.

At the municipal level, cities like Hamilton, Ontario, have been pioneers. Spurred by a local tragedy, the city began a stock epinephrine program in 2014 and now equips all its city-owned facilities, from recreation centres to community halls. These local initiatives demonstrate that the logistics of procurement, storage, and training are entirely manageable. They provide a scalable model for the nationwide system that Canadians are now demanding.

The push for this change is often driven by heartbreaking loss. In late 2025, the death of 14-year-old Malakai Flores in British Columbia from an allergic reaction highlighted the tragic gaps in public readiness. His family’s subsequent advocacy for "Malakai's Bill"—calling for epinephrine accessibility standards similar to those for AEDs—has resonated across the country, prompting municipalities like Sault Ste. Marie to investigate equipping their own public facilities.

The Human Cost and the Path Forward

The conversation is being accelerated by innovation. The recent Health Canada approval of neffy®, an epinephrine nasal spray, provides a needle-free alternative to auto-injectors. This development could be a game-changer for public access programs, potentially reducing the hesitation of bystanders to administer treatment in an emergency.

Ultimately, the data, the legislative precedents, and the emerging technologies all point in the same direction. The system is transforming from one of individual responsibility—where the burden falls solely on those with a diagnosis—to one of shared, public responsibility. The survey from Food Allergy Canada is more than a set of statistics; it is a clear signal that society is ready to invest in the infrastructure of empathy and preparedness.

"The survey findings reinforce that most Canadians would expect life-saving treatment to be available in a public emergency," Gerdts concluded. While personal responsibility remains paramount for those with known allergies, building a public safety net for the unexpected is the clear and necessary next step in our evolution as a caring and resilient society.