Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'After Hours Lounge (Off Topic)' started by DennisHP, Jul 25, 2002.
It was only a matter of time...
Hmmm, maybe they will pay for the additional seat on his next flight on Southwest! I hope this BS gets kicked out of court faster than a Bobby Hull slapshot...
I agree with the comments quoted from the Manhattan Institute fellow. This is a blatant attempt to get money via a court decision.
Funny, I was just reading a story in US News & World Report about lawyers who went after Big Tobacco, are now considering going after fast food, and junk food companies. Collectively, they call them Big Fat.
Who can I sue, in order that we might get people to TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEMSELVES???
Maybe we can sue the lawyers who launch these types of lawsuits.
I believe there are legitimate reasons to sue tobacco companies, though doing so through abdication of personal responsibility isn't one of them (in my opinion). The same is true with food. Actually, I don't think there's a real comparison -- there might be a case that tobacco companies are responsible for the physical addiction caused by tobacco (nicotine), and I think they are certainly responsible for the second-hand effects their products cause on unwilling recipients, but there is no way a scientific (or hell, even a logical) conclusion can be established that fast-food corporations are the fundamental blame for an individual's health problems. Even IF it's proven somehow that there's a direct cause between eating a burger and special sauces produced by a specific corporation, and an individual's poor health, these items have been a basic part of the food chain LONG before any corporation made their access more convenient through speedy, mass-preparation.
This lawsuit is partly (perhaps mainly) an attempt, in my opinion, by lawyers to establish another revenue stream through another of society's scapegoats. And don't be surprised if you see government backing, directly or indirectly: They'd love a chance to control what everybody ate.
Dana the idea about the possible lawsuits against big fast food chains isnt that they are addictive but that the companies use advertising that is misleading. Like McDonalds introducing salads. People think they can eat healthy at Mcdonalds if they just order a salad and a 44oz Diet Coke from Mcdonalds. Problem is this isnt true unless you can get that salad without the dressing. I heard that the dressings they are putting on the shake salads was like 40+ grams of fat
It is advertising like this that lawyers are thinking of going after fast food restaraunts and for the most part that they have never really tried to make fast food healthy for people. They just add as much fat to it as possible so that it tastes so damn good you dont care its loaded with fat.
How about the ads that claim there is only one gram of fat but don't mention the 45 grams of sugar! There's no doubt more people need to be educated about what happens to food once it's ingested.
I think the only way to stop these frivolous lawsuits is to penalize the lawyers who take the cases. Who knows- maybe this suit was planted by a tobacco company. Perhaps it will cause such disgust in the average person that once it gets shot down, it would set a precedent that could be applied to future tobacco suits.
Moronic, unless they can prove that FF companies are giving misleading nutritional information. I always take newsarticles like these with huge grains of salt, since often we're not told the whole story, but I can't think of any angle where this lawsuit can be seen as justified. It was a necessity?? Yeah, let's all sue people just because we're lazy and not good cooks. I guess the concept of buying a cookbook and shopping at the grocery store completely eluded him. What a bunch of fucking losers. And those lawyers should be ashamed of themselves. And who's paying for this? We do, of course, in the form higher insurance premiums. What the f**k is going on in this country? /Mike
What, that is utter crap. Talk about trying to get money in stupid ways. I bet the lawyer who took this on saw $$$ in his eyes.
So should McDonalds be responsible for that? No way. I buy salads at McDonalds and ask for their Fat Free dressing. Nobody ever said "No, you have to eat this 40+ grams of fat dressing!". They ask you what dressing you want. Just say you want the low-fat one. It's not hard. /Mike
Oh boy, what a bunch of crap.
I guess I can sue Clothing Store chains for "making" me poor because I just couldn't resist the, buy one get one free deals they constantly have.
IMO, this stemmed from those reports made public a few weeks ago about how fast food places offering "biggie sizes" and "super sizes" may be causing obesity in more Americans. It was like a dinner bell calling to anyone who is overweight with health problems and wants to make some money blaming anybody else but themselves for their own problems along with the un-ethical lawyers that probably saw nothing but dollar signs.
Hey, I eat my fair share of fast food too but I have no one to blame for being overweight and my eating habits but myself. Fast food joints don't make it easier on me to kick those bad habits but it's not their job to hold my hand.
This law suit shouldn't even see the inside of a courtroom but in this day and age I'm not so sure that it won't.
When this case is laughed out of court, who will he sue for giving him that bothersome free will that most of us have?
I agree. The truth though is that in the past few years several FF chains HAVE made it easier, by providing more nutritional information, and more "lower-fat" alternatives. Skip the fries, drink less soda (or diet soda), skip the cheese and cut back on the dressing on the burger and eat a salad there instead of a burger every once in a while, and you'll be fine. /Mike
From what I've found, fast food places don't lie about the nutritional (or lack thereof) content of their food. Sure, McDonalds doesn't advertise that their salad dressing has 40 grams of fat, but the information is available if you want it. Should we sue the grocery stores because they sell unhealthy food too? Most full-fat salad dressings in grocery stores are just as bad as the stuff McDonalds uses. Everyone is responsible for the food they ingest. McDonalds makes its money by selling items people want to buy. If people buy unhealthy food that's their prerogative. McDonalds is in the business to make money, not to be everyone's personal food intake regulator. Maybe this guy needs to pay his local Jenny Craig a visit. Not just because he needs to lose weight, but because Jenny Craig's business model is selling people healthy food that is already prepared and easy to fix. He's already spending a fortune eating out everyday, might as well put the money towards healthier food if he does not want to learn to cook.
Yay! Another frivolous lawsuit! Like Micke said above, avoid the fries and cheese and you'll be a lot better off (all those carbohydrates!). Hell, avoid the bun if you can! And skip the burger...you don't want to catch E.coli because of the U.S. meat packing practices. That is, ground beef with infected cow manure! Woohoo! Now how come nobody sued the fast food companies for food poisoning? Is the fast food lobby so blithering powerful that you can't sue them for REAL damages?