Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » A Lawsuit Against McDonald's That May Actually Make Sense?
|
|
 Re: A Lawsuit Against McDonald's That May Actually Make Sense? [message #226898 is a reply to message #226897] |
Mon, 16 October 2006 14:06   |
 |
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507
Registered: March 2003
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
I don't know. I see some merit to it, but a lot of it people are just asking too much. Sure, I can see where they're coming from, but this is still a (mild) case of people doing as they want as carelessly as they want until something happens, and now they want retribution. People don't want to be held responsible for their actions.
If the FDA cannot make restaurants provide information on allergens, I see no reason to put blame on McDonald's.
whoa.
[Updated on: Mon, 16 October 2006 14:07] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: A Lawsuit Against McDonald's That May Actually Make Sense? [message #226901 is a reply to message #226897] |
Mon, 16 October 2006 14:41 |
 |
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
The reason I'm stating it may make sense, is that the alledgedly lied about what the frying oil contained.
It's one thing to not mention something, it's another to state and advertises it doesn't exist (check the copy of the letter they have), when it does exist.
| Quote: |
"The real issue here is that McDonald's put these items on a list of gluten-free menu items," says Florida attorney Brian Smith, who currently represents about 50 individuals, mostly children, who suffer from milk allergies, celiac disease and autism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Lawsuit Against McDonald's That May Actually Make Sense? [message #226955 is a reply to message #226934] |
Tue, 17 October 2006 02:51 |
 |
EvilWhiteDragon
Messages: 3751
Registered: October 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| Quote: |
"The real issue here is that McDonald's put these items on a list of gluten-free menu items," says Florida attorney Brian Smith, who currently represents about 50 individuals, mostly children, who suffer from milk allergies, celiac disease and autism.
|
From what I've heard about such gluten allergy is that just a tiny amount of non gluten free food can "poison a whole gluten-free meal, in such a way that people that are allergic t oit can simply die because of it. So I feel that is would be a strong case.
| Quote: |
Earlier this year, McDonald's acknowledged that its hash browns and french fries, which the restaurant chain historically had reported as allergen-free, in fact may contain wheat and milk ingredients from the oil they are cooked in.
|
THey are even admitting it, so some kind of compesation would be in it's place.
BlackIntel admin/founder/PR dude (not a coder)
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
| V, V for Vendetta |
People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.
|
[Updated on: Tue, 17 October 2006 02:54] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Lawsuit Against McDonald's That May Actually Make Sense? [message #226997 is a reply to message #226897] |
Tue, 17 October 2006 11:34 |
|
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507
Registered: March 2003
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
I agree that McDonald's should have retribution for their lying, but it is not their responsibility to hold the consumer's hand. If the consumer has any food alergies, they should ask about that being in their food prior to their ordering and consuming the product. McDonald's, or any company/restaurant, should not expect to know everything about their individual customers. Their main responsibility is to provide their product within federal quality guidelines and sell them to their customers. Other than that, they shouldn't be held responsible. People have allergies to certain foods, but that is not the fault of any restaurant, nor the consumer, but it IS the CONSUMER's responsibility to ensure that they don't aggitate their allergies.
Edit: Would you blame a cat for aggitating someone's allergies? No, you would blame the person for having a cat. The same goes for this situation. You don't blame the company for selling their product, you blame the person for not being smart about their decisions to purchase the goods being sold.
whoa.
[Updated on: Tue, 17 October 2006 11:37] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: A Lawsuit Against McDonald's That May Actually Make Sense? [message #227244 is a reply to message #226897] |
Thu, 19 October 2006 03:55 |
 |
Sniper_De7
Messages: 866
Registered: April 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Why would it be lying if this were true?
| Quote: |
"No scientific research has consistently shown a connection," says Dr. Ami Klin, one of the country's leading autism experts and an associate professor at Yale University's School of Medicine. "It's a popular hypothesis, and something that is circulated among a group of individuals that have a grip on parents as to the importance of those things. But the reviews of that subject have not turned up any solid evidence."
|
If it's true that there is no real solid evidence, then I'm pretty sure McDonalds doesn't have to say "Well there's no solid evidence to support that such and such foods interacts with autistis folk. If a leading autism expert says that there is no solid evidence to suggest that it does anything bad, then I can't see why McDonalds would be at fault, if they were just listening to a leading autism experts statement.. I may be reading the whole thing wrong, but that's what I get out of it.
Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt
[Updated on: Thu, 19 October 2006 03:55] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Apr 22 01:34:09 MST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01576 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
