CTaylor42 Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 I knew it was a matter of time. Who didn't know that KFC was unhealthy? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13295802/ WASHINGTON - A doctor and a consumer advocacy group sued KFC Tuesday, seeking to force the fried chicken restaurant chain to stop cooking with a type of oil that has been implicated in heart disease. The Center for Science in the Public Interest, in a suit filed against Yum Brands Inc. in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, said some KFC meals were "startlingly" high in artery-clogging trans fat from the partially hydrogenated oils used for frying. KFC said the lawsuit was baseless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Who didn't know that KFC was unhealthy? Morons and people looking to make a buck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyRules Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 There are simply too many litigators with too much time on their hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 One of these days, some guy will sue Extremeskins, for ruining his marriage, due to all the time he spent on the site, and for ruining his health, due to the lack of exercise, resulting from so much sitting and posting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canethang 305 Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Morons and people looking to make a buck Hey I ate fried chicken and mas potatatoes everyday like that idiot in "Super Size Me" and I got fat! It's all the Colonel's fault! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdowwe Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Fat people who blame fast food joints and sue make me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 The insatiable greed and lack of personal accountability of the American public. And the legal enablers. Not a good combination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Fat is the new tobacco. Nanny state fascists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fight_on_til_you_have_won Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 If some of you guys had bothered to read the posted article, you'd discover it isn't some fat guy suing KFC, it's a doctor and a consumer advocacy group. Don't get me wrong, I think the lawsuit is ridiculous, but KFC doesn't exactly have the best track record when it comes to being honest about what they sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Hey. Looks healthy to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Well anyone can FILE a lawsuit - I really can't see what kind of cause of action they can be claiming here. It looks like someone just wrote up a form-letter complaint and put out a press release. ...somebody send me a memo if this survives a motion to dismiss... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSteve Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 If they win, I'm filing a countersuit with the basis being that my constitutional rights to dine unhealthily are being infringed upon by the health jihad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Well anyone can FILE a lawsuit - I really can't see what kind of cause of action they can be claiming here. It looks like someone just wrote up a form-letter complaint and put out a press release....somebody send me a memo if this survives a motion to dismiss.... It's only a matter of time before cases like this will be taken seriously, DjTj. I distinctly remember Peter Jennings doing a report on obesity and advocating taking some of the same approaches that many took against big tobacco (that’s pretty damn mainstream) It's no coincidence that the some of very same people who were behind the fight against big tobacco are getting behind this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 It's only a matter of time before cases like this will be taken seriously, DjTj. I distinctly remember Peter Jennings doing a report on obesity and advocating taking some of the same approaches that many took against big tobacco (that’s pretty damn mainstream)It's no coincidence that the some of very same people who were behind the fight against big tobacco are getting behind this. What do you think will provide the means for this to move to the next step? An FDA report? What's the catalyst? The USSC is about to rule on a punitive damages case in tobacco related litigation that will reinforce the multiple limitation of punitive damages (i.e., 9 times compensatory = punative). These kinds of decisions seem to me to indicate a different direction in these types of suits. I don't see these kinds of suits getting traction, but I'm interested to hear your perspective lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 The Center for Science in the Public Interest is not a typical plaintiff seeking to make a buck. They are the ones who broke the story about Trans-Fats, and why they are so much more dangerous than regular fats. Because of them, makes of snack things like Cheetoes had to disclose on their packages how much transfats they had in their foods. And what a surprise, once they had to disclose, those snack food makers just decided that they could make their products without transfats. Heck - are they even seeking damages? Do any of you know? Why not check before you write your "damn plaintiff's lawyers" responses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 The Center for Science in the Public Interest is not a typical plaintiff seeking to make a buck. They are the ones who broke the story about Trans-Fats, and why they are so much more dangerous than regular fats. Because of them, makes of snack things like Cheetoes had to disclose on their packages how much transfats they had in their foods. And what a surprise, once they had to disclose, those snack food makers just decided that they could make their products without transfats.Heck - are they even seeking damages? Do any of you know? Why not check before you write your "damn plaintiff's lawyers" responses? You can take the facts and shove them right up your ass Predicto. ****ing lawyers man, I tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 I hate you lawyers, sure it may save lives but if it changes the taste of kfc I will call for the suing of all lawyers for destorying the yums of kfc. the trick will be finding a lawyer willing to sue himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlinginSammy HOF '63 Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 KFC doesn't exactly have the best track record when it comes to being honest about what they sell. with a word like "Fried" in its name, any moron who didn't realize it isn't healthy should take their lumps, eat KFC like it's going out of style and win a Darwin Award. I say let KFC cook it how it wants. Just make them make their customers aware of what's in the food they're serving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 It's only a matter of time before cases like this will be taken seriously, DjTj. I distinctly remember Peter Jennings doing a report on obesity and advocating taking some of the same approaches that many took against big tobacco (that’s pretty damn mainstream)It's no coincidence that the some of very same people who were behind the fight against big tobacco are getting behind this. What a joke and waste of time. Comparing tobacco to food is crazy. Now if in the lawsuit they can prove that they put something in the food that made the users wanted to crave more then you would have a case, because it tastes good and is bad for you is not the same. The tobacco companies case had legs because of the drugs in the ciggarettes, this is not the same. Maybe what should happen is parents should not take their kids to McD's all the dam time and hide the xboxs and playstations so kids can be active. The food companies are not at fault it is the poor parenting that we see before our eyes, they should be sued Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 You can take the facts and shove them right up your ass Predicto.****ing lawyers man, I tell you. Huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 The Center for Science in the Public Interest is not a typical plaintiff seeking to make a buck. They are the ones who broke the story about Trans-Fats Yes, they hit their one. Congratulations CSPI! :laugh: Weren't you the who said their journal is actually pretty interesting and dispassionate but it's the center's public crusades that make it a joke? The Center is going to need a lot more 'hits' to even out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Huh? It's a joke JDM, I'm a lawyer too (in fact, I'm still at work working on an public offering!), and I was making a play on what Predicto posted. It was meant as a joke; I though it'd be funnier if there were no smilies. EDIT: In retrospect, I guess I take for granted the fact that most people know that I'm a lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 EDIT: In retrospect, I guess I take for granted the fact that most people know that I'm a lawyer. when the hell did you get so smart on us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 The Center for Science in the Public Interest is not a typical plaintiff seeking to make a buck. They are the ones who broke the story about Trans-Fats, and why they are so much more dangerous than regular fats. Because of them, makes of snack things like Cheetoes had to disclose on their packages how much transfats they had in their foods. And what a surprise, once they had to disclose, those snack food makers just decided that they could make their products without transfats.Heck - are they even seeking damages? Do any of you know? Why not check before you write your "damn plaintiff's lawyers" responses? I was getting a little annoyed that so many people responded to this story and none caught the obvious. Thankfully Predicto actually read the article. This is an advocacy group - winning the lawsuit was most likely never even considered. The fact that you are reading about just how bad KFC is for you and that the company now has much more pressure to change was probably the goal from the start. This isn't a fat guy taking McD's to court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drums and skins Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 If some of you guys had bothered to read the posted article, you'd discover it isn't some fat guy suing KFC, it's a doctor and a consumer advocacy group.Don't get me wrong, I think the lawsuit is ridiculous, but KFC doesn't exactly have the best track record when it comes to being honest about what they sell. I think that article was exactly against the idea that they're completely misleading the public and thus, against the point you made. Any food can be "part of healthy, balanced diet". It simply a matter of interpretation. Does this mean a fried chicken diet is healthy? Not really. In fact, I'd argue it indicates its not a healthy food since as common knowledge, fried foods are bad and through this commercial, it claims it needs to be part of a healthy, balanced diet. That is, you eat a lot of healthy stuff, and then can eat something as bad as KFC and not be worried over the health effects. Its all about the interpretation... And unfortunately there's a large chunk of the American public that is absolutely stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.