Man sues big food companies over diabetes

[beating_my_betes]

Man sues ‘The Elements™️’ after sticking hands in fire leads to severe burns.

 

[Bruce Stephens]

The lawsuit, if anybody wants to wade thru it: https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/byvrmbomype/Martinez v Kraft Heinz et al complaint 12-10.pdf

I don't think I have the energy to read all of it, but the first 10 pages puts forward a coherent argument that doesn't sound crazy to me.

Maybe he should sue his parents who fed him this crap

I'm guessing his parents aren't that wealthy, so would make a less attractive target even if they could be considered liable in any sense. I'm guessing they could successfully argue that they were feeding him in a way common among US parents at the time (quite possibly using the same arguments about advertising, etc., that his lawyers are using in the lawsuit).

 

[beating_my_betes]

Man sues ‘The Elements™️’ after sticking hands in fire leads to severe burns.

Quoting myself to say that now having read the linked article I can see this as more of a red herring than Swedish Fish.

 

[beating_my_betes]

I don't think I have the energy to read all of it, but the first 10 pages puts forward a coherent argument that doesn't sound crazy to me.

I don't think they have a leg to stand on.

 

[Bruce Stephens]

I don't think they have a leg to stand on.

I doubt very much they'll win. It just doesn't sound like a crazy argument (there seem to me to be reasonable similarities with Big Tobacco (including the same companies being involved)). I wouldn't be surprised if it gets to an actual trial (rather than being dismissed).

 

[GlucoseCrusher]

Do you suppose the flavouring is fishy tasting, like roll mops? I feel queasy just reading that. I'd assumed they were biscuits but obviously not.

It’s a popular candy in the US that has a cherry kind of flavor. It’s shaped like fish, red in color. Consumers can find it in just about any store that sells candies.

 

[Inka]

I'm guessing they could successfully argue that they were feeding him in a way common among US parents at the time (quite possibly using the same arguments about advertising, etc., that his lawyers are using in the lawsuit).

And McDonalds marketing of things like Happy Meals to children could be said to imply they’re good/suitable food for them. Again, any ads that show children eating these foods could be said to imply they’re a good choice for children.

 

[beating_my_betes]

I doubt very much they'll win. It just doesn't sound like a crazy argument (there seem to me to be reasonable similarities with Big Tobacco (including the same companies being involved)). I wouldn't be surprised if it gets to an actual trial (rather than being dismissed).

In what way(s) would you say this is similar to the litigation against 'Big Tobacco'?

 

[Amity Island]

I'm guessing they could successfully argue that they were feeding him in a way common among US parents at the time (quite possibly using the same arguments about advertising, etc., that his lawyers are using in the lawsuit).

And McDonalds marketing of things like Happy Meals to children could be said to imply they’re good/suitable food for them. Again, any ads that show children eating these foods could be said to imply they’re a good choice for children.

And even after all this time, tobacco and alcohol are still freely sold, both toxic. Both raise lots of money in taxes.

I think we are going to need a considerable shift in conscience and consciousness to put these things right.

 

[beating_my_betes]

I'm guessing they could successfully argue that they were feeding him in a way common among US parents at the time (quite possibly using the same arguments about advertising, etc., that his lawyers are using in the lawsuit).

And McDonalds marketing of things like Happy Meals to children could be said to imply they’re good/suitable food for them. Again, any ads that show children eating these foods could be said to imply they’re a good choice for children.

I the UK Happy Meals come with carrots an water. Could you perhaps present a case as to why any of the options are particulary unhealthy for kids

Happy Meal: Kids Meal: McDonald’s UK

Try the McDonald’s Happy Meal with fun & toys in every meal!

www.mcdonalds.com

 

[silver minion]

At best companies might award him a freebie of bagel bites.

There's plenty of warnings about over consumption of processed food, argument will be no one forced him to eat it & who can argue with that.

He is 18. Very likely he gained his eating habits very young. While parents have
a responsibility to feed their kids a healthy diet, they can't monitor them 24 hours a day. The marketing of sweet snacks and drinks to children and teenagers is relentless. It relies on the pester power of kids to badger parents for the latest craze.

 

[Inka]

I the UK Happy Meals come with carrots an water. Could you perhaps present a case as to why any of the options are particulary unhealthy for kids

Happy Meal: Kids Meal: McDonald’s UK

Try the McDonald’s Happy Meal with fun & toys in every meal!

www.mcdonalds.com

They didn’t use to though and there are still less healthy options. Here are McD saying they’ve reduced the sales by 50%, cut sugar, etc, but some of those changes are very recent - ie the last year or two.

Happy Meal® - Fun in Every Meal | McDonald's UK

Discover our McDonald's Happy Meal®, with toys or books, and delicious food in every one.

www.mcdonalds.com

.

 

[Eddy Edson]

I doubt very much they'll win. It just doesn't sound like a crazy argument (there seem to me to be reasonable similarities with Big Tobacco (including the same companies being involved)). I wouldn't be surprised if it gets to an actual trial (rather than being dismissed).

I can imagine some of the things which will be in the motions to dismiss.

To prevail I think the plaintiff would need to show eg evidence of specific actions by specific people acting with the authority of the companies on specific dates which they knew or should have known were in fact likely to be harmful to the plaintiff and that the plaintiff was in fact harmed by them.

To get this evidence the plaintiff would no doubt need discovery from the companies. The motions to dismiss presumably will argue that the complaint isn't specific enough to make this anything but the kind of fishing expeditition courts don't allow.

I think discovery will be the big battle. Fascinating if it gets that far but I'd probably bet against it.

 

[Bruce Stephens]

In what way(s) would you say this is similar to the litigation against 'Big Tobacco'?

Just the arguments they give in the first few pages: (allegedly) these companies were selling products that they knew were harmful but hard to resist, and deliberately made them harder to resist. And in many cases it was the same companies involved, so it's easy to argue they were just following the same playbook.

I think discovery will be the big battle. Fascinating if it gets that far but I'd probably bet against it.

I'd bet the same way.

 

[nonethewiser]

It’s a popular candy in the US that has a cherry kind of flavor. It’s shaped like fish, red in color. Consumers can find it in just about any store that sells candies.

Reminds me of sweet cigarettes in 1970s, they were made to look like a cigarette with long white candy tube & red tip, not a whiff of tobacco to be seen or tasted.

 

[Merluza]

I would think it is easy to argue, or at least claim, that nothing in these products is harmful. Any harm is self inflicted through over use.

 

[Annette&Bert]

I have noticed that there are sweets for sale that have clearly written "sugar free" I assume this is for people and children who want less sugar, they are certainly not aimed I would think at diabetics because yes they are sugar free but my goodness very high carb. I think manufacturers should produce very low carb foods and sweet treats then we could perhaps not worry. I have notions for cake and sweeties now and then but I am very careful.

 

[Robin]

Food advertisers have sometimes tried to be careful about what they say, at least in this country. I remember a cereal product being advertised on TV as something to have 'as part of your nutritious breakfast' and thinking, yes, the least nutritious part, the milk they showed being poured on, and the small glass of orange juice nearby was probably much better for you than the advertised product. But the overall impression that the advert wished to convey was that the cereal was the nutritious bit.

 

[Amity Island]

Food advertisers have sometimes tried to be careful about what they say, at least in this country. I remember a cereal product being advertised on TV as something to have 'as part of your nutritious breakfast' and thinking, yes, the least nutritious part, the milk they showed being poured on, and the small glass of orange juice nearby was probably much better for you than the advertised product. But the overall impression that the advert wished to convey was that the cereal was the nutritious bit.

Do you think supermarkets have been a big driver in junk food consumption?

I remember shopping at local shops and markets and no part of the weekly shop involved going to the sweet shop. It was literally butchers, bakers, fishmongers and fruit and veg and the weekly market. There were still the supermarkets, but these were supplemented by the local whole food shops and markets, most of which have been driven out and closed.

There is the social and community aspect too of having local shops where customers were known and conversation exchanged.

 

[Merluza]

Supermarkets were discouraged, maybe prohibited, from displaying sweets at the check outs several years ago, it was obvious incitement to buy. I don't think our local mini market is so constrained.

They have pretty splendid aisles full of sweeties and the like, not to mention crisps and things but at least you have to choose to go down them, they do sell other stuff like fruit and vegetables. The aisles full of bottled water annoy me more.