Post #47,108
7/26/02 8:58:44 PM
|
Yes they indeed did!
They hide it all in commercial advertising that if you ate their food you would have a good time. But spending a week in a hospital because my colon got inflamed from 20+ years of eating Big Macs is not my idea of a good time. I was decieved by Ronald McDonald and other advertising gimmicks, into believing that the fast food was good to eat. Nowhere in their commercials did they reveal that eating fast food was bad for me, and that I would get seriously ill from eating their food over a long peroid of time. I honestly didn't really know it was bad for me until I started having GI problems in my late 20's. But the problem them was that I was already hooked on it and couldn't stop eating it.
Currently I am too poor to eat at fast food joints, and my colon is healing, but it is still in a fvcked up condition.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #47,115
7/26/02 9:39:26 PM
|
Not informing != Hiding information.
The information was availible.
McD's et. al. did not dispute the information, hide the information, nor make any claims about their food being healthy that I know of. Note the "that I know of."
Apply similar reasoning to automobiles: Wait, nevermind, they actually DO hide safety information from the public. :P
I do sympathize with your position, but a "free money grab" for what is a very legally shaky reason could lead to a "domino effect" - any product that might have injurious side effects that the company did not make an active effort to conceal - I.E., the information was there, and the company did not dispute that information - would become an instant target.
As for the advertising, NEVER trust an advertisement. The whole idea behind an advertisement is to convince you that you are worthless unless you purchase something from the advertiser, whether or not you actually NEED the product.
There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
|
Post #47,126
7/26/02 11:03:54 PM
|
No, the information was not available
where was the information that consuming the food over a long peroid of time would cause colon issues? Did McDonald's print that on papers that I could read in their stores? No, they did not. They knew it was bad food, and they served it anyway. They have made no attempt to make their food healthier, or cause less of a chance to develop illnesses.
I am not looking for millions of dollars, just a new colon. I don't want the money, I want my body back in the condition that it should be for my age.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #47,133
7/26/02 11:55:52 PM
|
Yer missing the point.
Something you do a lot of, honestly.
It isn't McDonald's responsibility to inform you of the risks that their food may present to you. It is your responsibility as a consumer to evaluate the risks, based on availible information, just like it is the McFastFoodChain's responsibility to evaluate whether or not you are a customer that they will accept money from. (Is it your responsibility to inform the retailer, any retailer, if you have a shoddy credit history or a record of bouncing checks?)
If a retailer actively tries to CONCEAL the fact that their product is bad for you, THEN they should be liable. That is different than NOT STATING that their product is bad for you, when you can find the information about the food from other locations, such as the library, various bookstores, the newspaper, etc.
There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
|
Post #47,145
7/27/02 12:36:06 AM
|
Oh so
it is perfectly legal to sell someone poison and call it food? How about expired food, a lot of stores do that, they don't even bother to check the expiration date and people buy it and eat it without checking the expiration date. Just ask Boxley about some cheese that he bought that way and the time he had to spend in the ER getting his stomach pumped.
In any case, when McDonald's and KFC first came out, they told mothers to take a break and buy food from them instead of making it. That the food was the same from their place, as the kind she made. Which was false. So moms started bringing home a sack of hamburgers or a bucket of chicken instead of making a meal.
Corps can get socked for selling contaminated beef that has the "Mad Cow" disease in it, but not for gut busting hamburgers that can cause colon cancer?
Is this some sort of SNL skit, like where they sold dangerous Haloween costumes and dangerous toys, and claimed that it was not their fault?
I want McDonald's and the others to serve healthy food, so that others do not get the same problems that I got. Is that too much to ask? Selling healthy food? Most Fast Food is not fit for human consumption. But they don't care, as long as they make a buck. They don't care that loyal customers like me suffer so much pain and discomfort.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #47,151
7/27/02 1:11:45 AM
|
Stay on topic, please.
it is perfectly legal to sell someone poison and call it food? How about expired food, a lot of stores do that, they don't even bother to check the expiration date and people buy it and eat it without checking the expiration date. Just ask Boxley about some cheese that he bought that way and the time he had to spend in the ER getting his stomach pumped. This is not relevant to the discussion at hand. If you have evidence that McDonalds sell products that are, in the eyes of the law, unfit for human consumption, please show it. I should note that I'm not particularly interested in odd cases, because accidents happen and employees foul up - what you are claiming is systematic sale of unfit food. If something is actually harmful per se, then it must be labelled thus. Burgers are not actually harmful per se. In any case, when McDonald's and KFC first came out, they told mothers to take a break and buy food from them instead of making it. That the food was the same from their place, as the kind she made. Which was false. So moms started bringing home a sack of hamburgers or a bucket of chicken instead of making a meal. So? "Moms" are grown adults, who vote and drive cars. They are capable of making informed decisions about what to feed their families. Apparently. Corps can get socked for selling contaminated beef that has the "Mad Cow" disease in it, but not for gut busting hamburgers that can cause colon cancer? Evidence? Is this some sort of SNL skit, like where they sold dangerous Haloween costumes and dangerous toys, and claimed that it was not their fault? No. I want McDonald's and the others to serve healthy food, so that others do not get the same problems that I got. Is that too much to ask? Selling healthy food? Most Fast Food is not fit for human consumption. But they don't care, as long as they make a buck. They don't care that loyal customers like me suffer so much pain and discomfort. What is "most fast food", and why is it "unfit for human consumption"? If you mean that fast food alone is not a balanced diet, then you'd be right. That's where your cognitive abilities come in, and you EAT SOMETHING ELSE. McDonalds have no obligation to you beyond selling you products that are fit for human consumption in the eyes of the law, and are producing using a process that breaks no laws. As long as McDonalds comply with all relevant legislation, they are discharging their responsibility to you, the customer.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #47,152
7/27/02 1:28:20 AM
|
Evidence
my colon problems, and the problems that others have that are involved in this suit should be evidence enough that fast food is unfit for human consumption. Would you like the results of my coloscopy or something?
After avoiding fast food, I have been doing a lot better, but still in a lot of pain. But I suppose that pain and suffering as a result of a company's negilgence is not good enough reason to change the way they do business? A lot of the hamburgers were half-cooked and red inside, or made to sit under a heat lamp for hours until it resembled some kind of rubber product. We must protect the consumer from this type of food and make fast food places serve healthier food. I am not asking for a multi-million dollar settlement, I just want the corps to take responsibility for their actions and make an effort to make their food healthier. Why? Apparently most citizens are hooked on fast food and it has made us obease and a lot sicker than he should be.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #47,153
7/27/02 1:44:39 AM
|
Re: Evidence
my colon problems, and the problems that others have that are involved in this suit should be evidence enough that fast food is unfit for human consumption. Would you like the results of my coloscopy or something? Your colon problems, unfortunate though they are, are evidence of nothing other than your diet was unsuitable or that you had some other physical issue. After avoiding fast food, I have been doing a lot better, but still in a lot of pain. But I suppose that pain and suffering as a result of a company's negilgence is not good enough reason to change the way they do business? A lot of the hamburgers were half-cooked and red inside, or made to sit under a heat lamp for hours until it resembled some kind of rubber product. We must protect the consumer from this type of food and make fast food places serve healthier food. I am not asking for a multi-million dollar settlement, I just want the corps to take responsibility for their actions and make an effort to make their food healthier. Why? Apparently most citizens are hooked on fast food and it has made us obease and a lot sicker than he should be. EAT SOMETHING ELSE THEN.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #47,138
7/27/02 12:02:36 AM
|
Hey when yall self rightious fooks :)
pay 8 bucks for a cheesburger like I pay 4 for a pack of chokers you might think twice about bandwagon science.
thanx,
bill
."Once, in the wilds of Afghanistan, I had to subsist on food and water for several weeks." W.C. Fields
|
Post #47,373
7/29/02 2:18:46 PM
|
Thanks for the summary Bill
As always, spot on. I took a lot of these same schmucks to task about this same issue about four years ago and had similar results. We'll see how it plays out now that the "hypothetical" lawsuit I was warning about is now a "real" lawsuit.
You been benefitting greatly from the "education campaign" that the tobacco settlement money is being used for. Or for health care in general? ... or is all that money just being pissed away on roads so that more fucking harmful cars can choke us out? Thought so. Thank God that at least the lawyers can afford to buy the SUV's to kill themselves with. :-)
Just a few thoughts,
Screamer
As soon as you're born they make you feel small
By giving you no time instead of it all
Till the pain is so big you feel nothing at all
J. Lennon - Working Class Hero
|
Post #47,398
7/29/02 6:02:20 PM
|
Heh:_____ National Lawyer Day!
{swirling brownish mist + theremin music + the Sweet Stench of Success}
{Ad assembles itself from the detritus ...}
Chip-in and buy *your* lawyer the UAV with the Highest-CG available + underinflated Firestones rescued from the recycle heap (only ~ 16 % o' those rollovers were from any kind o'tire anyway)
Make clear how.. humiliated! you will feel if s/he does not use this vehicle every day! (no fair bringin the SL-500 to work) <<<
Think ya gots a Winner, Dan :-\ufffd
|
Post #47,435
7/30/02 1:18:34 AM
|
You got roads?
We just got a bogus "balanced budget" for the year to cover the old Gov's financial shennanigans.
----
United we stand
Divided we dominate the planet without really trying
|
