NationStates Jolt Archive

In its attempt to utterly cripple the ability to hold industries liable for wrongdoings, Congress accidently does something correct: taking a shot at banning lawsuits trying to sue food places for obesity.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051020/ap_on_go_co/obesity_lawsuits;_ylt=AqcxXaluOkyrqo9dxMIB6A2s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-
WASHINGTON - The Republican-controlled House voted Wednesday to shield fast-food chains from lawsuits that blame them for making people fat.

Nicknamed the "cheeseburger bill," the measure stems from lawsuits accusing McDonald's of causing obesity in tens of thousands of children. The food industry has asked Congress and state legislatures to protect it from liability, and so far, 21 states have agreed.

"You cannot litigate personal choices and lifestyles," said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said potential costs from the lawsuits threaten the food industry and its 12 million employees and raise food prices for consumers.

"These suits would be laughable if they were not so harmful," Sensenbrenner said.

The measure, which won approval on a 306-120 vote, would prevent class action lawsuits blaming restaurants and food companies for weight gain or obesity. The House passed a similar bill last year, but the Senate ran out of time to act.

Two-thirds of American adults are overweight, and nearly one-third are obese, while obesity among children and teenagers more than doubled in the past 30 years, according to government estimates.

Critics of the bill contend that a better way to make people responsible for how they eat is to require nutrition information on menus and menu boards.

"But of course this silly legislative effort has nothing to do with encouraging personal responsibility and everything to do with pleasing a powerful and politically connected industry," said Michael Jacobson, director of the Washington-based Center for Science in the Public Interest.

A food industry lobbyist said lawsuits against food companies are the wrong way to fight obesity in America.

"More energy must be put into solving the problem of obesity, and less into assigning blame for the purpose of collecting legal fees," said Hunt Shipman, executive vice president of government affairs and communications for the Food Products Association.

Courts have dismissed most obesity claims, but an appeals court in New York reinstated one lawsuit against McDonald's earlier this year. It is still pending.

I never, ever in my life recall McDonald's as advertising Big Macs or Happy Meals as nutritious meals or in any other way not bad for you (in opposition to what the tobacco industry has done). If you are obese and feel the need to sue McDonalds, it is because you should have bought the salad instead of the two Number 1s; or if your child is obese and you feel the need to sue McDonalds, you shouldn't have bought them a Happy Meal everytime you came within 20 miles of a McDonald's.

......
I never, ever in my life recall McDonald's as advertising Big Macs or Happy Meals as nutritious meals or in any other way not bad for you (in opposition to what the tobacco industry has done). If you are obese and feel the need to sue McDonalds, it is because you should have bought the salad instead of the two Number 1s; or if your child is obese and you feel the need to sue McDonalds, you shouldn't have bought them a Happy Meal everytime you came within 20 miles of a McDonald's.

In that case, the food industry has little to worry about. Banning lawsuites seems a little overprotective, especially in the land of 'small government'

The problem is that our current conservative government, in the US, is made up of two types of small-government conservatives. There's the type which is absolutely hypocritical and actually wants more spending, but lies out of his ass; and there's the type that pushes for increased spending and decreased revenue until finally the government starts to collapse under its unwieldy budget and the politician can finally say, "Sorry, folks, it's time to abolish all social services." He'd probably want to keep the pork barr-- er, I mean the transportation and energy budgets going, though.

It's about damn time!

Yes, I'm sure McDonalds forced you to eat that double cheeseburger. :rolleyes:

See: Supersize Me. It makes a good political statement...even if it seem stupid and the guy spends a lot of time barfing.:rolleyes:

It worked, didn't it? :D

Personally, I do not see the reasoning behind blaming the fast food corperations for making you fat. It doesn't make sense to me. :confused:

What next?

Perhaps a bill that prohibits all stupid litigation? Only sensible litigation should be allowed. That way, those who think they have axes to grind need to revert to firebombs and general sabotage. Which is surely much less harmful, and cheaper too...

Yes, I'm sure McDonalds forced you to eat that double cheeseburger. :rolleyes:
they did, they built one of those things near my house on purpose, they sneak into my house at night an wisper in my ear "drive-thru open 24 hours. see our dollar menu"

:eek:


okay maybe not, but isn't junk food just as addictive as cigarettes ?


oh wait, I don't think people should sue cigarette companies either.....

grr. I wanted to be on the losing side of the argument :mad:

See: Supersize Me. It makes a good political statement...even if it seem stupid and the guy spends a lot of time barfing.:rolleyes:

...and "Bowling for Columbine" is a logical, well made documentary with nary a flaw or misleading edit.

Just can't roll my eyes that far back.

...and "Bowling for Columbine" is a logical, well made documentary with nary a flaw or misleading edit.

Just can't roll my eyes that far back.

I barfed during "Bowling for Columbine". I intentionally barfed on the people in front of me because they were laughing about the NRA.

Then I told the theater manager that I was deathly ill from eating one of their hot dogs, and asked for my money back.

It makes sense, they're just trying to run a business, they don't want people throwing phoney lawsuits that make no sense on them. of course macdonalds makes you fat, but how can you sue for it?

teh same way you can sue if you break into a nightclub to skip paying £3 and fall out teh window on your way back out, hit your head and break your front teith... £12,000 i think + dentists bills for this lady, im sorry dont have the link a wee while ago but shows you waht you can sue for.

It makes sense, they're just trying to run a business, they don't want people throwing phoney lawsuits that make no sense on them. of course macdonalds makes you fat, but how can you sue for it?

Find a plaintiff's lawyer who is willing to stoop that low. They aren't hard to find.

Here's a link to a rather large list of them:

http://www.atla.org/

I remember hearing about a story once where a woman sued a grocery store because she tripped over a child and broke her wrist, the catch? it was her kid she tripped over.....:rolleyes: I don't know if it is true and I can't find anything on it, but there should be a law against lawsuites like that.

The worst lawsuit I saw was this dude had an RV and when he was driveing turned on Cruse contol. the problem? after that he whent back and took a nap, he crashed and sue the RV comp. (Winabago i think) got 3 mill and a new RV. sad sad shit.

The worst lawsuit I saw was this dude had an RV and when he was driveing turned on Cruse contol. the problem? after that he whent back and took a nap, he crashed and sue the RV comp. (Winabago i think) got 3 mill and a new RV. sad sad shit.


Actually that one was false. It never happened.

theres also one where a prisoner tried to escape, but fell over on his way out and broke his arm, he got compensation of course.....

Actually that one was false. It never happened.


ah ok I really glad to hear that.

See: Supersize Me. It makes a good political statement...even if it seem stupid and the guy spends a lot of time barfing.:rolleyes:
Supersize Me is a distortion of facts. Supersize Me a guy eats McDonalds every day for every meal, he eats everything on the menu. He gets fat. Well, duh. I think there is a counter-documentary made by a lady who got fed up with the Supersize Me bullshit. She ate at McDonalds every day for every meal, but she lost weight. She ate salads, drank milk and water, and watched her calories.

Supersize Me is a distortion of facts. Supersize Me a guy eats McDonalds every day for every meal, he eats everything on the menu. He gets fat. Well, duh. I think there is a counter-documentary made by a lady who got fed up with the Supersize Me bullshit. She ate at McDonalds every day for every meal, but she lost weight. She ate salads, drank milk and water, and watched her calories.

She must not have eaten the caesar salad thats just as fattening as a Big Mac. :p

Also I hated Supersize me. It was so full of bullshit.

If she did it like that then she is not doing what he did, its like me saying im going to smoke a pack a cigs a day and prove there fine, but I smoke Cigs with no tar, arsnic or all that other good stuff in normal cigs

That doesn't really surprise me.

Personally, I like Michael Moore (hell, I exaggerate almost as much as he does) But he blows things out of proportion waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more than I do.

^That was also blown slightly out of proportion :)

If she did it like that then she is not doing what he did, its like me saying im going to smoke a pack a cigs a day and prove there fine, but I smoke Cigs with no tar, arsnic or all that other good stuff in normal cigs
What he did was a lie and manipulation of facts. Here is what Supersize Me proved: if you don't watch what you eat, you get fat. How long has everyone been saying that? Decades. He proved that if you eat too much and don't watch what you eat, you will turn into a fat asshat; then he tried to blame it on McDonalds. He could've done this bullshit at Subway. (Who probably would have sued him for defamation due to their whole premise being they are good for you [if you have wheat bread, no condiments, the basic cheese, and no-non vegetable extras])

one question before I respond

did you watch it?

I did. Of course you are going to get fat if you eat fast food. Give me a break. He proved nothing that we didn't already know.

Well that woman (dont know her name) did not do the same thing as whats-his-name did

He ate everthing on the menu at least once and did not walk more then 5000 steps (I think it was 5000 give or take 500)

So what? She proved how much of an idiot the guy is. Like its been stated before. Eating fast food makes you fat.

Also he never ate any of the salads.

How is that, the way I see it she was trying to prove that eating fast food will NOT make you fat.

(he did but only one of each)

In its attempt to utterly cripple the ability to hold industries liable for wrongdoings, Congress accidently does something correct: taking a shot at banning lawsuits trying to sue food places for obesity.


Well damnit ... so much for my retirement plan.

Well that woman (dont know her name) did not do the same thing as whats-his-name did

He ate everthing on the menu at least once and did not walk more then 5000 steps (I think it was 5000 give or take 500)
Which proves what? If you become a lazy glutton, you get fat. How is that in any way, shape, or form relevant to McDonald's menu? He could've proved that in a documentary called "My Grandmother's Kitchen."

If you become a lazy glutton, ...

It's the American Way(tm)! :D

Which proves what? If you become a lazy glutton, you get fat. How is that in any way, shape, or form relevant to McDonald's menu? He could've proved that in a documentary called "My Grandmother's Kitchen."


it was how fast it all happend not the end resalut.

All the guy did was eat the fattening stuff. She only ate the salads and ate healthier. She was proving that if you eat healthy you can lose weight.

ya but she was clameing she did what he did and lost mass but she was doing something almsot complely difrrent

it was how fast it all happend not the end resalut.
I don't think you are getting the "lazy gluttons become fat hippos" point.

If you stayed with my grandmother for a week, you would gain far more than 24 pounds in a month.

I wish my Grandmother was like that.

I wish my Grandmother was like that.
She is an old southern lady. A normal dinner consists of enough fattening southern food to feed a half dozen people.

well my grandma cooks a tonne but then she will talk so much it would burn off all the Calaries gained from it trying to ignore all of it!

In its attempt to utterly cripple the ability to hold industries liable for wrongdoings, Congress accidently does something correct: taking a shot at banning lawsuits trying to sue food places for obesity.

because if there is one problem destroying america, it's corporations having to go to court.

haven't all of the cases of this type gotten thrown out without the need for any additional congressional intervention? i assume this law means that the food corps are worried that there actually is a legitimate liability issue that nobody has tried to sue over yet, where it won't just be summarily thrown out, and they decided to go preemptive to make sure they aren't held accountable for any actual wrongs they do.

because if there is one problem destroying america, it's corporations having to go to court.

haven't all of the cases of this type gotten thrown out without the need for any additional congressional intervention? i assume this law means that the food corps are worried that there actually is a legitimate liability issue that nobody has tried to sue over yet, where it won't just be summarily thrown out, and they decided to go preemptive to make sure they aren't held accountable for any actual wrongs they do.

Most of the time, cases like this are thrown out - but a few win often enough to make life expensive just defending against them.

The firearms manufacturing industry is a case in point - even cities were jumping on the bandwagon to sue them.

One can imagine people suing the manufacturers of disposable lighters for the criminals who commit arson.

So, Congress is passing some laws to stop the practice. Including a bill that prevents people and jurisdictions from suing legitimate manufacturers of firearms for selling weapons that might possibly be misused down the road.

Maybe one way to stop all the frivolous lawsuits is something like a criminal indictment process applied to civil suits. If one can't get a judge to believe the merits of a lawsuit without a defense, then there is no point in dragging the defending party through the legal process.

I don't remember where I saw it, but somebody suggested that whenever somebody lost a case like this they would need to pay a fee for wasting the courts time.

Along with the "stupid lawsuit" fee, we could also do what some other countries have done - the loser pays all legal fees. That takes the motivation away from lawyers who sue because they know it is cheaper for their victims to settle rather than fight what would normally be a winnable lawsuit. That might also take away the necessity of these industry shield laws.