[quote]Kratos wrote:
It is a matter of choice. Nobody is forcing people to eat at these shitholes. Who doesn’t know that fast food is total garbage, trans fats or not?
[/quote]
Hmmm, I beg to differ. Take away the trans fat, and fried chicken isn’t all that unhealthy. Neither are french fries. Real Potatos cooked in olive oil? Sounds healthy to me. Real Chicken fried in a healthy way? Sounds healthy to me.
I say sue the bastards. Someone has to stop this
In the spirit of full disclosure-
K.F.C. should wave banners across the front of all stores saying “Prepared With Trans Fats!!!”. Add a cute cartoon logo that is wearing an exercise outfit with a big TF on the chest.
They shoulld start an add campaign proclaiming it to the high heavens. “Now With Each Serving Containing 30 Grams of Trans Fats!”.
That would be freakin beau-ty-full.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
In the spirit of full disclosure-
K.F.C. should wave banners across the front of all stores saying “Prepared With Trans Fats!!!”. Add a cute cartoon logo that is wearing an exercise outfit with a big TF on the chest.
They shoulld start an add campaign proclaiming it to the high heavens. “Now With Each Serving Containing 30 Grams of Trans Fats!”.
That would be freakin beau-ty-full.
[/quote]
I think they should have fat transexual cashiers.
[quote]swivel wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
If it’s a legal product and they list their ingredients, I don’t see the issue.
I dislike regulation via lawsuit – if they are going to ban trans fats, ban them. But if they’re legal and they’re complying with regulations concerning letting customers know what the ingredients are, that should not make them liable for monetary damages.
i like this view. but, i still don’t understand how the tobacco thing went down w/o making cigarettes illegal…anyway from reading the complaint it seems the major issue is that kfc, at least in the d.c. area, was purposely not disclosing the use of trans-fats to the their customers. and if that’s true, then i’d say it’s not so frivolous.
"51. kfc’s past and continued failures to disclose that it’s food item are prepared w/ trans fat etc…
[/quote]
The thing with cigarettes was that they were both toxic and addictive. The tobacco companies disputed that it was addictive, but anyone that’s tried to quit knows how tough it is. Yes, it was a personal choice to start to smoke, but not so damn easy to stop.
Trans fats are not addictive. Are they a “poison” like belligerent suggests? They’re obviously unhealthy, but I would stop way short of calling them a poison. Carbon monoxide, found in cigarettes, will kill a person if present in sufficient quantities. If I eat a bucket of KFC, the worst I can expect is a bad case of diarrhea. I doubt I would die of a heart attack right away. Several years of eating buckets of KFC, yeah, that’s bad. But again, this stuff isn’t addictive. Common sense should tell you that eating too much KFC, or any fast food for that matter, is unhealthy.
My question is, what monetary damages have the plaintiffs suffered? None that I can think of. As far as injunctive relief is concerned, I don’t see the irreparable harm here. If I were KFC, I’d agree to post a “nutrition facts” poster like McDonald’s has and be done with this.
What I object to is the fact that people, who make choices to harm themselves… are able to fall back upon frivolous, unfair claims and lawsuits and reciving monetary damages, and this sends that very message that “they’re responsible for my actions, I am not.”
And what a dangerous message to tell people in so many ways. And who ultimately foots the responsibility for these frivolous issues if the person doing so shouldn’t have to? See how backward, just hold each individual responsible for him/herself and you won’t have such a waste of society’s time, energy and resources…then maybe real problems can be more the focus.
I have a problem with allocating scarce resources to where they won’t be properly used, when there are more needy, worthy causes out there that are suffering…such as all the two parent taxpayers I see who have to live in their cars because housing is so high, working people with chronic disease such as renal failure/cancer who need the financial help, etc. etc. etc.
Why does society focus on such frivolous issues like people with enough resources to be able to purchase things to do harm to themselves, who most of the time will continue to do so anyway, while others who truly need the help and would greatly appreciate the help are pushed to the wayside? It’s a senseless waste of resources.
I know this is an overly simplistic view, but frivolous lawsuits are one of the big contributors to waste of time, resources and energy, in society IMHO.
[quote]chinadoll wrote:
What I object to is the fact that people, who make choices to harm themselves… are able to fall back upon frivolous, unfair claims and lawsuits and reciving monetary damages, and this sends that very message that “they’re responsible for my actions, I am not.”
And what a dangerous message to tell people in so many ways. And who ultimately foots the responsibility for these frivolous issues if the person doing so shouldn’t have to? See how backward, just hold each individual responsible for him/herself and you won’t have such a waste of society’s time, energy and resources…then maybe real problems can be more the focus.
I have a problem with allocating scarce resources to where they won’t be properly used, when there are more needy, worthy causes out there that are suffering…such as all the two parent taxpayers I see who have to live in their cars because housing is so high, working people with chronic disease such as renal failure/cancer who need the financial help, etc. etc. etc.
Why does society focus on such frivolous issues like people with enough resources to be able to purchase things to do harm to themselves, who most of the time will continue to do so anyway, while others who truly need the help and would greatly appreciate the help are pushed to the wayside? It’s a senseless waste of resources.
I know this is an overly simplistic view, but frivolous lawsuits are one of the big contributors to waste of time, resources and energy, in society IMHO.[/quote]
is this a “frivolous lawsuit” ?
from what i read the guy who started it was trying to do exactly what you describe: take responsibility for himself and make good choices about what he was eating.
and now he’s pissed because he thought he was making good choices, but had the rug pulled out from under him because kfc advertised their product as one thing, but delivered another. so he says.
i don’t see that kind misrepresentation as trivial. getting ripped off is exactly the kind of thing you should take people to court for. if it’s true.
after reading the complaint it doesn’t stike me as being in the same league as the guy who sets his coffee on the dashboard and wants 8 million bucks, or the burglar who trips on a dog toy and breaks his wrist. it’s a class action suit and he’s not looking for gobs of money for personal gain.
might be looking for publicity though. but like i sadi he might just be pissed. i had a local business rip me off once and i told everyone in 3 counties about it.
[quote]Kailash wrote:
Personally, I would scarf chicken fried in coconut oil, anytime. But it wouldn’t be as crispy as the Colonel’s secret toxic recipe. And that’s why they don’t sell it.
I’m sorry, but there is something very wrong with that. I’m single and I work only 20 hours a week. I have plenty of time to think about my health, learn how to enhance it and cook proper meals.
And I can’t imagine how it is for someone who works 60 hours a week and raises children, and might find it advantageous to pick up a bucket of chicken or some other restaurant-prepared food on the way home. Food that was healthy before the advent of this relatively recent toxic food environment.
They shouldn’t be poisoned for someone else’s profit. And I’d hope people like myself could have compassion enough to understand the situation of others, who aren’t as lucky as we to have this opportunity at so much knowledge and alternatives.[/quote]
Please die. Anyone who doesn’t know fried chicken is bad for them is too stupid to live.
Chinadoll, anyone who eats trans fats IS being held responsible for their actions. The body is a much better accountant than society’s justice system… And now KFC gets theirs. Justice.
Also, you confuse me when you say that this lawsuit is a drain on society’s resources. How so? If this causes KFC to use natural fats, or even just raises awareness of the issue, the result far outweighs any court costs that might be incurred.
Now, of all the drains on the public infrastructure to complain about… jeez.
Here, I’ll give you a replacement whine (look at the graphic). See how corporations pay less and less tax every year, compared to private individuals? And then they have the nerve to come to our elected representatives, looking for bailouts (corporate welfare) when their big gambles don’t pan out, or some executive pulled a cut and run.
All risk and no responsibility, right there for ya! And not no small fry either, but the ones getting fat off all of us.
People > money. Justice > law.
So until trans fats are illegal, we’ll just have to put them to justice in the courts.
Kailash~
I agree with your point that the big companies are getting rich off consumers, but I don’t agree that certain individuals making money off of these fat corporations via lawsuits is the answer. And the consumers making the companies rich is what free enterprise is all about, and until these individuals who are making the companies fat take the responsibility NOT to purchase their products, NOT to drive the demand-supply curve in the favor of the companies, then things will not change.
To chose not to buy and consume junk food that is widely known to be bad for you is called Taking Personal Responsibility for your own health.
And your saying that KFC and other companies have to “GET THEIRS” (your words) for what some person does to him or herself? I don’t agree, and never will, with this kind of mentality. I think that’s a dysfunctional mindset and that same mindset is what’s contributing to so many of the problems in society today.
And so true: “Anyone who doesn’t know fried chicken is bad for them is too stupid to live.”
[quote]swivel wrote:
and now he’s pissed because he thought he was making good choices, but had the rug pulled out from under him because kfc advertised their product as one thing, but delivered another. so he says.[/quote]
You guys know I hate to go back and forth with debates…but swivel, ARE YOU KIDDING ME? As smart as you are, are you seriously telling me that it’s plausible that this person thought that eating KFC DEEP FRIED CHICKEN was a healthy food choice? OMG.
[quote]Nicholas F wrote:
Kratos wrote:
It is a matter of choice. Nobody is forcing people to eat at these shitholes. Who doesn’t know that fast food is total garbage, trans fats or not?
Hmmm, I beg to differ. Take away the trans fat, and fried chicken isn’t all that unhealthy. Neither are french fries. Real Potatos cooked in olive oil? Sounds healthy to me. Real Chicken fried in a healthy way? Sounds healthy to me.
I say sue the bastards. Someone has to stop this[/quote]
Ok, and exactly what does any of that have to do with fast-food places? Olive oil? Do you know how expensive that stuff is? No way fast-food franchises are going to buy that by the vat. They aren’t in it for anybody’s health. KFC does have some liability, but let’s not get ridiculous. HEalthy oil or not, deep-fried crap still isn’t all that good for you.
[quote]Kratos wrote:
Nicholas F wrote:
Kratos wrote:
It is a matter of choice. Nobody is forcing people to eat at these shitholes. Who doesn’t know that fast food is total garbage, trans fats or not?
Hmmm, I beg to differ. Take away the trans fat, and fried chicken isn’t all that unhealthy. Neither are french fries. Real Potatos cooked in olive oil? Sounds healthy to me. Real Chicken fried in a healthy way? Sounds healthy to me.
I say sue the bastards. Someone has to stop this
Ok, and exactly what does any of that have to do with fast-food places? Olive oil? Do you know how expensive that stuff is? No way fast-food franchises are going to buy that by the vat. They aren’t in it for anybody’s health. KFC does have some liability, but let’s not get ridiculous. HEalthy oil or not, deep-fried crap still isn’t all that good for you.[/quote]
AMEN!
[quote]Kratos wrote:
Nicholas F wrote:
Kratos wrote:
It is a matter of choice. Nobody is forcing people to eat at these shitholes. Who doesn’t know that fast food is total garbage, trans fats or not?
Hmmm, I beg to differ. Take away the trans fat, and fried chicken isn’t all that unhealthy. Neither are french fries. Real Potatos cooked in olive oil? Sounds healthy to me. Real Chicken fried in a healthy way? Sounds healthy to me.
I say sue the bastards. Someone has to stop this
Ok, and exactly what does any of that have to do with fast-food places? Olive oil? Do you know how expensive that stuff is? No way fast-food franchises are going to buy that by the vat. They aren’t in it for anybody’s health. KFC does have some liability, but let’s not get ridiculous. HEalthy oil or not, deep-fried crap still isn’t all that good for you.[/quote]
Not only that, but olive oil BURNS. That is why you don’t fry chicken in it unless you are trying to get rid of your house for the fire insurance money.
Nicholas F…getting dumber by the post.
—As far as Oilive oil, I wanted to clarify the following because I was asked about it after posting this:
Extra Virgin has the lowest smoke point at 400 degrees Fahrenheit, which makes it best used in light saut?ing. Pure Oil has a smoke point of 438 degrees Fahrenheit, which qualifies it for stir-frying. Always use Light Olive oil for deep-frying (smoke point of 468 degrees Fahrenheit).
The lower the smoke point, the easier it burns. That would mean that all olive oil is not the same and the ones with higher smoke points can be used for more cooking purposes.
[quote]chinadoll wrote:
You guys know I hate to go back and forth with debates…but swivel, ARE YOU KIDDING ME? As smart as you are, are you seriously telling me that it’s plausible that this person thought that eating KFC DEEP FRIED CHICKEN was a healthy food choice? OMG.
[/quote]
i don’t what know they thought, or what’s plausible. but if kfc was misrepresenting their product by advertising it as a “good healthy choice” for the health-conscious consumer on the go, like subway does, and not disclosing their use of trans fat to allow the health-conscious consumer an opportunity to read through the marketing bullshit, then that’s a problem and kfc should get spanked.
but who does the spanking ? like boston barrister said, i don’t think regulation by litigation is a great way to go, but the alternative is what ? more opportunity for bullshit gov’t entities to shape the rules in favor of their constituents ?
seriously, not everyone is food smart. i grew up in a house w/ no coke, m&m’s, or doritos, and so my first year of college i was drinking 3 mountian dews and hitting the hot-fudge waffle sundae bar for breakfast. and that stuff tasted so good i would’ve kept eating it forever if i hadn’t gone home for vacations and realized how much better i felt after a week of a good diet.
lastly , l like fried chicken. it’s not bad food. sure the breading /oil isn’t the best if need to make 5% bf but other than that big deal. good meat from a healthy animal fried in it’s own rendered fat is one thing. skid-row crack-baby-skank-farm chicken fried in “mel-fry” that’s changed once a month is another.
[quote]Kratos wrote:
Nicholas F wrote:
Kratos wrote:
It is a matter of choice. Nobody is forcing people to eat at these shitholes. Who doesn’t know that fast food is total garbage, trans fats or not?
Hmmm, I beg to differ. Take away the trans fat, and fried chicken isn’t all that unhealthy. Neither are french fries. Real Potatos cooked in olive oil? Sounds healthy to me. Real Chicken fried in a healthy way? Sounds healthy to me.
I say sue the bastards. Someone has to stop this
Ok, and exactly what does any of that have to do with fast-food places? Olive oil? Do you know how expensive that stuff is? No way fast-food franchises are going to buy that by the vat. They aren’t in it for anybody’s health. KFC does have some liability, but let’s not get ridiculous. HEalthy oil or not, deep-fried crap still isn’t all that good for you.[/quote]
Expensive? So what. this cheap food mentality is whats killing america
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Kratos wrote:
Nicholas F wrote:
Kratos wrote:
It is a matter of choice. Nobody is forcing people to eat at these shitholes. Who doesn’t know that fast food is total garbage, trans fats or not?
Hmmm, I beg to differ. Take away the trans fat, and fried chicken isn’t all that unhealthy. Neither are french fries. Real Potatos cooked in olive oil? Sounds healthy to me. Real Chicken fried in a healthy way? Sounds healthy to me.
I say sue the bastards. Someone has to stop this
Ok, and exactly what does any of that have to do with fast-food places? Olive oil? Do you know how expensive that stuff is? No way fast-food franchises are going to buy that by the vat. They aren’t in it for anybody’s health. KFC does have some liability, but let’s not get ridiculous. HEalthy oil or not, deep-fried crap still isn’t all that good for you.
Not only that, but olive oil BURNS. That is why you don’t fry chicken in it unless you are trying to get rid of your house for the fire insurance money.
Nicholas F…getting dumber by the post.
—As far as Oilive oil, I wanted to clarify the following because I was asked about it after posting this:
Extra Virgin has the lowest smoke point at 400 degrees Fahrenheit, which makes it best used in light saut?ing. Pure Oil has a smoke point of 438 degrees Fahrenheit, which qualifies it for stir-frying. Always use Light Olive oil for deep-frying (smoke point of 468 degrees Fahrenheit).
The lower the smoke point, the easier it burns. That would mean that all olive oil is not the same and the ones with higher smoke points can be used for more cooking purposes.[/quote]
Where did I ever advocate using olive oil to cook fried chicken?
Professor “250 lbs of useless muscle” X, getting …shoot, I already knew he is idiotic.
[quote]chinadoll wrote:
You guys know I hate to go back and forth with debates…but swivel, ARE YOU KIDDING ME? As smart as you are, are you seriously telling me that it’s plausible that this person thought that eating KFC DEEP FRIED CHICKEN was a healthy food choice? OMG.
[/quote]
Having dealt with the “average middle class person,” I can say with certainty that because most everyone here is educated or at least fairly knowledgeable about fitness and health issues, we take our knowledge, and our common sense, for granted. I was shocked to learn just how stupid and/or uninformed the average person really is. (On a side note, I’ve become somewhat of an elitist bastard as a result, but trust me, if you would have had some of the experiences that I have had, you would become elitist yourself. Or at least feel very good about yourself.) And a stupid person with a little bit of knowledge is as dangerous, or perhaps even more dangerous, than a stupid person with no knowledge. For example, the media frequently portrays chicken as a healthier alternative to red meat. I’m not saying this is necessarily true, but this is the message that the general public receives. So, if chicken is healthy, and KFC serves chicken, therefore, KFC food must be healthy. The whole issue with deep frying is too complicated an analysis for some people to make.
The question becomes, what do we do about it? Given my cynical nature, I think you can regulate and try to educate all you want, people will still find a way to screw themselves up. Look at drugs, for example. These are illegal, and people know that they are harmful. Yet, despite the fact that using drugs could result in jail time or even death, people still use. If the threat of prison or death isn’t enough of a deterent, what is? The so-called “battle against obesity” will be a losing battle just like the “war on drugs.” Unless people want to make the change themselves, no amount of intervention, from the government or otherwise, is going to help. Getting rid of trans fats isn’t going to help a damn.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
The question becomes, what do we do about it? Given my cynical nature, I think you can regulate and try to educate all you want, people will still find a way to screw themselves up. Look at drugs, for example. These are illegal, and people know that they are harmful. Yet, despite the fact that using drugs could result in jail time or even death, people still use. If the threat of prison or death isn’t enough of a deterent, what is? The so-called “battle against obesity” will be a losing battle just like the “war on drugs.” Unless people want to make the change themselves, no amount of intervention, from the government or otherwise, is going to help. Getting rid of trans fats isn’t going to help a damn.[/quote]
I totally agree with you Mike.
[quote]Nicholas F wrote:
Where did I ever advocate using olive oil to cook fried chicken?
Professor “250 lbs of useless muscle” X, getting …shoot, I already knew he is idiotic.
[/quote]
You do know that they deep-fry french fries, right? “Real potatoes cooked in olive oil?” It’s called inference. Now you’re just backpedaling, or you were just being disingenuous. "Useless muscle…"that’s a good one.
MiketheBear: Excellent post. Spot on, I’d say.
My six year old nephew knows that deep fried food is bad for you.
I think it’s so funny that we are here arguing the plausability about weather or not people realize that eating junk food, deep fried food, etc…is bad for you. The people on the left’s opinions versus the people on the right’s opinions. With all the media, education about it in the schools, etc. for DECADES, you have to have lived on Mars-- or URANUS :)-- for the last couple of decades to not know. I don’t buy it, its a bs no integrity gimmick to create a lawsuit to make money.
And why does society need a written disclaimer to dictate weather or not they use common sense anymore? We never did decades ago before all this litigation stuff. “They didn’t print on the hot coffee cup ‘warning: coffee is hot’ so I didn’t know, and burned myself.” Decades ago, people knew coffee was hot, a caloric surplus made you fat, etc…but now suddenly in the era of the frivolous lawsuit, society is walking around clueless and not knowing their ass from their face? I don’t think so.
I know that that point about the hot coffee has been argued to death, but I still laugh when I get a cup of coffee from a fast food place and the “Hot Coffee” warning is there printed on the cup “gee I never woulda guessed-- that’s a new one by me”. This is really litigation based and the courts and the rest of us in society with some integrity need to put our collective foots down and say “enough already.”