NEWS FLASH!! Fast food is bad for your health!!

[Azred]

Originally posted by Melusine: However, people that started smoking a long time ago were mislead into thinking it wasn't dangerous. There have even been commercials saying smoking is good for you! The tobacco industry has long been hiding facts about the addictiveness of nicotine, so these lawsuits actually make *some* sense.

I must disagree. No one was ever forced to smoke; the fact that they developed an addiction is not the fault of the tobacco company. I agree that the tobacco companies hid the fact that they tampered with their procuts, but that does not translate into culpability for personal illnesses. If that were the case, then auto manufacturers must logically be culpable for deaths in car crashes for providing a "potentially dangerous product".

[Morgeruat]

Originally posted by WillowIX: Wow, you really can file lawsuits against everything down there. What´s next? Parents sue candy companies for dentist bills? Sheesh...

actually a woman sued (and won) her parents for malpractice because she had personal issues and needed alot of therapy. It's things like this that really annoy me, especially whenI travel, people from other countries think we don't do anything here but sue everyone else.

the worst thing about the case is that if it's not thrown out the window immediately the fast food companies are probably going to settle out of court to try and keep court costs down

[Morgeruat]

Originally posted by Azred: quote: Originally posted by Melusine: However, people that started smoking a long time ago were mislead into thinking it wasn't dangerous. There have even been commercials saying smoking is good for you! The tobacco industry has long been hiding facts about the addictiveness of nicotine, so these lawsuits actually make *some* sense.

I must disagree. No one was ever forced to smoke; the fact that they developed an addiction is not the fault of the tobacco company. I agree that the tobacco companies hid the fact that they tampered with their procuts, but that does not translate into culpability for personal illnesses. If that were the case, then auto manufacturers must logically be culpable for deaths in car crashes for providing a "potentially dangerous product".[/QUOTE]not entirely true, in the 80's the tobacco companies actually added MORE nicotine to the cigs to make them more addictive, the father of a friend of mine got extremely sick because of it, and quit smoking after that. most people in the last 2 decades have known about the dangers, but most smokers have been hooked longer than that.

[Melusine]

Originally posted by Azred: I must disagree. No one was ever forced to smoke; the fact that they developed an addiction is not the fault of the tobacco company. I agree that the tobacco companies hid the fact that they tampered with their procuts, but that does not translate into culpability for personal illnesses. If that were the case, then auto manufacturers must logically be culpable for deaths in car crashes for providing a "potentially dangerous product".

Of course not. Cars are not inherently dangerous, cigarettes are. I did not say people were forced to smoke but an addiction is a force that it's hard to battle against. So if people were NOT told about the extreme level of addictiveness of nicotine, and there was no way they could know it, then the tobacco companies may not have prohibited them to stop smoking, but they HAVE made it very difficult to do so. Nicotine addiction is one of the worst to overcome. People at the time had no idea that once they started smoking they wouldn't be able to stop, but the tobacco industry DID now, and kept the information hidden out of financial motives. In those few cases, I think a lawsuit is justified. Withholding information with the motive of getting people addicted and possibly getting people terminally ill because you'll make money out of it should be illegal.
In all the other cases, where people KNEW smoking is addictive, it's of course their own responsibility.

[Azred]

Originally posted by Melusine: Nicotine addiction is one of the worst to overcome.

I don't know...I found it really easy to quit, but that is neither here nor there. [img]graemlins/beigesmilewinkgrin.gif[/img]

I can see now, through our verbal parry-and-riposte, that my automobile analogy is not quite right. How about the alcohol distilleries then? They know that many people find alcohol a very addictive substance and difficult to quit, but continue making the product anyway. Should people begin suing Anheiser Busch or Jack Daniels because of their alcohol-related illnesses?

My point is that suing a company because of your own personal choices is not right. It is equally wrong for companies to hide knowledge that thier product might be harmful to the health of their consumers. [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Azred: My point is that suing a company because of your own personal choices is not right. It is equally wrong for companies to hide knowledge that thier product might be harmful to the health of their consumers. [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

I think we all agree on that. I guess this example of such a lawsuit just seems a whole lot more ludicrous than others

If he DOES succeed, I can categorically state I will lose any faith in the US legal system LOL!!!

[Azred]

Originally posted by Lord Shield: If he DOES succeed, I can categorically state I will lose any faith in the US legal system LOL!!!

You mean you still have some? [img]graemlins/saywhat.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/laugh3.gif[/img]

[ 07-26-2002, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: Azred ]

[Melusine]

Originally posted by Azred: quote: Originally posted by Lord Shield: If he DOES succeed, I can categorically state I will lose any faith in the US legal system LOL!!!

You mean you still have some? [img]graemlins/saywhat.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/laugh3.gif[/img] [/QUOTE]LOL!!! [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]
Agreed. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[LennonCook]

You think this lawsuit is bad ??
Oh, there`s worse alright...
The past couple of months, some people suid telstra (Australias telecommunications giant) because of their high prices. Sofar, that makes sense- we have laws in place to stop unnecesarily high prices being put into place. Telstra`s defense: "We are a goverment body, and so we do not have to adhere to the governments regulations".
Telstra won. AND the people suing them had to pay the court fees. So, in the end, telstra had broken the law with their prices; someone realised it, took it to court; but it didn`t cost telstra a cent. And you thought someone suing a fastfood company was bad ?? [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Azred: quote: Originally posted by Lord Shield: If he DOES succeed, I can categorically state I will lose any faith in the US legal system LOL!!!

You mean you still have some? [img]graemlins/saywhat.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/laugh3.gif[/img] [/QUOTE]nope. But shoul dany faith whatsoever happen along I'll lose it LOL!!