McDonalds Lawsuit Critique
...d be found liable for diabetes, hypertension and heart disease. Awards for winning such suits would be enormous. An industry spokesman has stated “anyone with an IQ higher than room temperature will understand that excessive consumption of food served in fast food restaurants will lead to weight gain.” They believe the blame lies on those consuming the food. The judge hearing the case dismissed it citing it runs up against a core American value, personal responsibility. He stated “that if customers know the risks, they cannot blame McDonalds if they choose to satisfy their appetites with large amounts of super sized McDonald’s products.” The judge went on to explain to the plaintiffs how they could fix their case and gave them time to do it. He told them they should focus on the fact that customers may not be given a reasonable chance to learn what they are getting into by eating McDonalds foods. The judge “grounded” (To provide a basis for (a theory, for example); justify.) “The case is a basic doctrine of tort law: that certain products may be unreasonably dangerous because they contain items that are outside the reasonable contemplation of the consuming public.” This means that although it is ok to sell unhealthy food, it is not ok to sell an item that is substantially less healthy than it appears, and a seller may be held liable for the harm it causes. Chicken McNuggets have twice the fat of a hamburger and “extra value meals contain three quarters of the calories an adult needs for a full day.” Last year McDonalds paid $10 million to set...