By now you have no doubt heard about a class action lawsuit which has been filed against McDonald's claiming that the fast-food chain has created a national epidemic of obese children. The lawyer leading the charge, Samuel Hirsch, is arguing that McDonald's food is "a very insipid, toxic kind of thing" when ingested regularly by young kids.
Funny thing is, water is a toxic kind of thing if ingested regularly. Doubt me? Read about hyponatremia and be amazed.
One of the plaintiffs is 13 years old, stands 5 foot 9 and weighs 270 pounds. He claims he ate McDonald's food three to four times a week. The other two plaintiffs are of similar size and weight and claim they also regularly ate at McDonald's.
Interestingly, all the parents of the teenagers involved are either unemployed or on disability. Could it be that the unemployment or disability payments aren't enough to give these people the lifestyle they think they deserve? No, that couldn't be it.
Of course, what's really odd is that even though the parents aren't working, somehow they found the money to let their kid(s) eat at a fast-food restaurant multiple times every week. This assumes the kids themselves weren't earning money working odd jobs here and there.
This case comes on the heels of a similar case filed in July by Caesar Barber and others seeking undetermined compensatory damages against McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Kentucky Fried Chicken (owned by Yum Brands Inc.) and Burger King. The attorney pursuing thar case is, guess who, Samuel Hirsch.
To quote Mr. Hirsch from the above suit, "Fast food chains failed to disclose the contents in terms of calories, fat grams and sodium. Even when posted, the information is not easily understandable to the public."
Funny, everytime I walk into a McDonald's there is a big poster on the wall next to the counter which breaks down all of the above information in every product at that store in a very easy to understand manner. You can even view the information online at McDonald's site. You can even, GASP!, ask for a pamphlet from the server which you can take to your table and read at your leisure.
In all of the above cases the people indicated that they ate fast food at least 3 or more times a week. For years. In the case of Caesar Barber, he claimed he did it because, a) the food was cheap and b) he didn't know how to cook. Apparently Mr. Barber couldn't find it in himself to try another place to eat. One which had a salad bar.
None of the plaintiffs in either suit exercised any self-control or took responsibility for their actions. They were the ones who chose to go to the restaurants multiple times every week. They were the ones who decided what to eat at those restaurants. They were the ones who paid for the food. They were the ones who had to look at themselves in the mirror every day (or one would hope that they looked in the mirror every day). No one forced them to eat the food.
The fact is, this is a frivolous lawsuit. There is no possible way that any food purveyor, or purveyor of any kind, can be held liable for the actions of those who frequent the establishment when it relates to health. If that were the case then every greasy spoon restaurant in the nation would be liable. Especially those that fry all their food such as chicken-fried steak.
So what is one to do? Unfortunately you can't shoot these idiots (and the plaintiffs as well). No, that would get you in trouble. You could protest outside the attorneys office (until you're arrested for exercising your free speech). There is, however, a remedy. Kindly direct your browser to the Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse (CALA) website and read what they have to say on these and other pathetic lawsuits.
Second, write your state officials and force them to rewrite your state laws to prevent the filing of such frivolous suits.
Finally, to paraphrase Willie Nelson, "Mama, don't let your babies grow up to be lawyers."