Proud Member Of This Board Who Is Ashamed Of Comic-Keys

[Guest]

FD, you know, sometimes the fast food gets a bad rap. A Couple of Double Quarter pounders with cheese is DEFINITELY not the same as wolfing down some lean chicken breasts, a cup of rice, and broccoli, BUT you can get away with these indulgences if taken to moderation and at the right time (like if you just completed a torturous, heavy duty workout and the muscles are CRAVING calories to re-fuel). Depends on your metabolism and work load. You can eat 7000 calories a day and not put on an ounce of fat if you're BURNING 7000 calories.

Dave Palumbo, Long Islands most famous bodybuilder and one of the nicest guys you'll ever meet, is living proof of that. The man LIVES at McDonalds, his skin is like tissue paper all year round, he's 5'10" 320 pounds, and so ripped that you can see his pancreas making insulin from the outside!!!! Of course, there are those who have said that they wouldn't be able to tell the difference between his face and that of a Neanderthal if he wandered into the Pre-historic section of a museum, like Brock Lestner, Dave's physique being the byproduct of HUGE amounts of growth hormone (HUGE growth with wildly distended but RIPPED abdomen, size 19 sneakers, oversized hands and disintegrating joints) as well as the standard array of bodybuilding anabolics.

Anyway, I always say, "It's not what you eat, it's WHO you eat!".

[JLA_ALL_THE_WAY]

How stupid is this guy anyway?

 

Probably about as stupid as that woman who successfully sued for the 'scalding' coffee incident.

 

How do these people sleep at night, or look at themselves in the mirror??!!

 

The situation's gettin' bad, people.

 

Rick

[FlyingDonut]

Before you get all ornery about the McDonald's case: How do these people sleep at night, or look at themselves in the mirror - you need to know the facts. From the Washington Center for Consumer Law:

 

The McDonald's Coffee Case

Sorting through fact and fiction....

 

Myth: An opportunistic old woman launched a frivolous lawsuit when she spilled her McDonald's coffee on her lap.

 

Truth: Lieback was sitting in the passenger seat of her grandson's car holding a coffee after purchasing it from a drive-through window of a McDonald's. When she opened the lid to add cream and sugar, she spilled the coffee.

 

The simple accident caused third-degree burns on more than 6 percent of her body. She was treated in a hospital for a week. McDonald's served coffee 20 or so degrees hotter than the industry standard. The woman, Stella Liebeck, underwent numerous skin-graft surgeries as a result of her third-degree coffee burns to her thighs and groin area. She had permanent scarring on more than 16 percent of her body.

 

McDonald's had already ignored more than 700 similar claims of coffee burns , many involving children. The company even ignored a request from the Shriner's Burn Institute in Cincinnati to turn down its coffee.

 

McDonald's refused to pay the then 79-year-old woman's initial medical expenses totaling $11,000. McDonald's actually countered with an offer of $800. And they also refused to turn down the heat on their coffee. Left with $20,000 unpaid bills, she finally hired a lawyer.

 

A mediator later recommended the parties settle for $225,000. Again, McDonald's refused and the case went to trial.

 

McDonald's representatives lied to the court and jury about the existence of other claims. A jury reduced the original verdict of $200,000 to $160,000 for contributory negligence - Liebeck spilled it on herself.

 

Based on McDonald's annual profits of more than $1 billion annually, and more than $1.3 million gross daily coffee sales, the jury levied two days of coffee sales receipts as punitive damages for a punitive damage award of $2.7 million.

 

A judge later reduced the $2.7 million jury award to $480,000. McDonald's later settled the case for an undisclosed amount, requesting the deal be kept sealed. Most major newspapers ignored the judge's reduction and the final outcome of the case.

 

Punitive damage awards are not currently allowed under Washington law. Juries undoubtedly return verdicts when faced with a large corporate defendant who has ignored reasonable pleas to resolve such situations or grievances.

 

In this case, McDonald's simply refused to turn down the heat, so the jury turned it up on McDonald's.

[JLA_ALL_THE_WAY]

Wow FD, thanx for the info. Looks like I picked a bad example. But my feelings remain; frivolous lawsuits are filed daily and I don't see it getting better any time soon. Unfortunately. But that's what happens when you try balancing freedom/capitalism with security/govt intervention. The scale will tip one way or the other; rarely is it level.

 

Rick

 

PS: One last query FD; was that the first time she had purchased coffee at Mickey Dees? You know why I'm asking this question, right?

[FlyingDonut]

I don't know and haven't been able to find out. Note, however, that I totally agree with you on frivolous lawsuits. The bit with the guy suing because he's fat is another one - there's probably a kernel of need in there (I see no problem with putting the nutritional information of a Big Mac up somewhere, for example), but his suit just takes it too far.

 

The McDonald's case is a very good example of the sheep media taking something and not actually reporting facts - Al Gore saying he "invented" the internet (which he NEVER said) is another one.