oreos illegal?

I realize how emotional folks get over their junk food - sorry to step on toes - but, the guy staged this action to help us be more aware of the harm false foods can do. It is from small campaigns such as this that balls start rolling. Sometimes they move under the radar for a time before popping up again, only full-blown next time. Who back in the 50s could have forseen the attack on tobacco? You just can't know for certain.

forget about balls rolling! let's roll some heads!

<i'm feeling a bit militant - must be some of my granola-head past re-emerging>

From another angle: I don't understand why a person trying to help folks be healthy has to be called a scum bag. What moral crime has been committed?

edgar, He wants to line his pockets with big bucks. c.i.

cic, have you been following this story?

Check it out, CI. He initiated the suit, got publicity, which is all he wanted, then withdrew the suit.

Harmful Foods: A dietician was once addressing a large audience in Chicago. "The material we put into our stomachs is enough to have killed most of us sitting here, years ago. Red meat is awful. Soft drinks erode your stomach lining. Chinese food is loaded with MSG. Vegetables can be disastrous, and none of us realises the long term harm caused by the germs in our drinking water. But there is one thing that is the most dangerous of all and we all have, or will, eat it. Can anyone here tell me what food it is that causes the most grief and suffering for years after eating it?" A 75 year old man in the front row stood up and said, " Wedding cake."

Ban Trans Fats

While I am not so sure I agree that everyone knows what they need to know about trans-fats, I do think he played this whole thing exactly right.

He's still a 'scumbag.' He wants free publicity? Yea, sure, he's an angel. c.i.

"Everybody knows about trans-fat?" Like I was born yesterday. c.i.

This is one of the few times I think you are flat out wrong, CI. But, to each his own (or, her own, as the case may be).

c.i. - are you serious that you think someone who wants to improve public health is a scumbag?

The publicity was not for the lawyer himself (can anyone remember his name without looking at what littlek posted?) but for increasing the awareness of people of the dangers of trans-fat.

If you really think he's a scumbag, I'm not really sure what to think about you.

I've opened a new topic on "trans-fat," but nobody seems interested enough to respond. c.i.

That's the topic here, CI.

How can it be so bad, if it tastes so good?

Filing a fake lawsuit or even a fake newspaper article is pretty standard stuff these days. People with limitted budgets get awfully creative with how they can advertise.

In fact, one could make an argument that the main purpose of the legal system IS to advertise.

What we have here with CI, with all due respect, is a case of my rascal, your rascal. If someone filed a similar lawsuit regarding something you agreed with, would he or she still be a rascal/scumbag? If the answer is yes, then your position has some validity, if it's no, then we can assume anyone filing a lawsuit regarding something about which you disagree is in the running for scumbagness and that simply is not fair.

Faceless corporations are faceless so they can do things in anonymity. Put lead in gasoline for fifty years after science showed it to be unnecessary and unhealthy, put red dye in meats and yellow dye in oranges after test after test showed the only reason for doing so was sales, put nicotine in tobacco products to increase it's addictiveness and hide that fact (and others) regarding genuine health threats from the people.

Should corporations regulate themselves as some have seemed to assert here? Do you trust those men and women to protect your health as well as their own and their bottomline? Or do we need a scumbag every few weeks to lift the side of their tent and let us see what they are really feeding us?

(BTW : First confirmed case of mad cow disease in Canada reported today. Slaughtered in January, reported today) How do you want your Memorial Day hotdog cooked.??
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/21/international/americas/21CANA.html?ex=1054094400&en=fe5f8180f2eaff80&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

love,

Joe

For once, I do have to side with the so-called "scumbag." He got what he wanted then withdrew the suit. He didn't go after what might have been a large settlement from Kraft just to shut him up, but he probably could have.

It is possible that the real reason he dropped the suit was because of a threat of a countersuit from Kraft, that he then used to his advantage.

Actually, Kraft claims that they hadn't even been served with papers yet.

Joe touched on some of my angst about this oreo lawsuit. There are so many things in our lives that our government allows producers of foods and products to poison us, that just filing a lawsuit on trans-fat does nothing to safeguard our health nor safety. As cav mentioned in my forum on trans-fat, people will continue to eat garbage with or without the knowledge about this one poison. How does knowledge about trans-fat help us? Did people stop smoking, because it caused cancer? "WARNING: Smoking may cause cancer." A lot of good that did! What do you people think was gained by this lawsuit? I know that bacon and eggs is bad for me, but I still eat it. Should some lawyer file a suit against egg and pork producers because it's unhealthy? Is bacon and eggs better or worse than trans-fat? What good will that do? It surely will not help people like me who will continue to enjoy bacon and eggs once in awhile. c.i.