4 ms·

This seems like an overweight person suing Coca-Cola and Krispy Kreme when they get diabetes.

s0rce 9y ago
I'm not sure that's a reasonable comparison. If Coke and Krispy Kreme had research 50 years ago that showed the link between their products and diabetes and then funded misinformation and contradictory research for the following decades to convince people otherwise it would seem warranted to sue them?
- flachsechs 9y ago
  > If Coke ... had research 50 years ago that showed the link between their products and diabetes and then funded misinformation and contradictory research for the following decades do you honestly believe this isn't the case? where do you think low fat marketing and all of the insanely bad public health fallout came from? it's bought and paid for by the sugar industry. having said that, no, i don't think we should sue them, what's the point of that? people like eating crap and medical care is still privatized.
- milesward 9y ago
  You say that like they didn't...
- sp332 9y ago
  Sugar manufacturers knew about this since the '60s. http://www.npr.org/2016/09/13/493801090/sugar-industry-manipulated-research-about-health-effects-study-finds http://www.npr.org/2016/09/13/493801090/sugar-industry-manip...
- siegecraft 9y ago
  Like this? https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/coca-cola-funds-scientists-who-shift-blame-for-obesity-away-from-bad-diets/?_r=0 https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/coca-cola-funds-sc...
maxlybbert 9y ago
There was a case of somebody suing McDonalds with the claims "that the combined effect of McDonald's various promotional representations ... was to create the false impression that its food products were nutritionally beneficial and part of a healthy lifestyle if consumed daily" and "that its use of certain additives and the manner of its food processing rendered certain of its foods substantially less healthy than represented" ( http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1181336.html http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1181336.html ). The suit was dismissed because the lawyers who wrote the complaint didn't claim that the affected customers actually believed the advertisements.

I'm not sure that's a reasonable comparison. If Coke and Krispy Kreme had research 50 years ago that showed the link between their products and diabetes and then funded misinformation and contradictory research for the following decades to convince people otherwise it would seem warranted to sue them?

flachsechs 9y ago
> If Coke ... had research 50 years ago that showed the link between their products and diabetes and then funded misinformation and contradictory research for the following decades do you honestly believe this isn't the case? where do you think low fat marketing and all of the insanely bad public health fallout came from? it's bought and paid for by the sugar industry. having said that, no, i don't think we should sue them, what's the point of that? people like eating crap and medical care is still privatized.
milesward 9y ago
You say that like they didn't...
sp332 9y ago
Sugar manufacturers knew about this since the '60s. http://www.npr.org/2016/09/13/493801090/sugar-industry-manipulated-research-about-health-effects-study-finds http://www.npr.org/2016/09/13/493801090/sugar-industry-manip...
siegecraft 9y ago
Like this? https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/coca-cola-funds-scientists-who-shift-blame-for-obesity-away-from-bad-diets/?_r=0 https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/coca-cola-funds-sc...

maxlybbert 9y ago

There was a case of somebody suing McDonalds with the claims "that the combined effect of McDonald's various promotional representations ... was to create the false impression that its food products were nutritionally beneficial and part of a healthy lifestyle if consumed daily" and "that its use of certain additives and the manner of its food processing rendered certain of its foods substantially less healthy than represented" ( http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1181336.html http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1181336.html ). The suit was dismissed because the lawyers who wrote the complaint didn't claim that the affected customers actually believed the advertisements.