My god... they're actually considering it...
- Thread starter Kaylee
- Start date
Lonnie Jaycox
New member
Folks,
Obesity does have a genetic component--the Pima Indian studies confirm it. As Bogie said--his body's reaction to carbs caused problems, he had to give up carbs--this is genetic; BUT, he gave up the carbs (good job, by the way). That is the answer--if you ar genetically pre-disposed to certains problems --change your life. Other people can eat 4x's the number of carbs that bogie did and not gain a pound--it is just how things are.
Obesity does have a genetic component--the Pima Indian studies confirm it. As Bogie said--his body's reaction to carbs caused problems, he had to give up carbs--this is genetic; BUT, he gave up the carbs (good job, by the way). That is the answer--if you ar genetically pre-disposed to certains problems --change your life. Other people can eat 4x's the number of carbs that bogie did and not gain a pound--it is just how things are.
Stories like this one cause my BP to rise, causing undo emotional stress, and possible cardiovascular damage. So many potential paychecks, so little time. Think I'll go after Katie, Matt, Ben, Jerry and Allen Derschawitz (sp?) first.
This could be a good thing if it makes the general public consider how ignorant all of these suits are. If all the lard ass, Rosie/Ohpra watching, sheeple out there, face the loss of Twinkies and HoHo's, they may reconsider the wisdom of suing gun companies.
This could be a good thing if it makes the general public consider how ignorant all of these suits are. If all the lard ass, Rosie/Ohpra watching, sheeple out there, face the loss of Twinkies and HoHo's, they may reconsider the wisdom of suing gun companies.
I'm about 100 lbs overweight right now, but I have a problem. I've been eating healthier stuff lately and hitting the weightroom more, and I'm beginning to lose some. Now, my question is, can I still get in on this lawsuit? Or do I have to start shoveling in cookies again and skip the gym?
'Cause, uh, seriously, that's like, the kind of sacrifice I'd be willing to make.
'Cause, uh, seriously, that's like, the kind of sacrifice I'd be willing to make.
I posted this once before, but it's just so appropriate! So here it is again - Lipidleggin'. Fiction written in 1978.
Hunter Rose
New member
I wonder...
If it's essentially ONE group of trial lawyers coming up with all these class-action suits, can WE file a class-action against THEM? Sue the s&$t out of them for creating/being a public nusince, or something?
If it's essentially ONE group of trial lawyers coming up with all these class-action suits, can WE file a class-action against THEM? Sue the s&$t out of them for creating/being a public nusince, or something?
Mike Irwin
Staff
Great, now a Big Mac will be $250 freaking bucks on the black market...
Saw the ad on telly bout the guy who lost a humungous amount of weight by eating somebody's subway sandwiches. Chant..."burgers n fries, burgers n fries" Fired up the diesel in sub freezing weather and went to an all night joint and got a sack of burgers and couple large orders of fries. Hate that ad.
Sam
Sam
trapshooter
Moderator
Lets see, the next time I get a ticket, I'll sue Chevrolet for making the car that made me speed.
The next time I hit my thumb with a hammer, I'll sue Stanley and/or Sears (and Bob Veeeela) for making me buy a defective tool that allowed me to do it.
The next time my wife makes me dinner consisting of anything with broccoli or a French name, I'll sue Direct TV for beaming those stinking cooking shows and recipe's into my tv.
The next time it occurs to me that my kids know nothing about real life outside of South Park, I'll sue the Comedy Channel (and Direct TV) for beaming funny stuff into my tv.
The next time I get really mad about standing in a line to buy something, I'll sue the store for not having enough help, and the people who made whatever it is I'm trying to buy, and the people they hired to advertise it, to make me want it.
I'll sue MTV, just because.
The next time I hear a 'news' reporter lie, I'll sue the network for pi--ing me off. (Should be ready to file any time now, as the news is on).
The sad thing is, there's at least one pond-scum 'lawyer' out there, somewhere, who would at least consider taking these cases, as long as I had the hourly rate.
The next time I hit my thumb with a hammer, I'll sue Stanley and/or Sears (and Bob Veeeela) for making me buy a defective tool that allowed me to do it.
The next time my wife makes me dinner consisting of anything with broccoli or a French name, I'll sue Direct TV for beaming those stinking cooking shows and recipe's into my tv.
The next time it occurs to me that my kids know nothing about real life outside of South Park, I'll sue the Comedy Channel (and Direct TV) for beaming funny stuff into my tv.
The next time I get really mad about standing in a line to buy something, I'll sue the store for not having enough help, and the people who made whatever it is I'm trying to buy, and the people they hired to advertise it, to make me want it.
I'll sue MTV, just because.
The next time I hear a 'news' reporter lie, I'll sue the network for pi--ing me off. (Should be ready to file any time now, as the news is on).
The sad thing is, there's at least one pond-scum 'lawyer' out there, somewhere, who would at least consider taking these cases, as long as I had the hourly rate.
Jamie Young
New member
I can top that
A couple years ago I heard on Rush Limbaugh that some woman sued an Abortion Doctor for an Uninteded Child Birth. Now somebody tell me what that must be like for a kid to grow up and find out his Mother did that.
A couple years ago I heard on Rush Limbaugh that some woman sued an Abortion Doctor for an Uninteded Child Birth. Now somebody tell me what that must be like for a kid to grow up and find out his Mother did that.
The fat's in the fire
Some of this was covered at http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=93010
Some of this was covered at http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=93010
Some guy tried to sue the milk industry a few years ago because he had high colesterol and hardening of the arteries. His contention was that the milk industry should hav labeled their product to reflect that it contained colesterol and could cause hardening of the arteries.
My all-time favorite junk lawsuit, though, is the one where the guy stood a ladder on a frozen pile of manure. As the day wore on, the sun came out and the manure thawed which promptly dumped him on his dumb ass.
He sued the ladder company because they failed to place a label on the ladder cautioning aginst placing same on a frozen pile of manure. The case was thrown out for lack of merit (as well as being full of manure).
It is cases like this that really give legs to the "loser pays" idea and tort reform in general.
My all-time favorite junk lawsuit, though, is the one where the guy stood a ladder on a frozen pile of manure. As the day wore on, the sun came out and the manure thawed which promptly dumped him on his dumb ass.
He sued the ladder company because they failed to place a label on the ladder cautioning aginst placing same on a frozen pile of manure. The case was thrown out for lack of merit (as well as being full of manure).
It is cases like this that really give legs to the "loser pays" idea and tort reform in general.
Nanaimo Barr
New member
does this mean I should ignore the fact that the company that makes my medication KNEW it causes weight gain and chose to with hold that information???
Let me try a little different spin on this.
Big Tobacco did everything that could be done to protect their business. (I actually spent some time working on one of the key cases; not my normal gig, but I had some time and I resented the government's efforts, so what the heck.) In the end, I believe tobacco lost because of public opinion. It just was not possible for the "death merchants" to get a fair trial, and the reason was that there was too much public support for the government's efforts. Trust me, judges read the papers, too. The handwriting was on the wall, and tobacco had no choice other than to fold.
Here's my point. I think, or at least I hope, that the government and the big plaintiffs' bar are on the verge of going too far. I think the public got behind the tobacco suits because: (1) almost everyone knows someone who died from cancer, (2) there's that "addictive" thing, (3) there was a sense that tobacco was doing a lot of covering-up, and (4) most people don't like cigarettes. I just don't see those factors translating to a suit against McDonalds.
This time, I think the tide of public opinion will utimately defeat the forces that want to control our lives and our choices. How many soccer moms will believe they've been "abusing" their kids for years by taking them to McDonalds?
So if I'm right (and I may not be, ask my wife), and if these lawsuits materialize and end up losing, they may actually provide us with a little breathing room for maybe 10 years. The government and the plaintiffs' bar may just back off for a while. We'll see.
By the way, don't dump the diet in the meantime. Even if these suits succeed, you'll see exactly as much money as smokers received (as compensation) and non-smokers received (as health insurance rebates) in the tobacco settlements: none.
Big Tobacco did everything that could be done to protect their business. (I actually spent some time working on one of the key cases; not my normal gig, but I had some time and I resented the government's efforts, so what the heck.) In the end, I believe tobacco lost because of public opinion. It just was not possible for the "death merchants" to get a fair trial, and the reason was that there was too much public support for the government's efforts. Trust me, judges read the papers, too. The handwriting was on the wall, and tobacco had no choice other than to fold.
Here's my point. I think, or at least I hope, that the government and the big plaintiffs' bar are on the verge of going too far. I think the public got behind the tobacco suits because: (1) almost everyone knows someone who died from cancer, (2) there's that "addictive" thing, (3) there was a sense that tobacco was doing a lot of covering-up, and (4) most people don't like cigarettes. I just don't see those factors translating to a suit against McDonalds.
This time, I think the tide of public opinion will utimately defeat the forces that want to control our lives and our choices. How many soccer moms will believe they've been "abusing" their kids for years by taking them to McDonalds?
So if I'm right (and I may not be, ask my wife), and if these lawsuits materialize and end up losing, they may actually provide us with a little breathing room for maybe 10 years. The government and the plaintiffs' bar may just back off for a while. We'll see.
By the way, don't dump the diet in the meantime. Even if these suits succeed, you'll see exactly as much money as smokers received (as compensation) and non-smokers received (as health insurance rebates) in the tobacco settlements: none.
Master Blaster
New member
I dont know how many of you remember the Silicone breast implant lawsuits of several years ago. $6 billion settlement money offered from various companies due to the lawsuits, and initial wins by plaintiffs.
It turned out that the real story was that the silicone did not cause the diseases claimed by the plaintiffs, the Mayo clinic completed a real study and discovered that auto immune disease, and scleroderma were no more likely in the women with breast implants than in the population in general.
A $6 billion group of settlements that resulted in the bankrupcy of several surgical equipment companies, was the result of annecdotal evidence not science, and of course the fact that half the population has breasts and the other half really like them
There was a certain emmotional hysteria that drove the lawsuit juggernaut along.
The plaintiffs attorneys made an incredible load of money.
The fact is that as long as we keep turning out more attorneys they will need to come up with new theories of liability to support their expanding industry.
It turned out that the real story was that the silicone did not cause the diseases claimed by the plaintiffs, the Mayo clinic completed a real study and discovered that auto immune disease, and scleroderma were no more likely in the women with breast implants than in the population in general.
A $6 billion group of settlements that resulted in the bankrupcy of several surgical equipment companies, was the result of annecdotal evidence not science, and of course the fact that half the population has breasts and the other half really like them
There was a certain emmotional hysteria that drove the lawsuit juggernaut along.
The plaintiffs attorneys made an incredible load of money.
The fact is that as long as we keep turning out more attorneys they will need to come up with new theories of liability to support their expanding industry.
Woo Hoo!!!!
I am finally going to be a member of an officially repressed minority
Wonder how much money we adipose challenged persons can extort out of the government for the obvious prejudice we have to endure at the hands of our popular culture
Al Sharpton and I finally have something in common
I am finally going to be a member of an officially repressed minority
Wonder how much money we adipose challenged persons can extort out of the government for the obvious prejudice we have to endure at the hands of our popular culture
Al Sharpton and I finally have something in common
Hunter Rose
New member
K80Geoff...
Are you SURE you want to claim there's a similarity between you and Sharpton? I mean, I kow black people that wish they could change colours, so as to loose the similarity...
Are you SURE you want to claim there's a similarity between you and Sharpton? I mean, I kow black people that wish they could change colours, so as to loose the similarity...