An L.A. specialty “so good it’s illegal” (Daniel Hernandez, L.A. Weekly, Feb. 6)(via Sullivan).
Posts Tagged ‘food safety’
Lactose intolerance class action
A lawsuit against milk producers over failure to warn buyers about the phenomenon gets poured down the drain by a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit (Howard Bashman, “D.C. Circuit Doesn’t Swallow Lactose-Intolerance Class Action”, Law.com, Nov. 19). Earlier: Sept. 9, 2006, etc.
Big Government, Big Business, and artisanal food
Alex Cockburn a few years back, quoted by Jacob Sullum at Reason “Hit and Run” (Sept. 17):
A lot of the history of food regulation in this country has turned out to be a way to finish off small, quality producers by demanding they invest in whatever big ticket items the USDA happens to be in love with at the time; said love objects usually turning out to be whatever the big food processors are using. That’s the reason why it’s hard to get decent sausages or hams….The big packers and processing plants get to participate directly in the writing of the laws that set the standard practices that the inspectors march out to enforce on all the little producers not part of the Meat Syndicate.
Welcome FOXNews.com readers
This site was mentioned on FoxNews.com when I was interviewed about the Starburst fruit-chew case earlier discussed by Christian Schneider.
Woman Deems Starburst “Dangerously Chewy”
Next time you feel like living on the edge, there’s no need to go sky diving or ski jumping. Simply bite into a Starburst fruit chew, cross your fingers, and hang on for dear life…
Michigan Woman Claims Starburst Candies Are Dangerously Chewy in Lawsuit
Starburst Fruit Chews are exactly as their name would indicate: chewy. But one Michigan woman says the candies are so chewy, they should come with a warning label.
Victoria McArthur, of Romero, Mich., is suing Starbursts’ parent company, Mars Inc., for more than $25,000 for “permanent personal injuries” she claims she sustained after biting into one of their yellow candy in 2005.
…
I think we need to take whatever steps necessary to keep this woman away from jawbreakers.
Cookies-for-troops menace averted
No need to worry that greeters will be foisting cookies on returning soldiers at Bangor International Airport any more: “airport officials asked the greeters to stop serving food last month because of concern about liability and food safety. ‘We just say, “We’re sorry, we can’t give out any cookies,”‘ said Bill Knight, a World War II veteran who founded the group.” (Katie Zezima, “Airport Tries to Rein In Greeters’ Generosity Toward Troops”, New York Times, Jun. 21). Other food menaces averted: Dec. 13, 1999 (homemade pies), Jan. 29, 2001 (school cookies, country fair pies and jams), Feb. 1-3, 2002, Jan. 18 and Apr. 28, 2007 (figurines in New Orleans king cake), Apr. 15, 2004 (potluck dinners), Jul. 18, 2006 (homemade baked goods in U.K. nursing home), and Apr. 28, 2007 (candy-wrapped toy).
Illegal Easter treats, and New Orleans King Cakes
Elsewhere around the world Ferrero Group, the Italian candy company, sells (with a suitable warning label) a treat called Kinder Surprise which consists of chocolate surrounding a small toy. However, the product is said to be illegal for sale in the United States: according to Donald Mays of Consumer Reports, “a nonfood item cannot be imbedded in a food product” under a law dating back to the 1930s. (“Choking-Hazard Easter Eggs Appear On Store Shelves”, WNBC, Apr. 5). If accurate, this would help explain something we’ve noted a couple of times in earlier posts (Feb. 1, 2002, Jan. 18, 2007), namely that store-bought Mardi Gras King Cakes do not have the little figurine baked into their batter that is found in the more authentic New Orleans versions.
Keep the public informed, get sued
Back in November and December of 2006, there was an E. Coli outbreak involving Taco Bell restaurants; dozens of customers were sickened. (It goes without saying that this led to lawsuits against the restaurant chain by those who got sick.) By early December, health officials had linked the outbreak to the chain; Taco Bell immediately went into action to locate the source of the problem.
Initial testing indicated that green onions used by Taco Bell were contaminated; moreover, in previous outbreaks, green onions had been the problem. So Taco Bell, in an effort to reassure the public, announced its findings and assured the public, via a series of press releases over the next few days, that “in an abundance of caution” it was removing green onions from its restaurants and would no longer sell them.
A few days later, Taco Bell announced that in fact green onions were not the culprit, but that to be extra-cautious, it would switch produce suppliers. (As we know, it turned out that lettuce was probably the source of the problem, and this was announced.) Everything that Taco Bell said was accurate; moreover, it correctly informed the public that green onions were not to blame once the CDC had confirmed this. Additionally, Taco Bell never mentioned the identity of its green onion supplier. Nonetheless, that supplier, Boskovich Farms, filed a lawsuit against the chain this past Friday, accusing Taco Bell of defamation and a series of related claims.
In short, Taco Bell is being blamed for being too open with the public in revealing information as the investigation developed. Of course, to the extent that Taco Bell failed to provide this information, the lawyers for the people who were sickened would be screaming “cover up.”
By the way, you may wonder why Boskovich Farms is claiming it was defamed even though Taco Bell never mentioned its name. Well, the company claims that those in the produce industry knew its identity as Taco Bell’s green onion supplier, so even though Taco Bell never mentioned it by name, its reputation was harmed. A reasonable claim, in the abstract. Presumably, though, those knowledgeable and sophisticated enough to possess this information are probably sophisticated enough not to be swayed by a Jay Leno monologue (!) almost three months after the incident — one of the two pieces of evidence cited by Boskovich in its complaint.
Update: C$341K trauma from seeing bottled fly
Updating our Apr. 26, 2005 entry, from Canada: “A Windsor, Ont., man lost out on a $341,775 court judgment yesterday, when the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that a bottling company should not have been held liable for triggering a phobia of flies that altered his personality and killed his sex life.” No one in the Mustapha family consumed the fly, or any of the water that had come into contact with it, but Waddah (Martin) Mustapha said the unsettling sight had precipitated a disabling psychological aversion. The Ontario court — applying Canada’s costs-follow-the-event principle — assessed $30,000 in costs against Mustapha. (Kirk Makin, “Appeal court rules against man haunted by fly in water bottle”, Globe and Mail, Dec. 16; opinion in Mustapha and Culligan of Canada (PDF)). More: Supreme Court of Canada rules against Mustapha (May 23, 2008)
New Orleans king cake, and the French kind
In its traditional presentation, the celebrated Mardi-Gras-season New Orleans King Cake contains a small concealed figurine of a baby which someone gets as part of their slice; the lucky recipient then has to throw the next party or buy the next cake. Back in Feb. 2002 we ran an item, quoting columnist James Lileks, on how purveyors of some store-bought King Cakes no longer were willing to conceal such a figurine, tradition or no. For a discussion of King Cakes, including a picture of what one looks like, check Blawg Review #90, just published the other week at Minor Wisdom.
Now the New York Times introduces us to what is apparently the original French version of the cake, a flat round galette, also served during Carnival and also concealing a good-luck figurine. Don’t expect to encounter this delicacy in American stores, however, for reasons readers of this site will easily anticipate:
Alexandre Colas recalled that he once met a baker from Syracuse, N.Y., at a trade show in Paris, who at first showed interest in buying porcelain favors for his baked goods but later backed off. “He said there were too many legal issues,” he said.
(John Taglibue, “3 Lands of Orient Compete With French Holiday Favors”, New York Times, Jan. 17).