business news in context, analysis with attitude

While these emails came in before the California attorney decided to withdraw his "Oreo lawsuit" against Kraft, they still make legitimate points worth being aired.

One MNB user wrote:

"Like fat, trans fats are a fact in our modern age. I gave up Oreos when an open bag spilled a cookie into my ice chest on a camping trip - the disgusting result was all it took for me. It was my choice.

"In the late 80's, when fat was spotlighted, manufacturers developed and marketed products for those desiring lower fat in their diets, it was not litigated: the market determined the need and success of those products. The same should happen with trans fats and with future items found to less than helpful in the human diet…

"My vote: First, kill all the lawyers."

Another MNB user wrote:

"Simply, when are we, as a society, going to take responsibility for our own actions?

"Litigation is frivolous, here. Parents should be controlling and monitoring what their kids eat.

"What's next? Should we take steak houses to court because our porterhouse may contribute to heart failure.

"Better yet lets lock Ben and Jerry up for their contribution to the demise of our population. Oh! Wait! What about those Kreepy Krispy Kreme folks...

Come on...Moderation..."

Another MNB user wrote:

What would (the attorney's) opinion be of a restaurant that refused to serve a customer who was obese? Would he then sue the restaurant for the violation of that customer's civil rights?

Yet another member of the MNB community wrote:

"Just like no tobacco company forces you to smoke that first cigarette, no one forces anyone to eat an Oreo. And I wonder if people who are impartial (maybe a doctor?) would say that as long as children have a healthy level of exercise, having a certain level of trans fat is ok? And if the target really is to protect children where is parental responsibility in all of this? You can put a warning label in a 15-font on the label and it might not matter as parents know that today cookies, cakes etc are high in sugar, fat and calories. At crunch time, when the kid in the cart is saying "I want that" I question whether parents will say no."

MNB user Kathy Kohout wrote:

"All I have to say is, what in the hell are people doing? What's next, law suits against City Water Departments because someone drowned in their bathtub and water is a dangerous substance? Whatever happened to personal responsibilities? Must we all be victims of someone else, unable to control our own destiny? YOU are the one that bypasses the healthy broccoli and heads for the Oreos. YOU are the one that would rather take the easy route and buy the Oreos instead of taking the time to bake some reduced fat oatmeal cookies for your family. YOU are the one that puts them into your kid's lunchbox every day. YOU are the one not watching your kids once they get home and are left alone to eat an entire bag of Oreos. YOU are the one stopping at the closest drive through loading up on Big Macs and Happy Meals instead of cooking something nutritious. The companies are only responding to YOUR demand. I would bet the Oreo people make a hell of a lot more money than the broccoli farmers because YOU voted with your dollars for Oreos over broccoli.

"I love Oreos. I buy about a bag a year and gobble the whole bag up in three days. I also love McDonalds. I eat there about once or twice a year. Oreos and McDonalds are fabulous American institutions when enjoyed in moderation. I remember a few years ago when all fat was bad. What did the food manufacturers do? Replaced fat with sugar. Now sugar is bad and they're replacing sugar with fat. I also remember when growing up that something in bacon was bad. It's now 30 years later and people are still slapping bacon on everything and living to tell about it. In fact, the Atkins diet puts bacon with all its fat, protein and chemicals right up there with broccoli. The truth is, I don't want to live to be 100 if it means going 100 years without Oreos, McDonalds, and bacon. If I die at 65, so be it. But I want to go with a bacon cheeseburger in one hand, a beer in the other and drooling Oreos."

We were with you until that last image…which is a little more than we can handle at this hour of the morning.

MNB user Mark Beuerman wrote:

"I am getting tired of hearing all of the reports of lawyers and politicians getting self-righteous by offering their services to protect our children from the evils of junk food. Has anyone but the Associated Press picked up on the research released from the University of North Carolina stating that caloric intake of teenagers has increased only 1% in the past two decades, while physical activity in teenagers has decreased 13%, thus leading to the 10% rise in teenage obesity? Perhaps the lawyers should be trying to sue the Presidents Council on Physical Fitness, or is it the age-old story of suing the one with the money?"

Another MNB user wrote:

"Why doesn't he sue Sony, Panasonic & Toshiba? They introduced remote controls that I'm sure contribute as much to this problem. Come to think of it, let's get GM, Toyota & Mazda, since they could have invented pedal cars instead of petrol ones. After all, if they didn't have cars, they couldn't get drive through…

However, not everyone was quite as absolutist. MNB user Norma Gilliam chimed in:

"In as much as I truly believe that people must be responsible for what they put in their mouths and for the personal decisions they make, I heard
something on talk-radio the other day that make me ponder. They were speaking about the obesity problem in America and a doctor mentioned that so many products are made with "corn syrup." He said it is cheaper than sugar, but he also said it has an "addictive" quality to it. It supposedly triggers something in the brain that makes you crave more of it. If this is true, and can be proven....those lawyers may just have a case. Like you said, I guess it is just a matter of time before this thing busts loose!"

One thing we're sure of. This trend will continue to gain momentum.

However, in reading these and other emails, we do have a thought. We all like to blame the lawyers, and like ton suggest that people need to take personal responsibility for their actions.

But aren’t lawyers mostly being hired by people who want them to sue? And so, following the "personal responsibility" logic, shouldn't we blame not the lawyers, but the people who hire them?

Just a thought.
KC's View: