APPEJAY STYA UNIVERSITYBSCR-602

NUTRITION AND FOOD TECHNOLOGY

The McLawsuit: The Fast-Food Industry AndLegal Accountability For Obesity

Presented by Sakshi Saxena

ASU2013010200124IBT VIIth

McDonald's is an American hamburger and fast food restaurant chain.

It is the world's largest restaurant chain, serving approximately 68 million customers daily in 119 countries across approximately 36,538 outlets.

Introduction

In august 2002 a group of overweight children in New York City filed a class action lawsuit against McDonald’s Corporation seeking compensation for

•Obesity related health problems•Improved nutritional labeling of McDonald’s products, •Funding for a program to educate consumers about the dangers of fast food.

Case details

Pelman v.McDonald’s, brought on behalf of children who consumed McDonald’s products and allegedly became obese or overweight and developed diabetes, coronary heart disease, high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol intake, or other health effects as a result

Case detailsThe Pelman plaintiffs claimed that McDonald’s had engaged in deceptive

advertising, sales, and promotion; produced food that was unreasonably unsafe; and failed to warn consumers of the dangers of its products.

The complaint alleged that McDonald’s knew or should have known that its actions would exacerbate obesity and its associated health problems in millions of American children.

RESULT CASE DISMISSEDFAILING TO ADEQUATELY

STATE A CLAIM

Case detailsThe plaintiffs’ amended complaint, filed a month later was narrowed to two main allegations :

First, McDonald’s food products were “so processed with additives and other ingredients and preservatives” that they created a “danger and hazard,” and McDonald’s was negligent in failing to warn consumers of this hazard.

Second, McDonald’s marketing behavior amounted to fraudulent and deceptive business practices under New York State’s consumer protection laws.

Case detailsFAILURE TO WARN CONSUMERS

The plaintiff must prove that

(1) the danger was not apparent to the averageconsumer; (2) the product is unreasonably dangerous for its intended use;(3) the plaintiff’s obesity was caused by the food in question;(4) the harm would not have occurred had an adequate warning been given.

Case detailsFRAUDULENT AND DECEPTION

The Pelman plaintiffs claimed that McDonald’s falsely represented its food as nutritious in its advertising and marketing and that the content and preparation methods of its food were neither honestly described nor what consumers ordinarily would expect.

For instance, McDonald’smarketedits fries as “zero cholesterol” but did not disclose that the fries are cooked in oils that contain trans fatty acids, which have been found to raise atherogenic LDL cholesterol levels even more than saturated fat.

Case details

RESULT CASE DISMISSAL

Impact of the case?

Food Industry Consumers

•The Pelman plaintiffs observed that the claims made on the McDonald’sWeb site have changed since the filing of that suit.

•Nutritional information on Mc Donald's products is increasingly being posted in prominent locations and online.

•McDonald’s has announced plans to remove trans fats and reduce saturated fats in french fries, chips, and other products—although McDonald’s has since•“delayed” implementation of the decision.

•McDonald’s also announced in March 2003 that it would be adding a number of lower-fat and lower-calorie offerings to its menu.

•Mc- Donald’s television commercials in Britain highlight the health benefits of items such as fruit bags and pasta salad—a major change in an advertising strategy that has consistently focused on taste, value, and convenience.

Impact of this case

ConclusionsIf widespread and successful, litigation would force fast-food defendants to shoulder more of the costs associated with consumption of their products.

In this way, courts’ decisions imposing liability on manufacturers of asbestos, guns, medical devices, tobacco, fast food, and other products that pose public health harms have major socioeconomic implications.

Even if not successful, fast-food litigation could motivate food makers to introduce voluntary changes in their business practices.