A recent study claims that teenagers notice but ultimately disregard calorie counts on fast-food menu boards, ordering the same number of calories as they did before New York City’s mandatory labeling laws took effect. B. Ebel, et al., “Child and adolescent fast-food choice and the influence of calorie labeling: a natural experiment,” International Journal of Obesity, February 2011. In a follow-up to a 2009 study, New York University researchers collected survey and receipt data from “349 children and adolescents aged 1–17 years who visited the restaurants with their parents (69%) or alone (31%) before or after labeling was introduced.” The findings evidently showed “no statistically significant differences in calories purchased before and after labeling,” although 9 percent of the subjects reported that calorie information influenced their purchasing decisions. In addition, 70 percent said that taste, followed by cost, was the most important factor in their choices, and the majority underestimated…
Category Archives Issue 382
A scientific literature review has reportedly warned against routine energy drink use, claiming that these beverages have been associated with reported “serious adverse events, especially in children, adolescents, and young adults with seizures, diabetes, cardiac abnormalities, or mood and behavioral disorders or those who take certain medications.” Sara Seifert, et al., “Health Effects of Energy Drinks on Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults,” Pediatrics, February 2011. Using PubMed and Google resources “to identify articles related to energy drinks,” researchers apparently estimated that energy drinks “are consumed by 30% to 50% of adolescents and young adults,” and raised concerns about the effects on those with cardiovascular conditions, ADHD, eating disorders, and diabetes. “Energy drinks have no therapeutic benefit, and both the known and unknown pharmacology of various ingredients, combined with reports of toxicity, suggest that these drinks may put some children at risk for serious adverse health effects,” reported the reviewers, who…
According to a news source, the families of those who died or became ill from consuming Salmonella-tainted peanut products scheduled a February 11, 2011, press conference to call for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to bring criminal charges against the man who headed the bankrupt Peanut Corp. of America, to which the contamination was allegedly traced. More than 700 people were said to have experienced ill effects during the 2008-2009 outbreak and at least nine died. Former Peanut Corp. CEO Stewart Parnell invoked the Fifth Amendment when called to testify before Congress, and, despite a two-year investigation by the U.S. attorney’s office, no charges have yet been filed. The press conference coincided with a food safety seminar at the American University Washington College of Law at which some of the family members were scheduled to speak along with plaintiffs’ lawyer William Marler, who has represented a number of those allegedly…
According to an advocate general opinion, which is not binding on the European Union (EU) Court of Justice, honey that contains genetically modified organisms (GMOs) due to the proximity of the hives to experimental GMO maize fields is considered a food produced from a GMO and therefore cannot be marketed unless authorized. Heinz Bablock v. Freistaat Bayern, No. C-442/09 (Advocate General’s Opinion, issued February 9, 2011). The case was referred from a German administrative court considering the claim of a beekeeper who alleged that the state of Bavaria had rendered his apicultural products unfit for marketing or consumption by growing the experimental GMO maize near his hives. The maize DNA was apparently detected in samples of his honey. While the advocate general determined that pollen from GMO maize is “no longer viable and is thus infertile” and as such “cannot be regarded as a GMO,” still its presence renders the…
A diabetic man has reportedly filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court, seeking at least $4,000 in mental anguish damages from a Studio City sushi restaurant that requires those patrons paying an all-you-can-eat price to eat all of the food served and not just the fish. Martin v. A Ca-Shi Sushi, No. __ (Cal. Super. Ct.). David Martin alleges that restaurant owner Jay Oh is discriminating against diabetics by requiring them to eat the rice along with the sashimi, which Martin picked out and consumed, leaving the rice behind. According to a news source, Oh offered to prepare two orders of sashimi alone for Martin at a cost of $3 less than the all-you-can-eat sushi deal, but Martin refused. Instead, he filed a lawsuit and said he would be willing to settle for $6,000. Oh is reportedly going to fight the litigation even if his legal costs exceed…
Galeos, LLC has been sued in a federal court in California for misrepresenting the nutritional content of its miso-based salad dressings, purportedly advertised on the weight-loss TV show “The Biggest Loser” and promoted as beneficial to health. Healey v. Galeos, LLC, No. 11-00240 (C.D. Cal., filed February 11, 2011). Details about a previous suit with similar allegations filed in the same court appear in Issue 376 of this Update. The plaintiff contends that independent laboratory testing has shown that the label for the company’s Miso Caesar Dressing® understates the calories by 430 percent, the fat by 550 percent and the sodium content by 350 percent. Seeking to certify a nationwide class of consumers, the plaintiff alleges violations of California’s unfair competition and false advertising laws, breach of express warranty and negligent misrepresentation. She also seeks an injunction requiring the publication of corrective nutritional values, compensatory and punitive damages, as well…
12
