Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday November 19 2019, @12:21PM   Printer-friendly
from the at-least-it's-not-bugs dept.

Lawsuit claims Burger King's Impossible Whoppers are contaminated by meat

Burger King was sued on Monday by a vegan customer who accused the fast-food chain of contaminating its meatless "Impossible" Whoppers by cooking them on the same grills as its traditional meat burgers.

In a proposed class action, Phillip Williams said he bought an Impossible Whopper, a plant-based alternative to Burger King's regular Whopper, at an Atlanta drive-through, and would not have paid a premium price had he known the cooking would leave it "coated in meat by-products."

The lawsuit filed in Miami federal court seeks damages for all U.S. purchasers of the Impossible Whopper, and an injunction requiring Burger King to "plainly disclose" that Impossible Whoppers and regular burgers are cooked on the same grills.

[...] Its website describes the Impossible Burger as "100% Whopper, 0% Beef," and adds that "for guests looking for a meat-free option, a non-broiler method of preparation is available upon request."

Also at Boing Boing.

Previously: Meatless "Beyond Burgers" Come to Fast Food Restaurants
Burger King Adds Impossible Vegan Burger To Menu
Plant-Based "Impossible Burger" Coming to Every Burger King Location

Related: Inside the Strange Science of the Fake Meat that 'Bleeds'
FDA Approves Impossible Burger "Heme" Ingredient; Still Wants to Regulate "Cultured Meat"
Following IPO of Beyond Meat, Tyson Foods Plans Launch of its Own Meatless Products
Impossible Burger Lands in Some California Grocery Stores


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Tuesday November 19 2019, @08:11PM (2 children)

    by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Tuesday November 19 2019, @08:11PM (#922061) Homepage Journal

    Who read TFS?

    From TFS:

    [...] Its website describes the Impossible Burger as "100% Whopper, 0% Beef," and adds that "for guests looking for a meat-free option, a non-broiler method of preparation is available upon request."

    All the plaintiff had to do was ask.

    I don't see advertisements (on the 'net or on the telly), so I have no idea what BK's advertising claims or doesn't claim.

    At the same time, if I were to eat at BK (yuck!), and was a vegan (https://www.livescience.com/24875-meat-human-brain.html) that would be the first thing I'd want to know and would ask about.

    Regardless of any other arguments, the fact that BK's statement on their website, quoted above (unless *directly* contradicted by advertising), puts the plaintiff on shaky legal ground IMHO.

    N.B. IANAL

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 20 2019, @03:27AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 20 2019, @03:27AM (#922242)

    Why did you cite that?

    It says humans wouldn't have evolved without meat...

    "The bottom line is, it is certainly possible to survive on an exclusively raw diet in our modern day, but it was most likely impossible to survive on an exclusively raw diet when our species appeared,"

    ...but then again humans wouldn't have an evolutionary history without dinosaurs, and nobody says humans today can't survive without dinos. So... brainfart I guess?

    • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday November 20 2019, @06:19AM

      by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Wednesday November 20 2019, @06:19AM (#922281) Homepage Journal

      So... brainfart I guess?

      Nope. The inclusion of a link to that article was absolutely intentional. I'll explain, and I'll use small words so you'll be sure to understand.

      The very beginning of the article I linked says:

      Vegetarian, vegan and raw diets can be healthy — likely far healthier than the typical American diet. But to continue to call these diets "natural" for humans, in terms of evolution, is a bit of a stretch, according to two recent, independent studies.

      Eating meat and cooking food made us human, the studies suggest, enabling the brains of our prehuman ancestors to grow dramatically over a period of a few million years.

      Did you miss that part, or just ignore it?

      I'd add that comparing the very thing that allowed us to grow our big honkin' brains to the the demise of the dinosaurs isn't just dumb, it's downright asinine.

      If the dinoasaurs hadn't been killed off, mammals might well have evolved into primates and then us *anyway*. But without eating meat and cooked foods, wouldn't have allowed us to shrink our jaw muscles and make room for bigger brains, and the ready calories from easier to eat/digest wouldn't have been available to feed those growing brains.

      There's a direct evolutionary link between eating meat and cooked foods and our big brains.

      If we hadn't been eating meat, then we wouldn't be having this pleasant conversation as we'd be too busy foraging and hiding from predators to do so. What's more, we likely wouldn't have language or the base of technology that language made possible.

      I included the link as a subtle (if inaccurate, and yes, I did/do realize that) dig at the intelligence of vegans/vegetarians.

      That you didn't figure that out makes me wonder if you might be a vegan/vegetarian. That would make your comment much more understandable.

      Heh. Heh. I put the laugh there to make sure you realize I'm having a little joke at your expense, as you appear to lack the requisite intellectual capacity to pick up on such things.

      Right. Now compare the above to my inclusion of the link you asked about. The intent/meaning of both are exactly the same.

      I *hope* you get it now, but I'd appreciate confirmation, with an actual confirmation, or just getting mad because I made fun of you once -- or if you're a vegetarian/vegan -- twice.

      Have a lovely evening!

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr