Posted on 02/19/2006 3:39:08 AM PST by ShadowDancer
McDonald's Faces Suit After Girl Becomes Ill
POSTED: 9:03 pm EST February 18, 2006
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- The parents of a 5-year-old girl have sued McDonald's Corporation claiming its French fries contained a wheat protein that caused their daughter to become seriously ill.
Mark and Theresa Chimiak said in the lawsuit filed Friday in Palm Beach Circuit Court that their daughter Annalise had an intolerance to gluten.
The Chimiaks said they filed the lawsuit after McDonald's acknowledged earlier in the week that wheat and dairy ingredients were used in cooking oil for French fries.
The family's attorney, Brian W. Smith, said the family had checked with McDonald's before she ate the fries and were assured the product was gluten-free.
Jack Daly, senior vice president of McDonald's, said in an e-mail to the Palm Beach Post that the company is conducting research to determine that the fries have no gluten.
disagree. If McD's told the family that the fries were gluten-free, but they weren't, it's classic negligence.
Did they contact the teenager flipping burgers or the company headquarters for their information. Maybe it was the bun the hamburgers were on.
If a child has issues, maybe, just maybe, Mom should consider cooking things from scratch for herself.
That would be too much trouble, and then who would they be able to sue?
My sister is a celiac and I can't imagine her eating ANY potato product, much less french fries. Am I wrong??
Of course you are wrong, if she acts responsible how on earth will she be able to sue.
What about taking personal responsibility for our own results ? Ditto the earlier poster who indicated that those with "food issues" might want to avoid fast food places, even when comforted by teenagers. It is this type of crap that has us all hostage to lawyers and insurance companies.
The new labeling law was passed to correct the problem that not all ingredients had to be listed on food labels under the old system. McDonald’s fries, because they were said by the company to be gluten free and because they were cooked in dedicated fryers ( not shared with breaded items) were thought to be a safe restaurant food in the celiac community. So now we find that the flavorings contained gluten and perhaps they were not strictly gluten free. Perhaps the research on whether the gluten protein used in the flavoring actually survives the processing and ends up in the final food product will help us understand these issues. The same question existed with the issue of whether the gluten protein is eliminated by distillation in alcohol and vinegars.
This type of revelation about "hidden" gluten in prepared foods was inevitable as food companies really determine for the first time what is actually in the food they sell or serve. Many food items thought questionable will also now be declared safe for this same reason. In fact, I have read articles about major food companies deciding to reformulate their products to eliminate major food allergens in the process of complying with the new labeling law. In the end, I think this is a good thing. Food suppliers should know and reveal what is in the food they sell to the public. However, I would much rather have celiac sufferers realize that anytime you are eating out you take a risk, even if you are told the item is gluten free, and make an intelligent choice to accept that risk or not. Ultimately, with lawsuits like this restaurants will protect themselves by never claiming gluten free status for their food, even when it is, and the results are fewer choices and an even more restricted lifestyle for people with celiac disease. Nobody wins in this case but the lawyers.
I hope you realize you can't 'outgrow' an autoimmune disease. The wheat stimulates the destruction of the intestinal villi. You may not see the symptoms but the internal damage can still be occuring in isolated patches of the intestine. Sometimes the overt symptoms come back in middle age. The greatest risk that we were apprasised of regarding undetected symptoms or non-treatment (i.e gluten in your diet) was an elevated risk of lymphoma.
It may be 'easy' to ignore the diet, but I would be careful. If she is indeed over it I would think the blood test would have shown an absence of the anti-gliadin antibodies after a gluten challenge?
Thanks for the picture... It makes me think "What is the Breck Girl doing these days"
A good example of your point is the Malto Meal company which had been producing several cereals that should have been, according to the ingredients gluten-free.
They got sick of inquiries as to the 'purity' of their ingredients, so their solution was to add WHEAT STARCH to the product and stop the annoying phone calls.
McDonalds has been a bedrock of 'normalcy' for our celiac kids. If the lawsuits screw this up we will not be pleased.
An unadulterated potato is one of her safest options. It's the 'fixin's' is where the trouble starts.
Wait a doggone minute. I can't eat cauliflower without becoming highly offensive in a packed elevator. Are you telling me I need to kill myself?
I'm curious. Why would your sister avoid potatoes? Potatoes don't contain gluten. Actually, potato flour is used as a substitute for wheat flour in a gluten-free diet.
Furthermore, why would a parent of a gluten-intolerant child ask McDonald's if their fries contain gluten? Certainly they're in a position to know exactly which foods to avoid and which are safe. And potato fries are safe.
Unless, of course, they read about the cooking oil controversy BEFORE visiting McDonald's. Which means they knew about it ahead of time and intentionally made their own 5-year-old child sick in order to play the legal lotto game.
When they found out there was a buck to be made... I bet the kid chews through cans of Chef Boyardee at home.
sorry John, wrong poster...
An unadulterated potato is one of her safest options. It's the 'fixin's' is where the trouble starts.
Thursday, at the noon break, there was quite a rear-ender smashup right in front of the courthouse. The other jurors and I were having quite a bit of fun speculating on how many attorneys would be pushing and shoving to present their business cards on the scene.
My understanding is that after avoiding gluten completely, the intestine will return to to its normal function -- that there is no permanent damage.
Is that correct?
"My understanding is that after avoiding gluten completely, the intestine will return to to its normal function -- that there is no permanent damage."
That is correct.
I got food poisioning from a Burger King when I was a kid. I thought I was going to DIE. Did my Mom sue? No.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.