Quote Originally Posted by dean_martin
Most warnings on products are governed by federal regulations, although there are plenty of lawsuits over the adequacy of some product warnings. GM, I think this topic is funny too. I just felt like speaking up when JM hyperbolized that all product warnings are due to frivolous lawsuits.

About the obesity lawsuit - that was a law professor and his students that filed that lawsuit against several fast food chains. It was thrown out. People have tried to use the courts to implement social change for many years. Most of the time they fail because it's not the right place. I have found it interesting though that after that lawsuit McDs announced it was going to use a different type of oil for its fries and that it was going to provide more nutritional information for the items on its menu.

Most of the time the courts get it right and weed out suspect claims. Judges are authorized to award the other side their costs for having to defend these claims. I get suspiscious of knee-jerk reactions that include legislation banning these types of claims when the courts can take care of them. What if you get food poisoning, HIV/AIDS or hepatitis from a fast food place, but find you can't sue them because a law was passed banning lawsuits against fast food places for the quality of their food?

As for the warnings on the BIC lighter and the Sears mower, I don't know why they're there. I do agree that there are a lot of dumb people walking around. Product warnings has become a highly specialized field. If the product's warning is not prescribed by the government, then the product's warning is probably based on studies of human behavior. That says quite a bit about the general population.
I'm sorry Dean, but I don't see anything funny in your post. That will cost you.

Just joking. You can be the voice of reason. It's nice to have a few thought out thoughts thinking around us thoughtless thinkers. Ya think?