6 ms·

Important recommendations from the article: don't eat, drink, or put in the eye most parts of a Covid test. The article doesn't mention the paper package, you m

by jonnat 5y ago

Important recommendations from the article: don't eat, drink, or put in the eye most parts of a Covid test. The article doesn't mention the paper package, you might be safe eating that.

chrisweekly 5y ago
I'm reminded of a book from my childhood, "Don't Eat the Daisies". (And the infamous McDonalds "coffee might be hot" lawsuit.)
- shirleyquirk 5y ago
  McD would like this to continue being a cliche example of frivolous litigation, but the opposite is true. https://negrettilaw.com/news/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit-facts/ https://negrettilaw.com/news/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit-facts/ or any other search result will tell you: - She was hospitalised for 8 days, suffered burns to her pelvic /bones/, was disabled for 2 years. - She offered to settle for the cost of her hospital bill, McD refused. - McD were keeping the coffee at 190°F
  - dekhn 5y ago
    no bones were burned. that's absurd.
    - shirleyquirk 5y ago
      >In some areas, the burn went as deep as subcutaneous fat, muscle, or bone (photos are not for the faint of heart). https://www.lawphx.com/blog/2017/march/mcdonald-s-hot-coffee-lawsuit/ https://www.lawphx.com/blog/2017/march/mcdonald-s-hot-coffee...
      - dekhn 5y ago
        there's no photos on the site, and like any lawyer, they used an OR statement which evaluates ambiguously Other reports state skin damage (second or third degree burns) which are serious. Remember, lawyers always use appeals to emotion and other tricks to overstate things to get the best possible outcome (a settlement in this case).
        shirleyquirk 5y ago
        Sorry, yes, terrible resource. I could be wrong about the depth to which her burns penetrated, I can't find where I initially read that. I offer instead a lesser argument: it is not absurd that a burn penetrate deep enough to affect bone, especially at the pelvis where bone is close to the surface. I will not link photos, they are indeed horrifying and if you go look for them they are more persuasive than anything I can say
        dekhn 5y ago
        Bone-affecting burns are 4th degree or higher. It's almost absurd to imagine that a cup of coffee below boiling could do that even where skin layers (and fat layers, which absorb a lot of heat) are thin.
  - dpark 5y ago
    I think McDonald’s was stupid to not settle and pay her medical bills. But the facts indicate that McDonald’s coffee was not significantly hotter than other coffee. 190 degrees is only 5 degrees hotter than is typical for the industry. Starbucks serves at 185. It’s worth noting that as a result of this lawsuit, McDonald’s didn’t even lower the temperature of their coffee. This isn’t just because they’re stubborn assholes. Customers want hot coffee and hot coffee happens to be dangerous.
- tasha0663 5y ago
  > And the infamous McDonalds "coffee might be hot" lawsuit Except it's not supposed to be hot enough to cause third-degree burns. The entire event is horribly mischaracterized. From https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts > Mrs. Liebeck was not driving when her coffee spilled, nor was the car she was in moving. She was the passenger in a car that was stopped in the parking lot of the McDonald’s where she bought the coffee. She had the cup between her knees while removing the lid to add cream and sugar when the cup tipped over and spilled the entire contents on her lap. > The coffee was not just “hot,” but dangerously hot. McDonald’s corporate policy was to serve it at a temperature that could cause serious burns in seconds. Mrs. Liebeck’s injuries were far from frivolous. She was wearing sweatpants that absorbed the coffee and kept it against her skin. She suffered third-degree burns (the most serious kind) and required skin grafts on her inner thighs and elsewhere.
  - dhimes 5y ago
    IIRC McDonalds had also been ordered by one or more judges to lower the temperature because a lot of people were getting hurt. They simply refused. Then the judge got this case and the rest is history (if mischaracterized by a remarkable PR campaign by McDonalds).
  - SapporoChris 5y ago
    I kind of miss having hot coffee from McDonald's. https://www.ehow.com/info_8682077_brewing-temperatures-mr-coffee.html https://www.ehow.com/info_8682077_brewing-temperatures-mr-co... Brewing Regulations The standard brewing regulations of the Specialty Coffee Association of America (scaa.org) and the National Coffee Association (ncausa.org) require that coffeemakers brew coffee at a temperature between 197.6 degrees Fahrenheit and 204.8 degrees Fahrenheit. Most new coffeemakers will brew to these temperatures, but their performance wanes with extended and excessive use. Of the Mr. Coffee brand, the model JWX27, a 12-cup programmable coffeemaker, has routinely scored highest among tests done by coffee drinkers. https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts McDonald’s operations manual required the franchisee to hold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit. My point. Coffee is brewed hot. McDonald's coffee wasn't abnormally hot, it was in fact much cooler than fresh brewed coffee. Now do you want fresh coffee or not? We really don't need to coddle people with common sense precautions.
- dreamcompiler 5y ago
  The McDonalds hot coffee lawsuit was widely portrayed as being frivolous, but it was not [0]. tl;dr: The victim was an older lady who was a passenger; she was not the driver. She received third-degree burns because the coffee was very close to boiling temperature. She required skin grafts and was permanently disfigured. So then the question becomes: Why do most people think this lawsuit was frivolous? That's not by accident. [0] https://www.huffpost.com/entry/watch-hot-coffee-a-powerf_b_884318 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/watch-hot-coffee-a-powerf_b_8...
  - dpark 5y ago
    I feel bad for that lady but that doesn’t mean the lawsuit had merit. Many similar lawsuits have been dismissed. Coffee is hot. Hot stuff can burn. Her lawyers argued that coffee should never be served above 140 degrees. No one wants coffee at that temperature (certainly not anyone who’s going to add cold milk that would make it tepid). 140 degrees isn’t even “safe to eat chicken” temperature.
- biohax2015 5y ago
  Plenty of people have given you the details on the McDonald’s case, but I’d like to point folks to the documentary “Hot Coffee”, which covers cases similar to the McDs case where the blame is unjustly pushed onto consumers. Just be warned that you will be come out of it angry.
  - dpark 5y ago
    I’m curious what the alternative is. People want their coffee hot. How do you serve them hot coffee without risk?
    - biohax2015 5y ago
      The problem was that the coffee was way, way hotter than it was supposed to be, which resulted in serious injury to the customer. The pictures are gruesome. The blame was on McDonalds for negligently selling a dangerous product to a customer. You can look up the case for the details.
      - dpark 5y ago
        Standard coffee temperature recommendations reach 185. McDonald’s standards are up to 190. This is not “way hotter”. I’ve read about the case.
        hcknwscommenter 5y ago
        You are purposely conflating the temperature at which coffee should be made (~185), with the temperature at which coffee should be served (~160). Yes, some folks suggest they are drinking 175 degree coffee. Those folks are wrong.
        dpark 5y ago
        This is a weird split. Do you typically make coffee and then leave it sitting for 20 minutes before consuming? I make coffee and then drink it. Also, no. Coffee is brewed higher than 185. The Specialty Coffee Association on their own page advocates for 195-205 for brewing temp. https://sca.coffee/research/protocols-best-practices https://sca.coffee/research/protocols-best-practices Wikipedia claims that SCA advises up to 185 for serving and that Starbucks does exactly that. I don’t see citations for this specifically, though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Rest... “Similarly, as of 2004, Starbucks sells coffee at 175–185 °F (79–85 °C), and the executive director of the Specialty Coffee Association of America reported that the standard serving temperature is 160–185 °F (71–85 °C).”

by jonnat 5y ago

Important recommendations from the article: don't eat, drink, or put in the eye most parts of a Covid test. The article doesn't mention the paper package, you might be safe eating that.

chrisweekly 5y ago

I'm reminded of a book from my childhood, "Don't Eat the Daisies". (And the infamous McDonalds "coffee might be hot" lawsuit.)

shirleyquirk 5y ago
McD would like this to continue being a cliche example of frivolous litigation, but the opposite is true. https://negrettilaw.com/news/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit-facts/ https://negrettilaw.com/news/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit-facts/ or any other search result will tell you: - She was hospitalised for 8 days, suffered burns to her pelvic /bones/, was disabled for 2 years. - She offered to settle for the cost of her hospital bill, McD refused. - McD were keeping the coffee at 190°F
- dekhn 5y ago
  no bones were burned. that's absurd.
  - shirleyquirk 5y ago
    >In some areas, the burn went as deep as subcutaneous fat, muscle, or bone (photos are not for the faint of heart). https://www.lawphx.com/blog/2017/march/mcdonald-s-hot-coffee-lawsuit/ https://www.lawphx.com/blog/2017/march/mcdonald-s-hot-coffee...
    - dekhn 5y ago
      there's no photos on the site, and like any lawyer, they used an OR statement which evaluates ambiguously Other reports state skin damage (second or third degree burns) which are serious. Remember, lawyers always use appeals to emotion and other tricks to overstate things to get the best possible outcome (a settlement in this case).
      - shirleyquirk 5y ago
        Sorry, yes, terrible resource. I could be wrong about the depth to which her burns penetrated, I can't find where I initially read that. I offer instead a lesser argument: it is not absurd that a burn penetrate deep enough to affect bone, especially at the pelvis where bone is close to the surface. I will not link photos, they are indeed horrifying and if you go look for them they are more persuasive than anything I can say
        dekhn 5y ago
        Bone-affecting burns are 4th degree or higher. It's almost absurd to imagine that a cup of coffee below boiling could do that even where skin layers (and fat layers, which absorb a lot of heat) are thin.
- dpark 5y ago
  I think McDonald’s was stupid to not settle and pay her medical bills. But the facts indicate that McDonald’s coffee was not significantly hotter than other coffee. 190 degrees is only 5 degrees hotter than is typical for the industry. Starbucks serves at 185. It’s worth noting that as a result of this lawsuit, McDonald’s didn’t even lower the temperature of their coffee. This isn’t just because they’re stubborn assholes. Customers want hot coffee and hot coffee happens to be dangerous.
tasha0663 5y ago
> And the infamous McDonalds "coffee might be hot" lawsuit Except it's not supposed to be hot enough to cause third-degree burns. The entire event is horribly mischaracterized. From https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts > Mrs. Liebeck was not driving when her coffee spilled, nor was the car she was in moving. She was the passenger in a car that was stopped in the parking lot of the McDonald’s where she bought the coffee. She had the cup between her knees while removing the lid to add cream and sugar when the cup tipped over and spilled the entire contents on her lap. > The coffee was not just “hot,” but dangerously hot. McDonald’s corporate policy was to serve it at a temperature that could cause serious burns in seconds. Mrs. Liebeck’s injuries were far from frivolous. She was wearing sweatpants that absorbed the coffee and kept it against her skin. She suffered third-degree burns (the most serious kind) and required skin grafts on her inner thighs and elsewhere.
- dhimes 5y ago
  IIRC McDonalds had also been ordered by one or more judges to lower the temperature because a lot of people were getting hurt. They simply refused. Then the judge got this case and the rest is history (if mischaracterized by a remarkable PR campaign by McDonalds).
- SapporoChris 5y ago
  I kind of miss having hot coffee from McDonald's. https://www.ehow.com/info_8682077_brewing-temperatures-mr-coffee.html https://www.ehow.com/info_8682077_brewing-temperatures-mr-co... Brewing Regulations The standard brewing regulations of the Specialty Coffee Association of America (scaa.org) and the National Coffee Association (ncausa.org) require that coffeemakers brew coffee at a temperature between 197.6 degrees Fahrenheit and 204.8 degrees Fahrenheit. Most new coffeemakers will brew to these temperatures, but their performance wanes with extended and excessive use. Of the Mr. Coffee brand, the model JWX27, a 12-cup programmable coffeemaker, has routinely scored highest among tests done by coffee drinkers. https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts McDonald’s operations manual required the franchisee to hold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit. My point. Coffee is brewed hot. McDonald's coffee wasn't abnormally hot, it was in fact much cooler than fresh brewed coffee. Now do you want fresh coffee or not? We really don't need to coddle people with common sense precautions.
dreamcompiler 5y ago
The McDonalds hot coffee lawsuit was widely portrayed as being frivolous, but it was not [0]. tl;dr: The victim was an older lady who was a passenger; she was not the driver. She received third-degree burns because the coffee was very close to boiling temperature. She required skin grafts and was permanently disfigured. So then the question becomes: Why do most people think this lawsuit was frivolous? That's not by accident. [0] https://www.huffpost.com/entry/watch-hot-coffee-a-powerf_b_884318 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/watch-hot-coffee-a-powerf_b_8...
- dpark 5y ago
  I feel bad for that lady but that doesn’t mean the lawsuit had merit. Many similar lawsuits have been dismissed. Coffee is hot. Hot stuff can burn. Her lawyers argued that coffee should never be served above 140 degrees. No one wants coffee at that temperature (certainly not anyone who’s going to add cold milk that would make it tepid). 140 degrees isn’t even “safe to eat chicken” temperature.
biohax2015 5y ago
Plenty of people have given you the details on the McDonald’s case, but I’d like to point folks to the documentary “Hot Coffee”, which covers cases similar to the McDs case where the blame is unjustly pushed onto consumers. Just be warned that you will be come out of it angry.
- dpark 5y ago
  I’m curious what the alternative is. People want their coffee hot. How do you serve them hot coffee without risk?
  - biohax2015 5y ago
    The problem was that the coffee was way, way hotter than it was supposed to be, which resulted in serious injury to the customer. The pictures are gruesome. The blame was on McDonalds for negligently selling a dangerous product to a customer. You can look up the case for the details.
    - dpark 5y ago
      Standard coffee temperature recommendations reach 185. McDonald’s standards are up to 190. This is not “way hotter”. I’ve read about the case.
      - hcknwscommenter 5y ago
        You are purposely conflating the temperature at which coffee should be made (~185), with the temperature at which coffee should be served (~160). Yes, some folks suggest they are drinking 175 degree coffee. Those folks are wrong.
        dpark 5y ago
        This is a weird split. Do you typically make coffee and then leave it sitting for 20 minutes before consuming? I make coffee and then drink it. Also, no. Coffee is brewed higher than 185. The Specialty Coffee Association on their own page advocates for 195-205 for brewing temp. https://sca.coffee/research/protocols-best-practices https://sca.coffee/research/protocols-best-practices Wikipedia claims that SCA advises up to 185 for serving and that Starbucks does exactly that. I don’t see citations for this specifically, though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Rest... “Similarly, as of 2004, Starbucks sells coffee at 175–185 °F (79–85 °C), and the executive director of the Specialty Coffee Association of America reported that the standard serving temperature is 160–185 °F (71–85 °C).”