Is this different than the energy drink sold by Panara Bread that caused two deaths? Do they have a reasonable complaint about the chip?
I’m of many minds. First, let’s talk about the Paqui / Hershey’s labelling. This is an image of the back of the coffin-shaped package:
(image taken from this article for credit)
That’s pretty big, and pretty clear, at least compared to Panera’s labelling, which really didn’t do anything other than mention the ingredients AFAIK, nor mention that said quantity was just below the daily maximum advised dosage).
But… I’m also of the opinion that they damn well know that while they labeled it for adult purposes, that it was going to end up in the hands of anyone with the money to purchase. It’s not as if the purchase of the product was restricted in any way, such as booze and tobacco products. So, while the disclaimers are strong, but the parents maaaaaay still have a case.
As for Walgreens, it ties into the above, yeah, they sold a product that is advertised for adults to a teen, but again, not one that was restricted to adults. Do they have the legal right or responsibility to card in that case? My guess is probably not.
So, entirely IMHO, the parents have a case, although not a particularly strong one, and are casting a wide net to share their pain and increase the possibility of a settlement (I do think it’s both, rather than a naked cash grab).
But we’re getting into some interesting territory legally speaking. At first, shit was sold with no warnings, and often the manufacturer’s directly knowledge of risk - see the history of cigarette sales in the world. Now, a number of things have warnings, but are small, unclear, or insufficient, and are being attacked, which, I argue, is probably a good thing, as I feel that Panera’s were absolutely insufficient.
But in this case, we have marketing that targets bravado, something that is going to intentionally (IMHO) or not be attractive to teens. I don’t see how if I argued in good faith that they didn’t know what was likely to happen. However, in the most backhanded support for Paqui/Hershy, the warnings are bigger and more clear than the ones on the earlier challenges.
So at what point are warnings sufficient? Just about anything sold commonly on the shelves is dangerous if used improperly, from asprin to Dihydrogen oxide, to Tide bleach. And someone, somewhere is going to challenge unwary individuals to do such things from the safety of the internet, and there will be consequences, often to those too young to see themselves as the targets of those warnings.
IMHO (IANAL, IANAD, etc) if the warnings aren’t in any way enforceable, then the retailer doesn’t have much of a say or a role in the distribution of said properties as the law currently stands. However, a caveat - the warning says “keep out of the reach of children” which I’d guess is meant to indicate that parents purchasing it for themselves should keep it away from kids, but could be used against the retailer’s decision to not put it behind the counter or other limited access area.
Personally, I’d like to see in this case where discovery occurs, and if Paqui was knowingly targeting teens despite the packaging and risks (which I find likely), that they are held to a higher standard, but not sure if it’ll get to that point - which is why I expect a settlement.
Sorry if I sound like I’m weaseling on this, emotionally I’m sympathetic to the parents and skeptical of the manufacturer, but intellectually I’m torn by the knowledge that everything has a risk, and everyone has at least some responsibility to mitigate the risk. Which is what the warnings are supposed to provide, but obviously are insufficient to the task (see every warning / terms and agreement we have to click through on a weekly basis while rarely taking the time to read).
To my eyes, it almost looks like the warning is just a marketing gimmick. You’ve placed the product a cutesy little coffin as you might a Halloween treat and put it in an area where anyone could buy it. What did you think was going to happen? If I were a kid who read the label, would I even take it seriously? The worst I’d expect is that it would burn my mouth and we’d all have a good laugh over it. The label doens’t mention anything about capsaicin leading to intense intenstinal/stomach pain, shortness of breath, etc., etc. I’m an adult, and I didn’t know it was possible for capsaicin to cause these problems.
This was briefly discussed in a pit thread starting here:
So that’s a pretty awfully written article but am I right in saying the only dangerous thing in that chip was capsicum? That can obviously be super unpleasant but is there actually a mechanism it can be lethal? And if so, is there any evidence that the amount in the chip was remotely close to that?
The caffeinated lemonade case was different as it was clearly a substance that could be dangerous in those quantities (especially to people who are sensitive to it)
Actually it does. The label says “Seek medical assistance should you experience difficulty breathing, fainting or extended nausea”. I suppose one might think that that warning has nothing to do with the package contents and is just general advice, but I think you’d have to be pretty obtuse to reach such a conclusion.
I had tears in my eyes as I read the label. When they tell you to wash your hands after touching a chip before you touch your eyes they weren’t kidding.
That’s what I’ve been wondering, too. Capsaicin triggers certain nerve receptors, and that’s all that it does. So far as I can tell, the only way it could actually kill would be someone who had a specific medical condition making them abnormally sensitive to it, and such a person is responsible for knowing that they shouldn’t eat something like this. It’s no different from someone with a nut allergy dying after eating nuts, except that this stuff is much easier to avoid.
Capsaicin consumption can also cause more serious health problems, including shortness of breath, allergic reactions, chest pain, heart palpitations, and even heart attacks or strokes. Consumption of larger amounts of capsaicin can also cause repeated vomiting that can lead to life-threatening esophageal damage.
The kid had congenital heart defects. It is the kind of randomly suprising death of a teen that you hear about a few times a year, except usually it happens during sportsball activities. A basketball player suddenly dropped dead on the court at my college while I was there because of congenital heart issues, but basketball didn’t kill him.
The autopsy also said that Wolobah had cardiomegaly, meaning an enlarged heart, and a congenital defect described as “myocardial bridging of the left anterior descending coronary artery.”
Wow, I was curious if I could find any Google link on that guy back in 1993 (there was, it was listed as “cardiac arrhythmia”) but I also found basketball players that died at my former school in 2002 and 2011. (Cardiac arrest and blood clot in the lung.)
There’s a restaurant in the Caribbean that has a house-made salsa-like condiment that they put on the table for locals. I noticed it and asked about it once and was given some to try. It was extreme, but I (barely) handled it. I never requested it again.
Then one year an American woman asked about it. (I knew she was American because I, with my piss-poor hearing, could follow her conversation from across the room). The waitperson tried to tell her she shouldn’t try it, but the woman insisted, so they brought her some.
I watched, knowing what I’d see. She eventually was laying on the floor, struggling to breath and crying. We continued enjoying our meal and when I caught the server’s eye I winked.
In my mom’s case yes. It would react with her medicine and cause psychotic breaks and near heart attacks.
Do you feel more information should be added to the warning label of the chip?
We watched an episode of CSI: Las Vegas last night that involved torture/death by capsicum. The bad guy injected it straight into an arm and the victim had convulsions so bad he dislocated both shoulders. Then the small brain hemorrhage of his exploded and he bled out. Not sure if the baddie was charged with straight-up murder or something not as serious.
The problems comes in that a person doesn’t always know they have a particular medical condition until something triggers it. 14 year old kid? Yes, it’s possible he had some sort of vulnerability that no one was aware of. I also don’t think it’s well known that very high doses of capsaisin can cause serious problems for people with heat conditions.