Michigan Woman Claims Starburst Candies Are Dangerously Chewy in Lawsuit

[StrayDawg]

Do we know whether or not that was the first time the woman had ever had a Starburst? If not, then I agree with you. If she had never had one before, then how should she know to avoid them?

That's a fair point, but here is another way to look at it:

I have never drunk a glass of Clorox bleach, but if I chose to do so, I would quickly figure out that the product could cause harm to me and I would spit out the bleach before it did permanent damage to my tongue. If this were her first Starburst, then when she bit into it and realized how "chewy" it was, she should have spit it out to avoid hurting her jaw.

In my case, I would be using the Clorox inappropriately, so my case would probably not go far. In her case, she is not misusing the product, so the court is hearing her case. However, in both cases, common sense could solve the problem without any attorneys.

[CChandler]

Thank Moats they didn't give her a Now-And-Later.

[Rooster]

They need to put her head in a vice and get a 2x4 and knock out all of her teeth so she won't ever have that problem again. People like her need to be tortured until common sense comes upon them.

[Abominable Gorilla]

This is like some strange advertising campaign.
"Starburst, the 'dangerously chewy' candies."

[marketdawg]

This is like some strange advertising campaign.
"Starburst, the 'dangerously chewy' candies."

Me likes...

[Dirtydawg]

That's a fair point, but here is another way to look at it:

I have never drunk a glass of Clorox bleach, but if I chose to do so, I would quickly figure out that the product could cause harm to me and I would spit out the bleach before it did permanent damage to my tongue. If this were her first Starburst, then when she bit into it and realized how "chewy" it was, she should have spit it out to avoid hurting her jaw.

In my case, I would be using the Clorox inappropriately, so my case would probably not go far. In her case, she is not misusing the product, so the court is hearing her case. However, in both cases, common sense could solve the problem without any attorneys.

Not a good example because you know that Clorox is a chemical that is used to clean. This was a candy to be eaten. Frankly, I don't see the need for an astronomical suit. I could see having the medical bills paid. It shouldn't take more than a couple of weeks for her pain to be gone, if that long. Vette's usually are gone a little over a week. She should also thank them because every time Vette's jaw locks up, she loses weight because she has to go on a soft food diet. I'm sure this woman will have the same result.

But frankly, the only reason I posted on this was to make a joke about Vette not being able to open her mouth too widely and it's implications to me, but then thought better of it.

[qng001]

But frankly, the only reason I posted on this was to make a joke about Vette not being able to open her mouth too widely and it's implications to me, but then thought better of it.

I feel sorry for you man

[StrayDawg]

every time Vette's jaw locks up, she loses weight because she has to go on a soft food diet. I'm sure this woman will have the same result.

Watch yourself big guy. We non-lawyers can debate this lawsuit all day without any consequences. But, publicly discussing a woman's weight can backfire in a hurry....especially when you live with her.

[JuBru]

Big, huge difference. In fact, Vette doesn't even eat starburst, now and laters or any other excessively chewy candy for that specific reason. I'll tell you what. Go buy some starbursts and eat them and then eat some ice cream, cooked carrots, green beans and other regular foods and tell me you can't tell the difference.

Not saying it there isn't a difference, just that I don't see it. To me, it's all motion... My jaw does the same motion with starburt as it does food and everything else... Guess I'm just weird.

[Dirtydawg]

Not saying it there isn't a difference, just that I don't see it. To me, it's all motion... My jaw does the same motion with starburt as it does food and everything else... Guess I'm just weird.

I understand what you're saying, but seriously, get you a starburst and a bowl of ice cream. Sit down at the table and take a bite of the ice cream. Then put a starburst in your mouth and give it a good hard bite and then come back here and honestly say that you can't see the difference in taking a bite of ice cream and biting down on a starburst-and I'm not talking about starburst that's been in the heat of the car all day either.

[FishingBack]

I feel like somebody should be responsible for their own medical conditions. The candy is safe for normal people and if you aren't "normal" then you should be careful about what you eat.

IE: If you have a condition that makes you choke easily then you shouldn't put a big jawbreaker or chunk of steak in your mouth and then sue somebody for being stupid.

[Dirtydawg]

I feel like somebody should be responsible for their own medical conditions. The candy is safe for normal people and if you aren't "normal" then you should be careful about what you eat.

IE: If you have a condition that makes you choke easily then you shouldn't put a big jawbreaker or chunk of steak in your mouth and then sue somebody for being stupid.

I agree, but what if the person doesn't know how chewy the candy is? How can that person be faulted?

[Guisslapp]

This is why there has not been any noticeable human evolution in recent history- we protect our idiots and keep the gene pool watered down.

[Dirtydawg]

This is why there has not been any noticeable human evolution in recent history- we protect our idiots and keep the gene pool watered down.

Actually, there's a more obvious explanation, but that's for a different thread and different forum.

[johnnylightnin]

This is why there has not been any noticeable human evolution in recent history- we protect our idiots and keep the gene pool watered down.