Congress To Ban Batteries Over New Report That Babies Choke On Them Too Often!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

there are common sense things and then not so commonly known things.

Yes and some people are knowledgeable and others less so. The fact that there is perceived to have been an increase in the number of choking incidents involving batteries is surely sufficient proof that awareness needs to be raised.

Surely that is common sense also...

ever stick your tongue on a 9V?

I can't say that I have. Common sense?

[luckytxn 2,264]

OK watch out. Kids can trip over their own feet and maybe even get hurt. Must wrap kids in bubble wrap to make sure they are safe. (Please parents leave air holes though)

[sandinista! 1,816]

if by 'coffee is hot', you are referring to the woman who sued mcdonald's....there was a lot more to that case than what they put in the media, and McD's was actually quite negligent in what they did.

Ok, so 'babies can choke on batteries' is not really an off the wall stretch, and really should go without saying, but it has NOTHING to do with the gov't putting a 'ban' on anything, silly man.

thank you for mentioning this. what happened to that poor woman was simply awful, and i agree that it was quite negligent on mcdonald's part. i don't think most people have any idea how extensive her injuries were. coffee hot enough to require skin grafts to her genitals and thighs is not safe to be handling through a drive-thru window, under any circumstances.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

thank you for mentioning this. what happened to that poor woman was simply awful, and i agree that it was quite negligent on mcdonald's part. i don't think most people have any idea how extensive her injuries were. coffee hot enough to require skin grafts to her genitals and thighs is not safe to be handling through a drive-thru window, under any circumstances.

you're joking right? McDonald's actually served the coffee under the recommended temperature for coffee. They weren't negligent at all in these circumstances.

The only argument that can be used is that people are naive to think that the coffee might not be as hot as when it's brewed at home in a normal coffee maker.

McDonald's did nothing wrong.

It was a simple freak accident.

[sandinista! 1,816]

under the recommended temperature for maximum taste preservation, yes. but that does not jive with what is safe to be handled between a drive-thru window and a car, when it takes less than 15 seconds for a liquid at that temperature to cause a full thickness burn. do you understand what a full thickness burn is? mobility is greatly limited when someone is seated in a car and clothes saturated with hot liquids remain in contact with skin longer when someone isn't able to move around enough to pull them away from their skin.

i couldn't care less what temperature coffee brewed and served at home is, sitting at yr dining room table with a cup of coffee is a completely different situation than sitting in a car. it's also a liability risk for their employees to serve coffee that hot to someone in a car-what if someone's foot slips off their brake while the employee is handing them the cup of coffee, and it spills on the employee, or the person in the car? simply, some things are not safe to serve at their usual temperature through a drive-thru window. i wouldn't consider serving drive-thru hot pot to be a very good idea either.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

So Alabama didn't have to ban vibrators at all, just ban the batteries. Can't we just put labels on vibrators..."Choking hazard" ????

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

Oh, how I have to bite my tongue at this

bite then.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

bite then.

Oh I did.

But it doesn't seem that you did.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

Oh I did.

But it doesn't seem that you did.

i'm not the one that said i was biting my tongue.

[Fandango 1,439]

you're joking right? McDonald's actually served the coffee under the recommended temperature for coffee. They weren't negligent at all in these circumstances.

The only argument that can be used is that people are naive to think that the coffee might not be as hot as when it's brewed at home in a normal coffee maker.

McDonald's did nothing wrong.

It was a simple freak accident.

Actually, you are totally incorrect. The coffee was at least 20 degrees above what it should have been (I think the links said it was 185 degrees, home brewed is 135-140 btw), and McD's already had 700 cases of scalding coffee burns to customers and never did anything about it. The woman was also severely injured, and only wanted her medical bills paid, which McD's refused to do.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

From above link:

McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.

Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee.

http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

Edited May 27, 2010 by Happy Bunny

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Actually, you are totally incorrect. The coffee was at least 20 degrees above what it should have been (I think the links said it was 185 degrees, home brewed is 135-140 btw), and McD's already had 700 cases of scalding coffee burns to customers and never did anything about it. The woman was also severely injured, and only wanted her medical bills paid, which McD's refused to do.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

From above link:

http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

recommended coffee serving temperature is actually 5 to 10 degress above what they were serving it at. It's all about the flavor!

I'm not one who has sympathy simply because growing up i was used to coffee being made with boiling water which is 212 degrees Fahrenheit or warmer. I would expect coffee I get anywhere to be that hot or just under that amount.

I 'get' the whole drive-through argument here and what they said in the case, I really do. At the same time though there's a bit of responsibility on the lady though as she's trying to add cream and sugar to a hot container in the car... Those coffee cups come with lids for a reason.

[Fandango 1,439]

recommended coffee serving temperature is actually 5 to 10 degress above what they were serving it at. It's all about the flavor!

I'm not one who has sympathy simply because growing up i was used to coffee being made with boiling water which is 212 degrees Fahrenheit or warmer. I would expect coffee I get anywhere to be that hot or just under that amount.

I 'get' the whole drive-through argument here and what they said in the case, I really do. At the same time though there's a bit of responsibility on the lady though as she's trying to add cream and sugar to a hot container in the car... Those coffee cups come with lids for a reason.

Stop it, you said the coffee was served UNDER the recc temp, and you were wrong. You're throwing bs in the way to deflect that. and I'd highly doubt you'd drink coffee straight after it being boiled, as it's not possible for consumption without burning the mouth and throat.

And the simple fact that we are sat here disagreeing about it proves that at the very least, it's not so 'common sense' as one would think.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

i'm not the one that said i was biting my tongue.

I thought you were the one who was saying to ignore people in order to avoid flaming...?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Stop it, you said the coffee was served UNDER the recc temp, and you were wrong. You're throwing bs in the way to deflect that. and I'd highly doubt you'd drink coffee straight after it being boiled, as it's not possible for consumption without burning the mouth and throat.

And the simple fact that we are sat here disagreeing about it proves that at the very least, it's not so 'common sense' as one would think.

http://www.ncausa.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=71

Your brewer should maintain a water temperature between 195 - 205 degrees Fahrenheit for optimal extraction. Colder water will result in flat, underextracted coffee while water that is too hot will also cause a loss of quality in the taste of the coffee. If you are brewing the coffee manually, let the water come to a full boil, but do not overboil. Turn off the heat source and allow the water to rest a minute before pouring it over the grounds.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

I thought you were the one who was saying to ignore people in order to avoid flaming...?

i'm offering advice to the new members. some of us do that, you know?