If such a reaction is remote, yet foreseeable to the manufacturer, the severity of the reaction (death) dictates a warning. It is a known, material risk, and the burden of warning is outweighedby the severity of the harm.
There’s no warning on the package that it could result in death. The maker could be sued in products liability for negligent failure to warn.
There was a good case in Mass. against Tylenol. One possible reaction of Tylenol is that your skin could melt and fall off (not even really exaggerating). Very remote possibility, but so, so severe. Manufacture knew it was possible, didn’t warn because it was so remote. But such a serious injury makes the risk material to a consumer, and so there’s a duty to warn.
So I think this is the problem, the packaging says only for adults (these kids were obviously not adults), not for those sensitive to spicy food or with allergies to what I can assume are the main ingredients.
I know disclaimers are a bit woolly as to what can stand up in court, but what more should they have put:
Perhaps something like “this food may cause severe gastrointestinal distress or internal bleeding, which may contribute to pulmonary distress, which in some cases may lead to heart attack, stroke, or death.”
It doesn warn if gastrointestinal diestess on the left if you look “abdomen attack”. The other stuff you have listed is nonsense and spicy food doesn’t cause that.
Is it the chip’s fault if this turns out to be an allergic reaction or something like that?
If such a reaction is remote, yet foreseeable to the manufacturer, the severity of the reaction (death) dictates a warning. It is a known, material risk, and the burden of warning is outweighedby the severity of the harm.
There’s no warning on the package that it could result in death. The maker could be sued in products liability for negligent failure to warn.
There was a good case in Mass. against Tylenol. One possible reaction of Tylenol is that your skin could melt and fall off (not even really exaggerating). Very remote possibility, but so, so severe. Manufacture knew it was possible, didn’t warn because it was so remote. But such a serious injury makes the risk material to a consumer, and so there’s a duty to warn.
So I think this is the problem, the packaging says only for adults (these kids were obviously not adults), not for those sensitive to spicy food or with allergies to what I can assume are the main ingredients.
I know disclaimers are a bit woolly as to what can stand up in court, but what more should they have put:
It’s only Naga and Reaper. Those are hot chillis, but I regularly cook with Reapers at home, they’re not going to kill anyone on their own.
Perhaps something like “this food may cause severe gastrointestinal distress or internal bleeding, which may contribute to pulmonary distress, which in some cases may lead to heart attack, stroke, or death.”
It doesn warn if gastrointestinal diestess on the left if you look “abdomen attack”. The other stuff you have listed is nonsense and spicy food doesn’t cause that.
Okay pal.
A warning would help sales too.
Arguably. Fools and their money, etc.