• Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    You mean the incident where McDonald made the coffee so hot it was beyond safe and the woman had 3rd degree burns fusing her pelvic region together?

    That case is one of the most well known examples of how corporations turn serious safety incidents into “haha stupid customer not know obvious thing”, as if the victim was to blame for McDonalds wrong doing.

    You chose that incident to argue your point? Wow, thank you, that makes my case here so much easier.

    • charles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      9 months ago

      I still don’t understand how the “hot coffee” debunking isn’t known world round by this point.

    • Kumatomic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah the moment they mentioned that like McDonald’s wasn’t at fault I stopped reading anything else they had to say.

    • Knightfox
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      You can get third degree burns from touching water which is 150 degree F for around 2 seconds. Most coffee world wide is served between 160 and 180 F.

      In that case the water was supposedly served at 190 F while competitors coffees were served at 160 F. The lawyers in that suit claimed that if the coffee had been in the 160 range it would have taken up to 20 seconds to get third degree burns. We now know that even at 160 F she would have gotten the same burns within 5 seconds.

      What exactly is your point?

      • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Coffee should not be served at 160f. That’s undrinkably hot and just burns the coffee.

        McDonalds only does this maliciously so you won’t ask for a free refill.