this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
593 points (98.7% liked)

News

23367 readers
3441 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Consumers cannot expect boneless chicken wings to actually be free of bones, a divided Ohio Supreme Court ruled Thursday, rejecting claims by a restaurant patron who suffered serious medical complications from getting a bone stuck in his throat. 

Michael Berkheimer was dining with his wife and friends at a wing joint in Hamilton, Ohio, and had ordered the usual — boneless wings with parmesan garlic sauce — when he felt a bite-size piece of meat go down the wrong way. Three days later, feverish and unable to keep food down, Berkeimer went to the emergency room, where a doctor discovered a long, thin bone that had torn his esophagus and caused an infection.

In a 4-3 ruling, the Supreme Court said Thursday that “boneless wings” refers to a cooking style, and that Berkheimer should’ve been on guard against bones since it’s common knowledge that chickens have bones. The high court sided with lower courts that had dismissed Berkheimer’s suit.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 191 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

"Decaf coffee"

It actually has 300000mg of caffeine

"It's well known that coffee has caffeine in it. Skill issue."

[–] BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world 113 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Decaf does actually still have caffeine, just normally like 97% less.

Which, I guess is like the boneless wings having 97% less bones, now in convinient needle shaped shards

[–] phx@lemmy.ca 49 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

Yeah, I feel like this is why it's called decaffeinated rather than caffeine-free... Caffeine has been removed but not completely.

But while the word "less" means a smaller amount, the suffix of "less" means without, i.e. childless

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/-less

Boneless doesn't mean "less" bones. The dictionary and commonly understood meaning is "without bones", and certainly without amounts of bone sufficient to cause significant injury when eating . It's certainly not a "cooking style" as uncooked chicken cuts with bones removed are sold as boneless.

Apparently these judges are "brainless"

[–] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

These judges have been bought by our corporate overlords.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] PlantJam@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago

Calm down there Panera.

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 130 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Boneless is a "cooking style?" No. It's which bag of chicken I pull out of the freezer before I even turn the oven on. I'm not going to sous vide the fucking bones out of my wings.

If the restaurant is deboning wings to order, fine. I'll accept that. But then that shit had better be on the menu so I know to be careful.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 20 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Boneless wings are usually breaded chunks of rib meat, not actually wings at all. Sometimes a cooking style starts with cutting raw meat off of bones and into don't-call-them-nuggets.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 95 points 4 months ago (10 children)

Would this logic extend to products labeled "alcohol-free"?

"Everyone knows beer has alcohol in it."

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 45 points 4 months ago

I'd be more worried about a product claiming it has no peanuts in it now.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Just wait until you hear about "synthetic" motor oil.

(It's been made from regular petroleum sources for a long time. It was argued in court that "synthetic" refers to a certain level of quality, not that it's actually built synthetically from something other than oil out of the ground.)

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] radivojevic@discuss.online 90 points 4 months ago (19 children)

Ahh yes, another court in the pocket of corporations.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] doctortofu@reddthat.com 73 points 4 months ago

So just like all those "unlimited" phone plans with limits, "free" trials that require a credit card number and "lifetime" warranties that expire after a few years? Cool. Cool cool cool...

[–] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 65 points 4 months ago

So amazingly stupid. The conservative justic's "logic" here is a case-study in failing upwards. He tries to say that "nobody would think that chicken fingers are actual fingers." Like, chicken fingers is a colloquial name, and is not the same as a fuckin descriptor adjective. He might as well say that dairy-free ice cream can have dairy in it, because "no reasonable person would think ice cream wouldn't have dairy in it."

what a joke. This brought to you by the same supreme court that has ruled against the will of Ohio voters who voted for an anti-gerrymandering bill, just to have a republican led commission drag it's feet, presenting identical maps, and instead of allowing the usage of an actual fair map, they just threw the baby out with bathwater, leaving in place the terrible gerrymandered maps that heavily favor republicans till 2030.

Just another reason I'll never move back to my home state. conservatives ruined it.

[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 62 points 4 months ago (3 children)

under new supreme court ruling, if you sell boneless chicken with bones, you aren't wrong, just an asshole

[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 13 points 4 months ago

Not even an asshole, just an ineffective cook

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 55 points 4 months ago (1 children)

can't wait for this to apply to gluten free, sugar free, nut free products. people can die from this shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] InternetUser2012 43 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If I order boneless wings, and I get bones, I'm getting my fucking money back and not eating at that establishment ever again.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Biggles@lemmy.myserv.one 34 points 4 months ago (10 children)

Buffalo wings aren't made from real Buffalo, either. Hell, most Buffalo can't even fly.

[–] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Don't get me started on Rocky Mountain Oysters

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 33 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So... no company is beholden to anything that they say? Is that the gist...?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Pretty much. The correct outcome of every case is the one that benefits capital the most. Our current national Supreme Court has demonstrated that precedence can be ignored when convenient. They basically signaled to every other judge in the country that this kind of shit is fine.

Start with the decision and work backwards. Just make some shit up, nobody will do anything about it anyway.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 33 points 4 months ago

That's fucking ridiculous though I think it's perfectly fair for s restaurant not to be ultimately liable. This case feels like a gimmie to Perdue/Tyson to dodge any accountability for their bargin bin meat farming operations.

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 32 points 4 months ago

I'm gonna assume this is one of the Project 2025 legislations

[–] undergroundoverground@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I don't know why but it reminds me of an American friend I had who couldn't beleive we didn't have limits on the amount maggots/maggots eggs allowed in fruit juice.

They refused to drink any fruit juice here until it had to be explained to them that the reason that there's no acceptable limit on maggots/maggots eggs in our fruit juice is because ANY amount of maggot is over the acceptable amount.

Not their fault of course. We only know what we're used to.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 16 points 4 months ago (3 children)

That doesn't sound right. How can you guarantee zero fly/fruit fly eggs in something like orange juice with pulp. Fly eggs are tiny and can be found on fresh fruit skins even on the trees. Certain juices preclude the kind of filtration that could be used to achieve 100% fruit fly egg removal. I don't know anything about European food regulations, but from a practical perspective it seems impossible to guarantee ZERO fruit fly egg contamination. Especially considering Europe tends to be more flexible with insects in food than the US such as Casu martzu.

I suspect if there really is no max insect parts limit, there is a procedural requirement that ensures contamination is kept low.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 28 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

What is the difference between chicken nuggets and boneless wings? The article mentions that boneless wings are 'of course' nuggets of breast meat.

I wonder if they'd have agreed that nuggets can have bones too?

[–] sudo 40 points 4 months ago (2 children)

One of the justices literally writes about that. In this article.

“The question must be asked: Does anyone really believe that the parents in this country who feed their young children boneless wings or chicken tenders or chicken nuggets or chicken fingers expect bones to be in the chicken? Of course they don’t,” Justice Michael P. Donnelly wrote in dissent.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bamboo@lemm.ee 11 points 4 months ago (9 children)

Usually a boneless wing is a chunk of meat, with identifiable meat fibers and such. Just a breaded and fried chunk of breast. Whereas chicken nuggets are usually made from ground chicken, often molded into a few different shapes.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 28 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Its getting where courts at every level are running contrary to logic and justice.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nforminvasion@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Slavery is freedom. War is peace. Boneless pizza can now have bones.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] nimomycelium@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago (3 children)

The Ohio Supreme Court's decision to allow chicken wings advertised as 'boneless' to contain bones warrants an examination of the principles underlying voluntary exchanges and the protection of consumer rights. When individuals engage in transactions, the terms and descriptions presented are expected to be accurate, fostering trust and informed decision-making. An advertisement promising 'boneless' wings that includes bones disrupts this trust, introducing an element of deception.

For a marketplace to function effectively, it is essential that representations made in the course of business transactions are truthful. Consumers rely on these representations to make choices that align with their preferences and expectations. If these expectations are systematically violated, the very foundation of voluntary exchange is compromised.

Thus, the court's role in addressing such issues is to ensure that the transactional environment remains transparent and honest. By upholding standards against misleading advertisements, the court helps maintain the integrity of voluntary exchanges, allowing individuals to engage in transactions free from coercion and deceit.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You can't expect the new car you purchased to be new.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] PenisDuckCuck9001@lemmynsfw.com 17 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

So boneless wings can have bones.. But do boned wings still have to have bones? I am a boneless wing enjoyer and I hate bone wings. Why waste all that effort eating around the bones when you can just not?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

So what then is the difference between the boneless chicken wing cooking style and normal chicken wing cooking style? If it starts with "take a piece of chicken meat without any bones", then what stops this line of argument from saying that it doesn't matter how well they follow the recipe and thus restaurants can serve whatever they want to meet any order and then just say "we were following the (name of food) cooking style, not promising that, and are just bad at following that style or made up our own version"?

On a related note, how are judges determined to be qualified to make any decision? Are they supposed to be fair and intelligent, or just do their best to judge things in a fair and intelligent style?

That said, there was a bit of a fluke involved to have the bone go down the wrong way and also him not even notice for a few days. IMO in a proper decision, the restaurant shouldn't have been fully liable for this incident, though they should have had some liability for that bone. And then some of that liability might be passed on to whoever provided them with the "boneless" chicken meat.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago (13 children)

Did the restaurant just screw up the order, or was this some process deficiency with the deboner?

[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

yes, customer got boned at a restaurant and in court

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We are talking chicken, not fish, right?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RandomStickman@kbin.run 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

More lies from the saucy nugs

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›