• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Taco Bell sued

Puppycow

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
32,019
Location
Yokohama, Japan
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41258574/ns/business-consumer_news/

This is a class-action lawsuit because the plaintiff claims that Taco Bell's 'seasoned beef' is not 100% beef.

This seems like the dumbest lawsuit I've heard in a while. Doesn't the USDA regulate this stuff? If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me. Don't like it? Don't buy it. We don't need self-appointed food cops trying litigate the definition of 'seasoned beef.'
 
My understanding is that the complaint is about their wording. To call something "taco meat" in the U.S., it needs to have x percent beef, and Taco Bell has x-3 (or something like that).
 
Taco meat filling is supposed to be 40% ground beef. Taco Bell's is 36%. Big deal. It's funny because what they use is healthier than a higher percentage of beef. The rest of the non-beef filler is pretty much oatmeal.
 
Beef that lowers your cholesterol? Ooops! I think the oatmeal claim is what go Cheerios in trouble.

Beanbag
 
Taco Bell Makes Spicy Retort to Suit

Taco Bell is striking back against a lawsuit that challenges the actual beef content in the chain's beef tacos, illustrating how vulnerable companies can be in a viral age. But the company's response also shows how a suit's target can use social media to mount a speedy and far-reaching defense.
(...)
Taco Bell, a Yum Brands Inc. unit with almost 6,000 stores world-wide, responded swiftly with a spicy and potentially risky retort to the lawsuit. Its rebuttals include full-page newspaper ads headlined, "Thank you for suing us."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704832704576114280629161632.html
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41258574/ns/business-consumer_news/

This is a class-action lawsuit because the plaintiff claims that Taco Bell's 'seasoned beef' is not 100% beef.

This seems like the dumbest lawsuit I've heard in a while. Doesn't the USDA regulate this stuff? If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me. Don't like it? Don't buy it. We don't need self-appointed food cops trying litigate the definition of 'seasoned beef.'

The USDA doesn't regulate advertising.

I think it is fine to argue over the point to an extent. I mean if Taco Bell meat was 99% recycled newspaper and 1% meat, I don't think they should be allowed to call it "meat". It all depends on where you draw the line.

That being said, I don't think the consumer has suffered much. The less annoying route is to file a complaint with the correct authorities and let them decide if they deserve to be fined.
 
whoops. I had several things wrong so I removed my post
 
Last edited:
My understanding is that the complaint is about their wording. To call something "taco meat" in the U.S., it needs to have x percent beef, and Taco Bell has x-3 (or something like that).

Taco meat filling is supposed to be 40% ground beef. Taco Bell's is 36%. Big deal. It's funny because what they use is healthier than a higher percentage of beef. The rest of the non-beef filler is pretty much oatmeal.

This article says that it's supposed to be at least 70% beef, and Taco Bell is claiming that it's actually 88% beef.
 
This article says that it's supposed to be at least 70% beef, and Taco Bell is claiming that it's actually 88% beef.
We have another thread on this - on it they gave the basic formula - Two of the ingredients listed as part of the flavoring/sauce are actually meat substitutes/fake - They may have flavor, but I only eat TB tacos if anything - and only if I have one of my chosen hot sauces to go on it. I am so sorry TB won the fast food Mex competition. Taco Tico beat them on everything except being bland and mediocre enough. TB wins that in a walk.:mad::jaw-dropp:eek::(:(:(
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41258574/ns/business-consumer_news/

This is a class-action lawsuit because the plaintiff claims that Taco Bell's 'seasoned beef' is not 100% beef.

This seems like the dumbest lawsuit I've heard in a while. Doesn't the USDA regulate this stuff? If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me. Don't like it? Don't buy it. We don't need self-appointed food cops trying litigate the definition of 'seasoned beef.'

I agree completely . The USDA has a lot at stake getting this stuff right - so they sign off on it - down the hatch it goes
 
Taco meat filling is supposed to be 40% ground beef. Taco Bell's is 36%. Big deal. It's funny because what they use is healthier than a higher percentage of beef. The rest of the non-beef filler is pretty much oatmeal.

That's not the issue. The issue is that calling something that is only 36% beef "beef" is false advertising. If they called it "taco meat filling" the suit wouldn't have happened.

That said, I don't know anyone who expected there to really be all that much beef in the "beef" tacos. If anything, the fact that rat isn't listed among the ingredients is an improvement over my expectations.
 
That's not the issue. The issue is that calling something that is only 36% beef "beef" is false advertising. If they called it "taco meat filling" the suit wouldn't have happened.

That said, I don't know anyone who expected there to really be all that much beef in the "beef" tacos. If anything, the fact that rat isn't listed among the ingredients is an improvement over my expectations.

The lawsuit alleges only 36% beef but Taco Bell claims it uses at least 88% beef. They even took out adverts saying this.

I wonder why your expectations are so low, though?
 
There regulations about the percentage content in processed meats are already pretty lax (just because rat isn't listed doesn't mean there isn't any allowed in it). If you think hotdogs are bad you should see what they allow in those breakfast sausages. Despite my already lowered expectations I'd prefer if they adhered to the law.
 
There regulations about the percentage content in processed meats are already pretty lax (just because rat isn't listed doesn't mean there isn't any allowed in it). If you think hotdogs are bad you should see what they allow in those breakfast sausages. Despite my already lowered expectations I'd prefer if they adhered to the law.

Evidence?
 
I pretty much skimmed a few other articles not linked here which is where I saw those numbers. I just assumed TB claimed it was taco meat filling. If it is 88% beef then the lawsuit will probably be thrown out.
 
That's not the issue. The issue is that calling something that is only 36% beef "beef" is false advertising. If they called it "taco meat filling" the suit wouldn't have happened.

That said, I don't know anyone who expected there to really be all that much beef in the "beef" tacos. If anything, the fact that rat isn't listed among the ingredients is an improvement over my expectations.


Aren't there about a million better things to worry about, especially in this chaotic world we are in right now? Financial woes.. terrorism.. so many problems.

I mean, I could see if this could be argued to be a real health issue with some kind of study to back it, showing how this was actually hurting people or something. But this is just semantic ******** being stirred up by nanny state activist types who need to find better and more constructive things to put their efforts into.
 
Taco bell serves low quality food, the hell you say.

I think it is a given to assume taco bell food is about as healthy and real as soylent green. But i don't care , it is taco bell, i don't think " gee i need something healthy, lets go to taco bell.". I think " Hmm, it is open, i guess i will go to taco bell and eat something squeezed out of a tube. " Everyone knows your body reacts to it like you just drank windex, but it tastes kinda good.
 

Back
Top Bottom