| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Tue May 26, 2009 8:44 pm Post subject: Korea: Harmful bacteria found in coffee franchises |
 |
|
As a lifelong coffee drinker I've always thought the concept of "iced" coffee was as bizarre as the taste is disgusting. Something dreamed up by the coffee franchises to deal with low sales of hot coffee in the summertime. Now I'm REALLY glad I don't drink the stuff:
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2905360 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue May 26, 2009 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fingers in ears.
LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forgive me if I am missing something but in each and every case wasn't the bacteria found in the ice/water of said beverages? Doesn't seem like a coffee joint problem to me, seems like a problem with the water supply.
If thats the case, wouldn't you be better off drinking a coffee with just a few ice cubes in it rather than a tall glass of water or some of the very common fruit juices around? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Good question...I don't know if staphylococcus aureus can be found in tapwater, but I do know it's a common bacteria found on human skin and in unsanitary postoperative wounds. So I would guess that at least part of the problem is unsanitary conditions and/or inadequate hand washing prior to preparing the drinks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The ice also contained 12 times the maximum number of a certain type of bacteria allowable by law. |
The only reason the ice contained 12 times the bacteria allowed by the law is because the government foolishly and immorally passed regulatory legislation limiting the amount of such bacteria allowed. If no such law exist, no laws would be broken, and we'd all be happier and more prosperous.
What were they thinking? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed May 27, 2009 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The ice also contained 12 times the maximum number of a certain type of bacteria allowable by law. |
The only reason the ice contained 12 times the bacteria allowed by the law is because the government foolishly and immorally passed regulatory legislation limiting the amount of such bacteria allowed. If no such law exist, no laws would be broken, and we'd all be happier and more prosperous.
What were they thinking? |
This is the government passing a law regulating the quality of a government provided service, and the service failed the governments own test. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The ice also contained 12 times the maximum number of a certain type of bacteria allowable by law. |
The only reason the ice contained 12 times the bacteria allowed by the law is because the government foolishly and immorally passed regulatory legislation limiting the amount of such bacteria allowed. If no such law exist, no laws would be broken, and we'd all be happier and more prosperous.
What were they thinking? |
This is the government passing a law regulating the quality of a government provided service, and the service failed the governments own test. |
My point was more that this is just another incident that makes it absolutely clear businesses will in no way monitor or improve themselves above and beyond what is required to maintain profitability regarding consumer safety. I agree the failure here was a governmental failure; it's the government's responsibility to enforce its mandates and keep its people safe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ...Um.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 1:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The ice also contained 12 times the maximum number of a certain type of bacteria allowable by law. |
The only reason the ice contained 12 times the bacteria allowed by the law is because the government foolishly and immorally passed regulatory legislation limiting the amount of such bacteria allowed. If no such law exist, no laws would be broken, and we'd all be happier and more prosperous.
What were they thinking? |
This is the government passing a law regulating the quality of a government provided service, and the service failed the governments own test. |
My point was more that this is just another incident that makes it absolutely clear businesses will in no way monitor or improve themselves above and beyond what is required to maintain profitability regarding consumer safety. I agree the failure here was a governmental failure; it's the government's responsibility to enforce its mandates and keep its people safe. |
Do you think a coffee chain that makes its customers sick will stay in business? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cheonmunka
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yes, because there are sooo many people who don't know about the problem and suck it up anyway when it happens to them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The ice also contained 12 times the maximum number of a certain type of bacteria allowable by law. |
The only reason the ice contained 12 times the bacteria allowed by the law is because the government foolishly and immorally passed regulatory legislation limiting the amount of such bacteria allowed. If no such law exist, no laws would be broken, and we'd all be happier and more prosperous.
What were they thinking? |
This is the government passing a law regulating the quality of a government provided service, and the service failed the governments own test. |
My point was more that this is just another incident that makes it absolutely clear businesses will in no way monitor or improve themselves above and beyond what is required to maintain profitability regarding consumer safety. I agree the failure here was a governmental failure; it's the government's responsibility to enforce its mandates and keep its people safe. |
Do you think a coffee chain that makes its customers sick will stay in business? |
Entirely possible if incidents of bacteria-driven sickness remain only moderately frequent, as without government monitoring many customers would never realize what was happening. I know if I were to get sick the iced coffee I drank that morning wouldn't exactly be the first suspect to come to mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Life is risky. You can't legislate for every little thing that might happen to a person in the course of his life. All we can do is try to keep safe on a personal level. Personally, having the govt worry about the water in my coffee makes me less safe as the worrying is paid for out of taxes that could have been used for something else. Something else such as buying more coffee that would create a job instead of destroying one through excessive regulation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| Life is risky. You can't legislate for every little thing that might happen to a person in the course of his life. All we can do is try to keep safe on a personal level. |
Many risks can be reduced via legislation, and I and many others want many risks reduced via legislation. I understand you want to live in some sort of Mad Max world where you're responsible for your own safety and the government doesn't provide services, but honestly I don't think most of us do (which is why people tend to vote for more regulation, not less).
I want to be able to buy food in a grocery store without wondering if it's toxic. I want to be able to buy a car certain it's reasonably safe. I want to be able to buy medicine without wondering if the people are lying to me about what it does. Regulation can give me this, and I'm willing to pay part of my income for it.
You want a risky life and no taxes? Feel free to move to Somalia. Most of us in the developed world aren't interested in your hypothetical unregulated Utopia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| Life is risky. You can't legislate for every little thing that might happen to a person in the course of his life. All we can do is try to keep safe on a personal level. |
Many risks can be reduced via legislation, and I and many others want many risks reduced via legislation. I understand you want to live in some sort of Mad Max world where you're responsible for your own safety and the government doesn't provide services, but honestly I don't think most of us do (which is why people tend to vote for more regulation, not less).
I want to be able to buy food in a grocery store without wondering if it's toxic. I want to be able to buy a car certain it's reasonably safe. I want to be able to buy medicine without wondering if the people are lying to me about what it does. Regulation can give me this, and I'm willing to pay part of my income for it.
You want a risky life and no taxes? Feel free to move to Somalia. Most of us in the developed world aren't interested in your hypothetical unregulated Utopia. |
Jesus. Just call a lawyer and sue them for negligence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| Life is risky. You can't legislate for every little thing that might happen to a person in the course of his life. All we can do is try to keep safe on a personal level. |
Many risks can be reduced via legislation, and I and many others want many risks reduced via legislation. I understand you want to live in some sort of Mad Max world where you're responsible for your own safety and the government doesn't provide services, but honestly I don't think most of us do (which is why people tend to vote for more regulation, not less).
I want to be able to buy food in a grocery store without wondering if it's toxic. I want to be able to buy a car certain it's reasonably safe. I want to be able to buy medicine without wondering if the people are lying to me about what it does. Regulation can give me this, and I'm willing to pay part of my income for it.
You want a risky life and no taxes? Feel free to move to Somalia. Most of us in the developed world aren't interested in your hypothetical unregulated Utopia. |
Jesus. Just call a lawyer and sue them for negligence. |
I'd prefer to never suffer in the first place than to suffer then possibly be compensated if I can prove it was their fault. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
