Vegans Sue Burger King Because They Think Meat Contaminated the Impossible Whopper
Burger King countered that it told people the restaurants would cook the patty “in an ‘open kitchen environment.'”
Nothing, I repeat nothing, will ever satisfy these people.
Burger King attempted to reach a broader audience by offering the Impossible Whopper, a plant-based patty that tastes like the Whopper.
But vegans have sued Burger King because meat has contaminated the new “burger.”
From TMZ:
Phillip Williams just filed the lawsuit, claiming the burger giant advertises the Impossible Burger as a vegan alternative to its meat burgers, yet they’re all cooked on the same grill.
Williams says his burger was contaminated by meat byproducts. He bought the burger in question in ATL.
The lawsuit says Burger King has no disclosures on its menu that would notify a consumer prior to the purchase of the Impossible Whopper that it was cooked in a manner that would result in meat by-products on the burger.
Williams is seeking damages. He also wants the judge to force Burger King to cook the patties on a different grill.
However, Burger King countered that it told people the restaurants would cook the patty “in an ‘open kitchen environment.'” The company placed an asterisk on the Impossible Whopper’s launch page to warn “consumers of its cooking methods.”
Burger King also stated the restaurants can prepare the Impossible Wopper “in an oven instead of in the shared broiler” if requested by the customer.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Oh dear me!
Where are the original SNL comedy writers when you need them?
Honestly you can’t make up such craziness as this!!!!!
Next I suppose the vegans will demand that their meatless burgers be fried by nude cooks so they’re be now leather shoes or belts, etc. anywhere near their meatless burgers……
wish I could feel sorry for Burger King, but you reap what you sow.
This is a wonderful warning to every other restaurant chain or private to get away from Impossible Burger and the like now. The lawsuits isn’t worth the hassle or buying a seperate grill.
Wokescolds cannot be made happy, they can only be made more miserable by any action you do. Therefore the best way to contribute to their enjoyment (such as it is) of life is to do *nothing* for them. Ignore them. Well, we can still laugh at them, just do it quietly and with some respect.
They’d rather have their grievance than ever have it rectified to their satisfaction.
Give an inch, they’ll take a mile, then complain about you not giving a mile in the first place.
Vegans are B-12 deficient. Keep it natural.
I read an article the other day about a vegan couple who kept their little child on a vegan diet. He died of starvation.
Maybe I should sue BK (see the wall st. definiton of that abbreviation) over contaminating my meat with the GMO Soy Frankenfood.
Apparently a vegan diet is no cure for chronic butthurt.
The enablers of all this expensive wackiness are lawyers.
If professionals used some minimal professional judgement and just told some of the more outrageous customers to bugger off, the world would be a better place. Other fields—medicine, engineering, etc.do—have professional standards about what they will and will not do. Lawyers should be able to manage it, too.
Did Burger King promise a vegan burger? If so, BK should not be cooking that vegan burger on the same grill they cook meat burgers on. At least, not without proper disclosure.
I don’t think “an open kitchen environment” is proper disclosure. I would not understand that to mean on a cooktop used for meat.
BK never promised a vegan burger – they very specifically did not call it vegan – whoppers come with mayo for goodness’ sake! They gave all the disclosure anyone with actual food allergies would need to make an informed choice, so what the heck is wrong with vegans that this isn’t enough?
Oh. AND. They offered an alternative cooking method just in case, all anyone has to do is ask. Again – all the information was readily available to anyone who bothered to read the information or simply ask the question.
If you felt that strongly about it, then you could ask the kid at the counter, couldn’t you? They don’t have a “certified” Vegan kitchen because Burger King is a MEAT based restaurant. There are no health or religious issues that would justify the time, hassle and expense, not to mention the sheer stupidity of such a stunt. If vegan customers want a vegan meal, they can either take the chance with a M/W burger inside a restaurant surrounded by meat or they can walk out the door and graze on the landscape around their local Burger King store and stop trying to pretend you can be Vegan and eat a freaking Hamburger.
It’s the same crowd, and the same philosophy, as those who declare themselves “atheists” but celebrate Christmas (without Christ, of course), because they like getting presents.
Let’s consider this for a minute, Burger King is supposed to build a new kitchen or entirely sterilize the old one between burgers?
Yeah that’s reasonable. Scraping the grill is more than due diligence.
“I don’t think…”
Could have just stopped with that.
I just learned the breakfast place I frequent cooks my bacon on the same grill as eggs! D*mn them! When I order bacon, I want bacon and not not bacon!
Then there are those of us who fry our eggs in bacon grease.
Yummmm!
Mary Cooper: The trick to pancakes is bacon grease. I cook everything in it.
Leonard Hofstedter: Everything? Aren’t you worried about your health?
Mary Cooper: Oh, doctors are always changing their mind. One week bacon grease is bad for you. The next week we’re not getting enough of it.
– The Big Bang Theory, “The Rhinitis Revelation”
This reminds me of the time I was helping out a friend throw a BBQ for his neighbors (kali). A couple of his neighbors were vegans. So we prepared vegan kebabs for them. We thought we were being considerate. That we had really went out of our way to accommodate them.
They refused to eat those kebabs because they had been cooked on the same grills as the meat.
At first we thought they were kidding.
No, they were serious.
So the only sane follow-on response was, “GTF out and don’t come back.” Then we threw the vegan kabobs in the trash because no sane person would eat that compost.
Which really should be Burger King’s response. But it’s their own damned fault for falling into the legal trap in the first place.
Never, ever, give an inch to the left.
I’m pretty sure what these people are craving is not a “meatless burger” but a cock sandwich. Stuff their mouths full of that and they’ll STFU.
My last experience with BK leaves me to wonder if they put actual meat on their regular whopper
Hard to find underneath that head of lettuce and the sliver of pinkish tomato looking thingie
If they can’t find a reason not to bitch, let’s just quit being so foolishly accommodating and let the perpetual whiners eat all their meals at home. Preferably in their own back yards, grazing on all fours.
What would these people do if they ever absolutely had their way?
Commit genocide.
I was in line yesterday and the counter girl got my order of a double cheese burger and the Impossible Burger guy’s order mixed up for a few seconds because they came out at the same time. I was the professional looking guy, he the construction worker, she the Filipino immigrant. We sorted it out and all had a good laugh, knowing certain stereotypes came into play. Then went back to our jobs.
This is the way it was supposed to work.
I don’t believe they ever claimed it was vegan, just meat free. They took credit for the burgers having a smaller carbon footprint (no cow-farts required).
Could someone please explain to me how damages on this suit could be any more than the cost of exactly one impossible burger?
haha!
I think Burger King should have to file their legal fees under advertising.
I used to be a vegan in my younger/stupider days and I am intrigued enough to want to try it. Best vegan burger I ever had was at Nepenthe in Big Sur watching the whales swim by. No doubt because it was grilled next to real burgers.
I may have to try it to see how far things have advance and I think that the jury should have to factor my purchase into the damages.
Sooo…about the bun and the condiments….also 100% vegan? Certified Vegan? Kosher Pareve? No cheese allowed cheaters!!
This is what the vagans did to McDonalds in 1990. They agitated because McDonald’s fries were deep fried in oil that contained a little beef tallow for flavor. McDonald’s (and all other fast food outlets) capitulated and now their fries are pretty much tasteless and the replacement oils are more heart-unfriendly. Malcolm Gladwell Has Some Serious Thoughts About McDonald’s Fries
Vegans would bitch if you hung them with a gold rope!
There is definitely a food safety concern when fast-cooking foods share a grill with meat. The lawsuit does not mention food safety, but that would be a legitimate argument. Everyone knows that hamburger must be thoroughly cooked and should reach an internal temperature of 165 degrees F. Everyone knows that the spatula and any other tools that came into contact with undercooked meat must be “flamed” or cleaned prior to using them on cooked food. I have no idea what is in the vegan burger (soy, grains, etc.?) but I would want to know it was prepared separately from potential contaminates found in meat. I do not support this lawsuit, but I think food safety must be a high priority.
Last I looked meat was food.
“I have no idea…”
Apparently.
Three problems:
1. Not a vegan burger nor advertised as such. It’s advertised as a meatless burger.
2. Modern veganism usually excludes soy as an “evil” gmo product (and the major product, wheat, is not far behind). If they can find ANY evidence of this guy spouting off about the evils of soy and/or wheat, they can puncture huge holes in his laughable damages claim.
3. You spout off nonsense about food safety, but in order to claim damages, the plaintiff would need to prove that the food was microbially contaminated and unsafe.
Please cease and desist on using my state’s namesake in the future (whether it’s your real name or not). We have enough problems here thanks to liberal migration.
I don’t believe for 1 nano-second that cross-contamination has any role what so-ever in fast food safety. How many burgers do these guys serve every day? But one never hears about food poisoning.
Um, BK offers an alternative cooking method (I suspect zapping it in a ‘crowave). That lawsuit would be summarily quashed anywhere but in California.
Burger King deserves this stupid lawsuit for serving a “burger” like this.
no, they deserve mockery, not another cash grab precedent setting judgment or settlement.
Um, the name of the restaurant is “Burger King”, not “Veggie King”. Ordering ANYTHING from them and then getting pissed that maybe it isn’t as pristine as your unrealistic snowflake standards think it should be because it was cooked near… wait for it… BURGERS is like going to a barber shop and then getting pissed that you somehow got a haircut while you were there.
No sympathy for dumbasses.
I really don’t give a D if someone wants to be a vegetarian or a vegan.
Expecting the rest of us to cater to you is nuts. Want a burger cooked in a place that doesn’t have any possibility of cross contamination?
Don’t go to Burger King to get it.
Oh, and BK, get a clue. Don’t cater to nuts.
This won’t be about the lawsuit, which is obviously ridiculous, but about “Impossible Burger” itself. Late last month, I tried one. Not at a Burger King but at brewpub that’s also well regarded for its cooking. I’d intended to do that at Burger King, but saw this as a great opportunity because the soyburger would have a fighting chance in the hands of good cooks.
So I ordered one Impossible and one real burger, and alternated. A few bites of one, a few bites of another. I might add that I’m on the adventurous side when it comes to food, having once wolfed down a couple scoops of black ants on rice in China, and then getting a second helping to show that no one was going to intimidate this American.
My conclusion was that the “Impossible Burger” is edible but entirely tasteless. Reminded me of taro, a Polynesian starch served at a luau in Hawaii, except even blander. 100% of “Impossible” flavor comes from what you put on it. The patty is entirely inert. The real burger was far, far tastier. “Impossible Burger,” one and done.
That night, as my stomach was churning a bit, I looked up the ingredients. The first thing to say is that these things, both “Impossible” and a competitor, “Beyond,” are made of highly processed ingredients. I think that’s somewhat ironic given how the same people who want to avoid meat are typically rattling on about the overprocessed Western diet. Well, kids, these “Impossible” and “Beyond” are a chemical stew.
One of the chemicals explains why my gut churned. “Impossible Burger” contains methylcellulose, an ingredient that absorbs moisture and bulks things up. Think of an alternative to corn starch; why they don’t just use corn starch, I don’t know. Anyway, methylcellulose also has some other properties, one being laxative. In fact, there’s a brand name laxative (I forget which one) out there that is made from methylcellulose.
I had to also chuckle at another use of methylcellulose. K-Y jelly apparently is entirely methylcellulose, along with the rest of the “water-based personal lubricants.” Trust me, I think modern lube is a gift, but it’s really not been anything that I’ve ever eaten, at least not on purpose. But methylcellulose’s laxative and lubricant properties might explain why my “Impossible Burger” lunch was telling my stomach that it wanted to slide right on through.
So there you have it. I tried it that you might not have to.
Reminding me of my first, and last, time trying seaweed salad. Never thought something raw could taste burnt.
Seaweed, and its land-based cousin, kale, is best consumed as a minor part of something else.
If the fast food chains want to provide a meatless burger they should just offer a portobello mushroom or a meatless burger with an extra thick stack of lettuce inside to crunch on topped by your favorite fixings. Those aren’t “burgers” but they are both tasty and satisfying.
My sneaking suspicion is that Burger King is behind the lawsuit so their insurance company can pay for all of this publicity.
I’m a very happy carnivore, just getting to the end of a half beef purchased a couple years ago direct from a rancher who also supplies Whole Foods. So don’t interpret the following as my being anything close to a vegan; far from it.
I’ve seen portabella burgers out there. Probably had one at some point, given my willingness to try different food. Most experiments wind up being “one and done,” the most recent before the “Impossible Burger” having been Indian fry bread at a native place in Southern Utah.
But hell, this is America and people should eat what they want to eat and not eat what they don’t want to eat. As an occasional dinner party host, I’ll accommodate people. I recall accommodating someone who had Celiac Disease that makes it very hard to digest grains. For those interested, it’s VERY easy to accommodate.
All I ever object to is drama and/or lectures. The guy with Celiac didn’t make any kind of production out of it. In advance of the dinner, he informed me and we talked about it. There was no sweeping declaration of “gluten sensitivity.”
I have another friend who’s recently been diagnosed with severe gout. That one can be triggered by all kinds of foods, and in his case meat is a trigger. He’s not happy about it; not only is gout really rough, but he sure as hell didn’t want to give up burgers and steaks.
He doesn’t lecture anyone either.
portobello burgers can be really good, but have to be done right. The good ones are thick and meaty as opposed to limp and gloppy. Probably not something that can be mass marketed very well.
the same people who want to avoid meat are typically rattling on about the over-processed Western diet.”
Perhaps, yet is it not obvious that that something like this (making plant foods imitate meat) must be an engineered product? How could it be anything else? Surely no one would expect minimally processed plant foods to look, taste or smell anything like meat?
Then again, they did brand it “impossible burger.” So, perhaps some really do expect the impossible from it.
And, umm, yes, perhaps this is mostly an argument illustrating why an excess of lawyers might lead to rent-seeking and parasitism.
I think the “Impossible Burger” is pitched at urban hipsters, along with middle-aged fat women who blame everything other than eating too much for that extra 40 pounds. I laugh, especially at the guys who eat those things, seemingly oblivious to the estrogenic effect of consuming a lot of soy.
But hey, as long as they don’t interfere with my dead cow, chicken, pig, and fish, I’m fine with it. I predict a fairly short half-life for mass-market fake burgers. I expect it to be like the cigar bubble of the late 1990s, where a lot of men went out an bought a box and never bought another one.
Most of them learned that they didn’t much like cigars, and the rest decided that they weren’t good enough to be kicked out of bed for smoking. LOL. Once people have an Impossible Burger or three, I think the majority will switch back.