Re: Feeding gel candy to a 2-year-old

[Roger Schlafly]

"Tsu Dho Nimh" > wrote
> The problem with "konjac" is that, unlike gelatin, it does not
> dissolve with body heat. The candies were of exactly the right
> size to act as corks ... and the manufacturer knew it.

Yes, I am sure the manufacturer knew the size of the candy.
I bought some of that candy. It was ok for adults. I would not
have fed it to a 20-month-old baby. It was not marked as baby food.

[Jeff Utz]

"Roger Schlafly" > wrote in message
...
> "Tsu Dho Nimh" > wrote
> > The problem with "konjac" is that, unlike gelatin, it does not
> > dissolve with body heat. The candies were of exactly the right
> > size to act as corks ... and the manufacturer knew it.
>
> Yes, I am sure the manufacturer knew the size of the candy.
> I bought some of that candy. It was ok for adults. I would not
> have fed it to a 20-month-old baby. It was not marked as baby food.


Get a clue. Kids eat candy. To make candy that can get caught in a child's
throat is irresponsible.

Especially when the make of the candy should know that should a child die
from it, the maker will be sued.

All the best,

Jeff

[Geezer From The Freezer]

I've heard of sillier, like the woman who sued a shop for tripping
over a child. The child being hers. She won - ludicrous!!!

Would never happen in the UK.

[Mark]

"Roger Schlafly" > wrote in message >...
> "Jeff Utz" > wrote
> > Especially when the make of the candy should know that should a child die
> > from it, the maker will be sued.
>
> So tell the candymakers to quit using peanuts.


No, tell parents to be aware of choking hazards. I know it goes
against the sensibilities of people like you and JG, but *someone* has
to educate parents about choking hazards. Not everyone is as smart
and completely knowledgable on all aspects of child rearing as you'd
like to think.

I think the culpability should be equally applied between the
manufacturer and the parents in this case. The maker didn't call
these things "Mr. Happy's Trachea Plugs", but they might as well have.
The parents, however, should have had the sense not to feed their
toddler a piece of candy like that.

Mark, MD

[Mark]

"Roger Schlafly" > wrote in message >...
> "Jeff Utz" > wrote
> > Especially when the make of the candy should know that should a child die
> > from it, the maker will be sued.
>
> So tell the candymakers to quit using peanuts.


No, tell parents to be aware of choking hazards. I know it goes
against the sensibilities of people like you and JG, but *someone* has
to educate parents about choking hazards. Not everyone is as smart
and completely knowledgable on all aspects of child rearing as you'd
like to think.

I think the culpability should be equally applied between the
manufacturer and the parents in this case. The maker didn't call
these things "Mr. Happy's Trachea Plugs", but they might as well have.
The parents, however, should have had the sense not to feed their
toddler a piece of candy like that.

Mark, MD

[Mark Probert]

Mark wrote:

> "Roger Schlafly" > wrote in message >...
>
>>"Jeff Utz" > wrote
>>
>>>Especially when the make of the candy should know that should a child die
>>>from it, the maker will be sued.
>>
>>So tell the candymakers to quit using peanuts.
>
>
>
> No, tell parents to be aware of choking hazards. I know it goes
> against the sensibilities of people like you and JG, but *someone* has
> to educate parents about choking hazards. Not everyone is as smart
> and completely knowledgable on all aspects of child rearing as you'd
> like to think.
>
> I think the culpability should be equally applied between the
> manufacturer and the parents in this case. The maker didn't call
> these things "Mr. Happy's Trachea Plugs", but they might as well have.
> The parents, however, should have had the sense not to feed their
> toddler a piece of candy like that.


When my kids were small, I had a plastic tube which was approximately
the diameter of a 3 year old's trachea. We went around the house looking
for things that would slide down it.

I was amazed at some of the things that fit.

[Jeff Utz]

"Mark Probert" > wrote in message
et...
> Mark wrote:

(...)

> When my kids were small, I had a plastic tube which was approximately
> the diameter of a 3 year old's trachea. We went around the house looking
> for things that would slide down it.

I have a good subsitiute for one of those tubes: the core of a roll of
toilet paper.

Jeff

[LSU Grad of '89]

Mark, give some of us parnets the benefit of the doubt. I did not know that
these foreign gel candies WERE NOT GELATIN.....I heard about the damn things
on an Oprah I had recorded. I am a FT workign mom - an engineer
(nevertheless a thinking individual) - and Yes, they should be called Mr.
Happy's Trachea Plugs - that's more warning than those Chinese packages
give. If you don't know it's not gelatin and you don't read the package -
and who does when both parents are trying to keep thier jobs by working OT
and the 2 yo is frustrated and falling apart by the time you get dinner
ready ? They need to completely ban these things, but I saw some in Honolulu
just last week.

Also, be aware that baby oil can be aspirated, and has killed at least one
child this way. Sad, but one child dying of anything preventable with proper
warning to parents - one child dying is too many....

L.


"Mark" > wrote in message
om...
> "Roger Schlafly" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Jeff Utz" > wrote
> > > Especially when the make of the candy should know that should a child
die
> > > from it, the maker will be sued.
> >
> > So tell the candymakers to quit using peanuts.
>
>
> No, tell parents to be aware of choking hazards. I know it goes
> against the sensibilities of people like you and JG, but *someone* has
> to educate parents about choking hazards. Not everyone is as smart
> and completely knowledgable on all aspects of child rearing as you'd
> like to think.
>
> I think the culpability should be equally applied between the
> manufacturer and the parents in this case. The maker didn't call
> these things "Mr. Happy's Trachea Plugs", but they might as well have.
> The parents, however, should have had the sense not to feed their
> toddler a piece of candy like that.
>
> Mark, MD

[JG]

"Roger Schlafly" > wrote in message
...

> A California judge thinks that a candy maker should pay $50M to
> parents who fed gel candy to a toddler:

> http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/6283711.htm

> Family of child who choked on candy awarded $50 million

[...]

The article didn't point out that it's likely the Jing family won't see
a cent of the award; collecting damages from Taiwan-based companies is
notoriously difficult. I'm really surprised the judge in this case
(even though the trial did take place in the Bay "I'm a victim; it's not
MY fault" Area) didn't find that there was contributory negligence on
the part of the parents, i.e., that *their* lack of sound judgment was
the proximate cause of their son's death. What's next, suits against
grape growers? Orville Redenbacher? Oscar Mayer?

The article also didn't state whether Sheng Hsiang Jen Foods (or the
company[ies] that distributed their gel candy, if they didn't market it
themselves) had a warning label on the package; apparently some brands
did have labels advising that the candy not be given to young children.

[Kathy]

Jeff Utz wrote:

> "Mark Probert" > wrote in message
> et...
> > Mark wrote:
>
> (...)
>
> > When my kids were small, I had a plastic tube which was approximately
> > the diameter of a 3 year old's trachea. We went around the house looking
> > for things that would slide down it.
>
> I have a good subsitiute for one of those tubes: the core of a roll of
> toilet paper.
>
> Jeff

A cardboard toilet paper roll is bigger than an adult's trachea, let alone a
young child's.

Kathy

[Jeff Utz]

"Kathy" > wrote in message
...
> Jeff Utz wrote:
>
> > "Mark Probert" > wrote in message
> > et...
> > > Mark wrote:
> >
> > (...)
> >
> > > When my kids were small, I had a plastic tube which was approximately
> > > the diameter of a 3 year old's trachea. We went around the house
looking
> > > for things that would slide down it.
> >
> > I have a good subsitiute for one of those tubes: the core of a roll of
> > toilet paper.
> >
> > Jeff
>
> A cardboard toilet paper roll is bigger than an adult's trachea, let alone
a
> young child's.

Correct. But few things that can slip through a toilet paper core can also
get stuck in a child's respiratory tree. And something does not have to slip
into trachea to cause respiratory distress.

Jeff

> Kathy
>

[Mark Probert]

Kathy wrote:
> Jeff Utz wrote:
>
>
>>"Mark Probert" > wrote in message
et...
>>
>>>Mark wrote:
>>
>>(...)
>>
>>
>>>When my kids were small, I had a plastic tube which was approximately
>>>the diameter of a 3 year old's trachea. We went around the house looking
>>>for things that would slide down it.
>>
>>I have a good subsitiute for one of those tubes: the core of a roll of
>>toilet paper.
>>
>>Jeff
>
>
> A cardboard toilet paper roll is bigger than an adult's trachea, let alone a
> young child's.

it makes a better safety standard, as it provides a larger margin for
error and how kids seem to get around everything.

[zzz]

On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 03:21:09 GMT, "LSU Grad of '89"
>

>Mark, give some of us parnets the benefit of the doubt. I did not know that
>these foreign gel candies WERE NOT GELATIN.....I heard about the damn things
>on an Oprah I had recorded. I am a FT workign mom - an engineer
>(nevertheless a thinking individual) - and Yes, they should be called Mr.
>Happy's Trachea Plugs - that's more warning than those Chinese packages
>give. If you don't know it's not gelatin and you don't read the package -
>and who does when both parents are trying to keep thier jobs by working OT
>and the 2 yo is frustrated and falling apart by the time you get dinner
>ready ?

If you're both working OT, why do you think you have time to raise
children?


>They need to completely ban these things, but I saw some in Honolulu
>just last week.
>
>Also, be aware that baby oil can be aspirated, and has killed at least one
>child this way. Sad, but one child dying of anything preventable with proper
>warning to parents - one child dying is too many....
>
>L.
>
>
>"Mark" > wrote in message
om...
>> "Roger Schlafly" > wrote in message
>...
>> > "Jeff Utz" > wrote
>> > > Especially when the make of the candy should know that should a child
>die
>> > > from it, the maker will be sued.
>> >
>> > So tell the candymakers to quit using peanuts.
>>
>>
>> No, tell parents to be aware of choking hazards. I know it goes
>> against the sensibilities of people like you and JG, but *someone* has
>> to educate parents about choking hazards. Not everyone is as smart
>> and completely knowledgable on all aspects of child rearing as you'd
>> like to think.
>>
>> I think the culpability should be equally applied between the
>> manufacturer and the parents in this case. The maker didn't call
>> these things "Mr. Happy's Trachea Plugs", but they might as well have.
>> The parents, however, should have had the sense not to feed their
>> toddler a piece of candy like that.
>>
>> Mark, MD
>

[Paul Robinson]

Roger Schlafly wrote:

> A California judge thinks that a candy maker should pay $50M to
> parents who fed gel candy to a toddler:

Try again. If you had read the article, you would have noted it said that a
California judge ordered a DEFAULT JUDGMENT against the (Taiwanese)
manufacturer for not having anyone show up to defend the case.

I suspect that they would have to go to Taiwan to enforce the order, and a
court there might not be so likely to do so. Unless the company has U.S.
assets it doesn't matter how many judgments they get, or anyone gets.


--
Paul Robinson "Above all else... We shall go on..."
"...And continue!"
"If the lessons of history teach us anything it is
that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us."

[Roger Schlafly]

"Paul Robinson" > wrote in
> > A California judge thinks that a candy maker should pay $50M to
> > parents who fed gel candy to a toddler:
> Try again. If you had read the article, you would have noted it said that
a
> California judge ordered a DEFAULT JUDGMENT against the (Taiwanese)
> manufacturer for not having anyone show up to defend the case.

Yes, I read the article, and my statement was correct. The judge
set the damages as $50M, in his opinion.