Ohio Supreme Court: boneless chicken wings are a cooking style and chicken obviously has bones

[Manfred Belheim]

This thread is classic internet.

 

[Plains-Cow]

After reading the article itself... stupid clickbait.
("Boneless wing" is actually finger-shaped nugget of breast fillet. One such had a thin slice of bone left in and some unfortunate guy scratched his esophagus with that. In that context, perfectly sensible ruling).

For context, he sliced open his esophagus, was taken to the emergency room for emergency surgery, treated for chest infections over his heart, had a heart attack, was placed in two medical comas, and fed with a tube because he didn't have the common sense that boneless wings should be expected to have bones in them since chickens obviously have bones. The next time someone asks me, "Hey Plains-Cow, how do you cook wings?" I'm going to reply, "Boneless!" because, of course, that refers to a cooking style.

 

[Farm Boy]

Premasticate that stuff.

 

[danjuno]

This is Saturday morning cartoon villain levels of evil. The judicial branch has spent the last decade or so catching up at letting the mask slip in a way typically only elected politicians in the other branches had clearly done up to that point.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, if we're going to be burning our biscuits, we've got a lot more things to pick at!

Assuming the restaurant doesn't pack nuggets and instead ships them in, it's a processing issue, right? How many of those operations are left, given our governmental and market based approach to regulating and making them profitable? More illegalswork-permit-challenged to work in the packing plants again, after the border stuff, maybe they're doing better?

 

[Manfred Belheim]

This is why I stick to poisonless chicken as a general rule.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

I had boneless wings maybe once because I was dumb and didn't know. They're really just glorified nuggets, so I never understood the name.

It's a difficult situation because any meat could very well have a bone within it. I've had bones in burgers, ham, nuggets, etc. It's inevitable. You really just have to chew carefully, softly, in order to pick these things out before heaven forbid something gets stuck.

 

[Gorbles]

Excited to try out my new line of "just deal with it" when That Political Grouping get mad about the next thing they're invariably going to get mad about.

Seat belts, maybe.

 

[Farm Boy]

I say the regulatory point of interest here didn't happen in the restaurant, it probably can't be entirely dealt with and still sell chicken nuggets and you come back with seat belts for me?

Bit early to be drunk, isn't it?

 

[Plains-Cow]

I had boneless wings maybe once because I was dumb and didn't know. They're really just glorified nuggets, so I never understood the name.

It's a difficult situation because any meat could very well have a bone within it. I've had bones in burgers, ham, nuggets, etc. It's inevitable. You really just have to chew carefully, softly, in order to pick these things out before heaven forbid something gets stuck.

"Live by the boneless, die by the bone."

 

[Gorbles]

I say the regulatory point of interest here didn't happen in the restaurant, it probably can't be entirely dealt with and still sell chicken nuggets and you come back with seat belts for me?

Bit early to be drunk, isn't it?

All my favourite rulings are the ones I agree with.

 

[Farm Boy]

No, I'm just curious what to do with bones-removed chicken processes. I provided a link to a lot of current regulatory definitions, you can probably link follow to specifications and tolerances. Like allowable spiders per jar of peanut butter(I seem to remember it being ~3). So what's defined as a bone, rather than gristle, how big, and how many are allowed in the final product? Restaurants are not going to be pulling apart pre-ordered "chicken tenders(nuggets)" to check them. They are unlikely to be pressing chicken processing leavings into nugget patties in store either. If they're hand cutting meat, they're probably going to sell it as the better piece of meat it still is. Do you have a stance to take or are we just talking ****? The latter is fine, especially if you're drunk, but it'd be nice to track where we're at.

I mean, the simplest solution is to rename every product that is currently called "boneless" with "nugget," "finger," or "tender," but I'm not sure we actually prevent any esophageal perforations with that dog and pony show.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Well, the bones had been removed, except by accident some small shard remained. The court decided that this is not a danger that a reasonable person needs to be explicitly pre-warned about and I agree. It is not as if the guy was server regular chicken wings.

Or do you think the world would be a better place if restaurants started to include fine print warnings in their menus: "As a result of industrial de-boning process, boneless wings might rarely have shards of bones remaining inside them - please exercise appropriate caution when chewing and swallowing" ?

That depends on the size of the bone fragments remaining. If it's like pieces the size of a small seed than of course not. But if the fragments are large enough to be a choking hazard than one can reasonably claim negligence on part of whom ever supervised the process.

 

[Gorbles]

No, I'm just curious what to do with bones-removed chicken processes. I provided a link to a lot of current regulatory definitions, you can probably link follow to specifications and tolerances. Like allowable spiders per jar of peanut butter(I seem to remember it being ~3). So what's defined as a bone, rather than gristle, how big, and how many are allowed in the final product? Restaurants are not going to be pulling apart pre-ordered "chicken tenders(nuggets)" to check them. They are unlikely to be pressing chicken processing leavings into nugget patties in store either. If they're hand cutting meat, they're probably going to sell it as the better piece of meat it still is. Do you have a stance to take or are we just talking ****? The latter is fine, especially if you're drunk, but it'd be nice to track where we're at.

I'm assuming "torn a hole in a man's oesophagus" allows us to identify a tolerance that's well beyond what you're suggesting simply isn't doable.

If the seat belt analogy is verboten, I'll have to rely on a poorer one. It's like saying "well we can't prevent all digital threats so why bother ever preventing any". Except in that case it would wholly be personal choice, and people get mad when that choice is taken away from them (contextually at times justified, and at others times less so. But that's a derail, I'm just better at tech).

I'm also assuming that consistently, to be against them darn pesky feds being pesky, you should be more aligned with those criticising it. But alas.

No need to project on the drinking either. I don't rely on excuses

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

See if we all stopped eating meat, there’d be no bones about it!

 

[Plains-Cow]

That depends on the size of the bone fragments remaining. If it's like pieces the size of a small seed than of course not. But if the fragments are large enough to be a choking hazard than one can reasonably claim negligence on part of whom ever supervised the process.

It was a whole half of a wishbone; looked like a small knife.

 

[Farm Boy]

I'm assuming "torn a hole in a man's oesophagus" allows us to identify a tolerance that's well beyond what you're suggesting simply isn't doable.

I'm also assuming that consistently, to be against them darn pesky feds being pesky, you should be more aligned with those criticising it. But alas.

No need to project on the drinking either. I don't rely on excuses

It's 5 hours earlier here and I have a cold, not gonna be as intoxicated as making your points fun usually takes!

But hope springs eternal for future discussions!

One would think that if the processing actually was afoul(ha!) of current regulations(in a res ipsa sort of way), the lawsuit would have been better targeted at this, rather than at the name. But I don't know. For the people that are incensed about this more than I am, those regulations would seem to be the starting point.

 

[Gorbles]

It's 5 hours earlier here and I have a cold, not gonna be as intoxicated as making your points fun usually takes!

But hope springs eternal for future discussions.

For you and me both. Until then, hypocrisy is as hypocrisy does. The next time a big judgement comes down you're upset at, I'm sure folks will be supportive.

 

[Farm Boy]

I edited in a 3rd line, I hope it addresses this bog standard response, but maybe not.

 

[Plains-Cow]

Mandated x-ray machines in all restaurants for customers and employees to use to determine the risk factor present when horking down chicken lumps.

"Does YOUR chicken have bones? It could be likely!"