Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Disgusting fast food cases in the news

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Disgusting fast food cases in the news

    West Virginia Pizza Hut manager canned after peeing in kitchen sink


    The unnamed manager, who oversaw six different locations, was caught on camera Jan. 29 peeing in a sink in the Kermit restaurant's kitchen. He was immediately fired, and health inspectors closed the location.

    The regional manager for six West Virginia Pizza Hut franchises has been flushed from his job after surveillance video captured him peeing in the sink in a food prep area.

    Dated Jan. 29, the video shows the unnamed manager on a computer before walking over to the metal sink, unzipping his fly and letting loose. Once he finishes, the man turns on the faucet — not to wash his hands, but presumably to “flush” his urine.

    (video)

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1620641
    Or, how about this one:


    Texas pizza employee who rubbed genitals on customer's order apologizes: cops


    Austin Michael Symonds, 18, was reportedly upset that the family sized pizza was ordered 30 minutes before closing, so he decided to rub his testicles on it as punishment. The pizza's intended customer walked in, however, and caught him in the act, said police.


    Austin Michael Symonds, 18, was charged with tampering with a consumer product after allegedly caught rubbing his genitals on a consumer's pizza at Papa Murphy's Pizza in Texas.

    Austin Michael Symonds, 18, was disgustingly caught in the act of defiling the pre-baked food just as its intended customer walked in to the Texas pizzeria pick it up.

    When Symonds realized he was caught, he allegedly apologized, saying: "Man, I am really sorry. That was stupid."
    The shocked customer asked Symonds how old he is. When he replied, the customer said: "So you are old enough to know better."
    "Yes," Symonds answered.
    In a recorded phone call between Symonds and the store's manager, the teen said he pulled off the filthy stunt in an act of revenge for the order's timing.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1941878


  • #2
    Many humans are filthy, you take your chances when you eat their food.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Steve856
      Yes, it is disgusting. And most likely illegal. But are either one of these cases harmful to health?

      In the first case, the urine was washed down the sink, so it never touched the food, but even if it did, it is my understanding that urine is generally very free pathogens.

      Both cases resulted in arrests, the thing is, in the video of the kitchen sink used as a urinal, you can clearly see the guy didn't wash his hands, which means he was there prepping food and whatnot with his dirty hands. What else does he do there that we haven't seen is the question. If he didn't even bother washing his hands after peeing in the kitchen sink, is he also fixing sandwiches, slicing tomatos or otherwise handling food after taking a dump, handling the garbage, picking his nose?

      The other guy scrotum dunking the customer's pizza, there's another one you can figure also doesn't bother washing his hands either when handling food. The fact he did this because he was angry the customer ordered 30 mins before closing strongly suggests this guy is a mental case, what else has he done before getting caught? dripped drain cleaner on the food? wiped his butt with the napkins before folding them back up and putting them in the bag for the customer?
      We all know they have done this before, this time they got caught, how many people get sick out of the blue and have no idea how they got sick?
      This is how salmonella, hepatitus and many other illnesses are spread.

      Comment


      • #4
        If I rubbed my junk on something every time I had to respond to a call 30 minutes before ending tour of duty... Well, I guess dayshift would be fighting over who has to drive my car.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Steve856
          Thank you.

          I see what you are saying. Whereas I questioned whether the exhibited actions of these food handlers are harmful, you interpreted their actions simply as exemplary of a series of harmful conduct.

          So what you are saying is that it is not simply the lack of washing his hands after peeing or rubbing of the testicles on the food product that is wrongful, but other wrongful action which these actions telegraph.

          I think you have it correct, these actions go well beyond just what we see in the video and know about because as we all know these particular incidents are absolutely beyond doubt not the first and only time these guys have done these and similar acts, much like the burglar or car thief getting away with a lot- this was the one time they got caught.
          Much like the burglar or car thief you know when they are caught it wasn't their very first time either.

          So with that in mind it's indicative of a pattern of very negative behavior, this time it was urinating in the sink and not washing his hands either, the very fact he didn't even wash his hands tells me he almost certainly doesn't bother to do it at any other time except maybe when someone else is nearby and might observe.
          So there he is, the store manager, handling dirty cash, using the sink or the restroom, blowing his nose, whatever, handling food and not washing his hands, he's a public safety h***ard and should never be in the food handling business.

          The scrotum dunker, this one has some serious "issues" he's angry because someone ordered near closing time, having worked years ago in a pizza delivery only unit I can state without reservation that it was very common for people to call for a pizza even 2 minutes before closing time and wanting it delivered all the way over on the other side of town. Normal people might get annoyed if they are at the end of a 10 hour shift, tired, and wanting to get home, they might try and get out of it with a "sorry, we're closed" they don't drop their pants down in a public restaurant and rub their scrotum (or worse) and stuff on food in some kind of "retaliation" for someone harmlessly ordering food because they got home late from work and didn't want to cook.

          So what else has this scrotum dunker done before? spit on someone's food and serve it? what if he has hepatitus, TB in an early stage, drops some drain cleaner on someones' food, or fishes something out of the toilet bowl and includes it in the meal? This time he was caught because the customer who ordered just happened to walk in at the right time to see it! a minute either way and the story would have changed and testicle dunker would still be working there today.

          This guy is a nut case who needs psychiatric care, and a public health h***ard as well, he should never be in any job that involves food handling either. Maybe a job manning a toll booth or janitorial work suits him better who knows.
          Last edited by Sculptor; 09-20-2014, 04:00 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Steve856
            Yes, it is disgusting. And most likely illegal. But are either one of these cases harmful to health?

            In the first case, the urine was washed down the sink, so it never touched the food, but even if it did, it is my understanding that urine is generally very free pathogens.

            In the second case, well, many women and men imbibe in semen. There are actually cookbooks on this subject, e.g.,
            http://www.amazon.com/Natural-Harves.../dp/1481227041 . (Uh, no, I do not speak from personal experience.)
            Yes, it is directly harmful. There are many pathogens transmitted through urine and semen. In the case of urination, that sink, which is in the food preparation area, may come into contact with food items or dishware/utensils used to prepare food. In the case of semen, that has great potential to transmit communicable diseases. Both cases would be considered imminent health hazards.
            "Respect is earned. Honesty is appreciated. Trust is gained. Loyalty is returned."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Steve856
              I have no question that from legal view point that exposure to either urine or semen, or any other fluid bodily fluid, is considered to present an “imminent health hazard.” Exposure to imminent health hazards is strictly controlled in the food industry. Just as most people, I too find urine and semen to food to be disgusting, and I am all for limiting urine and semen in my food by declaring it as presenting an imminent health hazard.

              My posting merely questioned whether either of the instances really presented any statistically significant health hazard. As in a health hazard defined by science, and not as legal construct. I have a hard time believing that in either of the two cases above, there is a significant health threat.

              Urine is generally free of pathogens. The exception is in cases of bacteriuria, which are common in patients with an indwelling catheter, is also seen in older LT care residents, and occasionally occurs in pregnant females. In the first case, there is a very little chance (<1%) that the urine of the contained any pathogens. And of course, after washing the urine down the sink like he did, drastically drops the likelihood that anyone would suffer from his urination. There are much bigger health hazards to worry about in a typical kitchen, than this.

              In the second case the probability of getting infected is even lower. It is zero. The dough that the Mr. Austin Michael Symonds teabagged or ejaculated into was raw. Commercial pizza ovens heat at 500 to 600 °F (260 °C to 320 °C) into which the raw dough is placed for several minutes. Autoclaves, which sterilize instruments and other objects, operate at much lower temperatures, 250 °F (or about 120 °C) for shorter amount of time. Although autoclaves operate at higher than ambient pressures, I do not see how anything can survive such incredibly high temperatures.

              (As an aside, I wonder what percentage of people who perform felatio get sick because of pathogens in the semen.)
              You sir, are a complete moron. What consenting adults do or not do has no bearing on being subjected to somebody's filth unexpectedly. Trying to justify it in any way makes you a sicko. I'm glad there are laws against it. Why don't you go lobby your legislators to make sharing your personal body excretions for digestion perfectly legal.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Steve856
                I have no question that from legal view point that exposure to either urine or semen, or any other fluid bodily fluid, is considered to present an “imminent health hazard.” Exposure to imminent health hazards is strictly controlled in the food industry. Just as most people, I too find urine and semen to food to be disgusting, and I am all for limiting urine and semen in my food by declaring it as presenting an imminent health hazard.

                My posting merely questioned whether either of the instances really presented any statistically significant health hazard. As in a health hazard defined by science, and not as legal construct. I have a hard time believing that in either of the two cases above, there is a significant health threat.

                Urine is generally free of pathogens. The exception is in cases of bacteriuria, which are common in patients with an indwelling catheter, is also seen in older LT care residents, and occasionally occurs in pregnant females. In the first case, there is a very little chance (<1%) that the urine of the contained any pathogens. And of course, after washing the urine down the sink like he did, drastically drops the likelihood that anyone would suffer from his urination. There are much bigger health hazards to worry about in a typical kitchen, than this.

                In the second case the probability of getting infected is even lower. It is zero. The dough that the Mr. Austin Michael Symonds teabagged or ejaculated into was raw. Commercial pizza ovens heat at 500 to 600 °F (260 °C to 320 °C) into which the raw dough is placed for several minutes. Autoclaves, which sterilize instruments and other objects, operate at much lower temperatures, 250 °F (or about 120 °C) for shorter amount of time. Although autoclaves operate at higher than ambient pressures, I do not see how anything can survive such incredibly high temperatures.

                (As an aside, I wonder what percentage of people who perform felatio get sick because of pathogens in the semen.)
                I am going to borrow a line from Iowa, you are being deliberately obtuse, aren't you...

                I don't think I could make it any clearer. As someone who inspects food facilities, I would shut both these places down immediately based on the imminent health hazard supported by science and medicine. By the way, what medical background do you have to make those statements as if they were fact? You are completely wrong about the incidence level of pathogens in urine and you do not take into consideration communicable diseases. The "washing of the sink" does not "drastically" reduce the likelihood of the pathogens remaining. Not even close. You are also completely wrong about the probability of transmitting disease through semen. What if there is a malfunction with the oven and it does not reach the proper temperature? Did you know that temperatures at the center of the food do not necessarily reach the same temperature as the oven? What if after ejaculating, he touched other items in the kitchen?

                These are EXACTLY the kinds of health risks we need to be worrying about!
                "Respect is earned. Honesty is appreciated. Trust is gained. Loyalty is returned."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Steve856
                  =
                  Do I need to use monosyllabic words?
                  [/COLOR]
                  Don't go there -----------------------YOU are the one that seems to be having trouble understanding what you are being told my multiple people


                  Originally posted by Steve856
                  Obviously there seems to be a communication problem. I apologize.

                  I too am glad that there are laws against it. The reason why I do not wish to lobby my legislator in sharing bodily excretion is that I find it disgusting. I have no desire to ingest semen nor urine.

                  I thought that I stated that already in the first paragraph of post #2 and in the first paragraph of post #9.

                  Is it really that difficult for you to understand that I find it disgusting and think that it remain illegal? Do I need to use monosyllabic words?

                  First you apologize then you insult him-------------------------I think you are starting to be just a RICHARD HEAD.


                  You just hit my ignore button threshold.....................................You aren't worth dealing with

                  You are dead to me

                  Not going to feed the troll no more
                  Last edited by Iowa #1603; 09-28-2014, 11:33 PM.
                  My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Steve856
                    Look, I agreed that contact of bodily fluids with food should be illegal. Read my posts. Yet, Jasper called me a "moron", and stated that am a "sicko" (both of which I interpret as an insult), for justifying it in any way. I am not justifying it, and have never thought that it should be legal, and see no reason why I should lobby legislators to do exactly the opposite of what I feel.
                    I called you a moron because...
                    "My posting merely questioned whether either of the instances really presented any statistically significant health hazard. As in a health hazard defined by science, and not as legal construct. I have a hard time believing that in either of the two cases above, there is a significant health threat."

                    You have a hard time believing a lot of things apparently. Yes, a health hazard as defined by actual science and thereby the legal construct. jesus.

                    Comment

                    MR300x250 Tablet

                    Collapse

                    What's Going On

                    Collapse

                    There are currently 3692 users online. 248 members and 3444 guests.

                    Most users ever online was 158,966 at 05:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                    Welcome Ad

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X