Man Dies Of Heart Attack While Eating 6,000-calorie Triple Bypass Burger At Heart Attack Grill

A man in his 40s this week died of a heart attack while eating a 6,000-calorie Triple Bypass burger at an aptly named chain that serves up massive burgers and allows grossly obese individuals to eat for free. We previously looked at Heart Attack Grill when its overweight spokesman died at 29. The question is whether a restaurant can be sued for knowingly serving food that comes with a higher risk of death or serious bodily injury — a risk that is openly advertised by the restaurant and assumed by the customer.

With the recommended caloric intake of an adult male set at 2500 calories, diners at the Heart Attack Grill can easily consume roughly 400 percent of the daily calories in a single artery-clogging, heart-stopping meal.

On Saturday, a customer in Las Vegas suffered a cardiac arrest at the table as other customers reportedly jockeyed to take pictures of him. The Triple Bypass Burger contains three slabs of meat, 12 rashes of bacon and cheese as well as a “unique special sauce.”

The owner, John Basso, was aghast at the behavior of the other customers (who may have believed this was a stunt). A former nutritionist and manager of a Jenny Craig weight loss diet center, Basso insisted that “[e]ven with our own morbid sense of humor, we would never pull a stunt like that.”

They would, however, keep serving heart attacks on a bun with “Flatline Fries.”

While I find the restaurant perfectly disgusting, I would have problems with a torts lawsuit when customers clearly understand the risks. Indeed, a sign at the front of the restaurant proudly proclaims “Go away. If you come in this place, it’s going to kill you.” There are a wide array of foods that are bad for you. However, courts have never said that serving up such dishes is akin to a food version of a dram shop violation.

In our previously discussion, we saw how the restaurant enlisted Blair River (a 572-pound obese man) as their spokesman. River, 29, died from pneumonia — a death connected to his obesity by critics.

The Heart Attack Grill food posts a warning that eating at the restaurant “may include sudden weight gain, repeated increase of wardrobe size, back pain, male breast growth, loss of sexual partners, lung cancer, tooth decay and liver sclerosis stroke. In some cases mild death may occur.” This death does not appear quite mild for the tourist but the food was certainly served as advertised.

Source: Daily Mail

51 thoughts on “Man Dies Of Heart Attack While Eating 6,000-calorie Triple Bypass Burger At Heart Attack Grill”

  1. “milk is not good for children and neither is bread”

    Bron the rule of thumb is anything that is white is no good for you. Sugar, bleached flour, salt, cocaine, msg, crystal meth, white people.

    Brown is o.k. 🙂

  2. Bdaman and Bron-

    We got some good advice from our Army First Sergeant many years ago that I still follow: “Believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see and you’ll do just fine.”

  3. Bdaman:

    thanks, so now they are telling people how to fix lunches for their children. I thought it was true. Progressives cant help themselves, they have to be in control of every little aspect of our lives.

    I noticed that the memo has the list of foods the child should eat, milk is not good for children and neither is bread. The government cant even get their nutritional pyramid right, I wonder what makes them think they can do anything else right.

    That is one messed up story even if the parents are being subsidised. People should take a hard look at getting anything from the government, it will come with a price – your freedom.

  4. Of course the first story wasn’t true so this one isn’t either.

    2nd N.C. Mother Says Daughter’s School Lunch Replaced for Not Being Healthy Enough

    Zambrano said the teacher told her it was not the first time student lunches have been inspected, and that officials come “every so often.”

    The policing of children’s food at West Hoke has been portrayed as an isolated incident, but a curious memo Jazlyn brought home to her mother seems to point to something more.

    The memo, dated Jan. 27 with the subject line “RE: Healthy Lunches,” was signed by school principal Jackie Samuels and said, while “we welcome students to bring lunches from home…it must be a nutritious, balanced meal with the above requirements. Students, who do not bring a healthy lunch, will be offered the missing portions which may result in a fee from the cafeteria.

    Sounds alot like the first story doesn’t it. Except this one has a copy of the memo.

  5. Mike Spindell:

    I deserve that.

    That is what I get for jumping off the handle, but you have to admit that with government all things are possible when it comes to intrusions of privacy.

  6. @Roger Lambert

    And this applies to you and your health care plan, too, right? Why should policy holders have to subsidize your unhealthy choices?

    New small-government mandate:

    Anyone enrolled in any health care plan will submit all menus for approval, be subject to random on-site refrigerator and stomach content inventory inspection, or, will be obligated to eternal parenteral-only feeding regimen, AntAbuse and nicotine patch administration, and daily Marine boot camp-approved exercise regimen.

    All those in favor say, “Zieg Heil!”

  7. “f the guy wants to eat something which is bad for him, he should have the freedom to do it as long as we dont have to fund his health care.”


    And this applies to you and your health care plan, too, right? Why should policy holders have to subsidize your unhealthy choices?

    New small-government mandate:

    Anyone enrolled in any health care plan will submit all menus for approval, be subject to random on-site refrigerator and stomach content inventory inspection, or, will be obligated to eternal parenteral-only feeding regimen, AntAbuse and nicotine patch administration, and daily Marine boot camp-approved exercise regimen.


  8. Bron,

    I heard a story the other day from a reliable source that Conservative Free Marketeers were using private security firms to murder people who didn’t agree with them. They were also raping and then murdering their entire families. There are only a few sources for this true story, because if word got out about the thousands who died the “Free Market” movement would become frightening and so they repress it. How can you in good conscience support this murder? Also, when did you stop beating your wife?

  9. @ Elly, the fact of the matter is there was someone peeping in on what the girl had in her lunch bag regardless if it was a precondition of the program. Next they will want to check her lunch bag as soon as she exits the home and then they will demand to enter it.

  10. Nanny State Assholes:

    “No turkey sandwich for you.
    Story By Matthew Boyle – The Daily Caller

    A North Carolina elementary school forced a preschool student to eat cafeteria chicken nuggets for lunch on Jan. 30 after officials reportedly determined that her homemade meal wasn’t up to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s standards for healthfulness, according to a report from the Carolina Journal.

    The newspaper reported that the four-year-old girl brought a turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, potato chips and apple juice in her packed lunch from home. That meal didn’t meet with approval from the government agent who was on site inspecting kids’ lunches that day.

    The Department of Health and Human Services’ Division of Child Development and Early Education requires that all lunches served in pre-kindergarten programs must meet USDA guidelines. Meals, the guidelines say, must include one serving each of meat, milk and grain and two servings of fruit or vegetables. Those guidelines apply to home-packed lunches as well as cafeteria meals.

    The Carolina Journal reported that the girl and her mother wish to remain anonymous to avoid public scrutiny, but she did write to her state representative to complain about it.

    “I don’t feel that I should pay for a cafeteria lunch when I provide lunch for her from home,” the mother wrote in a complaint to her state representative, Republican G.L. Pridgen of Robeson County.

    “What got me so mad is, number one, don’t tell my kid I’m not packing her lunch box properly,” the girl’s mother told a reporter. “I pack her lunchbox according to what she eats. It always consists of a fruit. It never consists of a vegetable. She eats vegetables at home because I have to watch her because she doesn’t really care for vegetables.”

    The story has sparked national outrage against bureaucrats and politicians who aim to force food standards and health initiatives into place through legislation and regulatory action. North Carolina Republican Party spokesman Rob Lockwood told The Daily Caller it’s the latest example of why government “intrusion” isn’t helping anyone.

    “More parental inclusion, less government intrusion would go a long way to solving our nation’s woes,” Lockwood said in an email. “Today is not a strong day for big-government, nanny-state enthusiasts.””

    Unbelievable just unbelievable.

  11. if the guy wants to eat something which is bad for him, he should have the freedom to do it as long as we dont have to fund his health care.

    Here’s an excellent op-ed by Richard Ralston, of Americans for Free Choice in Medicine, which appeared in the Orange County Register of February 14th:

    What do politicians call it when they force you to buy health insurance (or anything else) every day, for the rest of your life?
    They call it “personal responsibility.”
    How do they get away with that? Can anyone remember a time when personal responsibility referred to what we each think what we should do? To what we individually decide is the right thing to do? When exactly did it come to mean “obey orders,” or “do what you are told or pay a fine—or maybe go to jail, if you don’t”?
    Politicians try to get away with such outrages by first corrupting a range of more fundamental principles. A prime example is the charade of a supposed “right” to health care. In practice that means everyone should demand that medical care be provided to them by physicians and hospitals at no cost—even if they take no responsibility for protecting their own health, even if they don’t give a damn about their health or the cost of their own negligence, even if they don’t lift a finger to help themselves. After all, they have a “right” to health care, don’t they?
    Of course, no one and no government can afford medical care that would meet these demands. When a system that pretends to do so is enforced, patients will soon discover that they actually have no access to any medical care at all—except what the government decides to permit.
    Those who resist government force but really do take responsibility for themselves are condemned as greedy for money by those who are greedy for power.
    When did “what I must demand” replace “what I must earn”?
    Why have those who want only to seize and redistribute wealth replaced those who admire producers of wealth—such as quality medical-care providers? In what kind of world does that exist? Only in a world in which achievement is condemned as persecution of those who achieve nothing, and wealth is condemned as theft by those who create nothing.
    We cannot assume personal responsibility for our medical care by abdicating the freedom to make our own decisions about it. We must reject the demands of those demonstrating in the streets that we surrender our own medical decisions to them. No one has a right to take away our health care choices any more than they have a right to make us pay for a home they cannot afford, or pay off the loans for their Ph.D. in Romantic Poetry, or to be given a government job, or, as we have heard not long ago, to enjoy a “right” to free government diapers.
    We can assume responsibility, however, by eliminating the restrictions imposed by state insurance commissioners on our ability to find affordable insurance.
    We can assume responsibility by eliminating the power of the Food and Drug Administration to withhold lifesaving drugs from terminally ill patients until after they are dead.
    We can assume responsibility by repealing thousands of pages of laws and regulations written by people with precious little competence in regulating anything, let alone medical care.
    We can assume responsibility by recognizing the tremendous value of those physicians and others who create our medical care—and by respecting their rights.
    To preserve our medical care, as well as all the essential aspects of our lives, we must utterly reject those who promise to fulfill all our needs, if only we hand over all of our freedom. There can be no greater personal responsibility.

  12. A so-called sovereign citizen in Washington is now suing federal prosecutors for conspiring against him using poor grammar, or as he calls it, “backwards-correct-syntaxing-modification fraud.”

    From the filing:

    For this federal-judge: David-Wynn: Miller’s-correction of the vassalees-fiction-syntax-grammar-pleadings is with the correction-participation-claim of this babble-indictment-evidence and: bad-probation-syntax=grammar-evidence. (Why did the vassalees do this case with a void-communications?) For the void-drogue-law, void-oath of an office, void-judge’s-oath, void-docking-court-house-vessel in the Washington-state-dry-dock and: void-original-lodial-land-title.

  13. Totally OT but maybe interesting:

    “DHS Monitoring Of Social Media Under Scrutiny By Lawmakers
    WASHINGTON — Lawmakers looking into homeland security officials’ practice of monitoring social media sites seized on a report Thursday by a civil liberties group that said taxpayers have shelled out more than $11 million to a private contractor to analyze online comments that “reflect adversely” on the federal government”

    I followed the links and the actual document (Contract) in PDF format (you can save and view at your leisure) is here:

    Skimmed much of it, read some of it and the task orders are not only to monitor the sites but engage and provide the government view and provide facts. Troll for the government in other words. Some of the examples of the daily summaries show direct lifts from the sites including names of the posters.

    The appendices have lists of the sites at pgs 127-137, 148, a list of subjects of interest at 163 and a list of sites for developing events at 191-194. These are the targeted sites of known usefulness. General key word searches are sop and and (site gateways) are on the list.

    [Considering the topics of interest to DHS and others Turleyblawg probably cones up daily in the key-word and ‘developing’ searches.] 🙂

    It’s not like anyone doesn’t know it is going on but having the document to peruse is interesting.

Comments are closed.