A loyal reader sends this link - NEW FAT LAWSUIT AGAINST FAST-FOOD CHAINS: Attorney Files Overweight Children Case .

The attorney representing an overweight New Yorker in a lawsuit against four fast-food chains has filed a second class action case on behalf of overweight children.

Samuel Hirsch, the lawyer for Caesar Barber of New York, today said he has filed the second case because "we feel the advertising strategies [of quick-service chains] target children."

We could easily make a case for Sam as a public nuisance. He is trying to compare his campaign to the campaign against the tobacco companies. These suits should fail forever. These suits differ in many important ways.

Tobacco is addictive. One need not smoke to live. The tobacco industry used advertising and other manipulations to seduce non-smokers to smoke. Once they started they often became addicted - leading to huge profits for the industry. One cannot smoke 'intelligently'. Almost any smoking is hazardous to one's health.

Everyone must eat. The only choice is what to eat. No food is addictive. When pressed, anyone can remove a particular food from one's diet.

Since one must eat, the only argument is what constitutes healthy food. As readers of this blog know, that question remains debatable. Probably no single food is bad, what is bad is various combinations and amounts.

McDonalds and colleagues do not make you eat too much. They certainly do not encourage lack of exercise. Do we need a law to prevent these suits? What a waste of time and money!