McDonald's fans say this meal combination ‘immediately' cures migraines
Chronic migraine sufferers are lovin' it.
A TikTok video claiming that a large Coke and fries from McDonald's is the be-all end-all solution to migraines has taken off online – with hundreds of people confirming the salty and sweet combo 'immediately' cures their worst headaches.
'Trying McDonald's chips and a Diet Coke because I've had a headache for 48 hours and TikTok said it would help,' TikTok user @MillyHancockk wrote alongside her now-viral clip.
In the caption, she added: 'Can confirm it works' along with a laughing crying emoji.
The TikToker, whose clip has been viewed nearly 4 million times, drew in hordes of commentators, many of whom came to confirm the hack works for them as well.
'I work in neurology and our headache specialist literally recommends this to patients,' one person commented.
'I know it's just the salt and caffeine but every time I have a migraine or even one coming on I get a coke and a fry and it's immediately cured,' another commentator added.
Another explained: 'So basically Coke & fries help headaches because caffeine tightens blood vessels, sugar boost blood glucose, and salty carbs rebalance electrolytes.'
Others offered slight alterations to the hack.
'As a diet coke lover and migraine sufferer, diet won't do it you need the regular coke,' one said,
'Whoever told you Diet Coke was playing, it's gotta be a full fat and salty chips. Works everytime,' another added.
Dubbed the 'McMigraine meal' by some social media users, the much-loved combo is proven by experts to be effective in relieving migraine pain for some, Verywell Health reported.
'We know the caffeine can help migraines in the short-term therapy of them. So it isn't too surprising that the caffeine in Coca-Cola itself is helpful," David Walker, MD, a headache and facial pain specialist at Rush University Medical Center told Verywell.
The carbonation of a Coca-Cola soda may also help settle the stomach for people who experience nausea when suffering from migraines, Walker added.
While the hack works for some, experts warn that caffeine can also trigger migraine.
Equally, the salt content in McDonald's fries could impact some migraine sufferers, Walker warned.
"It's great that this helps certain individuals. I don't think it should be generalized because on the flip side of things, fried foods can trigger migraines," Walker said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal judge blocks enforcement of law barring kids from social media
The Joseph Woodrow Hatchett U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building in Tallahassee, Sept. 27, 2022. Credit: Michael Moline A federal judge blocked on Tuesday the state's enforcement of a 2024 state law requiring social media platforms to delete accounts of kids 15 years old and younger. The preliminary victory for the two trade associations representing social media giants comes after U.S. District Judge Mark Walker had dismissed the suit in March because the companies had not proven they would be affected. However, Walker barred the state from enforcing the law on Tuesday (HB 3), writing that it stifled minors' First Amendment rights and that there were other avenues to combat mental health concerns associated with the use of social media. 'Assuming the significance of the State's interest in limiting the exposure of youth to websites with 'addictive features,' the law's restrictions are an extraordinarily blunt instrument for furthering it,' Walker wrote. NetChoice and Computer & Communications Industry Association, representing companies including Google, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and YouTube, filed the suit against the law in October and the former Attorney General Ashley Moody had agreed not to enforce it while the parties waited for a decision from Walker on whether to temporarily block it or allow fines of up to $50,000 per violation. The attorney general's office will appeal Walker's block to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, said Jeremy Redfern, the attorney general's director of communications, in an email to Florida Phoenix. 'Florida parents voted through their elected representatives for a law protecting kids from the harmful and sometimes lifelong tragic impacts of social media,' Redfern wrote. 'These platforms do not have a constitutional right to addict kids to their products.' Walker disagreed with the state's argument that parental control features weren't enough to protect kids from addictive features and that the law only prohibits kids from having accounts and doesn't restrict access to the content altogether. 'While it is true that at least one of these platforms, YouTube, does not require users to be account holders to passively view some content, all require users to hold accounts in order to share one's own content—in other words, to speak,' Walker wrote. CCI's president and CEO, Matt Schruers, celebrated the ruling. 'This ruling vindicates our argument that Florida's statute violates the First Amendment by blocking and restricting minors—and likely adults as well—from using certain websites to view lawful content,' he wrote in a press release. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Buzz Feed
37 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
37 Cheaper Versions Of Expensive Products So Spot-On That You'll Gaslight Yourself Into Thinking You Bought The Real Thing
A tinted lip balm so close to the same magic as "Black Honey," TikTok's beloved $25 ~universal shade~ from Clinique, that it will genuinely startle you — especially when you see the price. This is a perfect, non-sticky "go-to" lippie that's just a step above the "no makeup makeup" look, giving the perfect subtly polished effect. An affordable, Lululemon-esque longline sports bra just as comfy, supportive, and versatile as the real thing that reviewers love it both for outdoor workouts, gym use, *and* errand running. This is designed to be supportive without being too compressive, with lightweight fabric that keeps you breezy in the heat. A Baccarat Rouge 540-inspired moisturizing body wash infused with white jasmine, red currant, and sweet amber that reviewers swear by for a cheap alternative to keep that delectably luxe scent on them all day long. Nothing wrong with smelling a lil' ~~expensive~~! A set of Victoria's Secret–inspired seamless "invisible" underwear so soft and stretchy your butt will want to *sing* when you slide them on. This is a true holy grail underwear that doesn't show, doesn't ride up, and somehow manages to look cute all at the same time. A pair of luxe retro-style oval sunglasses giving Miu Miu vibes without the $489 price tag. The devil's in the chic details on this one, including the little gold embellishments on the sides and the nostalgic shape of the lenses, which are softer than the typical skinny oval lens. And a three-pack of vintage-inspired polarized sunglasses for anyone who needs to stock up on a few "these look like Ray-Bans, but I won't cry into my Baja Blast if I accidentally leave them in the Taco Bell parking lot" pairs this year. These are especially handy because you can match the subtle prints to whatever 'fit you're wearing! A TikTok-beloved "Soft" perfume rollerball that honestly has no right smelling so delectable and layering so well considering it's only five cash dollars. Reviewers are obsessed with the scent's warm sweetness with a hint of citrusy zest, comparing it to waffle cones, lemon pound cake, and warm vanilla scones ... and this $65 bottle of Pink Sugar 👀. And a cult-favorite Creamy Coconut fragrance rollerball reviewers compare to the $25 Sol de Janeiro version 👀☀️ . This is from TikTok-famous small business brand Kuumba Made, known for its luxury scents at ridiculously affordable prices, so you know they're on their game — reviewers especially love how ~beachy~ and long-lasting this sweet but elevated fragrance feels and how nicely it plays with other scents! Mise En Scene Perfect Serum, a beloved K-beauty staple reviewers compare to the $46 Gisou version for MEGA hair hydration and heat protection up to 450 degrees, so you can style your hair without sacrificing on ✨shine✨. This unique blend of seven-oil blend Moroccan argan, olive, coconut, apricot, Marula, jojoba, and camellia oil not only protects hair, but helps correct damage from dryness, *and* reduces drying time. E.l.f. Glow Reviver Melting Lip Balm for all the ultra fans of Summer Fridays, Rhode, and Laneige whose bank accounts are begging them to put a stop to the lippie madness. These new deliciously tinted, moisturizing, buildable glosses are just as buttery and decadent as the balms that inspired them, for a fraction of the price. (Brb, drowning myself in the "Strawberry Shortcake" and "Vanilla Toffee" flavors.) A bodycon lounge dress perfect for fans of Skims looking to spare themselves a few bucks — this versatile, figure-hugging dress has just the right amount of compression to mimic the iconic style and stay oh-so-comfortable for long periods of wear. Essence's Drop of Sunshine Bronzing Drops, aka the more affordable version of the beloved $39 Drunk Elephant version. This buildable, hydrating formula is an easy way to add a ~sunkissed touch~ to your beauty routine without breaking the bank (or compromising your skin!). A pair of high-waisted running shorts with a comfy scrunch-elastic waistband reviewers compare to the Lululemon version. These are lightweight, quick-dry, and come in so many adorable colors that your butt might just want them on rotation until laundry day. And a pair of Buff Bunny-inspired booty-highlighting biker shorts for anyone who wants to add some fun prints and colors to their favorite ~asset~ when they're on the move, for a fraction of the usual $48 price. E.l.f.'s iconic eyelash curler that'll blow all the expensive versions out of the water — this gives your lashes such an instant, gentle lift that you'll be like, "Oh, cool, there's dark magic in here somewhere." If you want to take your bare lashes or mascara to the next level, this little gizmo will do it in a few seconds flat, without the $22 price tag of the Shu Uemura version that reviewers compare it with. A ribbed button up tank top with some real Abercrombie & Fitch energy to perfectly straddle that line of "professional" and "I am 100000% going out after work today, and a martini glass will be involved." A set of golden bracelets giving ~quiet luxury~ vibes at "I want to pay rent this month" prices. Reviewers especially love these mix-and-match sets because they look like expensive versions from Cartier — the middle one is giving the $8,000 "Juste Un Clou" and the studded one is giving the $6,000 "Love Bracelet!" And a dainty gold-plated station necklace, another home run from jewelry brand Pavoi so close to the real diamond versions from Quince and Dorsey that run $400+ that it'll turn all your everyday looks into ~quietly expensive~ looks. A Skims-inspired square-neck compressive body suit that's basically 10 outfits in one — you can rock it solo, wear it as a bodysuit tucked into jeans, or pair it with a hoodie or a jacket. Go, little base layer, gooooo! A Lululemon-esque adjustable mini belted pack (aka ~fanny pack~) you can wear around your waist or shoulder for a lightweight bag alternative that you won't lose, since it is literally attached to you. A lot of reviewers mention how genuinely *stunned* they are by how much this little bag can secretly carry. A set of Bala Bangle-inspired wrist and ankle weights to get your ~fitness~ on this summer — these serve all the same cuteness and function without the $55 price tag. Not to mention this has a TON more colors available to match your 'fits. A hydrating, plumping lip glow oil reviewers compare to the cult-fave Dior Lip Oil ... that is, if it were a FRACTION of the price 👀. A set of satin pillowcases that not only have a cooling effect, but are soft on your skin and create less friction for your hair so it won't get as tangled while you sleep. Reviewers especially love these because they're an affordable alternative to ones that typically run $18 per case! E.l.f.'s Holy Hydration! Thirst Burst Drops, another home run from the brand's moisturizing "Holy Hydration" line that reviewers are comparing to the $35 Watermelon Dew Drops from Glow Recipe. This lightweight formula is designed to brighten and plump skin for a dewy effect, whether you're wearing it alone, applying it under your makeup, or mixing it with your foundation. A super lightweight, loose-fitting high neck muscle tank for fans of the Lululemon version at a *much* lower price point. This is a breezy *dream* thanks to the quick-dry fabric, the cross-over pleat in the back, and the slight petal hem at the bottom. And another Lululemon-inspired piece, a charming and oh-so-comfortable tennis skirt with built-in shorts similar to the Align style. The secret inner pocket on these is perfect for stashing keys and tennis balls, and the shorts are designed with a four-way stretch so they won't ride up. A multipurpose blush stick reviewers compare to the $18 Pixi Beauty version — this version may be cheaper, but it's also easily buildable, blendable, and perfect for that light, dewy, "kissed by a happy pink cloud" look. A square-neck lettuce trim "going out" top that a lot of reviewers compare to an expensive mall brand, but muuuuch more affordable. And thank goodness, because once you fall for its comfy stretch and effortless cool, you're going to want it in WAY more colors. Moodmatcher color-changing lipstick, an affordable WinkyLux alternative that not only adapts to the pH of your skin to create a personalized, perfect shade for your skin tone, but lasts for HOURS. Reviewers marvel at its all-day staying power even after meals and breaking a sweat. Look at that lil' green lipstick go!! A plated, jewel-embedded ring you can buy yourself as a little treat if the $1,250 Cartier Love Ring is decidedly out of your budget. Dare I say this version is ... prettier than the designer one? A luxe, super soft two-piece pajama set with some real "vacation mode" energy, so even if your travel plans are "backyard" and "someone else's backyard," you can still feel like you're on a tropical getaway. Psst — reviewers compare these to the $128 Roller Rabbit version! 👀 A high-quality, *just* compressive enough layering T-shirt reviewers love so much that a ton of them tried it and immediately ordered more colors to stock up. This shirt is double-lined but still feels lightweight on the skin, giving a sophisticated, expensive look with a casual feel. Reviewers compare it to Skims at a fraction of the price! E.l.f. Halo Glow Liquid Filter that looked at the iconic (and expensive) Charlotte Tilbury Flawless Filter and said, "Game on, pal." Not only does this give that dewy, soft, "barely there" finish, but it's designed to hydrate your skin with hyaluronic acid, helping improve your moisture barrier for longterm glowiness, too. Etude's delightfully multipurpose Dear Darling Water Tint, which a lot of reviewers compare to Benefit's Lip Tint. This smudgeproof formula is designed primarily to be a natural-looking, weightless lip stain, but reviewers use it as a blush as well! A pair of elevated, effortlessly chic wide leg petal sweatpants that look like they fell out of an Anthropologie ad. Reviewers love how cozy and breathable these are, and that the style is perfect for indoor lounging *and* outdoor errands. A ridiculously versatile minimalist nylon tote bag for fans of Longchamp's Le Pliage bag who perhaps do not feel responsible enough to own the real deal, knowing how messy and chaotic everyday life and travel plans can get. This version is a dead ringer for the name brand, and reviewers adore that it's nearly waterproof and super comfortable to sling over your shoulder. An Anthropologie-inspired reversible quilted throw blanket you can get in all kinds of fun, lively sprints that will startle your boring couch into having a personality, or give your bed a *much* needed reset after a long dreary winter.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
14 Times McDonald's Was Caught Up In Legal Issues
McDonald's is one of the biggest names in fast food. It operates over 38,000 locations across the world. It's a fixture in cities, suburbs, and rural communities alike, and it seems like there's no place that the Golden Arches have not touched. With a presence that large -- and over 80 years in operation -- it's no surprise that McDonald's has faced its fair share of legal battles. Indeed, the fast food giant has been the subject of many lawsuits from customers and has also filed several suits against other corporations since its founding. Some cases are well-known, including the "hot coffee incident," while others have emerged more recently due to ongoing concerns over price-gouging, deceptive marketing, and food safety. In an effort to shed light on some of McDonald's most notable and relevant legal battles over the years, we assembled the list of the lawsuits, court cases, and proceedings you need to know about. Read more: Every McDonald's Burger, Ranked Worst To Best Liebeck v. McDonald's is perhaps one of the most well-known legal cases involving the fast food behemoth. This incident set a precedent for how McDonald's would go about labeling its products and also highlighted the chain's track record for putting profits before customer safety -- which is arguably one of the worst mistakes McDonald's has ever made. In 1992, Stella Liebeck suffered third-degree burns after a McDonald's coffee spilled in her lap. The burns were extensive -- covering 16% of her body -- and took upwards of two years to heal. Liebeck tried to settle with the company for $20,000, which would cover her medical expenses, but McDonald's offered a mere $800. When Liebeck took McDonald's to court, it was revealed that the chain's coffee wasn't just hot -- it was 30 to 40 degrees hotter than coffees served at other restaurants. The legal team also noted that 700 individuals had experienced similar burns from McDonald's coffee, yet the chain required franchises to continue to serve the beverages at between 180 degrees and 190 degrees Fahrenheit. It was thought that the reason for this was that if McDonald's served its coffee as hot as possible, it would not need to give customers as many refills of it, thus saving the company money. The court eventually awarded Liebeck compensation for compensatory and punitive damages -- to the tune of $2.7 million, which was eventually reduced. Now, McDonald's coffee cups display a warning to customers noting that the contents are hot. It also prompted the chain to issue training to its employees on how to properly attach lids and serve beverages at a "drinkable" temperature. Children who grew up in the '70s and '80s may have fond memories of McDonald's television ads, complete with characters like the Hamburglar, Grimace, and Officer Big Mac. But, before there were these characters, which were as integral to McDonald's as its food, there was "H.R. Pufnstuf" -- a one-season show that appeared in 1969, a year prior to McDonald's character-filled ad campaign. "H.R. Pufnstuf" shared some commonalities with McDonaldland -- and it was easy to draw parallels between McDonald's Mayor McCheese and the large-headed dragon character in the show. The creators of "H.R. Pufnstuf" eventually ended up suing McDonald's for stealing the character and adapting it for its own ads. It was eventually revealed that the advertising company McDonald's used approached the creators of the show about a potential collaboration, but backed out at the last second -- only to allegedly lift the ideas for themselves. McDonald's was forced to pay $50,000 in damages, but both sides appealed the verdict, which eventually led to the courts yet again siding with "H.R. Pufnstuf" -- and ultimately increasing the damages to upwards of $1 million. The fast food giant also had to revise its character lineup for the ads to prevent further infringement. McDonald's seems to have capitalized on all things "Mc" -- from the Egg McMuffin to the McNugget. And, one 1988 ruling proved that McDonald's truly did have a foothold on all things "Mc." A federal district judge ruled that Quality Inns International Inc., a large hotel chain, would need to cease using "McSleep Inns," the name of its new chain of economy-level hotels. McDonald's issued warnings to the company prior to the ruling, though the hotel chain clapped back by filing a lawsuit, claiming that the name did not technically infringe on McDonald's trademark. McDonald's countersued under the premise that using "Mc" in the name of the hotel would cause consumers to falsely associate it with the fast food chain. The judge eventually sided with McDonald's, granting a permanent injunction against the use of the name and gave Quality Inns International a 30-day window to fall in line. The chain was eventually renamed "Sleep Inns." This is not the only instance of McDonald's taking legal action over its ownership of the "Mc" name. In 2019, following a complaint filed by an Irish fast food chain called Supermac's, the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) ruled that McDonald's "had not proved genuine use of the 'Mc' prefix on some of the products it trademarked," according to a BBC article. However, McDonald's was given the right to ownership of "Mc" branding for several items, including some sandwiches and chicken nuggets. McDonald's wouldn't be the first company facing allegations of marketing towards children, but its actions did result in a legal firestorm in 2018, when a Canadian man sued the chain for allegedly violating a provincial law that prohibits marketing towards children under 13. Quebec is one of the few places in the world where such marketing is illegal, and the law only offers a few exceptions -- restaurants not being one of them. The father, who reportedly visited McDonald's every couple weeks with his three children, argued that the Happy Meal's toy tie-ins to pop culture, like film releases, and display of toys at a child's eye-level were evidence of the chain's alleged wrongdoing. This was not the first time that McDonald's had come under fire for similar issues. In 2010, a California mother, in partnership with the Center for Science in the Public Interest, alleged that the company's decision to pack its Happy Meals with toys is deceptive towards children. The suit argued that the use of these toys to market to children was not only unethical, but it also encouraged unhealthy eating. Much like the Canadian class action lawsuit, the California mother reported that her two children constantly requested visits to McDonald's in order to complete the set of toys hidden in the Happy Meal boxes. The California suit came after two counties in the state, Marin and San Francisco, passed laws that prohibited the inclusion of toys in children's meals that did not reach certain nutritional benchmarks. Although it may seem like McDonald's is constantly being sued by individuals, the company has taken its fair share of legal action against other entities. In 2024, McDonald's filed a federal lawsuit against the "Big Four," beef companies -- Cargill, JBS, Tyson Foods, and National Beef -- over allegations of price-fixing. McDonald's alleged that the beef producers -- which controlled about 80% of the U.S. beef market in 2018 -- had been intentionally reducing the amount of beef produced in order to charge more for it, like by closing several of their large processing facilities. The fast food giant argued that the deliberate actions to control the price of beef were in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The complaint also alleged that the "Big Four" colluded at conferences and trade shows and shared business information with each other that would increase their profits -- at the expense of companies like McDonald's. McDonald's is one of the largest purchasers of beef in the world, though the amount of money that the company sought in damages against the meat packers was not specified. Similar cases have been brought against the "Big Four" by other plaintiffs besides McDonald's, including Aldi, Sodexo, and Target. Eating at McDonald's became more difficult for halal eaters -- a dietary requirement that requires animals to be slaughtered in accordance with Islamic law and prohibits the consumption of pork -- in 2013. Two years prior, a customer sued the fast food chain, alleging that the chicken sandwich he had purchased had been falsely advertised as halal. The lawsuit detailed that although the Dearborn, Michigan franchise advertised and purchased halal McNuggets and chicken sandwiches, it started selling non-halal chicken once it had run out of halal-compliant meat -- on multiple occasions. As a result of the $700,000 settlement and lawsuit, the last two McDonald's franchises to serve halal options -- both located in Michigan -- removed halal products from their menus in 2013. While this was the first case brought against McDonald's concerning halal food, it was not the first one brought against McDonald's with labeling-related concerns. In 2002, McDonald's paid a $10 million settlement to Sikh, Hindu, and vegetarian groups after mislabeling its french fries as vegetarian when the fry oil actually contains added beef flavor. The confusion emerged after the chain announced it would be switching from frying with beef tallow to vegetable oil in the '90s. McDonald's was hit with a somewhat unique discrimination lawsuit in 2016 after plaintiff Scott Magee alleged that the chain violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Magee, who is blind, claimed he attempted to order food from a Louisiana McDonald's in 2015, but was ultimately denied service after the lobby had closed. This would mean he would have had to use the drive-thru, and, at the time, the chain prohibited pedestrians from ordering via the lane. The suit alleged that the company did not offer the accessibility needed to serve visually-impaired customers after its lobbies had closed. The federal judge ultimately sided with McDonald's, ruling that the disability itself was not the reason why Magee couldn't use the drive-thru, therefore McDonald's was not in violation of the ADA. Moreover, the judge believed that McDonald's corporate couldn't technically be held responsible, since the three franchises that Magee said were in violation of the ADA operated via corporate franchise agreements. These agreements allow the independent operators to decide how they want to handle late-night business, in compliance with federal laws. 2024 was arguably not a good year for food safety, as evidenced by the infamous McDonald's E. coli outbreak. The October 2024 outbreak was linked to McDonald's Quarter Pounders, specifically the onions added on top of them. By the end of the outbreak, 104 cases of E. coli contamination were reported, with one death and 34 hospitalizations across 14 states. McDonald's and other fast food chains pulled onions from stores following news of the outbreak, but it did not stop the legal firestorm that ensued. A resulting $5 million class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of two plaintiffs who fell ill after eating contaminated sandwiches. This lawsuit was the third of its kind filed following the E. coli outbreak; Two people in Nebraska and Colorado also filed lawsuits against McDonald's. The $5 million class action suit, more specifically, alleged that McDonald's engaged in "fraudulent, unfair, deceptive, misleading, and/or unlawful conduct stemming from its omissions surrounding the risk of E. coli contamination affecting the Products," as reported by NBC News. You would think that McDonald's would have learned its lesson about hot food by now. But the chain faced yet another legal run-in in 2019 when a 4-year-old girl suffered second-degree burns by "unreasonably and dangerously" hot chicken McNuggets inside of her Happy Meal, as reported by NBC6. The girl's family sued both the Florida franchise and McDonald's corporate for the incident and requested upwards of $15 million in damages. Both McDonald's and Upchurch Foods Inc., the franchisee, argued that they were not responsible. But, the jury found both parties failed to put ample warning on the packaging to indicate risk. That said, McDonald's was not found negligent in this case, but the jury awarded the family $800,000 in damages. The HACER scholarship program, launched by McDonald's in 1985, has given more than $33 million to Latinx and Hispanic students since its inception. However, it faced legal challenges in 2025 after the American Alliance for Equal Rights sued the company, alleging that the HACER scholarship violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which "prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance"). The plaintiffs also argued that the program violates Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race and ethnicity when forming contracts. The "contract" implied is the privacy policy that applicants sign when they fill out the HACER scholarship application. In a statement issued by McDonald's in January 2025, the company said that it plans to "safeguard HACER" going forward. It also announced it would be dropping the criteria for one parent of the applicant to be of Hispanic or Latino origin and would instead require applicants to share their impact and contributions to the Latinx and Hispanic community in the application. Although it settled the lawsuit, McDonald's stated that it "[disagrees] with this claim" and plans to evolve its program going forward so it can continue to meet the needs of scholarship recipients. McDonald's broken ice cream machines have become a running joke, but customers may not have to wait much longer for their local franchise to get its machines up and running again. In October 2025, the U.S. Copyright Office gave the fast food chain the opportunity to work around digital locks on its ice cream machine, which previously meant that only the original manufacturer could fix them. The Taylor Company -- which has been supplying the machines to McDonald's franchises for over 70 years -- held a copyright on its machines under the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which essentially prevents tampering or the circumventing of control access on copyrighted technologies, including those pesky McFlurry machines. The case also established an exemption to the act for retail-scale commercial food businesses going forward. However, there are still barriers to companies bypassing this technology. For one, it's illegal to sell digital lockpicks that would allow others to repair the machines independently. The COVID-19 pandemic changed a lot of the ways that food service outlets operate, and one decision at an Oakland McDonald's sparked new controversy for the fast food chain. Workers at one franchise filed a public nuisance lawsuit in spring 2020 after they were told by their managers to wear doggy diapers and coffee filters as masks. The chain also allegedly did not comply with social distancing requirements, and managers did not perform proper temperature checks on employees before they started work. A total of 25 workers and their family members contracted COVID-19, and the managers' actions led to a 33-day strike -- one of the longest in McDonald's history. As part of the settlement, the Oakland franchise was required to follow worker safety guidelines and establish a worker safety committee. McDonald's corporate was not a defendant in the case and, in a statement issued to SF Gate, said that the conduct that occurred at the Oakland franchise was not reflective of pandemic-era procedures required at other locations. No breakfast at McDonald's is complete without orange juice -- but you may not know you're paying extra for it. That's the claim in a class action lawsuit filed against the fast food giant in 2023 in California. The plaintiffs argued that McDonald's did not adequately disclose the orange juice up-charge on its breakfast menus. The lawsuit suggested that McDonald's uses deceptive advertising on its menu boards by suggesting the OJ is included, without any asterisk or notation to indicate the charge. The plaintiffs on the case claimed that they only found out about the charge after they had purchased their meal, and one plaintiff claimed she would not have ordered the beverage if she'd known about the additional charge. The lawsuit also allegeed that employees were not trained to inform patrons about the charge before they ordered their meal. Your morning cup of coffee is supposed to be the pick-me-up that helps you get through your day. But for one customer, it turned into nothing short of a nightmare. A woman who visited a Dothan, Alabama McDonald's in 2020 alleged that her caramel macchiato was tainted with chemicals that workers were using to clean the machine. She reported that her mouth went numb when she sipped the coffee, which she claims caused permanent scarring in her throat and may require corrective surgery. The woman said that she asked for help, but that the drive-thru employees slammed the window in her face and would not disclose what chemicals they had used to clean the machine -- nor did they call for emergency assistance. The woman sued McDonald's corporate, the Alabama branch of the chain, and the owner-operators of the Dothan franchise for a whopping $13 million total in damages. The case was eventually dismissed by a judge following mediation and a motion to dismiss from both sides. Read the original article on Chowhound.
