“On December 11, 1999, a 13-month-old girl in 

Sonora, California suffocated on the container, and

was found deceased in her playpen with half of the ball covering her nose and mouth. Following her
death, the Tuolumne County Sheriff's Department issued a warning about the containers. [2] This was
the first time a Burger King toy was blamed for a death. [5] Two days later, the Consumer Product
Safety Commission asked Burger King to recall the containers, which Burger King refused to do.
[3]
 They stated they were afraid to create anxiety for parents, as it was too soon to confirm whether
the ball was responsible for the child's death, wanting to wait for an independent confirmation of the
cause of death. The autopsy results had not been completed and released. Burger King
spokesperson Kim Miller stated if it turned out the container was a choking hazard, they would pull
them out. However, they did not want to end a promotion if there was no issue with it. [6] The toys
found in the containers were not a part of the proposed recall. [4]
According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the design and size of the container made
it easier for people to suffocate than with a plastic egg or a cup. It is just the right size to cover the
nose and the mouth, and owing to the plastic's pliability, a child may suck the air out, creating a
vacuum effect and causing the ball to become stuck to the face. Russ Rader, spokesperson for the
commission, stated the more the child breathes, the tighter the ball is held in place. He claimed it is a
hidden danger and is something parents could not anticipate. [6]
On December 23, an 18-month-old Kansas girl reportedly got half of the ball stuck on her nose and
mouth, but her father managed to remove it before she was injured. This resulted in Burger King
agreeing to a recall after no resolution had been passed between them and the Consumer Product
Safety Commission.[6] However, the CPSC told them to wait five days—December 29—to announce
the recall to allow for them to get its nationwide strategy in place. Burger King agreed, but told their
stores to cease distribution of the containers.
However, when word began to leak out to the press, they released an early press release on
December 27 announcing the recall, to the protest of government officials. These officials argued
they needed time to distribute recall posters to more than 8,000 restaurants, a video news release,
and an appearance on a national news show for CPSC chairperson Ann Brown. These were to be
timed to avoid the period after the Christmas holiday when families were returning home from
traveling other places for holiday celebrations and unable to watch a national newscast or were
paying no attention to even radio news.
Brown proceeded to do the segment as planned on NBC News's Today, though changed the focus
of the segment to criticize the chain for announcing the recall too soon and taking their time in
determining if a recall was needed. Brown stated she was still upset by their actions a week after the
incident, adding that most companies are more cooperative than this. She compared it to an incident
that happened around the same time, where a Nordstrom department store's sweater's zipper was
detached and became a choking hazard. The sweaters were immediately recalled. [6]
Burger King issued a statement to parents that they should take the containers away from children
ages three and younger, and should be thrown away or returned to Burger King, where they could
be redeemed for a free small order of French fries. As noted above, children could keep the toy that
came with the ball. According to Burger King spokesperson Charles Nicolas, more than 25 million
containers were included in the recall. The container did not display any warning of a choking
hazard, stating it passed all choking tests and was appropriate for all ages. Burger King stated it
passed all U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission requirements and all international safety
standards.[2]
In a Knight Ridder Washington Bureau article criticizing the recall process used by companies, which
does not require companies to recall their products nor does it require they offer incentive to return
recalled products, editor Ben Finley makes reference to this recall. Because the item was of
negligible cost to purchasers of the kids' meals, many parents did not return the containers to Burger
King. A $1 million recall campaign was initiated by Burger King, which included television
advertisements [7] and warnings on take-out bags and tray liners from their restaurants. [8] More than
100,000 notices and fliers were sent to health-care providers and sites frequented by Pokémon fans.
[9]
 Despite this, a 4-month-old boy in Indianapolis, Indiana died of suffocation on January 25, 2000 in
his crib.[10]
Marlene Gordon, senior attorney for Burger King, stated their recall efforts were as strong or
stronger for their marketing campaign. Despite the campaign, less than half of the 25 million
containers were returned.[8] According to a Burger King spokesperson, Burger King had destroyed
more than 22.5 million undistributed containers and more than 500,000 returned containers by
December 2000.[11] Nancy A. Nord, acting chairperson of the commission, stated while a few came
back, they assumed most people threw them away. Research was done on the recall, which showed
that among customers who did not respond to a recall, 60% had thrown the containers away, which
is considered an effective recall. [12]
Burger King has stated its toy safety problems have not been fixed, as in a two-year period, they
have recalled three toys intended for toddlers; however, they showed the distinction between this
recall and the Pokémon recall, stating there were no injuries in these recalls.”
… Article taken from Wikipedia page “Burger King Pokémon container recall; Suffocation risk and
recall”