Restaurant removes 'radiation-protecting meal' after backlash

A Japanese cuisine restaurant in Shanghai, facing legal scrutiny, has withdrawn a disputed set meal from its menu after claiming that ingredients like vegetables, including potato, pea, and spinach, possessed special radiation-protection properties. Dazhong Daily, a Shandong-based news outlet, reported on Saturday.

The controversy arises against the backdrop of Japan's disposal of radioactive water into the sea, which has placed many restaurants specializing in Japanese seafood in a precarious situation. In light of these challenges, various establishments have begun seeking ways to mitigate the impact.

Amid the ongoing crisis, a Japanese food diner situated in Shanghai's Minhang district introduced a range of special set meals that purportedly offered protection against radiation on Thursday.

The menu touted benefits such as potato salad effectively reducing radioactive skin damage, while tofu's micro-elements magnesium and potassium were said to accelerate metabolism, offering radiation protection. The menu also claimed that beef facilitated cell growth and bolstered immunity.

The menu's exposure on the microblogging site Sina Weibo sparked a trending topic, generating considerable discussion among netizens. Many criticized the claims as absurd and accused the restaurant of capitalizing on the prevailing situation to exploit consumers.

When questioned about the scientific basis of the claims, a restaurant employee explained that the menu's information was provided by the chef, who consulted recipes and a nutritionist for insights into the ingredients' potential effects.

However, legal experts noted that the restaurant's exaggerated claims constituted unfair competition and were in violation of the law. Furthermore, if the radiation-protecting effects were proven to be false advertising, the restaurant could potentially face legal consequences under advertising regulations.

Fu Jian, a lawyer from Henan Zejin Law Firm, stated on Saturday that the misleading nature of the restaurant's advertisement went against the law on unfair competition. Fu also highlighted that if the radiation-protection claims were substantiated as false, the restaurant could be held legally accountable for deceptive advertising practices.