Nah, it showed up on Yahoo days ago.
I did several searches, and
not a single article stated the leftovers were from the night before, or
even any indication of how old the leftovers were. Many articles were written in such a way that a casual reader may have thought that was the case, however. For example, one article I found wrote:
"The Massachusetts college student had eaten rice, chicken and lo mein from a restaurant. Soon after, he felt abdominal pain..."
One might think, from that line, "OMG, he got sick
hours after eating food obtained at that restaurant." But earlier in the article it stated:
"Hours after eating leftovers from a restaurant..." (my emphasis)
Tricky wording, IMO. No mention of a timeline between when the leftovers were brought from the restaurant to when they were consumed. If the leftovers were truly from the night before, I would think that information would have been highlighted in every article, since that would clearly indicate there was a problem with the food at the restaurant and there certainly would have been an investigation of that restaurant (remember, this incident happened a year ago; it just went viral this week).
Let's face it -- we all know that these article writers write in such a way to try and shock the reader. That results in more hits and in the end, more pay. Can't really blame the writers; they're just trying to maximize their income.
The most likely scenario is that those leftovers were very old. Otherwise, there would be many other incidents like this since, let's face it, thousands of people bring home leftovers from noodle restaurants every single day.
Kurt