Super Size Me

"Tom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news😄Vd7d.560034$M95.525734@pd7tw1no...

Quoted message said:

Rented it last night. Overall, we enjoyed it. What had me
wondering
though, was the claims that all the food he ate at McDonald's
was high
fat(which it probably is), but not too much was said about the
amount of
carbs. All of the claims of high cholesterol and bad liver
function were
blamed on the fat. The nutritionist he was seeing did mention
the amounts of
processed carbs he was eating was not the way he should be
getting his
calories. Even though he was eating almost 5000 Cal a day,
which was double
what he was eating before, he was deficient in almost all
nutrients. At the
end of the show, they had 2 containers of the fat and sugar he
ate, for
visual effect. The fat was 12lbs. The sugar was 30lbs. They
didn't appear to
be measuring the overall carb content so I don't think it was
included in
the "sugar" container. They did mention quite a lot about the
amount of
teaspoons of sugar in the soft drinks, so I'm pretty sure the
container was
mostly from the pop he drank. I wish they would have broken
down the fat,
protein, carb ratios a bit better. Although I think they are
wrong in saying
the diet was high fat, it was a good illustration of what
eating to much
junk food can do to you. It was amazing to see his blood
levels go from
healthy to terrible in such a short time.
Tom
210/180/180

So what does it prove besides the fact the guys an idiot?
BJ

The thing that bugs me about the film is the fact that they picked on
McDonalds. I just think it is totally unfair to do such a thing. I can
easily eat 5000 cals a day just a home, buying junk food from the store and
making my own meals. I can mix up all the fat and sugar and low-nutrient
foods I want. I can ruin my health all by myself and I certainly don't need
a McDonalds to do it.

OTOH, I can make a decision to eat well to maintain/improve my health. And
I can choose to include several items from McDonalds and other fast food
joints in that plan.

I won't be watching that film.

Tom wrote:
:: Rented it last night. Overall, we enjoyed it. What had me wondering
:: though, was the claims that all the food he ate at McDonald's was
:: high fat(which it probably is), but not too much was said about the
:: amount of carbs. All of the claims of high cholesterol and bad liver
:: function were blamed on the fat. The nutritionist he was seeing did
:: mention the amounts of processed carbs he was eating was not the way
:: he should be getting his calories. Even though he was eating almost
:: 5000 Cal a day, which was double what he was eating before, he was
:: deficient in almost all nutrients. At the end of the show, they had
:: 2 containers of the fat and sugar he ate, for visual effect. The fat
:: was 12lbs. The sugar was 30lbs. They didn't appear to be measuring
:: the overall carb content so I don't think it was included in the
:: "sugar" container. They did mention quite a lot about the amount of
:: teaspoons of sugar in the soft drinks, so I'm pretty sure the
:: container was mostly from the pop he drank. I wish they would have
:: broken down the fat, protein, carb ratios a bit better. Although I
:: think they are wrong in saying the diet was high fat, it was a good
:: illustration of what eating to much junk food can do to you. It was
:: amazing to see his blood levels go from healthy to terrible in
:: such a short time. Tom 210/180/180
::
:: --
::
::
::
:: Tom + Pat Gallant
:: [email hidden]

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The thing that bugs me about the film is the fact that they
picked on
McDonalds. I just think it is totally unfair to do such a
thing. I can
easily eat 5000 cals a day just a home, buying junk food from
the store and
making my own meals. I can mix up all the fat and sugar and
low-nutrient
foods I want. I can ruin my health all by myself and I
certainly don't need
a McDonalds to do it.

OTOH, I can make a decision to eat well to maintain/improve my
health. And
I can choose to include several items from McDonalds and other
fast food
joints in that plan.

I won't be watching that film.

5000 cal a day is going to super-size any normal person
regardless of the
content.

BJ

BJ in Texas wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
:: news:[email hidden]...
::: The thing that bugs me about the film is the fact that they
::: picked on
::: McDonalds. I just think it is totally unfair to do such a
::: thing. I can
::: easily eat 5000 cals a day just a home, buying junk food from
::: the store and
::: making my own meals. I can mix up all the fat and sugar and
::: low-nutrient
::: foods I want. I can ruin my health all by myself and I
::: certainly don't need
::: a McDonalds to do it.
:::
::: OTOH, I can make a decision to eat well to maintain/improve my
::: health. And
::: I can choose to include several items from McDonalds and other
::: fast food
::: joints in that plan.
:::
::: I won't be watching that film.
:::
::
:: 5000 cal a day is going to super-size any normal person
:: regardless of the
:: content.

True, but the content of those calories does have a big impact on health.

::
:: BJ

BJ in Texas wrote:
:: "Tom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
:: news😄Vd7d.560034$M95.525734@pd7tw1no...
::: Rented it last night. Overall, we enjoyed it. What had me
::: wondering
::: though, was the claims that all the food he ate at McDonald's
::: was high
::: fat(which it probably is), but not too much was said about the
::: amount of
::: carbs. All of the claims of high cholesterol and bad liver
::: function were
::: blamed on the fat. The nutritionist he was seeing did mention
::: the amounts of
::: processed carbs he was eating was not the way he should be
::: getting his
::: calories. Even though he was eating almost 5000 Cal a day,
::: which was double
::: what he was eating before, he was deficient in almost all
::: nutrients. At the
::: end of the show, they had 2 containers of the fat and sugar he
::: ate, for
::: visual effect. The fat was 12lbs. The sugar was 30lbs. They
::: didn't appear to
::: be measuring the overall carb content so I don't think it was
::: included in
::: the "sugar" container. They did mention quite a lot about the
::: amount of
::: teaspoons of sugar in the soft drinks, so I'm pretty sure the
::: container was
::: mostly from the pop he drank. I wish they would have broken
::: down the fat,
::: protein, carb ratios a bit better. Although I think they are
::: wrong in saying
::: the diet was high fat, it was a good illustration of what
::: eating to much
::: junk food can do to you. It was amazing to see his blood
::: levels go from
::: healthy to terrible in such a short time.
::: Tom
::: 210/180/180
::
::
:: So what does it prove besides the fact the guys an idiot?
:: BJ

Nothing.

"BJ in Texas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Tom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news😄Vd7d.560034$M95.525734@pd7tw1no...

Quoted message said:

Rented it last night. Overall, we enjoyed it. What had me
wondering
though, was the claims that all the food he ate at McDonald's
was high
fat(which it probably is), but not too much was said about the
amount of
carbs. All of the claims of high cholesterol and bad liver
function were
blamed on the fat. The nutritionist he was seeing did mention
the amounts of
processed carbs he was eating was not the way he should be
getting his
calories. Even though he was eating almost 5000 Cal a day,
which was double
what he was eating before, he was deficient in almost all
nutrients. At the
end of the show, they had 2 containers of the fat and sugar he
ate, for
visual effect. The fat was 12lbs. The sugar was 30lbs. They
didn't appear to
be measuring the overall carb content so I don't think it was
included in
the "sugar" container. They did mention quite a lot about the
amount of
teaspoons of sugar in the soft drinks, so I'm pretty sure the
container was
mostly from the pop he drank. I wish they would have broken
down the fat,
protein, carb ratios a bit better. Although I think they are
wrong in saying
the diet was high fat, it was a good illustration of what
eating to much
junk food can do to you. It was amazing to see his blood
levels go from
healthy to terrible in such a short time.
Tom
210/180/180

So what does it prove besides the fact the guys an idiot?
BJ

True. But I was intrigued by the fact that the idea still exists quite
strongly that the fat content rather than the carb content is the main
offender for obesity. Just like most other high fat studies in the past.
Tom

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The thing that bugs me about the film is the fact that they picked on
McDonalds. I just think it is totally unfair to do such a thing.

Yes, MacDonald's is unfairly being singled out.
I can

Quoted message said:

easily eat 5000 cals a day just a home, buying junk food from the store

and

Quoted message said:

making my own meals. I can mix up all the fat and sugar and low-nutrient
foods I want. I can ruin my health all by myself and I certainly don't

need

Quoted message said:

a McDonalds to do it.

True

Quoted message said:

OTOH, I can make a decision to eat well to maintain/improve my health.

And

Quoted message said:

I can choose to include several items from McDonalds and other fast food
joints in that plan.

Yes. A person could go to almost any resturant and select healthier
foods. I don't think people go there to eat the salads though.

Quoted message said:

I won't be watching that film.

I wouldn't give it a high recommendation. It was obviously one sided
and unfair to MacDonald's showing extreme food choices. I don't know anyone
that would eat that much junk food.
Tom

Quoted message said:

Tom wrote:
:: Rented it last night. Overall, we enjoyed it. What had me wondering
:: though, was the claims that all the food he ate at McDonald's was
:: high fat(which it probably is), but not too much was said about the
:: amount of carbs. All of the claims of high cholesterol and bad liver
:: function were blamed on the fat. The nutritionist he was seeing did
:: mention the amounts of processed carbs he was eating was not the way
:: he should be getting his calories. Even though he was eating almost
:: 5000 Cal a day, which was double what he was eating before, he was
:: deficient in almost all nutrients. At the end of the show, they had
:: 2 containers of the fat and sugar he ate, for visual effect. The fat
:: was 12lbs. The sugar was 30lbs. They didn't appear to be measuring
:: the overall carb content so I don't think it was included in the
:: "sugar" container. They did mention quite a lot about the amount of
:: teaspoons of sugar in the soft drinks, so I'm pretty sure the
:: container was mostly from the pop he drank. I wish they would have
:: broken down the fat, protein, carb ratios a bit better. Although I
:: think they are wrong in saying the diet was high fat, it was a good
:: illustration of what eating to much junk food can do to you. It was
:: amazing to see his blood levels go from healthy to terrible in
:: such a short time. Tom 210/180/180
::
:: --
::
::
::
:: Tom + Pat Gallant
:: [email hidden]

I rented the movie last night too. I watched it with my parents who had not
seen it before.

Roger Zoul's and BJ's review of a movie they HAVE NOT SEEN is irresponsibly
misleading those who have so much to gain in seeing it.

The movie was not about overeating. The meals were the normal meals one
expects to buy at McDonalds. The only time he supersized was when the staff
at McDonalds urged him too. One of those staff members claimed that almost
everyone they asked would supersize upon request.

There is an amazing segment showing how and what children are eating in
schools these days. A Weight Loss Surgery patient goes under the knife.
There are Jay Leno style man-in-the-street interviews about fast food, and
questions about what a calorie is. We watch the blood tests and results.
The doctors show genuine surprise. His girlfriend describes changes in his
sex life. Above all that, the movie is interesting.

It is true that the typical medical doctors blamed fat. However, it doesn't
take Einstein to see the high percentage of carbs. I wish there had been
some measuring of all the transfats that McDonalds fed him.

I still have the rental. Today I am going to review the extra features.

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The thing that bugs me about the film is the fact that they picked on
McDonalds. I just think it is totally unfair to do such a thing. I can
easily eat 5000 cals a day just a home, buying junk food from the store

and

Quoted message said:

making my own meals. I can mix up all the fat and sugar and low-nutrient
foods I want. I can ruin my health all by myself and I certainly don't

need

Quoted message said:

a McDonalds to do it.

OTOH, I can make a decision to eat well to maintain/improve my health.

And

Quoted message said:

I can choose to include several items from McDonalds and other fast food
joints in that plan.

I won't be watching that film.

Tom wrote:
:: Rented it last night. Overall, we enjoyed it. What had me wondering
:: though, was the claims that all the food he ate at McDonald's was
:: high fat(which it probably is), but not too much was said about the
:: amount of carbs. All of the claims of high cholesterol and bad liver
:: function were blamed on the fat. The nutritionist he was seeing did
:: mention the amounts of processed carbs he was eating was not the way
:: he should be getting his calories. Even though he was eating almost
:: 5000 Cal a day, which was double what he was eating before, he was
:: deficient in almost all nutrients. At the end of the show, they had
:: 2 containers of the fat and sugar he ate, for visual effect. The fat
:: was 12lbs. The sugar was 30lbs. They didn't appear to be measuring
:: the overall carb content so I don't think it was included in the
:: "sugar" container. They did mention quite a lot about the amount of
:: teaspoons of sugar in the soft drinks, so I'm pretty sure the
:: container was mostly from the pop he drank. I wish they would have
:: broken down the fat, protein, carb ratios a bit better. Although I
:: think they are wrong in saying the diet was high fat, it was a good
:: illustration of what eating to much junk food can do to you. It was
:: amazing to see his blood levels go from healthy to terrible in
:: such a short time. Tom 210/180/180
::
:: --
::
::
::
:: Tom + Pat Gallant
:: [email hidden]

The "idiot" is the movie reviewer who did not see it.

Quoted message said:

:: So what does it prove besides the fact the guys an idiot?
:: BJ

Nothing.

Quoted message said:

Yes, MacDonald's is unfairly being singled out.

What about all the times they talk about the other fast food places? What
about the part where they show that McDonalds is the biggest? What about
the part where they compare children's knowledge of the various fast food
places?

The movie didn't just target Mcdonalds. They identified McDonalds as the
legitimate target.

Why the hell do people review a movie without watching it?

Tom said:

Rented it last night. Overall, we enjoyed it. What had me wondering
though, was the claims that all the food he ate at McDonald's was high
fat(which it probably is), but not too much was said about the amount of
carbs.

Hello Tom. I read a review of the concept from the point of view of how
different his McDonalds diet was to his normal diet and one point that
was made and emphasized was that his normal diet did not vary greatly
regading his carb consumption other than sugar and fats. Someone eating
pizzas, sandwiches, breakfast cereals would probably have as high a
carb intake as someone eating nothing but McDonalds.

Quoted message said:

All of the claims of high cholesterol and bad liver function were
blamed on the fat. The nutritionist he was seeing did mention the amounts of
processed carbs he was eating was not the way he should be getting his
calories. Even though he was eating almost 5000 Cal a day, which was double
what he was eating before, he was deficient in almost all nutrients. At the
end of the show, they had 2 containers of the fat and sugar he ate, for
visual effect. The fat was 12lbs. The sugar was 30lbs. They didn't appear to
be measuring the overall carb content so I don't think it was included in
the "sugar" container.

It was for four weeks wasn't it? That would be a little over 480 daily
carbs from sugar alone if you are right. Add the cals from fat and
protein and it is a wonder that he didn't have a heart attack before
the filming ended.

Quoted message said:

They did mention quite a lot about the amount of
teaspoons of sugar in the soft drinks, so I'm pretty sure the container was
mostly from the pop he drank. I wish they would have broken down the fat,
protein, carb ratios a bit better. Although I think they are wrong in saying
the diet was high fat, it was a good illustration of what eating to much
junk food can do to you.

Well, it was high in fat, nearly seven ounces of fat per day. That is
an awful lot of fat, although I think that if they did the same with a
fried chicken outlet it would be even higher. If the major change in
his diet was increases in saturated fats and sugar, then they weren't
exactly wrong. Although they didn't stress carbs, they did emphasize
sugar, which is considered the evil carb by many non diabetics.

Quoted message said:

It was amazing to see his blood levels go from
healthy to terrible in such a short time.
Tom

Probably made a lot of people think twice before taking their kids to
McDonalds again.

I have never liked that sort of food anyway, so it doesn't really
concern me. I find it all tastes the same, cardboard with dressings.

I wonder how it affected McDonalds' sales. Had to make a dent I would imagine.

Verity

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I rented the movie last night too. I watched it with my parents who had

not

Quoted message said:

seen it before.

Roger Zoul's and BJ's review of a movie they HAVE NOT SEEN is

irresponsibly

Quoted message said:

misleading those who have so much to gain in seeing it.

The movie was not about overeating. The meals were the normal meals one
expects to buy at McDonalds. The only time he supersized was when the

staff

Quoted message said:

at McDonalds urged him too. One of those staff members claimed that

almost

Quoted message said:

everyone they asked would supersize upon request.

There is an amazing segment showing how and what children are eating in
schools these days. A Weight Loss Surgery patient goes under the knife.
There are Jay Leno style man-in-the-street interviews about fast food, and
questions about what a calorie is. We watch the blood tests and results.
The doctors show genuine surprise. His girlfriend describes changes in

his

Quoted message said:

sex life. Above all that, the movie is interesting.

It is true that the typical medical doctors blamed fat. However, it

doesn't

Quoted message said:

take Einstein to see the high percentage of carbs. I wish there had been
some measuring of all the transfats that McDonalds fed him.

Look at the "smoking fry" in the bonus features. He put various burgers
and fries in different jars. The best comparison was the MacDonald's fries
to fries from a local ma and pa type fast food outlet. The MacDonald's fries
look like they were bought yesterday even after over a month. The other
fries deteriated within days. Possibly transfat oil for frying preserved
them?

Quoted message said:

I still have the rental. Today I am going to review the extra features.

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The thing that bugs me about the film is the fact that they picked on
McDonalds. I just think it is totally unfair to do such a thing. I can
easily eat 5000 cals a day just a home, buying junk food from the store

and

Quoted message said:

making my own meals. I can mix up all the fat and sugar and

low-nutrient

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

foods I want. I can ruin my health all by myself and I certainly don't

need

Quoted message said:

a McDonalds to do it.

OTOH, I can make a decision to eat well to maintain/improve my health.

And

Quoted message said:

I can choose to include several items from McDonalds and other fast food
joints in that plan.

I won't be watching that film.

Tom wrote:
:: Rented it last night. Overall, we enjoyed it. What had me wondering
:: though, was the claims that all the food he ate at McDonald's was
:: high fat(which it probably is), but not too much was said about the
:: amount of carbs. All of the claims of high cholesterol and bad liver
:: function were blamed on the fat. The nutritionist he was seeing did
:: mention the amounts of processed carbs he was eating was not the way
:: he should be getting his calories. Even though he was eating almost
:: 5000 Cal a day, which was double what he was eating before, he was
:: deficient in almost all nutrients. At the end of the show, they had
:: 2 containers of the fat and sugar he ate, for visual effect. The fat
:: was 12lbs. The sugar was 30lbs. They didn't appear to be measuring
:: the overall carb content so I don't think it was included in the
:: "sugar" container. They did mention quite a lot about the amount of
:: teaspoons of sugar in the soft drinks, so I'm pretty sure the
:: container was mostly from the pop he drank. I wish they would have
:: broken down the fat, protein, carb ratios a bit better. Although I
:: think they are wrong in saying the diet was high fat, it was a good
:: illustration of what eating to much junk food can do to you. It was
:: amazing to see his blood levels go from healthy to terrible in
:: such a short time. Tom 210/180/180
::
:: --
::
::
::
:: Tom + Pat Gallant
:: [email hidden]

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yes, MacDonald's is unfairly being singled out.

What about all the times they talk about the other fast food places? What
about the part where they show that McDonalds is the biggest? What about
the part where they compare children's knowledge of the various fast food
places?

The movie didn't just target Mcdonalds. They identified McDonalds as the
legitimate target.

Why the hell do people review a movie without watching it?

You made no mention of the guy that has eaten over 18000 big macs in his
life and he is quite slim and has a good cholesterol count. Does this mean
you didn't watch the movie either? Or were you just picking out the
highlights like I did? The movie was entertainment for me. It's not a valid
documentary, but does a good job of showing extremes of eating the wrong
foods. Although there is representation of other fast food outlets, he ate
only from MacDonald's menu.
Tom

Roger Zoul said:

The thing that bugs me about the film is the fact that they picked on
McDonalds. I just think it is totally unfair to do such a thing.

Why is that Roger? McDonalds exemplifies the very concept of mass
marketed, mass produced junk food. I would be surprised if they had
focused on junk food nutritional values and ignored McDonalds.

I can

Quoted message said:

easily eat 5000 cals a day just a home, buying junk food from the store and
making my own meals. I can mix up all the fat and sugar and low-nutrient
foods I want. I can ruin my health all by myself and I certainly don't need
a McDonalds to do it.

No, but you aren't spending millions of dollars every week trying to
convince other people to come home with you and eat your high fat, high
sugar, low-nutrient junk food, whereas McDonalds is.

Look at the McLibel suit a few years ago when McDonalds sued a British
couple for claiming that McDonalds food was unhealthy. That attitude
makes McDonalds *the* ideal focus for this type of documentary. They
have little regard for children's health, or for anything other than
profits. Any steps they have taken toward realistic disclosure of the
true nutritional values of their food have been slow, grudging,
reluctant, and seem only to be made just in time to avoid placing
themselves in legal jeopardy. Tell me that they don't know about trans
fats? Why do they continue to use them? Because they make more profit. I
don't know about McDonalds over there nowadays, but here they also have
had major problems and very bad publicity regarding the hiring and
firing of junior staff, with underpaying and poor treatment being
commonplace. They seem to have little regard for anyone, certainly not
those who work for them.

Quoted message said:

OTOH, I can make a decision to eat well to maintain/improve my health. And
I can choose to include several items from McDonalds and other fast food
joints in that plan.

The target audience isn't those people who can make informed decisions
regarding fast food, it those people who eat fast food everyday without
realising just how dangerous it is to their health.

Quoted message said:

I won't be watching that film.

Sounds a little like you are burying your head in the sand. Why not
watch it? You seem to have strong opinions about it, why not find out
whether your opinions are valid?

Regards

David

--

To reply, please include the letters DNF anywhere in the subject line.

All other mail is automatically deleted.

"Verity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 2004-10-02 00:34:11 +1000, "Tom" <[email hidden]> said:

It was for four weeks wasn't it? That would be a little over 480 daily
carbs from sugar alone if you are right. Add the cals from fat and
protein and it is a wonder that he didn't have a heart attack before
the filming ended.

Yes, everyone was quite worried about him.

Quoted message said:

Well, it was high in fat, nearly seven ounces of fat per day. That is
an awful lot of fat, although I think that if they did the same with a
fried chicken outlet it would be even higher. If the major change in
his diet was increases in saturated fats and sugar, then they weren't
exactly wrong. Although they didn't stress carbs, they did emphasize
sugar, which is considered the evil carb by many non diabetics.

That is quite high. Thanks for the calculation. 7 ounces is about 1760
Cal from fat. The fat studies in the past though, did the same kind of
tests. Combining both high carb and high fat is probably the most deadly.
High fat with more protein and low carb doesn't seem to have this affect on
cholesterol levels. In fact, they go down in most people. But the movie
shows that the "high fat is bad" myth still lives. It's more of the
combination of the 2 than just the 1. Also, the amount of transfats would
effect the blood lipids rather than natural fats.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It was amazing to see his blood levels go from
healthy to terrible in such a short time.
Tom

Probably made a lot of people think twice before taking their kids to
McDonalds again.

Haha. I'll bet it did.
Tom

Quoted message said:

I have never liked that sort of food anyway, so it doesn't really
concern me. I find it all tastes the same, cardboard with dressings.

I wonder how it affected McDonalds' sales. Had to make a dent I would

imagine.

Quoted message said:

Verity

Tom wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
:: news:[email hidden]...
::: The thing that bugs me about the film is the fact that they picked
::: on McDonalds. I just think it is totally unfair to do such a thing.
::
:: Yes, MacDonald's is unfairly being singled out.
:: I can
::: easily eat 5000 cals a day just a home, buying junk food from the
::: store and making my own meals. I can mix up all the fat and sugar
::: and low-nutrient foods I want. I can ruin my health all by myself
::: and I certainly don't need a McDonalds to do it.
::
:: True
:::
::: OTOH, I can make a decision to eat well to maintain/improve my
::: health. And I can choose to include several items from McDonalds
::: and other fast food joints in that plan.
::
:: Yes. A person could go to almost any resturant and select
:: healthier foods. I don't think people go there to eat the salads
:: though.

I eat their salads if I need to eat and McD is the only place. Subway is
better, as are other places.

::
::: I won't be watching that film.
::
:: I wouldn't give it a high recommendation. It was obviously one
:: sided and unfair to MacDonald's showing extreme food choices. I
:: don't know anyone that would eat that much junk food.
:: Tom
:::
:::
::: Tom wrote:
::::: Rented it last night. Overall, we enjoyed it. What had me
::::: wondering though, was the claims that all the food he ate at
::::: McDonald's was high fat(which it probably is), but not too much
::::: was said about the amount of carbs. All of the claims of high
::::: cholesterol and bad liver function were blamed on the fat. The
::::: nutritionist he was seeing did mention the amounts of processed
::::: carbs he was eating was not the way he should be getting his
::::: calories. Even though he was eating almost 5000 Cal a day, which
::::: was double what he was eating before, he was deficient in almost
::::: all nutrients. At the end of the show, they had 2 containers of
::::: the fat and sugar he ate, for visual effect. The fat was 12lbs.
::::: The sugar was 30lbs. They didn't appear to be measuring the
::::: overall carb content so I don't think it was included in the
::::: "sugar" container. They did mention quite a lot about the amount
::::: of teaspoons of sugar in the soft drinks, so I'm pretty sure the
::::: container was mostly from the pop he drank. I wish they would
::::: have broken down the fat, protein, carb ratios a bit better.
::::: Although I think they are wrong in saying the diet was high fat,
::::: it was a good illustration of what eating to much junk food
::::: can do to you. It was amazing to see his blood levels go from
::::: healthy to terrible in
::::: such a short time. Tom 210/180/180
:::::
::::: --
:::::
:::::
:::::
::::: Tom + Pat Gallant
::::: [email hidden]

Cubit wrote:
::: Yes, MacDonald's is unfairly being singled out.
::
:: What about all the times they talk about the other fast food places?
:: What about the part where they show that McDonalds is the biggest?
:: What about the part where they compare children's knowledge of the
:: various fast food places?

None of that matters.

::
:: The movie didn't just target Mcdonalds. They identified McDonalds
:: as the legitimate target.
::

What you mean by "the" legitimage target. The problem is education, not any
food institution. The entire film could have been done in any local
supermarket. It's about the choices that people make.

:: Why the hell do people review a movie without watching it?

With a name like "Super Size Me" the target is definitely the fast food
industry, but the problem is not the fast food industry, the problem is us.
If you don't think that the fast food industry wouldn't completely and
quickly change their offerings if WE stopped eating them, then you're not
paying attention. They are selling us what WE want. If we DECIDE to eat
better, then they will adapt or go out of business.

J. David Anderson wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::: The thing that bugs me about the film is the fact that they picked
::: on McDonalds. I just think it is totally unfair to do such a thing.
::
:: Why is that Roger? McDonalds exemplifies the very concept of mass
:: marketed, mass produced junk food. I would be surprised if they had
:: focused on junk food nutritional values and ignored McDonalds.

Go to your local supermarket and look for mass-marketed, mass-produced junk
food?

What makes you think McDonalds has any special niche in that area other than
name recognition?

::
:: I can
::: easily eat 5000 cals a day just a home, buying junk food from the
::: store and making my own meals. I can mix up all the fat and sugar
::: and low-nutrient foods I want. I can ruin my health all by myself
::: and I certainly don't need a McDonalds to do it.
::
:: No, but you aren't spending millions of dollars every week trying to
:: convince other people to come home with you and eat your high fat,
:: high sugar, low-nutrient junk food, whereas McDonalds is.

Go to your local supermarket and look at all the zillions of products that
are high-fat, high-sugar low-nutrient junk food, and look at what the
manufactures are spending on advertising for them.

::
:: Look at the McLibel suit a few years ago when McDonalds sued a
:: British couple for claiming that McDonalds food was unhealthy.

Coke is unhealthy? Ice cream is unhealthy? [censored], my local supermarket
pushes more unhealthy food than McDonalds does.

I can eat at McDonalds and many other fast food joints and stuff make decent
choices.

That
:: attitude makes McDonalds *the* ideal focus for this type of
:: documentary. They have little regard for children's health, or for
:: anything other than profits.

Do I even need to respond? They are a corporation and provides goods and
services to their customers. If childrens' health is an issue, where in the
hell are their parents?

Geez....let's blame everyone else for our problems, but take no
resposibility for them ourselves. Yeah.

Any steps they have taken toward
:: realistic disclosure of the true nutritional values of their food
:: have been slow, grudging, reluctant, and seem only to be made just
:: in time to avoid placing themselves in legal jeopardy. Tell me that
:: they don't know about trans fats? Why do they continue to use them?

Do I even need to respond? The transfats issue is virtually in all segments
of the food industry in this country.

:: Because they make more profit. I don't know about McDonalds over
:: there nowadays, but here they also have had major problems and very
:: bad publicity regarding the hiring and firing of junior staff, with
:: underpaying and poor treatment being commonplace. They seem to have
:: little regard for anyone, certainly not those who work for them.

This is corporate reality. Even heard of Wal-mart? Do you think this is
even the main message of this film?

::
::
::
:::
::: OTOH, I can make a decision to eat well to maintain/improve my
::: health. And I can choose to include several items from McDonalds
::: and other fast food joints in that plan.
::
:: The target audience isn't those people who can make informed
:: decisions regarding fast food, it those people who eat fast food
:: everyday without realising just how dangerous it is to their health.

It's not just fast food. It's not just McDonalds. It's your local
supermarket too. Sam's Club, Costco, etc.
Ever look at the foods people put in their shopping baskets?

::
:::
::: I won't be watching that film.
::
:: Sounds a little like you are burying your head in the sand. Why not
:: watch it? You seem to have strong opinions about it, why not find out
:: whether your opinions are valid?

I know they are. Do you really think that anyone is going to pay attention
to what this guy did? No one eats exclusively at McDonalds and expects not
to get fat. People just aren't that stupid and they will simply discount
the entire thing since they know they don't eat that way. They'll see the
guy for what he was doing, trying to find a topic for a film so he can make
money and/or gain fame.

::
::
:: Regards
::
:: David
::
:: --
::
:: To reply, please include the letters DNF anywhere in the subject
:: line.
::
:: All other mail is automatically deleted.

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

True, but the content of those calories does have a big impact
on health.

That's a choice... I haven't ever been kidnapped, dragged into a
McDonalds
and force fed hamburgers and fries.

BJ