Woman loses weight by only eating at McDonald's (1 Viewer)

[Scott L]

All you McDonald's fans, look how unhealthy the guy on the left is compared to the girl on the right.

 

[Paul Padilla]

Ick!

and assuming they're a couple....Ouch!

 

[Kevin Hewell]

I don't think the woman on the right looks very healthy either. She looks far too skinny. Just look at her arms and legs.

 

[Paul Padilla]

That's what I meant by Ick!

I guess I had hoped that Scott was being facetious. The guy isn't in great shape, but the girl is absolutely anorexic. And if she looks that thin in a picture, she has to be absolutely putrid in person. If I were asked to choose, I'd have to say that the guy is healthier. He isn't going to run any marathons, but he's not likely to develop ostioperosis from calcium loss due to malnutrition either.

 

[Nathan Eddy]

It's more than a stretch. Food--any food--will help keep you alive if you are starving. It can LITERALLY save your life. There is nutritional value in a bucket of pure fat (the calories). There is no nutritional value in cigarette smoke.

 

[MarkHastings]

But I think it has to do with the 'starting/normal' price. With bulk items, the multiple items are less expensive than the 'starting/normal' price. With food, the smaller portions are more expensive than the 'starting/normal' price.

It's a slight difference, but it's still true that you have to pay more for smaller portions.

 

[Paul Padilla]

The point was not to compare nutrition but to point out that big tobacco knew for years that their product was bad for people, to put it extremely mildly. One day we may see a similar exposition about some of the things in most fast food...who knew...for how long.

 

[Chris Lockwood]

> Ask for small fries with that meal and you save maybe 25 cents. That extra 25 cents would have gotten you more than twice the amount of fries, so you end up paying more for less

If the small fries are cheaper, how are you "paying more for less"?

I don't know of any place that charges more for a smaller portion. If they did that, just buy the larger one, & don't eat all of it. There's no law that you have to eat the entire meal.

 

[Paul Padilla]

Per unit...per ounce, etc. You saved 25 cents but you paid 5.3 cents per ounce vs. 2.4 cents per ounce for the large.

The economics are really a very minor point.

 

[Kevin Alexander]

Oh My God!!!! What happened to Beyonce'! She was so fine just a month ago!

 

[Paul Padilla]

LMAO

 

[MarkHastings]

No! No no! That's a scene from "The Nutty Professor 3" where Professor Klump accidentally puts his weight loss formula in Professor Carla Purty's drink.

 

[Nathan Eddy]

I don't really eat fries all the much (I'm doing a low-carb lifestyle), but when the family is craving McDonalds, we'll get a large fry to share. It's cheaper per ounce, but we all eat less. Common sense seems to be a good guide. None of us are overweight.

One person eating at McDonald's for a month is nothing more than anecdotal evidence. One person does not make a scientific, medical study. Sure, these stunts may make good drama, but it is virtually worthless in terms of deriving any useful medical or dietary information. You simply cannot make general, factual claims based on the results of one person's experience, and then expect to apply those results to the population in general.

The doctors in this movie who were "shocked" at the results should be ashamed. I would not trust any doctor who is shocked that 5000 calories per day of fast food had detrimental effects on one's health. Yet, people I meet who've seen the movie talk about this one point the most. Obviously, the doctors' shock impressed people as some sort of meaningful scientific data.

Perhaps the doctors were shocked by the DEGREE to which the man's health was affected. If so, then this merely illustrates my point above: one person can be an anomaly (hence the doctors's shock; he exceeded their expectations of a "normal" reaction to such a diet). We would have to repeat the experiment with others to see if they got the same results.

But those who are predisposed to believe this kind of anti-corporation, anti-fast food propaganda have no problem whatsoever using dramatic, anecdotal evidence in their arguments and as a means to influence people's behavior. It's just irrational and emotional.

 

[Chris Lockwood]

Except for the way she's dressed, that pic of the woman looks like something right from a "stop the famine" ad.

 

[Paul Padilla]

So does that mean the guy ate Sally Struthers? But I just saw her on Still Standing.

 

[Jeff_Standley]

The problem with her story is that she follows none of this up with medical evidence and facts like spurlock does. Yes she lost weight, but what did the food do to her body? What type of excersize and how much did she do to couteract the all Mcd's diet? People like this are taking away from the fact that fast food in your diet IS bad for you and should be eaten in moderation if at all.

Straight from the Mcd's website.

A point made by spurlock.

 

[MarkHastings]

But the article does say that she did this because she felt the movie made it sound like McDonalds is the REASON why people are obese. I still don't believe in the "McDonald's made me fat" argument.

When you think about it, how many Restaurants fall into the same category? I mean, if you constantly eat at a Pizza place, you're not going to lose weight. Or what about chains like Chilis, Applebees, etc.???

It really has more to do with eating out than it does "fast food". Virtually any place that you eat out at, all the time, is going to be bad for you.

 

[Charles J P]

Even Jared Fogel would admit you have to make smart choices from the menu. Do you think he would have lost all that weight eating a footlong meatball sub with extra cheese, a large non-diet soda and regular chips? Many people do this, I think someone should do and expose' documentary about subway... NOT. Enough already, I'm with Mark on this, the point is to prove that McDonalds doesnt make you fat, its your LIFE that makes you fat. Couch potatoes that work office jobs and eat McDonalds are going to get fat. People that walk to work and work outside are likely not to get fat from McDonalds. McDonalds is overprocessed and not healthy but a little of ANYTHING is not going to make you fat.

 

[Jeff_Standley]

Thats the good and bad thing about documentaries. You get the extreme watchers and the non believers. Any doc needs to be taken with a grain of salt. You also have to look at the motivation behind a documentary. Is it trying to prove a point against something or make a conclusion? Like the lady on Yahoo. Her motivation was to prove you could loose weight at Mcd's. So her outcome is going to be skewed from the start. She is not going let the food take over, if she is gaining weight on her experiment she will do more excersize to couteract the effects of eating Mcd's.
I do believe the "average" person eating at McDonalds or anywhere regularly is going to gain weight and not loose it ultimately because of the choices made. Eating, excersize, etc.
Most Americans as stated in the doc do little to no excersize throughout the day and with the convenience of fast food is is hard to stay fit. But once again all a choice made by the person eating. As mentioned above and in the article there are better choices that can be made at these places.

On a side note.
I really think you should watch the doc for the other points made in it though. The stuff about corporations and the money spent on advertsising and contracts to supply our school cafeterias with their product was really interesting as well.
The advertising part hit home with me because I have a little boy who is now 3. After seeing the kids in the documentary and the tactics used by the corporations, I looked at it a whole new way. My son is 3 years old and watches very little TV. Maybe George Shrinks or Thomas in the morning and the rest of the day he is out side or at the park. then at night we watch a couple cartoons on disney or something. The doc shows, if you havent seen it, how marketing by Mcd's as well as others is effective. Kids are shown pictures of recognizable figures and the only one they know is of Ronald McDonald. The kids know right off the bat who he is and stutter a little bit on the others.
I thought this was funny when I originaly saw it but there is truth in it. We dont go to Mcd's that much, for reasons not relating to Super Size Me but we would rather cook at home. And my son knows Rondald McDonald and everytime we drive Mcd's he knows the arches and says
"yeahhhh! McDonalds".
He knows that McDonalds is a place of fun and the place to be even at his age.
The only other store he knows in town is Wal-Mart because he gets toys when we go there.(Im a sucker I know haha)
Corporations are clever and Mcd's I think is one of the most clever in their marketing tactics. I do agree that even with all the marketing thrown at us we still have the ultimate choice of what we do, but these tactics are done because they work. But as for kids. Kids dont have the power at this age to make choices between whats good for them and whats bad. So these tactics become almost brainwashing at a young age, remember candy cigarrettes?
I cant believe we used to buy those as kids, LOL .

 

[MarkHastings]

I really wonder how much draw McDonald's would have (with kids) if their food was 'healthier'? I mean, do kids love it there because of the food? because of the "fun", or because of both. I wonder how much (from either side) you could take away and still be as successful as it is?

I know I LOVE their hamburgers, but I am at a point where I have to treat it like dessert and eat it only as a "treat". But I often wonder if I love them because I like the taste? because they are bad for me? or because they invoke memories of when I was a kid and McDonalds was like Disney Land.