Have you looked at the packaging at fast food places? People don't eat it because of the pretty packaging.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08...iet.professor/

I believe that the problem with fast food is not the food itself. It's the quantities of food that people are eating in general. I think it would be perfectly reasonable to subsist on fast food and have a generally healthy lifestyle by simply practicing self-control and moderation.

You don't eat carbs and fats? You should probably consult a doctor. I suspect you are just being silly, and probably a protein:carb:fat ratio broadly consistent with the general population. Not that there is anything at all wrong with eating carbs or eating fats. There are two of the three macronutrients that provide energy for everything we do, hardly crap. If you eat way to much of them, or cut fats or proteins (carbs are exempt) down to basically zero then you can screw things up, but to first approximation they are all fine in a mixture. That you don't eat processed food (I rarely do either and almost everything is homecooked except for my guilty pleasure of chips) doesn't mean you don't eat sugar and fat, and isn't a problem. The (alleged) problem with "processed food" isn't that it contains carbs and fats - that is fine - but that it adds various chemicals with the possibility of long term health consequences. Most of the time people have zero idea whether there actually are such long term health consequences, they just think it is bad because it is "processed" and only coincidentally are ever correct.


Go ahead an try. But make sure you consider what it means to be nutritious because there are two types: macronutrients and micronutrients. The food is obviously very rich in macronutrients which is why it is so high caloric. For people who are overweight this is problematic, but that doesn't stop it being highly nutritious. People also need some micronutrients although this is usually way overblown (as in taking a multivitamin a day and being the tiniest bit balanced is probably good). The complaints that mcdonalds is not nutritious isn't that it doesn't have excellent macronutrients and moderate micronutrients, but that it might also have some harmful additional stuff. In the past this was true to an extent, but most complaints about mcdonalds in specific and food in general turn out to be hokum.

No, but I've been around the internet long enough to see the "mcdonalds is teh evilzzzz" and bought into it for a long time. Then I started taking bodybuilding seriously and read everything I could about nutrition. Then I realized most of the talking points were utter nonsense and there is a whole cottage industry built on blasting mcdonalds and most of it is nonsense.

Exactly. If you eat very regularly just one type of fast food you might have to worry long term about deficiencies in a few micronutrients or long term build up of a few bad chemicals. Same with anything. But if you eat at all balanced you are probably okay.

WTF just happened to this thread?

@MB - It was 1am and there was no food in my house. It was fast food or a frozen burrito from the gas station. I dunno about you, but I'm not buying gas station ingredients and cooking a meal after a long (and slightly losing) session at 1am.

It wasn't a act of kindness to begin with. It was an act that required all people involved to respond the exact way OP wanted to make him feel good about his own action. When all parties involved didn't respond in the way OP desired his state of mind changed from it being a "good deed" and feeling happiness/joy to being an action that ruined his state of being or mood and made him feel angry.

Why should another persons' interpretation of the action change the state of being you are in when you commit such an act...this only occurs when you're attached to the result of the action rather than the actual act of doing good itself with no attachment to the outcome. If you know you have something valuable to give another person, why let someone else determine the value and make you question whether it actually has any value to begin with. Everything in life will have different value to different people...once you have determined what value a thing or an action holds to you, it's silly to let someone else diminish the value of it in your own mind simply because they put a different value amount or type of value on said thing/action.

This was all addressed already somewhere around pages 1-2...

So this is a knee jerk response to what you think is an uneducated, mindless trend following anti-McDs rant? McDs have improved since the days of Fast Food Nation, and Supersize me, it's true, they had to or they'd have gone out of business, but they still have a long way to go before they could be considered as purveyors of good quality food, healthily prepared food. I'm not a Nutritionist, but I know quite a few people who are that go to the same gyms as me so I'll ask around, see if they think I'm barking up the wrong tree.

But, here's the thing you're not picking up on Uke, McDonalds and the other big fast food chains could serve up perfectly adequate food, even good quality food (which IMO is never going to happen because of profit margins), and I still wouldn't give them my money because of the unethical way in which they run their business. The food being poor quality is just the tip of the iceberg. Do you know anything about how they operate? Did you know that McDs, a fast food company, are the world's largest toy distributor?


Yeah, this is the gotcha that I was waiting for. So, you've done some reading to maximise your workouts returns and now you think you can defend fast food? I'm not denying that fast food has nutritional content, that would be ridiculous, but on the whole it would not constitute a healthy diet and you know that. What they serve might have started out as perfectly normal food stuffs but by the time it hits your plastic tray their processing requirements have turned it into something quite different. Witness that only last year they were still washing beef in ammonium hydroxide, last year Uke, despite a decade of efforts to stop them using unhealthy practices and they woudl still be doing that if it weren't for Jamie Oliver.

The list of the ways McDs turn good food into unhealthy junk is long and available online. Don't go the the 'evilzzzz' sites, find your own credible sources.

It evolved , but I'll stop talking to Uke about fast food if you want, it is your thread and it is a pretty huge derail.

Is this a defence of you eating fastfood? It's not necessary.

I don't know the context, but I agree with MB. Avoiding overly processed food is relatively easy. There are plenty of ways to make food just as cheap, fast, easy and (not least) more tasty from pretty much scratch.

Not that I am one of those who believe processed food in moderate doses is poison, but a few things is hard to argue. It can give a lot of indigestion etc.

Fast food ala McD is always problematic. The calorie content is too high compared to other things your body needs, so if you (hypothetically) cut back to only meeting your calorie needs, you are going to become very malnourished. Also, you will probably take in far too much salt. You risk become what is popularly known as "skinny fat".

By the way, I'm curious how you turned 'don't eat sugary/fatty crap' into 'don't eat fats or carbs'? The important part of what I said was 'crap'. Also, you turned sugary into 'carb's, which is a bit cheeky. I get plenty of carbs, and almost none of them are from refined sugars,

Agreed. I do almost entirely homemade meals from scratch.

Don't think there is anything specific to mcdonalds here. High amounts of fat with low fibre (as in the majority of restaurants high and low end) can give certain people indigestion while being fine for the general populace. My wife is actually particularly sensitive to this (mcdonalds okay, but very rich foods at high end restaurants are bad). There isn't any particular problem with mcdonalds that I know of on this front.

And so it begins.

This is all nonsense. Think about what you are saying: by meeting your nutrition needs (ie getting the right number of calories) you become very malnourished. It is a contradiction in terms. As for skinny fat, people are skinny fat because they don't work out and thus don't have much muscle, but still constrict calories so they don't become overweight. It has little to do with eating. Having food that is calorie rich is perfectly fine, and people who don't eat at mcdonalds will regularly consume calorie rich products. Note that the amount of energy you get from a gram of fat, carb or protein remains relatively the same across different types of fats, carbs, and proteins (with calorie per gram of fat the highest), so you can't really escape it. You can try consuming foods with lots of water weight and fibre weight and the like to reduce the per gram calorie amount but these are like 3rd order concerns and don't support any of your skinny fat things.

I suspect you might be thinking something about micronutrients (but then you don't get to say anything about skinny fat). Saying there is a lot of salt is by far the biggest problem here, but then it is a problem very wide in the food industry and most people who never eat at mcdonalds consume too much salt. But this would be a very weird complaint if you wanted to make it: unless one is ONLY eating at mcdonalds, and never eats any vegetables outside of it your micronutrients should be fine. Just as someone who has a bag of chips or two every week is fine if they also eat other things. If you are worried, take a multivitamin. But you can't really use it as a criticism without criticizing basically everything.

Same difference. Your body turns both into glucose (pretty quickly, in most circumstances) and then literally cannot tell the difference between a glucose molecule that came from coke and a glucose molecule that came from brown rice. Carbs (of which sugars are one form) and Fats are just fine. Adding "crap" doesn't change it. Are their particularly evil fats and carbs? With fats yes...there are things like trans fats (which mcdonalds doesn't use, except the amount that naturally occurs in beef and the like). For carbs, less so. Giving you all the benefit of the doubt here, perhaps you are referring to glycemic index/load issues where you get different time dependent blood glucose levels based on metabolism from carbs into glucose based on different forms of carbs (like complex carbs breakdown a bit slower and thus spread out their releases in time). There are whole diets predicated on this kind of stuff that are mostly bull****, I can go into it if needed. But this is hardly just an indictment against mcdonalds, it is an indictment against white rice and potatoes and so on too.

To first approximation, you should consume the right amount of calories for weight maintenance at your amount of activity (or slightly more if you are body building and actively trying to gain weight). To second approximation, you should worry about your macros, ie that your macronutrients (fat, protein, carbs) are broken into appropriate ratios. Most people never need to worry about this if they are at all balanced and not doing intense body building. To third approximation you include other factors like the glycemic index I mentioned above. And then micronutrients are a separate consideration. So when you think about trying to criticize mcdonalds for their alleged bad nutrition, try to figure out where in this picture you are actually making a criticism.

I ignored most of your first post. That you know someone who bodybuilds, that you think i should go to some websites you don't link, that mcdonalds puts toys in their happy meals, and that you have repeated your assertion that it is unhealthy doesn't need to be responded to. My response is "uh...okay" to each.


This beggars belief. Does a gram of fat turn into anything but a gram of fat? Does it give less or more energy than before? What is specifically worse about this gram of fat than before? Try to be specific. I mean there are things that change, for example a lot of the bacteria in beef is killed off relative to regular beef...is it something like this that you are trying to object to?


So your single example with any specificity is something that a) the FDA says is generally safe b) widely used in the food industry c) occurs naturally in foods d) not used by mcdonalds. This is why we are not supposed to like mcdonalds? Some facts here: http://www.foodinsight.org/Questions...ood_Production
Sorry, on the singular example you gave outside of platitudes about it being bad, the criticism falls.

Malnutrition is about more than calories. I'm sorry, but you don't seem to know what your body needs very well.

The problem with McD style fast food is its abysmally low content of necessary nutrients for you body except fat, sugar and salt. So you get malnutritioned pretty much regardless.

Calling what I stated "nonsense" is inane.

I made the distinction clear in the previous post, but am still left guessing that what you are talking about here is that mcdonalds is laking micronutrients? I have to ask again because your posts seem to be very confused between the two (instead of listing the macronutrients of fat, carbs and protein you forget protein and add salt, a micronutrient.....and then you speak about skinny fat which would have nothing to do with micronutrients).

People should eat a range of foods to get a wide array of micronutrient, or if you are particularly worried you can take a multivitamin (although these are for the most part unnecessary). So if the only thing someone ever ate was one type of menu item from mcdonalds sure you would lack micronutrients just as you would if you only ate a few different things of anything at all. But there is almost no specificity to this criticism that applies to mcdonalds.

It is sort of a weird criticism...mostly people either complain about (usually unnamed) evil things added that are harmful, or (poorly) talk about how evil the macronutrients are that it is fatty and sugary. MB tried both of these. So for instance one might say that french fries are worse than homemade potatoes because they have so much more fat and salt. But your complaint here is that the one doesn't have as much micronutrients as the other???

Cute.

Sorry but it is. It is just objectively false that high calorie contents lead to people being skinny fat. There is no way this statement can even begin to be defensible.

Gee that makes me want to take this conversation seriously.

I said 'gym', I didn't mention bodybuilding, that was your incorrect assumption.

So you can find some sites that you find credible yourself rather than having to debunk mine. Are you having a bad day or something?

Yes.... and the reason McDs put toys in their happy meals? You're still not paying any attention to my most important claim, just focusing on the crappy food.


No, it started 'normal food stuff', and finished as 'not normal food stuff' i.e. it was healthy(ish) and then McDs processed it and it became something unhealthy . I didn't say fat turned into something else, I'm actually starting to wonder if your account has been hijacked. If you're not sure what I mean, ask, don't just make stuff up.

I gave one example because all I was trying to show is that they were still engaging in unhealthy practices so recently and despite all the efforts to improve their standards, sometimes one is all you need In the last 12 months McDs were using a product deemed 'unfit for human consumption' in their main meals. Also, 'widely used' means nothing, and 'generally safe' isn't helping your case at all. Just lol at this whole conversation.

Are you going to respond to this Uke or just ignore my accusation that you simply rewrote what I said into one of the worst strawmen I've ever seen on this forum?

Well, I am asking, WHAT DO YOU MEAN?? You say it goes from "normal" to "not normal". What does this mean? In what way? What is bad about it? What is unhealthy about it? Be specific. I already challenged you to do this and offer a range of examples of the types of ways you could answer it. But you keep asserting it is somehow bad and unhealthy but simply cannot describe why with any specificity. If it isn't the fat and carbs and protein turning into "something else", what then is it?

Except it isn't unhealthy (did you read my link) and they are not still engaging in it even though many others are. It is a terrible example.

I have no interest in whether mcdonalds uses toys or whether your gym going friend bodybuilds or not. I'm objecting to false about the health. If you offer something specific I'd gladly address those, but it isn't a lack of "seriousness" that I am ignoring these other things brought up in your post. I am specifically only addressing the serious parts.

I wrote a whole post about it. My most informative post ITT in fact. It isn't a strawmen, it was a distinction without a difference.

So we'll totally ignore my efforts to talk about how unethical the big fast food companies are, which for me is by far the most important aspect of this, and we'll talk just about the food then, let me explore your position a little, what is it exactly? You can't be claiming that fast food would constitute a healthy diet, that would be moronic, but you don't accept that the food is poor quality, so where are you exactly?

Also, the 'gym going friend' of your imagination is actually people I've trained with over the years (Martial arts, not body building), many of whom are very fit, a lot of them are kickboxers, some of whom are actually Personal fitness instructors, some are knowledgeable about nutrition and diet, a guy I'm training with tomorrow who actually does do body building comps is very up on nutritional knowledge, and I would have thought that my suggestion that I talk to them would have met with your approval and not the mocking tone you're using. What's got into you lately?

You turned 'don't eat sugary/fatty crap' into 'don't eat fats or carbs' and your post was completely irrelevant as a result. I'm not getting sucked into defending a position I never took in the first place. To borrow your words 'You can have this debate with yourself'.

Are you an MMA fan, MB? Solid following of MMA in the UK...

Correct, at no point have I engaged you in the slightest about toys or whatever unethical things you think they do. I suspect you won't be able to bring up a criticism against fast food that isn't a criticism on the entire capitalist system, but regardless I can (as I usually do) pick and choose what I do or do not want to reply to. So I am glad we both now understand that what I am replying to is your ridiculous statements about the quality of the food.

Now you ask me what my position is. I thought this was clear, but a few basic facts about nutrition I typed out in post 87. Generally I find an IIFYM (if it fits your macros) is broadly correct view of nutrition and that one can certainly eat mcdonalds within that context and further that there is little good reason to excortiate mcdonalds without doing similarly to most of the restaurant industry, supermarket items and the diets of the majority of americans. Further still, that the majority of problems with poor diets rest not in low quality food, but incorrect application of these principles (as in there if nothing wrong with french fries IIFYM...but for many people it doesn't fit their macros). Salt is my one major exception to this. And further still, I find that most of the ways mcdonalds are attacked simply don't stand up to the basic of nutrition science.

So that is my view but I want you pay good attention here. In fact, I'm going to quote myself:
I wanted you to give specifics about the nature of your claims about the low quality of the food. I've asked this repeatedly and every time you completely fail to do so. The problem is, you keep saying how unhealthy it is, but can't actually say why. Well state the reason, then we can see if the the science substantiates your claims. Instead, what you have done is things like this:


Jesus Mightyboosh, I don't care one iota about who your friends are or what they do or who you talked to or anything else in what is effectively an appeal to authority. This is why I ignored it in a post you claimed was not being serious. What I care about is specifically what you believe and the justification for those specific statements. You have said mcdonalds is unhealthy. I have asked you to explain why you think that, and even given you several possible frameworks and avenues. But your longest paragraph in response is something about your friends...why would I care about that? Am I supposed to believe your claims based on this?

I addressed this in detail in post 87. The first time you didn't notice it (an honest mistake), but please if you are going to keep repeating this then go back and address the details mentioned in that post.

Could you be any more patronising?

Nope, I'm just addressing your persistent and peculiar mocking tone about my 'friend'. I'm going to ask some people who know a lot more about it than I do in the interests of becoming better informed, this is something you should applaud and not mock but like much of what I'm saying, you mistook it for meaning something else entirely. I can't use what my 'friends' know to convince you of anything because I don't know what that is yet... Now can we be done with this?

Oh yeah, the 'perhaps you are referring to' post. lol. Sorry, but the levels of how patronising you're being are something I haven't seen here for a while, especially from you.

Using the word 'crap' does change things Uke, it changes it a lot. When I say 'sugary/fatty crap' I'm not referring to ay food that contains sugars or fats, and you know this, which is why your entire argument is a strawman. The food McDonalds serves may be made up of the same chemical elements that food is generally made of (except for what they add during the processing) but the quantities and combinations are what make it an unhealthy choice so your argument, which seems to consist solely of 'We actually need the things that are in McDs food and they're in other types of food too' is puerile. You seem to have latched onto 'fat/sugar' is bad for you, which I never even said, and are thinking 'hah, but they're carbs and actually we need carbs!', yeah we do to an extent but not in the quantities that McDs food contains, making much of their menu an unhealthy option unless you consume it fairly infrequently. We actually don't need sugar at all and excessive quantities have all sorts of negative effects on your health.

Parts of the problem with McDs use of sugar is that it's refined and therefore easier to digest, you get pretty much the full hit. Also the quantities that they use. I don't even need the chemicals they use to make a case for their food being unhealthy.

You asked for links, so here are some, knock yourself out:

The unhealthiest items on the McDonald’s menu

Fast food is the 'unhealthy choice', McDonald's tells its own staff
lol
McDonalds Fast Food: Toxic Ingredients Include Putty and Cosmetic Petrochemicals

Here's Why Eating McDonalds Every Day Is A Bad Idea (Even If You Do Lose Weight)

And just for a pictorial break.