Cashier ruins random act of kindness
If you call almost never eating processed food being a 'foodie' then yes, I'm a foodie but you make it sound like something weird, that requires some kind of effort when really it doesn't, you just don't be a schmuck who buys sugary/fatty crap and thinks it's good quality food because the food companies put it in pretty packaging.
lol@ 'highly nutritious'. I'm not going to bother to link all the evidence to debunk that statement, if you don't know about it you must have been living under a stone for the last 10 years. Just last year Jamie Oliver managed to stop McDs using beef treated with ammonium hydroxide in it's burgers.
I take it you eat this stuff?
I take it you eat this stuff?
For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.
His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.
lol@ 'highly nutritious'. I'm not going to bother to link all the evidence to debunk that statement, if you don't know about it you must have been living under a stone for the last 10 years. Just last year Jamie Oliver managed to stop McDs using beef treated with ammonium hydroxide in it's burgers.
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.
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.
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.
@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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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".
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,
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".
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.
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,
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.
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.
Sorry, on the singular example you gave outside of platitudes about it being bad, the criticism falls.
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.
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.
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???
Calling what I stated "nonsense" is inane.
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.
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?
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.
Sorry, on the singular example you gave outside of platitudes about it being bad, the criticism falls.
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,
No, it started 'normal food stuff', and finished as 'not normal food stuff' i.e. it was healthy 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.
Gee that makes me want to take this conversation seriously.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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:
Originally Posted by ME
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?
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?
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.
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?
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.
Feedback is used for internal purposes. LEARN MORE