Were you wasted when you wrote this post? You misspelled the dude’s name every time, and there are numerous other misspellings, such as “werwolf” here.
Be that as it may, your wholesale mockery of the “paranormal” (I’m used to this by now; water off the duck) combined with a ludicrous credulity re Spurlock’s claims does not speak well of your reasoning abilities.
Here’s the thing: HOW do I know that what I see is honest? You say there’s nothing rigged. Where’s the skepticism regarding the claims the film is making?
Again, how do I know that all this is honest? How do I know that he isn’t drinking off-camera? Jeez, people say that Lekatt is dense in an argument–why do I have to keep repeating the same things to you? Why don’t you listen/read?
OK, I repeat: The plural of anecdote is NOT DATA. Got it, Mr. Skepticism?
Cool–I now know what you mean when you use the word “proof.” I now know never to take you seriously again when you use this term.
HTF would you know unless you were a doctor or familiar with medical research. Not understanding skepticism is one thing; not even understanding the limits of your own knowledge is even worse.
Oh, so your certain that they’re “reputable.” Did you research that? Do you even know how propaganda works? Good propaganda is not a Jack Chick tract. Good propaganda is built up on both truth and lies so that it’s convincing.
I already said in a different post that junk food is indeed bad for you (as if you would bother to read what I write). My point is that the movie proves nothing and your arguments in favor of it are 100% horsesh*t.
A. He could have been drinking or using drugs.
B. He could have congenitive ailments.
C. He may have had an idiosyncratic reaction to the food that is unrelated to the wholesomeness of the food.
Use your imagination. Be a real skeptic.
Yes, these are the questions a skeptic should be asking.
There you go; there’s healthy doubt and skepticism at work here. Nice rhetoric, too, about the “little stalker.”
I don’t know. What is he trying to prove? What are is claims? What are yourclaims about his claims. You are making no sense.
No, but it’s propaganda, whose obvious takeaway is that, as you say, McDonald’s is “Satan” and genuinely awful for one’s health. Something must be done, there oughta be a law, just think of the children, etc. etc.
In Australia, we’re getting bombarded with these ads from the CEO of McDonald’s Australia (15 times during the footy on Saturday night!). Spitting chips - McDonald’s fights back. (I’ve actually seen the doco, unlike some of the people in here criticising it on false premises).
Some of the claims made by Russo (the CEO) in that article are pretty inaccurate.
For instance, he says that “We believe, and have always believed, that McDonald’s can be eaten as part of a well-balanced diet. What Mr Spurlock set out to do, which was double his daily calorie intake, deliberately not exercise and over-eat, was totally irresponsible.”
Well, as Spurlock found out when he called 100 nutritionists, no nutritionist recommends eating McDonald’s as part of a well-balanced diet. He didn’t deliberately double his calorie intake, it’s just what happens when you eat nothing but McDonalds, and that’s not too far away from what some people do. His exercise was reduced to that of the average American, because it’s average, normal Americans who are eating McDonalds. He only had 3 meals a day, no snacks, so he wasn’t over-eating.
Again from the article:"‘We’ve been taking the issue of obesity seriously for a few years now,’ he said, referring to the introduction of salads, nutritional labelling and low-fat breakfasts." A few years now? The salads and low-fat breakfasts were introduced in Australia late last year, and the labelling only started a couple of months ago.
Last Thursday the late news on Ch. 10 had a sound-bite from Russo: he said they’d made the ad because “loyal customers of McDonalds” had told them to stand up for themselves. Poor multi-billion dollar corporation, being picked on by a guy who uses them as a gimmick to get people to watch his documentary about obesity and it’s causes. My heart bleeds for them.
A small hijack: I was inspired by this thread to email McDonalds and complain that my local store has chosen not to stock apples. I believe they are the healthiest (and cheapest) item available, and was disappointed that our local McDonalds got rid of them less than a year after they were introduced, especially at a time where they’re trying to “health up” their image. Today I got a phone call from the manager of the local store to say that because of my email they were going to put apples back on their menu. Yay me!
I didn’t think of it at the time, but the manager said they originally found they weren’t selling enough of them and he hated throwing away all the uneaten apples. I should have asked him why he didn’t just include a free apple in Happy Meals if the stock pile looked like it wasn’t going to move. He was just going to throw them away anyway.
Let me preface this by saying I have not seen SuperSize Me yet, so I will not comment on Spurlock’s experiment. The one thing that he has mentioned in interviews I have read and I don’t think many people know about is that our schoolchildren are being fed crap with little nutritional value in school. My wife is an elementary school teacher and she has been saying the same thing for years.
Back when I was in grade school the food was not that great, but at least they gave me vegetables or mashed or baked potatoes or something. A typical school lunch is now a Cheeseburger, French Fries, Soda, and a Cookie. Or Pizza, Soda, and Ice Cream. Seriously, the school dieticians consider ketchup a vegetable.
And some people wonder why so many kids are on drugs to calm their moods.
THEY ARE EATING TOO MUCH F***ING SUGAR! No wonder they are hyper and cannot focus.
As an aside, I am now in my early 30’s and my metabolism is slowing down, which is typical for men my age. I recently changed jobs to a cubical position where I have a 1 1/2 hour drive to and from work and a 1/2 mile walk to work from the parking garage and 1/2 mile back to the car, but I pretty much sit in one place all day. I put on 30lbs in about a year and realized that I needed to change my diet and habits. I started doing workouts in the morning, and I cut soda out of my diet and instead I drink mostly water during the day and at dinner, with the occational alcoholic beverage to break up things. I have lost 15lbs. in 6 months.
I was able to figure out I needed to change something in my life to provide for better health, for some of my fellow Americans who need a kick in the butt, hopefully this movie can provide it. It is a selfish wish, I want to sit next to more people who can fit into the airline seats on domestic flights and not spill over into my seat.
Not to mention that he was consuming 5000 calories per day and not getting much exercise. Any food can cause problems when eaten in excess, Spurlock chose McDonald’s. I’d like him to consume 5000 calories worth of Gardenburgers a day for a month and see what happens.
Aeschines makes some good points. I have no idea what DtC is reading to think that I have a distorted view of the movie, my beef is with Spurlock himself. James K. Glassmanreally has a beef with Spurlock.
Ok, I haven’t seen the movie, nor am I a doctor, but I wonder - wouldn’t the other health problems be mostly a result of putting on so much weight so quickly, rather than a testament to the “toxicity” of the food? I mean, he gained about 26 pounds, right? That’s almost a pound a day. That rate of weight gain would have to strain your heart and liver, regardless of how you were going about putting on the weight, wouldn’t it?
Do the doctors in the movie mention this at all?
On Topic, McD’s is certainly giving this movie a lot of free publicity. However, I have long thought the push for everything to be super-sized was a revolting marketing ploy - they pretend it’s a good deal because it’s only $.30 more, but really they’re just giving you more of the stuff they can afford to give away in quantities a single person can’t reasonably finish. Saying yes everytime to the super-size deal is, I think what really screwed the pooch for the filmmaker’s health, so if the OzD’s don’t even do the super-sized thing, then they’d be right to be kinda ticked off about it. He was probably eating a pound a day just in extra french fries.
I will give you that “McDonalds food is Satan”. However, you realize that there are people who worship Satan, people who believe Satan is evil, and people who do not believe Satan exists. All these people do their own thing WRT Satan.
Who said anything about restricting anyone’s nutritional freedom? I don’t care what anyone else eats. The movie is just a warning about personal responsibility.
I do think that as a society we’ve gotten pretty irresponsible about what we feed our kids, though. There is no reason on earth that pop machines need to be in school cafeterias, much less the selection of crap that is paid for with tax payer dollars.
Either of which you would think would come up or be discovered in the numerous physicals he took during the making of the movie, and would have shown up on camera.
Explicitly not so. The point of the film is consumer awareness of how food is marketed. Again his final point is food will only get healthier when we demand it.
Once again, this experiment was not within the parameters of what Sperlock did. He deliberately restricted himself from exercising more than the average American.
A. He could have been drinking or using drugs.
B. He could have congenitive ailments.
C. He may have had an idiosyncratic reaction to the food that is unrelated to the wholesomeness of the food.
Use your imagination. Be a real skeptic.
[quote]
Okay.
D. Spurlock never gained any weight at all. In fact, he lost weight. He only appeared to gain weight due to trick editing. The movie was essentially shown backwards.
E. Morgan Spurlock is an agent of Burger King on a mission to destroy the competition.
F. Morgan Spurlock is a werewolf and the all-McDonald’s diet is harmful to werewolf physiology, but fine for humans.
G. McDonald’s doesn’t exist. It’s just an imaginary boogyman of the liberal media.
There’s difference between healthy skepticism and absurd stubbornness.
For anyone who still doesn’t get it, Spulock’s point (presented with humor and wit) is that eating a high-calorie, high-fat, high-sugar diet and avoiding exercise is not a healthy way to live. Many companies spend vast amounts of money advertising unhealthy foods and much of that advertising is aimed a children. Additionally, many people eat this kind of stuff on a regular basis, even in school cafeterias.
