Man eats McD's for a month and is healthier afterwards

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,291
19,310
146
Originally posted by: virtualgames0

I think you repeated yourself enough now.

I'll stop pointing out the simple facts when the sheep stop bleating the same nonsense over and over again.
 

Philippine Mango

Diamond Member
Oct 29, 2004
5,594
0
0
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: virtualgames0

I think you repeated yourself enough now.

I'll stop pointing out the simple facts when the sheep stop bleating the same nonsense over and over again.

So what is your stance on this whole debacle anyways?
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,291
19,310
146
Originally posted by: Philippine Mango
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: virtualgames0

I think you repeated yourself enough now.

I'll stop pointing out the simple facts when the sheep stop bleating the same nonsense over and over again.

So what is your stance on this whole debacle anyways?

On what? Spurlock's Movie? McDonald's? Or Obesity?

Many things have been discussed in this thread.
 

moshquerade

No Lifer
Nov 1, 2001
61,504
12
56
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Philippine Mango
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: virtualgames0

I think you repeated yourself enough now.

I'll stop pointing out the simple facts when the sheep stop bleating the same nonsense over and over again.

So what is your stance on this whole debacle anyways?

On what? Spurlock's Movie? McDonald's? Or Obesity?

Many things have been discussed in this thread.
wanna go get a happy meal Amused? :D

 

BudAshes2

Member
Jul 2, 2006
154
0
0
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: BudAshes
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: BudAshes
LOL amused has almost 37000 posts. I hope like 30 people post under that account.

Anyway, where i live organic is like 30-100% more expensive and it seems well worth it if i dont have to consume as many pesticides or hormones. I could see if it was 3x as much how it would be harder to justify.

More proof that the driving force behind the scam that is organic labeling is driven by irrational and unfounded fears.

Really? Well thanks for that tidbit. You forgot to put "zinger" at the end though.

Seriously, you crack me up dude, i think you might be the most rediculous person ive found on ATOT yet :)

That may be, but at least I can spell "ridiculous."

Meanwhile, the true ridiculous people are those buying organic foods for fear of perfectly safe farming practices that, quite frankly, the world would starve to death without.


OMFG I GOT OWNZORED

lol

anyways dude, your idea of perfectly safe varies from what i consider perfectly safe. I guess everything is relative. I dont consider food grown in hacked down rainforests perfectly safe, or how they mass raise chickens(which makes me want to vomit btw) to be perfectly safe, or any other environment destroying way crops and animals are raised to be perfectly safe. But as i said, everything is relative right?
 

Descartes

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
13,968
2
0
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: BudAshes
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: BudAshes
LOL amused has almost 37000 posts. I hope like 30 people post under that account.

Anyway, where i live organic is like 30-100% more expensive and it seems well worth it if i dont have to consume as many pesticides or hormones. I could see if it was 3x as much how it would be harder to justify.

More proof that the driving force behind the scam that is organic labeling is driven by irrational and unfounded fears.

Really? Well thanks for that tidbit. You forgot to put "zinger" at the end though.

Seriously, you crack me up dude, i think you might be the most rediculous person ive found on ATOT yet :)

That may be, but at least I can spell "ridiculous."

Meanwhile, the true ridiculous people are those buying organic foods for fear of perfectly safe farming practices that, quite frankly, the world would starve to death without.

You really are a one-trick pony, aren't you? Do you ever have anything unique to say, or do you go around spouting off the same nonsense in every thread?

You somehow find a way to bring in your same silly arguments into every thread, and you generally do this by repeating the same thing in every post.

At this point I could probably automate your arguments since there seems to be very little variation. The real irony is that you chastise others for being blind, but you're such a bigoted rube that you can't be bothered to listen to others.

Go ahead and pull up your list of Amused Arguments and spout off about scam this, scam that, people are blind, etc. etc. We've all heard it before... ad flipping nauseum.

*sigh*
 

Poulsonator

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2002
1,597
0
76
Like others have said, Spurlock ate the meals that were served to him. He only "force fed" himself because his body wasn't used to eating a normal meal from McD's. Once his body got used to it, he was able to eat what a LOT of other Americans eat regularly.

The main reason for him to eat the way he did was to hook his audience. That was it. Once he had us hooked, he was able to show us his McD results (which we all knew were going to happen), along with some other food problems America is facing (schools, etc.), and the fact that in the mad rush for everyone to make a buck, they push terrbily cheap food upon weak people. It wasn't just about McD's, but considering the force that McD's is, it was the perfect restaurant to use.

(Notice I said weak people above...that's the biggest problem in this country. There's no one to blame for your weight problems but yourself. If people weren't so stupid and lazy, there wouldn't be an fat people "epidemic" in America.)

I don't think anybody was shocked by the fact that Spurlock gained a ton of weight and completely screwed his body up while on the McD's diet. That was simply entertainment, and what was needed to get his documentary made.
 

DaShen

Lifer
Dec 1, 2000
10,710
1
0
Originally posted by: Baked
I wonder how much money McD paid him and how much food he hurled out after eating them.

QFT...
Or the experiment wasn't done exactly the same as Super Size Me (he probably got to choose what to eat).

He also could have been terribly unhealthy before.

In Super Size Me, the director was already healthy to begin with.
 

mrchan

Diamond Member
May 18, 2000
3,123
0
0
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: mrchan
The difference is Supersize Me ate what McDonalds considered to be a meal, the breakfast meals, extra value meals, etc. This guy only ate a small burger. Hell, you can eat nothing but fat and lose weight, just don't eat very much of it.

No, the difference is Spurlock ate 5000+ calories a day. To do so he ate past the point of feeling ill. He force fed himself. The symptoms he suffered, especially the liver problems, are the SAME symptoms farmers intentionally inflict on geese by force feeding them to enlarge their livers to make foie gras.

Not even the obese force feed themselves. They turn to food for comfort, not pain.


And the 5000 calories were composed of what McDonald's considered "meals".

What's your point?
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,291
19,310
146
Originally posted by: mrchan
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: mrchan
The difference is Supersize Me ate what McDonalds considered to be a meal, the breakfast meals, extra value meals, etc. This guy only ate a small burger. Hell, you can eat nothing but fat and lose weight, just don't eat very much of it.

No, the difference is Spurlock ate 5000+ calories a day. To do so he ate past the point of feeling ill. He force fed himself. The symptoms he suffered, especially the liver problems, are the SAME symptoms farmers intentionally inflict on geese by force feeding them to enlarge their livers to make foie gras.

Not even the obese force feed themselves. They turn to food for comfort, not pain.


And the 5000 calories were composed of what McDonald's considered "meals".

What's your point?

The point is, even the obese don't force feed themselves to the point of being physically ill. Even people with eating disorders use food as comfort, not torture.

Spurlock's symptoms could have been caused by ANY food, so long as it was force fed to him at three times his normal calorie intake. The sympotoms were the very same symptoms geese suffer when force fed to enlarge their livers.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,291
19,310
146
Originally posted by: Descartes
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: BudAshes
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: BudAshes
LOL amused has almost 37000 posts. I hope like 30 people post under that account.

Anyway, where i live organic is like 30-100% more expensive and it seems well worth it if i dont have to consume as many pesticides or hormones. I could see if it was 3x as much how it would be harder to justify.

More proof that the driving force behind the scam that is organic labeling is driven by irrational and unfounded fears.

Really? Well thanks for that tidbit. You forgot to put "zinger" at the end though.

Seriously, you crack me up dude, i think you might be the most rediculous person ive found on ATOT yet :)

That may be, but at least I can spell "ridiculous."

Meanwhile, the true ridiculous people are those buying organic foods for fear of perfectly safe farming practices that, quite frankly, the world would starve to death without.

You really are a one-trick pony, aren't you? Do you ever have anything unique to say, or do you go around spouting off the same nonsense in every thread?

You somehow find a way to bring in your same silly arguments into every thread, and you generally do this by repeating the same thing in every post.

At this point I could probably automate your arguments since there seems to be very little variation. The real irony is that you chastise others for being blind, but you're such a bigoted rube that you can't be bothered to listen to others.

Go ahead and pull up your list of Amused Arguments and spout off about scam this, scam that, people are blind, etc. etc. We've all heard it before... ad flipping nauseum.

*sigh*

Why should my answers change when the argument is the same? To please you?

Nope, sorry.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,291
19,310
146
Originally posted by: DaShen
Originally posted by: Baked
I wonder how much money McD paid him and how much food he hurled out after eating them.

QFT...
Or the experiment wasn't done exactly the same as Super Size Me (he probably got to choose what to eat).

He also could have been terribly unhealthy before.

In Super Size Me, the director was already healthy to begin with.

Real people choose what they eat.

Real people don't eat to the point of feeling physically ill on a regular basis.

Real people don't stuff themselves to the point of liver failure.

Nothing about Spurlock's farce was "real."