Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

SeneInSPAAACE t1_j68qxp3 wrote

"News" from 2004, and this experiment isn't quite as conclusive as one might think - although I do believe it made McD revamp their menu a bit.

There was another guy who also ate on McD exclusively for a year or so and he was fine. He skipped sugary drinks and french fries. Spurlock always took a default menu and if it was suggested, ate a "super-size" version of the meal with more drink and fries.

35

PotPumper43 t1_j68rvmj wrote

Also add a healthy dose of alcoholism to twist the source of those liver tests.

24

Duluthian2 t1_j68ziws wrote

Aren't the french fries and the regular drinks the things that makes McDonald's bad? Taking them out kinda defeats the purpose of the experiment.

6

HarryHacker42 t1_j6dvds6 wrote

Just because a restaurant serves Mozzarella sticks doesn't mean you have to order them every visit. Have some self control already!

4

jbeve10 t1_j69zxbf wrote

The movie was literally called Super Size Me. All he ate was super sized meals.

4

ShotPut4668 t1_j6byane wrote

That guy was a scam artist though. Nutrition isn't rocket science. None or his claims added up, he refused to release his meal plan(the most basic of basic) & used some crackpot diet afterwards to say how hard it was to return to normal.

Throw in the "documentary" being funded by a lawyer whose tried to make a living out of sueing mcd and what do you get?

A ridiculously popular, constantly referenced movie from people who think they're smarter than the plebz who don't know the fast foods aren't healthy. Stunning observation.

10

SeneInSPAAACE t1_j6aevng wrote

The rule was that if the cashier suggested the super-sized meal he had to take it. Which happened a lot.

7

DoubleLigero85 t1_j6kv0px wrote

He's also refused to release his food diary. Take that how you will.

2

pressNjustthen t1_j6fruc2 wrote

Great example of how biases and motives are the biggest predictors of a study’s results.

1

DestructODiGi t1_j68umk2 wrote

Besides the fact this is like 20 years old now… They proved his documentary was misleading and he had preexisting health conditions and terrible habits that contributed. The results were never duplicated.

23

FriendofGabe t1_j694h5r wrote

True, though I think the fact that he didn’t exercise made it more relevant. The 1990s and early 2000s were the peak of sedentary lifestyle change in the US. The average American then, and probably today, would probably have more similar results to Morgan than someone who did the 1+hour a day exercise required to offset it.

1

DestructODiGi t1_j695isp wrote

I didn’t say anything about exercise?

For sure he lied about being a heavy drinker and blamed McDonald’s for the entirety of his liver issues in the documentary and multiple actual scientific attempts have failed to replicate.

7

DJWGibson t1_j68sx5s wrote

Funny thing, the problem with that much McDonalds is the caloric intake. But if you offset that with exercise it's not a problem. Several people repeated it but increased their exercise and time at the gym and lost weight and even had their cholesterol levels go down.

2

sprint6864 t1_j696vpb wrote

Weight gain/loss is a bit more than calories in and out. That's just the baseline. The others also altered some of the choices made; like less sugary drinks or fries. It was the specific fact that the person who made the 'documentary' would always super size, consumed large amounts of soda and sodium, and was also a bit of an alcoholic.

5

DJWGibson t1_j69afu6 wrote

Yes. But if you hit the gym and do enough cardio & weights that you're burning all the calories from McDonalds and don't have other underlying health issues, even three daily Super Sized meals won't impact your weight.

Body builders need to consume a ridiculous amount of calories. While you're unlikely to bulk up from McDonalds and be as cut as you'd be from chicken and broccoli every three hours you won't get fan and unhealthy...

−5

[deleted] t1_j6abw90 wrote

[deleted]

3

DJWGibson t1_j6aevb0 wrote

False equivalency.

Just because I'm saying the documentary is problematic or that eating daily McDonalds isn't automatically unhealthy doesn't mean I'm saying McDonalds is good for you.

Heck, broccoli and roasted chicken are good for you, but eating a small plate of that every three hours isn't healthy either unless you're burning a lot of calories.

−1

sprint6864 t1_j69bbzo wrote

Body builders built up that metabolic rate, it's not something you can just construct over a few weeks in the gym. Their bodies are actively consuming a massive amount of calories while they're resting. What's more, they aren't just consuming anything and everything, their diets are very specific and focus on Macros. Reddit science and actual nutrition aren't the same. Healthy and long term weight loss/gain will always be more than just calories in/out, hence why The Biggest Loser is constantly being sued for the long term damages they've caused to contestants

1

Ecofre-33919 t1_j68shqw wrote

Old movie. But yeah i saw it.

−1

chumpy551 t1_j6bwili wrote

That "documentary" is Russian propaganda

−2