What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Super Size Me by Morgan Spurlock (1 Viewer)

In the movie Supersize Me..didn't the guy only supersize the meals when the Mcdonalds employee offered it.

"I'll have the #1 Meal."

"Would you like to Supersize that for only $.25 more?"

"Sure"

That's why he ate so many calories. The supersize option was offered pretty much 99% of the time.

And didn't that essentially force Mcdonalds to change their sales method of upsizing?

The pics of this guy...he goes from morbidly obese and a heart attack waiting to happen to just obese. But its a start. Good for him.

There was a Freakonomics podcast where they present the McDouble as the most nutritious thing a person could eat based upon cost per calorie.
Spurlock has specific rules governing his eating habits:

  • He must fully eat three McDonald's meals per day: breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
  • He must consume every item on the McDonald's menu at least once over the course of the 30 days (he managed this in nine days).
  • He must only ingest items that are offered on the McDonald's menu, including bottled water. All outside consumption of food is prohibited.
  • He must Super Size the meal when offered, but only when offered (i.e., he is not able to Super Size items himself) (Spurlock was offered 9 times; 5 of them were in Texas).
  • He will attempt to walk about as much as a typical U.S citizen, based on a suggested figure of 5,000 standardized distance steps per day,[8] but he did not closely adhere to this, as he walked more while in New York than in Houston.
"Fat Head" pretty much proves that he cheated and didn't follow his own rules.

The documentary notes which items he ate, the # of calories, and how many calories his doctor stated (multiple times) that he was consuming. It's mathematically impossible for him to have consumed as many calories as his doctor claimed he had unless he was eating food in addition to his McD meals.
I think what most likely happened was he was chugging milkshakes and sodas between meals.
No motivation to do such, right?

Except for the "If I gain 50 pounds, my documentary gets attention and I become a multi-millionaire" part

 
My sister in law bought a juicer for like $400 after watching Fat, Sick, and Nearly Dead. I don't think she uses it much.

 
In the movie Supersize Me..didn't the guy only supersize the meals when the Mcdonalds employee offered it.

"I'll have the #1 Meal."

"Would you like to Supersize that for only $.25 more?"

"Sure"

That's why he ate so many calories. The supersize option was offered pretty much 99% of the time.

And didn't that essentially force Mcdonalds to change their sales method of upsizing?

The pics of this guy...he goes from morbidly obese and a heart attack waiting to happen to just obese. But its a start. Good for him.

There was a Freakonomics podcast where they present the McDouble as the most nutritious thing a person could eat based upon cost per calorie.
Spurlock has specific rules governing his eating habits:

  • He must fully eat three McDonald's meals per day: breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
  • He must consume every item on the McDonald's menu at least once over the course of the 30 days (he managed this in nine days).
  • He must only ingest items that are offered on the McDonald's menu, including bottled water. All outside consumption of food is prohibited.
  • He must Super Size the meal when offered, but only when offered (i.e., he is not able to Super Size items himself) (Spurlock was offered 9 times; 5 of them were in Texas).
  • He will attempt to walk about as much as a typical U.S citizen, based on a suggested figure of 5,000 standardized distance steps per day,[8] but he did not closely adhere to this, as he walked more while in New York than in Houston.
"Fat Head" pretty much proves that he cheated and didn't follow his own rules.

The documentary notes which items he ate, the # of calories, and how many calories his doctor stated (multiple times) that he was consuming. It's mathematically impossible for him to have consumed as many calories as his doctor claimed he had unless he was eating food in addition to his McD meals. Fat Head even calculates with two additional hot fudge sundaes and it doesn't come close.
Fat Head does not prove anything, it makes accusations based on incomplete information.

What none of these films truly delve into is the differences between individuals that make certain lifestyles more or less healthy for that individual.

I am quite certain there are people who could have done everything exactly identical to what Spurlock did and come out of it just fine. And there are others that would come out of it much worse.

The question is how it applies to populations.

Personally I think there is too much cheap, unhealthy and easily accessible food out there. On top of it there is a vast amount of blatant misinformation put out by advertisers combined with an unwillingness of the population to properly educate themselves about healthy food choices. Throw in an increasing trend towards sedentary lifestyles and viola you end up with a country full of fatties. Go figure.

ETA: Forgot to mention the issue of food science being used to create "foods" that are the most potentially addictive. Look into it, it's a very real issue.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Fat Head" is a good documentary on Hulu/Netflix. He basically points out the lies in Spurlock's documentary as well as showing that you can eat at McDonald's for every meal for a month and be healthier than when you started. And that's not with him choosing the healthy options on the menu either.

Burgers and fries and soda are fine if you don't over-do it.
Hmm...I would seriously question that you could eat burgers and fries every meal for a month and be fine. I don't disagree with you that if you don't over-do it, it's fine...but it still isn't healthy.

I suppose you could eat a cheeseburger and small fry for lunch and dinner and not gain weight, as the calories in that wouldn't be too high. But you'd be starving and you wouldn't be healthy, imo.
The guy in Fat Head is not eating fries and soda nor is he having burgers for every meal. It is mostly a validation of the Paleo style.
He ate plenty of fries, plenty of burgers, and drank soda occasionally. Just like any reasonable person would do if they were forced to eat at McD every day. Common sense says you'd vary it up a bit.
Common sense is far from common.

 
In the movie Supersize Me..didn't the guy only supersize the meals when the Mcdonalds employee offered it.

"I'll have the #1 Meal."

"Would you like to Supersize that for only $.25 more?"

"Sure"

That's why he ate so many calories. The supersize option was offered pretty much 99% of the time.

And didn't that essentially force Mcdonalds to change their sales method of upsizing?

The pics of this guy...he goes from morbidly obese and a heart attack waiting to happen to just obese. But its a start. Good for him.

There was a Freakonomics podcast where they present the McDouble as the most nutritious thing a person could eat based upon cost per calorie.
Spurlock has specific rules governing his eating habits:

  • He must fully eat three McDonald's meals per day: breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
  • He must consume every item on the McDonald's menu at least once over the course of the 30 days (he managed this in nine days).
  • He must only ingest items that are offered on the McDonald's menu, including bottled water. All outside consumption of food is prohibited.
  • He must Super Size the meal when offered, but only when offered (i.e., he is not able to Super Size items himself) (Spurlock was offered 9 times; 5 of them were in Texas).
  • He will attempt to walk about as much as a typical U.S citizen, based on a suggested figure of 5,000 standardized distance steps per day,[8] but he did not closely adhere to this, as he walked more while in New York than in Houston.
"Fat Head" pretty much proves that he cheated and didn't follow his own rules.

The documentary notes which items he ate, the # of calories, and how many calories his doctor stated (multiple times) that he was consuming. It's mathematically impossible for him to have consumed as many calories as his doctor claimed he had unless he was eating food in addition to his McD meals. Fat Head even calculates with two additional hot fudge sundaes and it doesn't come close.
Fat Head does not prove anything, it makes accusations based on incomplete information.

What none of these films truly delve into is the differences between individuals that make certain lifestyles more or less healthy for that individual.

I am quite certain there are people who could have done everything exactly identical to what Spurlock did and come out of it just fine. And there are others that would come out of it much worse.

The question is how it applies to populations.

Personally I think there is too much cheap, unhealthy and easily accessible food out there. On top of it there is a vast amount of blatant misinformation put out by advertisers combined with an unwillingness of the population to properly educate themselves about healthy food choices. Throw in an increasing trend towards sedentary lifestyles and viola you end up with a country full of fatties. Go figure.

ETA: Forgot to mention the issue of food science being used to create "foods" that are the most potentially addictive. Look into it, it's a very real issue.
This is harder than it should be. I don't think it even has so much to do with people being unwilling as it does with the amount of bad "conventional wisdom" that exists around diet and exercise. And then there's the whole issue of our government subsidizing unhealthy food options and propagating many of the bad conventions, while ignoring any serious attempts at real education.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think we should have two new documentaries. One about a guy who eats breakfast, lunch and dinner at Crackerbarrel and gains weight, and another about a guy who does the same but loses weight.

The Supersize/Fat Head fast food industry debate has been beaten to death. Let's attack the full service restaurant industry now. If you don't like Crackerbarrel as the target, how about IHOP or Denny's? It just needs to be a place that serves breakfast, lunch and dinner in order to work.

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
I haven't seen "Fat Head" but googling it turns up lots of hits claiming that it's misinformed and manipulative.
Parts of it are misinformed and manipulative (e.g., the cartoon explanation of carbohydrate metabolism, or the criticism of Ancel Keys's experimental methods), but I don't know that the parts that criticize Spurlock's movie are in that category. They seem like pretty good criticisms, and I haven't seen a meaningful rejoinder by Spurlock.

 
I think we should have two new documentaries. One about a guy who eats breakfast, lunch and dinner at Crackerbarrel and gains weight, and another about a guy who does the same but loses weight.

The Supersize/Fat Head fast food industry debate has been beaten to death. Let's attack the full service restaurant industry now. If you don't like Crackerbarrel as the target, how about IHOP or Denny's? It just needs to be a place that serves breakfast, lunch and dinner in order to work.
Leave Cracker Barrel alone, we gotta draw a line somewhere. That's one of the last great places left to clog an artery without outside interference. You leave those po' folks alone.

 
Calories are not the end if the story nutritionally. Vitamins, minerals, fiber, other nutrients are vital. Sure, you could eat burgers and fries and lose weight (calories in less than calories out) but even losing weight isn't necessarily healthy. The way you do it, and what you put in to your body to do it, matter.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top