Absurd: McDonalds doubles up the chips

123468

Replies

  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    This is ridiculous - Mcdonalds doubles up there large fries to create a 1,142 calorie portion

    Is it any wonder people are getting so BIG when they are actively encourage to eat this amount??

    We need to see portions getting smaller. Heart attack city.


    Having the option =/= actively encourage

    People need to learn to eat smaller portions, not force businesses to provide smaller portions.

    Now the guy that used to buy two large fries is now only buying one. Nothing has changed except the size of the packaging in which the food comes.
  • 5ftnFun
    5ftnFun Posts: 948 Member
    Them: "Would like fries with that?" or "Would you like to super size that?"

    Me: "No thank you."

    So how easy that is?
  • jwdieter
    jwdieter Posts: 2,582 Member
    Drunk driving, mercury limits, fire and safety codes, etc.. all put another person's life in danger. If I sit around shoving McDonalds into my face all day, that's not causing a danger to anyone else. There's a big difference there.

    Drunk driving does impact others, it's true.
    Unlimited mercury in food does not put another person's life in danger. You make the choice to eat it yourself. There are food labels (due to nanny state), so can't pretend to push this off on others.
    Unsafe living environments do not put another person's life in danger. You make the choice to live there yourself. You can see if there's a window in your bedroom, and checking the wiring is just common sense.

    If you can't make a safe choice because you're a child, it's up to the parent to protect you.

    There are thousands of laws based on the premise that people cannot make choices that are appropriate for themselves. The rationale for these laws is generally human decency, but it's also about cost - dealing with the consequences of those bad choices.
  • 5ftnFun
    5ftnFun Posts: 948 Member


    I'm not even gonna tell you what I think about people who feed McDonald's to their kids.




    :laugh:

    That an occasional treat is fine and teaches the kid about moderation and talks about why there is nothing inherently evil about food just some nourishes the body more than others is a good parent? :bigsmile:


    That might be true, if McDonald's were actually food.
    Websters:

    "Any <b>nutritious</b> substance that people or animals eat or drink, or that plants absorb, in order to maintain life and growth. "

    I find nothing nutritious about fries. Therefore they are not food. They are poison.

    Delicious, addictive, crispy, salty poison.

    One french fry is going to kill me? Nope. 2? 3? 4? 5? 25? 1000? Where's the line?

    You think portion control may be the key here?

    Oh silly boy you. Who told you to use logic like that?
  • LonLB
    LonLB Posts: 1,126 Member
    McDonalds is always on the receiving end of the **** storm of attacks on un-healthy food.


    Yet, McD's is the BEST place of just about anywhere to get a decent lunch that ISN'T bad for you.
  • crista_b
    crista_b Posts: 1,192 Member
    Drunk driving, mercury limits, fire and safety codes, etc.. all put another person's life in danger. If I sit around shoving McDonalds into my face all day, that's not causing a danger to anyone else. There's a big difference there.

    Drunk driving does impact others, it's true.
    Unlimited mercury in food does not put another person's life in danger. You make the choice to eat it yourself. There are food labels (due to nanny state), so can't pretend to push this off on others.
    Unsafe living environments do not put another person's life in danger. You make the choice to live there yourself. You can see if there's a window in your bedroom, and checking the wiring is just common sense.

    If you can't make a safe choice because you're a child, it's up to the parent to protect you.

    There are thousands of laws based on the premise that people cannot make choices that are appropriate for themselves. The rationale for these laws is generally human decency, but it's also about cost - dealing with the consequences of those bad choices.
    With mercury limits, you would be putting someone's life in danger if you knowingly put out food with too much mercury without a warning. Humans must eat. If there's too much mercury in the food you sell, you could easily kill them even if they are making healthy choices in their life. It's still different than this situation.

    Fire and safety conditions are also putting someone else in danger. If a building didn't follow codes and burned down or collapsed and killed many people, it's the owner's fault because the owner put those lives in danger. It's not just about homes. Also, I can't check wiring because I rent. I'm not allowed to go poking around inside walls or I'll get fined or lose a security deposit. It's up to the owner to ensure that the place follows code to keep me safe in that situation.

    I understand that it's about cost and the rising obesity levels are also affecting insurance rates, but as I said before, that's a completely different debate that has to do with politics and insurance companies/prices.

    ETA: You, yourself, just said, "If you can't make a safe choice because you're a child, it's up to the parent to protect you." So if parents are responsible for making safe choices for their children, why can't we hold them responsible to make safe choices in regards to their own health and fast food instead of blaming the fast food companies?
  • JenAndSome
    JenAndSome Posts: 1,893 Member
    Just think, some people could choose to NOT eat it. What a concept!
  • magerum
    magerum Posts: 12,589 Member
    Take responsibility for your own eating habits. No one is holding a gun to your head and making you eat 1,100 calories in french fries.
  • RllyGudTweetr
    RllyGudTweetr Posts: 2,019 Member
    Drunk driving, mercury limits, fire and safety codes, etc.. all put another person's life in danger. If I sit around shoving McDonalds into my face all day, that's not causing a danger to anyone else. There's a big difference there.

    Drunk driving does impact others, it's true.
    Unlimited mercury in food does not put another person's life in danger. You make the choice to eat it yourself. There are food labels (due to nanny state), so can't pretend to push this off on others.
    Unsafe living environments do not put another person's life in danger. You make the choice to live there yourself. You can see if there's a window in your bedroom, and checking the wiring is just common sense.

    If you can't make a safe choice because you're a child, it's up to the parent to protect you.

    There are thousands of laws based on the premise that people cannot make choices that are appropriate for themselves. The rationale for these laws is generally human decency, but it's also about cost - dealing with the consequences of those bad choices.
    How do you plan on getting the WORLD (remember, not everyone on this site is American - heck, the OP uses British terms and the Mega-Potato is apparently aimed at a Japanese market - to accept this legislation, given that the WORLD doesn't universally enforce any of the other laws you mentioned?
  • MinimalistShoeAddict
    MinimalistShoeAddict Posts: 1,946 Member
    Easy solution: Don't order it!

    Stop blaming the restaurants for making people fat.

    This is the correct answer. Sit down restaurants generally have entrees with more calories as fast food. Should we blame them as well? Of course not! Everyone is responsible for what they choose to eat.

    I order these type of things fairly regularly and am at my ideal weight. McDonald's sells them because people like them. It is possible to fit such an item into your weekly calorie/macro target.
  • BeachIron
    BeachIron Posts: 6,490 Member
    Drunk driving, mercury limits, fire and safety codes, etc.. all put another person's life in danger. If I sit around shoving McDonalds into my face all day, that's not causing a danger to anyone else. There's a big difference there.

    Drunk driving does impact others, it's true.
    Unlimited mercury in food does not put another person's life in danger. You make the choice to eat it yourself. There are food labels (due to nanny state), so can't pretend to push this off on others.
    Unsafe living environments do not put another person's life in danger. You make the choice to live there yourself. You can see if there's a window in your bedroom, and checking the wiring is just common sense.

    If you can't make a safe choice because you're a child, it's up to the parent to protect you.

    There are thousands of laws based on the premise that people cannot make choices that are appropriate for themselves. The rationale for these laws is generally human decency, but it's also about cost - dealing with the consequences of those bad choices.
    How do you plan on getting the WORLD (remember, not everyone on this site is American - heck, the OP uses British terms and the Mega-Potato is apparently aimed at a Japanese market - to accept this legislation, given that the WORLD doesn't universally enforce any of the other laws you mentioned?

    Come on! It's so much easier to tell everyone else to change than to simply take responsibility for one's self. Bah!
  • jwdieter
    jwdieter Posts: 2,582 Member
    I understand that it's about cost and the rising obesity levels are also affecting insurance rates, but as I said before, that's a completely different debate that has to do with politics and insurance companies/prices.

    What was the debate supposed to be about in this thread?
    There's only one possible problem with mega serving size, and it's not whether or not to personally order it.
    Everyone here can make the choice to not order something (hopefully). The purpose of MFP is to inform that decision.
  • crista_b
    crista_b Posts: 1,192 Member
    Easy solution: Don't order it!

    Stop blaming the restaurants for making people fat.

    This is the correct answer. Sit down restaurants generally have entrees with more calories as fast food. Should we blame them as well? Of course not! Everyone is responsible for what they choose to eat.

    I order these type of things fairly regularly and am at my ideal weight. McDonald's sells them because people like them. It is possible to fit such an item into your weekly calorie/macro target.
    Yep. I've seen entrées at sit-down restaurants that are around 1,000 calories and intended for 1 person's meal. These fries are intended to be shared. Take responsibility and choose something else. It's really not a difficult concept.
  • jwdieter
    jwdieter Posts: 2,582 Member
    Come on! It's so much easier to tell everyone else to change than to simply take responsibility for one's self. Bah!

    McDonalds could serve razors in their fries and it would have no impact on me. It's not an issue of my personal draw to a big size of fries.
  • crista_b
    crista_b Posts: 1,192 Member
    I understand that it's about cost and the rising obesity levels are also affecting insurance rates, but as I said before, that's a completely different debate that has to do with politics and insurance companies/prices.

    What was the debate supposed to be about in this thread?
    There's only one possible problem with mega serving size, and it's not whether or not to personally order it.
    Everyone here can make the choice to not order something (hopefully). The purpose of MFP is to inform that decision.
    OP wasn't asking for a debate. This thread was saying that it's "absurd" for McDonalds to offer these fries. It became a debate because people won't take responsibility for themselves and accept that you aren't being forced to eat it.

    The discussion about obesity affecting insurance prices has to do with politics. This thread is simply about personal responsibility.
  • tsh0ck
    tsh0ck Posts: 1,970 Member
    personal responsibility. it's a real thing.

    I think it is absurd that McDonald's cut their kids meal fries down to like a half dozen and then throws in apple slices.
  • jwdieter
    jwdieter Posts: 2,582 Member
    OP wasn't asking for a debate. This thread was saying that it's "absurd" for McDonalds to offer these fries. It became a debate because people won't take responsibility for themselves and accept that you aren't being forced to eat it.

    The discussion about obesity affecting insurance prices has to do with politics. This thread is simply about personal responsibility.

    The only way it could be absurd is in a macro view. At an individual level, it's utterly irrelevant.
  • MinimalistShoeAddict
    MinimalistShoeAddict Posts: 1,946 Member
    I think this part is the kicker
    "According to Japan Today, the Mega Potato is being advertised as "perfect for sharing" and is launched after the director of nutrition for McDonald's insisted that its menu can be good for you. "

    This is being marketed to Japan and that fact actually has significance as to why this is even being put on the market. In east Asia (Korea and Japan in particular) there's a fad called "potato party" going around right now. Young people will go to McDonalds and buy a whole bunch of fries and then spread all of them out on the table and eat them all (of course divided up among many different people). It's been causing some trouble in Japan because it's seen as rude. This is probably to combat that trend.
    o-MCDONALDS-FRENCH-FRY-PARTY-570.jpg?15
    rude.jpg

    This is my kind of party....I would freakin love this!!!! I would buy those mega size fries. I have four kids.....a twenty piece nuggets and a mega fry would feed them. I would try and offer fruit too.....

    That looks awesome!!!
  • thesupremeforce
    thesupremeforce Posts: 1,206 Member
    This is being blown out of proportion. A large order of Cajun fries from 5 Guys has more calories than this, but it's designed for sharing, as is this McDonald's product. It's not the company's fault if some people don't share, and it's not like those people couldn't/didn't just order more food anyway.
  • RhineDHP
    RhineDHP Posts: 1,025 Member
    "DIE potato"


    "Nuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu"
  • Irontri7
    Irontri7 Posts: 143 Member
    The only bad thing about McDonald's is that they got rid of the Angus burger that I CHOSE to eat. They did NOT tell me to order it and inhale it along with a large soda and fries. I CHOSE to do that. Get the picture?
  • jwdieter
    jwdieter Posts: 2,582 Member
    The only bad thing about McDonald's is that they got rid of the Angus burger that I CHOSE to eat. They did NOT tell me to order it and inhale it along with a large soda and fries. I CHOSE to do that. Get the picture?

    As a side note, do you feel that McD should bring back pink goo? Was it wrong or right for McD to cave on that?
  • RllyGudTweetr
    RllyGudTweetr Posts: 2,019 Member
    The only bad thing about McDonald's is that they got rid of the Angus burger that I CHOSE to eat. They did NOT tell me to order it and inhale it along with a large soda and fries. I CHOSE to do that. Get the picture?

    As a side note, do you feel that McD should bring back pink goo? Was it wrong or right for McD to cave on that?
    You're familiar with the concept of the strawman, I see.
  • dakotababy
    dakotababy Posts: 2,407 Member
    Natural selection I s'pose... :/

    Yes. End Thread.
  • Oishii
    Oishii Posts: 2,675 Member
    The mega potato is in Japan. My experience is that food education in Japan is excellent.

    Firstly, they teach via experience. School dinners are compulsory during compulsory education (I believe) and at the schools I worked at children were given a plan for the week listing the sources of carbs, protein, fat and vitamins in each meal. Seven year olds, passing round the dried fish and peanuts, would tell me that I needed to eat them for calcium. My dh, who is Japanese, would look at a meal in terms of 'Where's my protein?' and couldn't stand low protein meals that are part of my family's traditions.

    The other part of my experience is that kids are kids. Japanese kids were just as into chocolate as I was/am. Just, luckily, their chocolate comes in such reasonable servings. My MIL sent a food package recently with children's chocolate snacks in and a portion is around 70kcal, which is quite reasonable as a snack. Also, kids like to rebel from time to time. Potato parties are all about the shock factor, not an indication of how these kids normally eat. I'd be willing to bet most mega potato portions are bought by groups of teens.

    As for taking kids to McDonald's, I do. We went from the time he was about 2 and he had fish fingers, apple slices and a milk. Now, at 5, he prefers to have the fries than the apples. He knows he won't be having it every day, and if the toy on offer isn't one he likes, he'd rather go somewhere else. At present I do not believe a future of obesity awaits him as he stops eating when full and can turn down dessert if he's eaten enough.
  • Vailara
    Vailara Posts: 2,468 Member
    I don't see the problem. It's one item, intended for sharing.
  • onyxgirl17
    onyxgirl17 Posts: 1,722 Member
    Just because they make it doesn't mean you have to order it....
  • jen_zz
    jen_zz Posts: 1,011 Member
    So? Plenty of American chains have main course dishes over 1500 calories.

    You choose which restaurant you go into, what dish you order, how much you eat.
  • LJSmith1989
    LJSmith1989 Posts: 650
    So? Plenty of American chains have main course dishes over 1500 calories.

    You choose which restaurant you go into, what dish you order, how much you eat.

    And? You can't tell me that the food industry has NO responsiblity when it comes to obesity etc

    Don't be naive
  • Martucha123
    Martucha123 Posts: 1,089 Member
    It entertains me, mcdonalds sells 20 pieces with the intent they can share.
    Next we will bash KFC for selling buckets of chicken. dem evil fast food.

    funny how nobody bashing KFC for selling whole buckets, right?? OP order small fries and get over yourself