How gross is fast food to you

Subway Jared lost lots of weight eating "fast food." He ordered the veggie and the turkey sandwiches on whole grain bread with no mayo, cheese or oil (Subway uses vegetable oil, not olive). It's just as quick as McDonald's.

I quit eating at McDonald's 15 years ago. My stepdad was a truck driver. He would go to the chicken manufacturer and pick up dozens and dozens of barrels of chicken blood and dozens of pallets of chicken feathers. The chicken blood was delivered to Purina so when your dog food says "real chicken flavor" it's made with chicken blood. Or beef or lamb or pork, whatever. They use the blood. But the feathers ... those were delivered to McDonald's. The stem in the feathers (the hard part going down the center) is stripped clean of the feathery parts and the millions of stems were pulverized into a fine powder.

THAT is what chicken McNuggets are breaded with. That's not flour. It's pulverized chicken feathers. It's not bad enough that the "chicken" itself is reassembled bits with gristle, ligament and tendons, but it's coated in pulverized feather stems. Next time you place an order, notice how the "breading" looks different from a piece of fried chicken from KFC which is real flour.

kudos for McDonald's for using all the animal. I respect that.

Oh sweet, sweet Taco Bell...I couldn't imagine a life without you. Burger King's BK Veggie with fries dipped in their onion ring sauce, and Jack In The Box & their best stuffed jalapenos ever...... Yeah, I find it 0% gross.

All really interesting and I'm starting to see your points. Thank you for actually presenting a well-rounded argument rather than just defaulting to the fact that it's not "clean". Drives me insane.

You make really good points as well!

My question is when EXACTLY it crosses over from a behavioral standpoint to actual physical dependency.

The answer is: It goes from innocent to malicious the second that these food scientists use detailed scientific research to intentionally deceive.

They intentionally deceive by using ingredients in precise combinations to subconsciously trigger certain neural pathways in your brain that lead to cravings, desires and eventually a physical dependence. It's VERY similar to the nicotine in tobacco. Tobacco smoke has nicotine, and nicotine activates certain parts of your brain that give you a desirable reaction. Your brain enjoys that desirable feeling and activates other pathways in your brain that lead to eventual dependency on the substance.

One cigarette won't addict you, much like one Big Mac won't addict you. However, over time (and repeated exposure), your brain learns to expect that pleasurable effect, and if it doesn't GET it, it tries to let you know it's upset by giving you headaches, mood swings, and a plethora of other side effects. An addict will eventually give in and provide the brain with what it seeks, be that a cigarette, a Big Mac, or a shot of vodka (in the case of alcoholics).

People in this thread have argued that it's not an addiction, it's just better flavored so you like it more. That's a valid statement, but it's the fact that these companies are intentionally trying to addict you, paired with the fact that they've researched and specifically applied the most addictive combinations, that make it deception. It's not like adding salt and pepper to a steak, it's chemical engineering applied to your food with the sole purpose of physically forcing you to consume more of their product. It's deliberately forcing you to do something against your will. Most people can say no. Most people can stop after a serving of Sun Chips. Most people just simply know better, and know when to put the second burger down; some people just simply can't. Regardless of whether you personally are capable of resisting their attempt at addicting you, there are still some people who fall prey to their tactics. Is that not a violation of their rights? Just because they're weak-willed doesn't mean they're any less deserving of having their free will preserved.

So to reiterate: these corporations, with the help of food scientists, have determined very specific and precise combinations of flavor, texture and other factors that they've conclusively proven will form a physical habit after an extended period of exposure. These combinations aren't foolproof and won't apply to everybody, but they work on a large majority of consumers. When these engineered items are consumed, your brain is aroused in more ways than you can comprehend, and you subconsciously want another one, and another one, and another one.

"When you first pop a chip into your mouth, the coating of salt and fat light up the brain's pleasure centers like a Christmas tree. The starch in the potato causes the same glucose spike as sugar, but is absorbed into the bloodstream much more quickly. That spike then immediately dips, making you want another potato chip. You can just keep eating them, and because there's no real substance to them, your stomach never gets full. The reasoning behind the "you can't eat just one" mantra is pretty much the same reason you can't be a casual meth user."

The rest of the article can be read here: http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/3-sinister-reasons-youre-addicted-to-junk-food/

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/3-sinister-reasons-youre-addicted-to-junk-food/#ixzz2bEFgeXxt

Another one: http://www.prevention.com/food/healthy-eating-tips/junk-food-addiction-and-how-break-cycle

I also think that if you look at these cultures' ethnic foods you'll find a lot more healthful choices than ours here in America. Here, fast food IS our ethnic food. I think this crosses over into more behavioral observation.

I completely agree with your first two statements - other countries do have more healthy foods, and fast food IS our ethnic food. I disagree that it's a behavioral observation. My entire point is that our "fast food culture" is addicting its members. Why don't the people in other countries have the same overeating problem with their cultural dishes? Sure, they're healthier, but they simply don't have the same kind of frenzied consumption culture that we do. Perhaps our society has become addicted to fast food? Maybe that's why we have such an epidemic of obesity in this country? Maybe the fact that hundreds of corporations have been engineering their food specifically to addict and force over-consumption has something to do with our epidemic? Sure, it might just be that we're a country of fat lazy slobs, but I think it goes a bit deeper than that - maybe it's not entirely our fault? Maybe a large portion of our population is physically (subconsciously) addicted to soft drinks, chips, burgers and fries? Looking at cultures around the world, and then looking here at home, it seems much more likely that something devious is going on.

America is the land of greed and excess. Overeating here is a pastime. In other countries it's not always the case.

You say overeating is a pastime - but why is it? Maybe because we're addicted to these foods? Just because you're addicted to something doesn't necessarily mean you KNOW you're addicted to it. Most of addiction is subconscious. Feelings of desire, cravings, unnatural feelings of need. I don't think Americans eat because they think it's fun, I think they eat because they're physically compelled and conditioned to eat, and eat, and eat. I think this compulsion comes from an addiction to junk food.

As for lower obesity rates in equally wealthy countries, Scandinavia is generally a very wealthy area of the world, yes, yet if you look at their cultural foods it is generally what we would consider "clean eating."

Absolutely, but why do they eat clean, and we eat "dirty"? Something keeps us shoveling crap into our faces. Everybody who's overweight would rather be skinny - do you really think that everybody just ENJOYS eating crap so much that they'd rather be fat? I don't - I think they're addicted to fast food. I think many other cultures have rejected our fast food culture, and continue to eat healthier and thereby stay skinnier.

Interesting about the chocolate. But, chocolate is a natural substance and it causes these cravings. So you're saying that these engineers are trying to make the physical reaction to fast food replicate a natural substance such as chocolate (or since we're going there, cocaine as well)?

bingo.

My question is, how do we know for a fact that it's the ingredients our bodies crave and not the taste?

One article:
"Food addictions are nothing new. We sometimes joke about being a “chocoholic” or having a “Big Mac attack.” However, it’s only recently that science has confirmed what we already suspected: Certain foods can create a vicious cycle of dependence.

Part of the problem is the way we metabolize processed foods. These all-too-common grocery items are hardly even foods anymore; they’ve been so “dumbed down” with overprocessing. Our bodies absorb their ingredients much more rapidly than, say, a whole grain. As a result, our blood sugar spikes, only to then plummet rapidly. That quick high, not dissimilar to what happens when people abuse alcohol or drugs, generates a craving for more.

To make matters worse, over time, people become desensitized to these spikes. One study using MRIs to measure brain activity confirmed that too much junk food inhibits the brain’s reward center. Just as alcoholics need more liquor to get drunk, “junkaholics” constantly need more junk food to achieve their “high.”

Other research, published in the journal Nature Neuroscience, found rats that ate processed snacks ignored healthy foods and became binge eaters. Even more disturbing, their brain patterns resembled those of cocaine abusers. "


And hey, I like you a lot! You seem very smart, you make great points, and I've enjoyed talking to you. I'm not trying to pick apart every point of yours, I'm just trying to show my side of the argument clearly. This is the best article I can find on the subject, if you're really curious, read the whole thing - it's a long read, but it's worth it - it'll give you an idea of the TRUE intentions behind these companies, and it's a very reputable source (NY Times):

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/the-extraordinary-science-of-junk-food.html?pagewanted=all

It is true that I used to have mood swings and headaches when I couldn't get the food I wanted, but this was stress related because I was battling a compulsion. Not because I was going through withdrawals. I think it's safe to say that when you are depriving your body of something you WANT, it's a stressful and sometimes miserable situation.

Read exactly what you typed, and then humor me - take a step back and agree with me for one second. Try to believe that what I'm saying might be true, and that you WERE possibly addicted to the junk food. Try to imagine that your brain was crying out for you to give it processed carbs so it could have a blood sugar spike. Everything you wrote screams addiction to me. Maybe it was withdrawals, and you were just trying to tell yourself you were grumpy. Heck, you just listed most of the symptoms of physical withdrawal - mood swings, headaches, increased stress levels and feelings of depression and misery. Just saying.

I still am a little fuzzy on the difference between the two. You say I prove your point that fast food is physically addicting when I really say that it was a psychological compulsion that made me crave the stuff.

Perhaps you were too busy trying to tell yourself it was a psychological compulsion to realize your brain was forcing you to eat it subconsciously.

Here, let me put it this way. I have a 100% perfectly healthy relationship with chocolate. I currently have a bar from Trader Joe's sitting in my freezer that's been in there for over a month. I eat a few pieces at a time, enjoy it, and put it back. So if I really was physically addicted to fast food, wouldn't I have the same problems with staying away from chocolate as I do from fast food? Trust me when I say that I ate a lot more fast food than I ever have chocolate.

You answered your own question: you ate way more fast food than you did chocolate. You became addicted to the fast food and craved it. You've kept your relationship with chocolate healthy and respectful - you have a little bit when you feel like it, but you don't over-indulge. It makes complete sense to me that you'd continue to have a healthy relationship with chocolate until you began to abuse it and created an addiction. It's much like alcohol - many people casually have a beer after work, or go out for drinks with friends a couple times a month. Alcohol is an addictive substance. It's only when people begin to abuse alcohol and create an addiction to it that it becomes a problem. An alcoholic is only an alcoholic when they become unable to stop.

My parents never gave me a candy bar when I was sad, they gave me a happy meal. I'm able to eat and enjoy chocolate in a normal way, but if I was to go through a drive through all bets would be off.

Again, you just answered your own question. Your parents gave you fast food when you were sad, not chocolate. That's why you have a healthy relationship with chocolate and an addiction to the fast food.

That's because my addiction to fast food is purely psychological.

I suppose it could be. As an outsider looking in, it could be either. Like I said earlier, you know your body and mind far better than I do. You're the only one who really knows - my only point is that it could FEEL psychological, but really be much more of a physical addiction than you think!

edited to clarify some of the grammar, keep getting my thought train interrupted at work (how dare they! lol)

haha yeah, I was typing at work earlier too. Payin me to surf the webs, FTW.

We do fast food from time to time. I wish we didn't, but we do. I take my fast food by a case by case basis, I'm more concerned about the cleanliness of the kitchen and the workers. I can usually tell within 5 minutes of walking in a place whether I will eat there or not (look in the bathroom, look at the floor, look at their uniforms). My favorite locally is a Taco Time, it's really clean and they use a lot of local vegis (plus the whole kitchen faces the drive-through window, so you can actually watch them make your food).

I was going to post something but it looks like all the words in the English language have been used in this thread.

KFC and Popeyes are inedible for me. Every time I try to eat their food, it just tastes so bad I can't continue.

McD and BK (etc) are mostly edible, but not what I'd prefer to eat.

Chipotle tastes good to me. Hardly ever go there because home burritos are so easy and good.

Lots of fast food places out there, and haven't tried every option. Only things I really have a problem with are the fried chicken places and Big Macs (seriously crappy burger).

Beer runs! I always go farther and run longer when I've had a (single) beer first. And chicken wings.

My mother claims if she drinks a specific number of beers, it improves her bowling. One too few or one too many and it doesn't work.

LOL... I feel the same way when I play pool. Just the right amount of beer and I play better. :bigsmile:

I do not label foods as good or bad, if it fits into my day, I eat it.

Pretty much this...

Agreed..

I rarely ate fast food even before I got into my "health kick." The rumors and horror stories (most of which I've deemed true now) I heard sickened me to the point where I ate fast food maybe four times a year -- and that's usually only because we're catching a bite to eat before a trip, hungry on the road, or out of food after a trip.

The nutritional facts (or lack thereof) are enough to make me coil in fear, but I almost never eat out now since I haven't a slightest clue what's in anything. Words cannot describe how scary and disgusting fast food is to me (and that's an understatement)!

I don't even crave fast food anymore! I used to be able to eat a whole pizza by myself! Looking back, I had the worst diet ever!!

Not at all. I had 5 bk stackers after gym today,

I don't eat fast food simply because I choose not to. It is not evil, it is not bad, it is none of the things I have read here describing it.

It is funny how people fall into the anti-ANYTHING campaigns.

I don't like red cars so I don't buy them, I do not care if you do !
I don't like Wal-Mart so I don't shop there, I do not care if you do !
I don't like chocolate ice cream so I don't buy it, I do not care if you do !

If you choose to do or not to do something, feel free to do just that. I assure you I do not care, it is not my place to judge you NOR is it your place to judge you.

It takes just as much time to stumble through the produce section of a grocery store for some bananas and a pint of berries. Eat an entire freakin container if you must. Still a better choice.

It takes just as much time to stumble through the produce section of a grocery store for some bananas and a pint of berries. Eat an entire freakin container if you must. Still a better choice.

Better than what?

Better than nothing? I mean, I suppose a crap ton of sugar and no fat or protein is ok if you just need some energy, but really, a 500 calorie Big Mac has a much better macronutrient profile than 500 calories of bananas and berries, so I'm not sure what that post was talking about. Maybe just another zealot with no mind for how nutrition actually works?

Most food from restaurants is junk food anyway. A Subway sub is just a giant burger, really.

I'm in the IIFYM camp. I should pay attention to things like trans fats but this whole 'toxic' movement is getting out of hand.

Just relax. Stay within your macros (or just calories if you don't want to track macros) and eat what's worth the calories.

I love hot chips but I don't eat them a lot because they just blow out my calorie goals when I do. I don't limit my consumption because they're 'toxic', I just try to manage my calories.