So you CAN eat McDonald's every day...

tincanonastring wrote: »

Kalikel wrote: »

3bambi3 wrote: »

Kalikel wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

Kalikel wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

BackupFridge wrote: »

2. Yes, we do have different nutritional standards. Micros matter. Vitamins and minerals matter.

Well, supposedly part of the experiment was meeting FDA requirements for nutrition, not just calories. (See http://abc7.com/health/teacher-loses-60-pounds-while-eating-nothing-but-mcdonalds/705916/) I'd personally like to know precisely what that means and what they aimed for, since I'm skeptical that he would on the usual menu (http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-lose-weight-eating-mcdonalds-2014-1), but it probably wouldn't be all that much different than many people who consider themselves to have healthy diets. Also, focusing on the nutritional content of foods wherever you get them (not just calories) is a valuable lesson and smarter than deciding that if you are at McD's (or some other less than ideal place from your perspective) it's a write off, might as well ignore the salad options.

That's all I'm saying - micros matter. I don't know why someone with a serious goal wouldn't chase those instead of indulging in ingredients like the type I linked above.

Depending on the person, it might be more sustainable, or it might be one step in a long term process of improving the diet and one's health (I knew someone for whom this was true--well, something similar, as she didn't eat at McD's for every meal), or you might have reason to go to get quick restaurant foods quite often so need to learn how to choose.

They included some, but not all, nutrients. Had they included them all, they'd have to admit that you cannot eat a well-balanced diet when limiting yourself to McDonald's food. I hope that the kids were taught all about micros and how they're as important as macros, what the different micros do for the body, which foods have them, etc. I hope they discussed sodium and trans fats. I hope they discussed fiber and phytochemicals and all that stuff.

I really hope that the kids learned something about nutrition other than "If you exercise, you can eat all your meals at McDonald's and still lose weight." That is something that could be taught in five minutes, leaving lots of time to cover things that most people don't know.

If all that time was spent on CICO, it's a huge waste of time that could've been spent educating the kids.

Given that the US is currently in the midst of a obesity epidemic (not a malnutrition epidemic), I don't think time spent educating children about CICO is a waste of time.

Which nutrients were excluded, by the way?

Teaching them CICO takes five minutes, leaving lots of time to teach other things.

I don't remember what all they included and excluded. A lot of them weren't included.

Some posts on these forums beg to differ.

Posts on this forum beg to differ with many things. There are none so blind as those who will not see. This isn't a school, though. Nobody is charged with imparting knowledge and nobody relies on this for their education.

The kids in the school could be presented with the info. It could've been worked into this very thing. It could've been taught. Maybe it was! I sure hope so!

The kids had to plan out his meals to meet FDA regulations. It wasn't just about CICO.

I think you might mean RDA recommendations?

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Kalikel wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

BackupFridge wrote: »

2. Yes, we do have different nutritional standards. Micros matter. Vitamins and minerals matter.

Well, supposedly part of the experiment was meeting FDA requirements for nutrition, not just calories. (See http://abc7.com/health/teacher-loses-60-pounds-while-eating-nothing-but-mcdonalds/705916/) I'd personally like to know precisely what that means and what they aimed for, since I'm skeptical that he would on the usual menu (http://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-lose-weight-eating-mcdonalds-2014-1), but it probably wouldn't be all that much different than many people who consider themselves to have healthy diets. Also, focusing on the nutritional content of foods wherever you get them (not just calories) is a valuable lesson and smarter than deciding that if you are at McD's (or some other less than ideal place from your perspective) it's a write off, might as well ignore the salad options.

That's all I'm saying - micros matter. I don't know why someone with a serious goal wouldn't chase those instead of indulging in ingredients like the type I linked above.

Depending on the person, it might be more sustainable, or it might be one step in a long term process of improving the diet and one's health (I knew someone for whom this was true--well, something similar, as she didn't eat at McD's for every meal), or you might have reason to go to get quick restaurant foods quite often so need to learn how to choose.

They included some, but not all, nutrients. Had they included them all, they'd have to admit that you cannot eat a well-balanced diet when limiting yourself to McDonald's food. I hope that the kids were taught all about micros and how they're as important as macros, what the different micros do for the body, which foods have them, etc. I hope they discussed sodium and trans fats. I hope they discussed fiber and phytochemicals and all that stuff.

Yeah, I basically agree.

I really hope that the kids learned something about nutrition other than "If you exercise, you can eat all your meals at McDonald's and still lose weight." That is something that could be taught in five minutes, leaving lots of time to cover things that most people don't know.

My impression was that it was more than this, that it was more about how to make choices. McD's doesn't have the best set of choices when compared to using a whole supermarket or some such, but there might be something to starting with a more limited set of choices to make it easier, using McD's to maybe make the experiment seem fun or challenging (or something easy for the teacher to do without cooking), or to help them see that even if they were eating lots of fast food (not sure if these kids were from families where fast food was common) that they should look beyond the burger and fries and worry about making more diverse choices.

I seriously doubt the take away was "eat McD's every day," however, as apparently some have assumed.

(I don't even like McD's -- haven't since I was a kid when we went on rare occasion as a treat.)

Since my diet flip, there are many things I used to like that I no longer do. Taco Bell and KFC - I cannot believe I ever liked that stuff. Stouffer's is now waaay too salty, can't eat it. Lots and lots of things got scratched off the "Tastes Good" list.

Not McDonald's. I haven't had a bit of everything, but I had a couple things. I cannot eat those fries any longer, ick. But the rest of it was as good as ever...which is to say, not really. I'd much, much rather have food cooked at home, but I do not gross out when having a bite of burger or chicken. I never thought it was really good, but I don't think it's worse now, like i do so many things.

I literally spit the Taco Bell out because I thought I was eating food that had gone bad. There is a local chicken place my son likes. That was still good, too.

Going back to the initial point of the exercise the teacher did. I still feel that through this hands on experience students were far more engaged and therefore learned more from this experience than they would have if they listened to a standard nutrition lecture in a health class.

It would be difficult to convince all teenagers to never eat fast food. However, getting them to make more informed decisions is always going to be better than not even bothering.

Abstinence typically does not work for the majority of people.

auddii wrote: »

Going back to the initial point of the exercise the teacher did. I still feel that through this hands on experience students were far more engaged and therefore learned more from this experience than they would have if they listened to a standard nutrition lecture in a health class.

It would be difficult to convince all teenagers to never eat fast food. However, getting them to make more informed decisions is always going to be better than not even bothering.

Abstinence typically does not work for the majority of people.

I've got more important things to do in my life than avoid fast food when it would be more convenient than another food choice...(to apply the "abstinence" to adults)

I wish their fries were gluten free. I miss them.

Thank you for reopening @kgeyser. I do think this type of information is important for those who feel like they can't or won't give up fast foods or convenience foods in order to lose weight. It's important to see that you can live a convience food lifestyle and still make choices that will lead to better health.

GOD this must've taken forever to edit for the mods!! Well done

Strange that this wasn't showing a 'new' flag, must be a clean up glitch.

I posted a bit earlier on the thread about wanting to undertake McVember. I may not get to do it as I have to travel for work to a country which does not have McDonalds, but I have been experimenting, for my own amusement.

At this early stage, it looks like the only way I could survive on McDonalds only for a month while sticking to my macros the way I normally do was if I allowed myself 2 meals at McDonalds and one meal at home per day and that meal needs to consist entirely of fruit and veg. The main reasons for this are that I am struggling to get anywhere near my preferred fiber intake and on 1200 calories and without a fruit and veg meal I am pretty darn hungry, even though I do get a delicious breakfast and dinner in quite easily.

Eating at 1200, I do not find sodium and sugar difficult to manage, eating 2 meals at McDonalds a day. Feel free to have a look at my diary for yesterday as an example of this. I have also run a few examples for myself in Excel and sugar and sodium are the least of my problems, if I combine my meals intelligently. People in America please not that the South African McDonalds calories and ingredients are slightly different so I have had to create my own entries based on the information on the South African site (not a massive difference).

Once again - this is me just messing about - not any kind of serious thing - before anyone jumps down my throat to tell me how I am doing it wrong or how my results cannot be applied to others. That is completely obvious, but thanks anyway.

I am struggling to keep my mojo going for the last bit of weight I have to lose and an unintended consequence of my junk food experiments this past week or two is the best weight loss I have seen in a while! Obviously this is only happening because I am being more careful about my deficit again, but I will take it! Lols

No one need fear for my health - if you glance at my Macros no terrible evils are being committed on my constitution. Also - no need to lecture me on 1200 calories please - I am often over that amount and I don't do any exercise so it is perfectly reasonable.

kshama2001 wrote: »

Those of you who feel that the film is an infomercial that should not be shown in schools can sign a petition here:

https://www.change.org/p/keep-mcdonald-s-nutrition-infomercial-out-of-our-children-s-schools

...The film is pitched to schools as "educational" - it even comes with a "Teachers Discussion Guide" prepared by McDonald's - but in reality it's little more than a heavily-branded infomercial for the fast food chain, one that seems cynically calculated to get kids to eat even more fast food than they do now. In this era of childhood obesity, that’s a terrible idea.

It’s fine to teach kids about calorie balancing, but this naked advertising effort expressly tells impressionable kids that “there’s nothing wrong with fast food” and that they shouldn’t believe any negative information on the Internet about fast food or McDonald’s. It also makes no mention of the poor nutritional quality of most fast food.

Teens and pre-teens are notoriously impulsive. So when a trusted authority like a science teacher says he ate fries on a near-daily basis for six months, as well as regularly eating Big Macs, Quarter Pounders and ice cream - and that he still eats at McDonald’s every day – do we think teens are suddenly going to become highly disciplined calorie-cutters? Or do we think they’ll get the message that it’s OK to eat even more fast food?

If McDonald's wants to post 540 Meals on YouTube or show it in movie theaters, that's the company's right. But it's our right as parents to keep this kind of aggressive fast food advertising out of our kids’ schools.

Does this keep other documnetaries (propaganda) such as Fedup, etc out of schools? If we have to gore someone's specific ox, we should probably get them all....am I right?

Goes to show calories a calorie.....and yes, being physically active does help a LOT....I didn't start seeing the scale move until I started being more active, and weighing my food that I eat.....

Love this. Whether you like McDonald's or not, the whole McDonald's made me fat thing is absurd. It's a silly excuse and I'm glad someone is taking the piss out of it.