PDA

View Full Version : Losing Weight while Eating at McDonald's



slknight
08-12-2005, 09:26 AM
This is an interesting article about the backlash from the film, "Supersize Me." A number of people have gone on various diets eating solely at McDonald's and lost weight. I think it's great. One person is quoted as saying "The problem with a McDonald's-only diet isn't what's on the menu, but the choices made from it." Exactly!

I've gotten so tired of all the people horrified by that film. Of course your health is going to suffer if you ate the crap the guy in the movie did. If I ate that same stuff from the grocery store, I'm sure I'd have similar health problems. Maybe I'll make a documentary about getting fat by eating only food sold from the grocery. :rolleyes: Hungryman dinners and Oreos, anyone?

http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/fitness/articles/2005/08/11/people_try_to_lose_weight_at_mcdonalds/

wallycat
08-12-2005, 09:29 AM
Study after study shows it is not WHAT you eat but HOW MUCH of it that you eat.
Of course, you'll live healthier and longer if you consume healthier foods like veggies and such but the bottom line continues to be to watch calories (and exercise can offset too many :) .

gertdog
08-12-2005, 09:44 AM
Neat article- thanks for sharing it!

I am one of the people who kind of enjoyed being horrified by the film, but not because of what he ate and how it affected his health. His "rules" didn't make much sense- have to supersize when asked, having to eat everything on the menu at least once, not being allowed to have water unless it was on the menu??? On the other hand, if it gets people talking about what moderation means, great.

It's more that I find myself fascinated by the fast food culture as a whole, particularly the creep in servings sizes over the decades (though Fast Food Nation explored this issue in greater depth). I thought the saddest thing in the movie was the scene with Jared from Subway giving an inspirational talk, followed by an interview with an overweight teenage girl basically saying she'd love to be able to lose weight, but not everyone can afford to eat at Subway every day- while her overweight mother stood by and nodded. Oy- talk about missing the point.

Kahlico
08-12-2005, 09:44 AM
Study after study shows it is not WHAT you eat but HOW MUCH of it that you eat.
Of course, you'll live healthier and longer if you consume healthier foods like veggies and such but the bottom line continues to be to watch calories (and exercise can offset too many :) .

Exactly. When I was a vegan for a short period of time (10 months) I didn't weight any less than I do now because I ate a lot of vegetable fat. Granted, my cholesterol level was insanely low (I think it was like 106 or something).

Quality over quantity is the motto I try to live by.

blazedog
08-12-2005, 10:13 AM
While I appreciate that the dieter was trying to make a point, I think it completely misses the point.

You can lose weight as long as you eat fewer calories -- that doesn't mean that you will be healthy and/or that you will be learning anything about maintaining.

Existing on 1200 - 1500 calories of burgers and salad from a fast food joint(which appears to be what this woman did) is not a particularly healthy diet. If one doesn't know why, I would suggest reading any basic book on nutrition.

slknight
08-12-2005, 10:37 AM
While I appreciate that the dieter was trying to make a point, I think it completely misses the point.

You can lose weight as long as you eat fewer calories -- that doesn't mean that you will be healthy and/or that you will be learning anything about maintaining.


Yes, but I think that all of the people who say "Oh, I saw Supersize Me and I'll never eat at McDonald's again" also miss the point. If you eat a lot of junk (whether it's from McDonald's, the grocery, or wherever), you're going to gain weight. If you eat less, you'll lose. The source doesn't matter.

blazedog
08-12-2005, 11:25 AM
Yes, but I think that all of the people who say "Oh, I saw Supersize Me and I'll never eat at McDonald's again" also miss the point. If you eat a lot of junk (whether it's from McDonald's, the grocery, or wherever), you're going to gain weight. If you eat less, you'll lose. The source doesn't matter.

Many people exist on diets that are basically junk food - beyond the weight issues in the film, his actual health deteriorated from the food eaten and the food not eaten (i.e. he was lacking some basic nutritional needs).

However, the point is if you eat a lot of FOOD (i.e. calories) you will gain weight -- doesn't matter if it's junk or not. If you eat fewer calories, you will lose weight -- doesn't matter if they are healthy foods or not.

Most people are nutritional idiots - people on C/L's BB are a self selected group who are not typical of the nutritional idiots I encounter most of the time - just yesterday I was stunned by a conversation with a woman who is not stupid who didn't know the difference between a simple and complex carbohydrate -- information which I don't personally consider to be esoteric.

My point was that the McDonald's diet was unhealthy regardless of whether you were thin -- there are a whole lot of thin people who eat unhealthy diets.

Julia1Pin
08-12-2005, 04:08 PM
IMHO, I think that McDonalds is one of the healthiest laternatives when you're traveling by car. I always get a grilled chicken sandwich, hold the mayo. And I love their fruit and walnut salads. Most other fast food restaurants do not offer you the healthier selections.

Blazedog - I agree 10000% on the nutritional idiots comment. It's like the people who go to sushi and think they're eating healthy. Um, you're eating tempura and sushi rolls with mayonnaise. :eek: That's not quite healthy.
but it is good :cool:

blazedog
08-12-2005, 05:37 PM
IMHO, I think that McDonalds is one of the healthiest laternatives when you're traveling by car. I always get a grilled chicken sandwich, hold the mayo. And I love their fruit and walnut salads. Most other fast food restaurants do not offer you the healthier selections.

Blazedog - I agree 10000% on the nutritional idiots comment. It's like the people who go to sushi and think they're eating healthy. Um, you're eating tempura and sushi rolls with mayonnaise. :eek: That's not quite healthy.
but it is good :cool:

Julia, I think we're in agreement. I do think it's possible to choose a reasonably healthy alternative at McD's. I also don't think in the scheme of things what one eats on one day matters -- it's what one eats most of the time that determines health and weight.

However, I don't think that one can be healthy and eat at McD's every day for every meal although one could certainly be thin.

ChristineVA
08-13-2005, 06:36 AM
There is another article on this in this month's Fitness magazine. Their food (or diet) editor was tasked to eat one week at fast food places. She was to restrict her calories to 1,500 a week. They wanted to prove that she could lose weight.

He stated her weight at 136 lbs at 5'4" and said she normally ate very healthfully (and never ate fast food). For the first few days she really struggled. I think on her first morning she had an Egg McMuffin and she was just stuffed (that would never happen to me). :p

Bottom line is that by the end of the week she had lost one pound. She said that she felt awful for most of the week though. Predominantly, she felt very bloated from the sodium (that was high in even the healthy choices) and was sluggish a lot. Wish I could post the article but I don't have it on line.
Christine

Shagbark
08-14-2005, 01:29 AM
What's wrong with everybody. You are what you eat! This nation is the fattest it's ever been. Our kids are the fattest they have ever been. We wonder why our kids don't excel in school in comparison to other nations....could it be what we are feeding them along with all the additives and sugar in our diets? How about eating to PREVENT heart disease and cancer...do we ever think of that?

Moderation is key I do agree with eating fast food but it doesn't look like we know how to moderate. Bigger and better that's the American way!

Chefzhat
08-14-2005, 07:32 AM
I just checked the McDonald's website and had a good giggle about the "Apple Walnut Salad".

9 oz servings size
310 calories, 150 from fat
85 grams sodium

Good grief. Plain burgers are best: 260 cals, 80 from fat.


Debiee

ChristineVA
08-14-2005, 07:35 AM
Yep, the McDonald's "plain old" hamburger is usually the best bet.

Jazzmatazz49
08-14-2005, 07:37 AM
I would probably lose weight if I ate every meal at McD's, because I hate most of their food. In my part of the world, it's the worst fast food franchise in quality and cleanliness.

blazedog
08-14-2005, 08:32 AM
I just checked the McDonald's website and had a good giggle about the "Apple Walnut Salad".

9 oz servings size
310 calories, 150 from fat
85 grams sodium

Good grief. Plain burgers are best: 260 cals, 80 from fat.


Debiee

This is really not accurate in terms of the nutritional stats -- The fat calories are mostly from the walnuts and salad dressing. Nuts are a healthy food. If fat and calories are a HUGE concern, then one can leave off. Also, as with any salad, fat and calories can be reduced by omitting salad dressing, using very little and/or requesting ff or rf salad dressing.

I don't eat at McD's so I'm not sure if this is the one that comes with some kind of yogurt -- again although it has calories, yogurt provides important nutritional benefits.

The plain burger consists of not particularly high quality beef with a high fat content plus a white flour bun -- The calories on the salad are a much better choice nutritionally.

Again, you can be thin and unhealthy by making poor nutritional choices -- it's not about the calories solely as the salads at McD's are easily reduced in fat with slight modifications while retaining all the nutrition making them a better choice than the burger.

Chefzhat
08-14-2005, 09:49 AM
Yes, the fat calories are from the dressing and the nuts. You can order the salad w/o dressing and nuts - meaning that you pay $3.70 for 6 apple slices and 3 grapes. Not a good value.

The nutritional figures are accurate - unless you're doubting the Mcd's website, which is where I got the information.

Robyncz
08-14-2005, 10:08 AM
Yes, the fat calories are from the dressing and the nuts. You can order the salad w/o dressing and nuts - meaning that you pay $3.70 for 6 apple slices and 3 grapes. Not a good value.

The nutritional figures are accurate - unless you're doubting the Mcd's website, which is where I got the information.

Sure the nutritional figures are accurate, but I think the point is the nutritional bang for the caloric buck, so to speak. Calories are only one factor. You can have a 260 calorie plain burger with very little nutritional value, or you can have fruit, yogurt, and nuts--all foods with actual nutritional value, and for 50 calories more.

I think this is exactly the point that earlier posters were trying to make. Sure, you can eat very low calorie foods and be thin, but we ultimately need good nutrition to stay healthy in the long run.

BlakeC
08-14-2005, 11:25 AM
I enjoyed Supersize Me, but I have to say it mostly highlighted what I felt I already knew. We're not teaching our kids how to make healthy, reasonable food choices and we're certainly not showing them how to cook anymore. I don't think alot of families eat most meals at home any longer. They simply don't make it priority when so much is available for take out/eat out.

It's only going to get worse until people open their eyes and take some personal responsibility for their own health and the choices they make. Here is a great example - I have co-worker who had gastric bypass surgery last year 'because no diet would ever work' Well, when everything you eat comes from a drive through window, then yes I will agree no 'diet' is going to work :rolleyes: Furthermore, a full year post surgery, she has lost only about 60 lbs and is whining that she can't lose anymore weight. Again, everything she eats continues to come from a drive through window - I promise I am not making this up. And of course there is NO exercise in her 'program' But yea, it someone else's fault that she can't lose weight. :confused:

Grace
08-14-2005, 06:21 PM
I agree with Robyn. If people want to look strictly at numbers, it would look like the burger is a better choice. But what's the point of being "thin" if you're totally unhealthy??? Besides the saturated fat in the burger, what about all the hormones and other chemicals in the beef that you don't even know about? That's not to say I don't eat a burger once in awhile - I don't advocate fanatacism, but when you pit the apples, grapes and walnuts (and the "dressing" is just regular vanilla yogurt - not regular soybean oil laden salad dressing - so it's actually healthy too) the salad wins hands down nutrition-wise. The only thing the burger has that the salad lacks is some protein (although there's some protein in the yogurt and maybe some in the walnuts? I don't know for sure...). Otherwise some refined white bread with a piece of greasy, chemical-laced cow flesh stuck in between can no way compete with the salad for sheer nutrition.