We’ve all heard of the documentary “Supersize Me” where Morgan Spurlock ate nothing but McDonalds and his health went south.
I’ve always thought this was a dishonest documentary, otherwise known as “a documentary.”
He ate 5,000 calories per day during this experiment. So, the moral of the story is NOT “McDonalds is bad” but I think something closer to “eating 9.26 Big Macs per day will kill you”
My wife and I have a saying “my response is my responsibility.” I think this fits here. How I eat is my responsibility. If McDonalds isn’t health food, it’s my responsibility to consume it reasonably. They do publish all their nutritional information. They are not claiming their food is something it’s not.
Spurlock went into this production to stir things up, to gain attention, and make some money, and he sure did that. He had a budget of about $1M and made $30M at the box office.
How about this documentary: eat nothing but organic food from “whole foods” but consume 5,000 calories per day… see what happens, my guess is, the exact same thing.
It’s not McDonalds fault that Mr. Spurlock (or anyone) makes bad choices. Sure, McDonalds food is not “good for me” and that means I cannot eat as much of it as I could carrots and broccoli, but if you want to show that it is inherently McDonalds’ food that is harming people, you’d need to exercise reasonably, and stick to a recommended calorie limit per day.
The sham of it all is that Mr. Spurlock presents himself as being under a Doctors care during this experiment, yet, I don’t think he exercised regularly, and has never published his actual food log (though he does claim the 5,000 calories per day intake).
I’m not sure what his point is, but here’s a science teacher who ate nothing but McDonalds, made reasonable choices, and ended up healthier after 90-days. You decide which is more honest…