Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think I'd disagree with the OP. Whether its a $1 hamburger or not, we enjoy the safest, cleanest food on the planet and that includes our junk food. Our people live longer than similar demographic populations (no don't bother tell me that life expectancy in Norway is two years longer) and it is part because of our very clean food supply.
I think McDonalds is a great company feeding a lot of people cheaply that would not be willing or able to cook better meals for themselves. And, the snobbish attitude that people who eat fast food are stupid or victims is just plain wrong.
If you think that if McDonalds closed that teenage kid or the trucker with 15 minutes or the mother of three without a stove or a working refrigerator would eat better, you are simply mistaken. We should be thankful for $1 hamburger. A lot of things in life look gross. That mother without a refrigerator would be serving something a whole lot worse than a $1 hamburger.
Well here we go...
America may have "safe" food in terms of cleanliness and handling practices (but after 10+ years in the restaurant business, i could argue that too, but it's off subject and a different discussion), but I "think" the point here is that our food is NOT safe and NOT healthy. The OP is pointing out things that many of us either don't know about, or choose to ignore. If you research our food supply, you will find out that it is very much NOT safe. The OP gave a good example of this, and unfortunately it is just one example of many. Read the book that I linked, if you care. The point of that book is basically that our industrialized food-chain is responsible for a lot of the modern illnesses that we see today. Epidemic occurance of heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and etc. Not only the $1 hamburger (although it is well documented in this thread that it is a problem), but the idea that all of our food is processed to the point that the nutritional value is taken away. Food in the last 100 years is a corporate product, designed for one thing: Hi yield at a low cost. So you can buy a $1 hamburger, or a 99-cent loaf of bread, or yogurt with a 2-month shelf life. But if you look at what goes into that product, you will find that the whole elements have been dismantled. Then we later found out that by doing this, by making food more portable, longer lasting, cheaper and more accessible (as you accurately pointed out), we have also robbed it of it's nutritional value. It is why a Norwegian (or approximately 32 other industrialized societies) have a better life expectancy than Americans. It is why, even though fat, cholesterol, and all that stuff is supposed to be bad, a Frenchman eating cheese and fois-gras has a better health record (and life expectancy) than the American eating "heart healthy" snack-wells, and "Omega-3 enriched white bread".
Bottom line, as Kimballette stated, the less processed food you can eat, the better.
Just for full disclosure, I am not some kind of granola eating, berry-gathering hippy. I've been known to hit the dollar-menu on many of occasions (but thanks to this thread, maybe just a a LITTLE bit less). I am not some advocate telling YOU what YOU should eat. I really don't care.
But you're missing the point of this thread with your comments. I don't think that if McDonalds closed, the people you mention would eat better. I think they'd go to Hardees. What I think is that as our society is automated, and set up for mass consumption, we've accomplished a lot. But that there have been some negative side effects too, one of them being the SERIOUS deterioration of our diet and food supply.
I was just saying to my wife today (mostly as a result of this thread, and the book I linked) that I don't expect to totally and drastically change my lifestyle or ways of eating. But if I can just take a little bit away from this discussion, and maybe sway my habbits a little bit, maybe eat one less dollar burger, or one more meal made of recognizeable "whole foods" each week, then I'll be a little bit better off.
That's what works for me. I am not telling you what to do or what to eat. That is your choice. But the discussion is a good one. You chose to come here and read it. Take it or leave it. But I have learned a lot. I consider myself at least "somewhat educated", and this was quite enlightening for me, and encouraged me to learn even more. My motivation in this (even though I am not the OP) is to share what I've learned, and hope that others may see something in it too, or may choose to ignore, but at least the info is out there, and more easily accessible for those who want it.
(Norway is at latitude 62 degrees North and that is why their life expectancy is longer than those people at more southerly locales. The earth spins at a slower rate the more north you go.)
My point was not at all that if McDonalds closed people would just go to Hardy's. My point was that the mass produced, shortcut taking, "scoop it all up and dump it in" fast food manufacturing IS the reason that we are the best fed most healthy nation on earth.
That's was the organic, berry picking, free range zealots don't get. People are able to actually get a $1 hamburger here. You may not want to eat it. Can't blame you for that a bit. But it is only because of Walmart and McDonalds and their ilk that we many of us can afford to get a coat for our kid, or have an apartment with a pool or take a vacation.
If all retail food was prepared under conditions that pass the "I like that process" test for the faint of heart, we would spend a whole lot more on food and a whole lot less on other things. You can chose to do that and apparently you do mostly. Me too. But if it wasn't for these awful looking chicken farms and meat processors, we would have less choice on our personal economics.
I would agree that because of Walmart, McD's and the like, we are able to sustain a larger population (grossly generalized, but to your point, I agree), but on the flip side of that equation, it is becoming apparent that there are some really nasty downsides to all of the efficiencies we have gained.
It always has been, and always will be a balancing act. True capitalist run amuck would be our downfall, no more or less so than if all the free-range zeleouts had their way.
The key is balance. (That statement applies to so many things: Politics, religion, lifestyle, and the list goes on.)
Anyway, I respect your opinion, and to a HUGE point, I agree with it (see my first reply to this thread). That being said, it has been enlightening to me, and I hope I've picked up a few nuggets (no pun intended) of info that can help me find my best balance....
Well, me too. One thing for sure. I have never eaten a chicken nugget (in fact I never eat any chicken product I didn't prepare except for fried chicken or chicken wings) and now, I am quite reassured as to the wisdom of that.
I am particularly wary of raw or undercooked chicken and when you get a chicken salad sandwich or processed chicken product you have no idea what the preparation of that chicken was like. I love chicken, but until its all at 163 F. its radioactive as far as I'm concerned.
I think I'd disagree with the OP. Whether its a $1 hamburger or not, we enjoy the safest, cleanest food on the planet and that includes our junk food. Our people live longer than similar demographic populations (no don't bother tell me that life expectancy in Norway is two years longer) and it is part because of our very clean food supply.
Have to agree with you.
I think the real issue is NOT food safety as much as it is an attack on large businesses.
If a farmer runs a small operation raising 100-200 hogs (and can barely keep his family fed much less provide a college education to his children), he is a good operator. If the same farmer becomes successful and raises 50,000 hogs, he is a rotten agri-business man (who by the way, may employ 40-50 workers).
On one food forum, a couple of posters want to require everything to be organic saying that it is OK if milk is $4-5/gallon. How nice of them. Of course, these are the same guys who think nothing of dropping $250 for a meal at Moto in Chicago or French Laundry in NoCal.
Made by grinding together connective tissue and beef scraps normally destined for dog food and rendering, BPI’s Lean Beef Trimmings are then treated with ammonia hydroxide, a process that kills pathogens such as salmonella and E. coli.
The resulting pinkish substance is later blended into traditional ground beef and hamburger patties.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). I am not some advocate telling YOU what YOU should eat. I really don't care.
. What I think is that as our society is automated, and set up for mass consumption, we've accomplished a lot. But that there have been some negative side effects too, one of them being the SERIOUS deterioration of our diet and food supply. 
) of info that can help me find my best balance....
Pink Slime
