From John Tierney
Here’s the response from Mr. Taubes, a correspondent for the journal Science, to Jeff’s assertion that McDonald's food is certainly unhealthy:
I have two comments about Jeff's post. First, anyone who can tell you "with certainty" that MacDonald’s is bad for us is the kind of zealot who can be dangerous if taken seriously. He might believe it, and he might have good reason to believe it, but telling us "with certainty"? I don’t think so. I can give him numerous examples of populations with epidemics of obesity and diabetes that were fast-food-restaurant free. McDonald's may be serving up foods or nutrients that are bad for us (as may be Starbucks, for that matter), but the negative effects will depend entirely on what people order and what they then eat.
One commentator said:
First, I’m astonished by Mr. Taubes' comments in suggesting that McDonalds is actually food, as I’m not so sure that is the case. Trans-fats kill, and they have no nutritional value–they are simply used to make things taste fresher, but they clog arteries.
Trans-fats should only be consumed by people who are OK with the idea of having a stroke or heart attack.
We also eat too much sugar and the wrong sugars, ...
That last comment may represent popular thought, but it is wrong. Of course trans fats are nutritious, and there is no proof that any other food is better than McDonalds food.
Post a Comment