I read on the blog of Mikel López Iturriaga , also known as the comedian, the news of a man who lost weight eating for 3 months at McDonald’s . What’s more, John Cisca, a science teacher at an Iowa institute and the person who underwent this 90-day “experiment”, lost 17kg and, what is more impressive, under their cholesterol levels at this time. But, before you start looking at your plate of vegetables with suspicion and start running like crazy to McDonald’s establishments, let’s analyze the news a little more.
How was weight loss achieved?
Like all weight loss, what was done in this case is to limit John’s calorie intake to 2000kcal and invite him to do a little exercise, in this case, go for a walk 45 minutes each day. Taking into account that the teacher weighed 127kg, if we calculate his total energy expenditure according to the equations proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and knowing that he performed a light activity, we see that John had a total energy expenditure of about 3000kcal. In other words, with this diet, a negative energy balance of 1000 kcal per day was achieved, so that weight loss was totally predictable.
To achieve this, obviously, unlike the protagonist of the documentary Super-Size me that was carried away by the offers of the fast food chain and ate the larger portions whenever they were offered, our protagonist tried, along with his students, Organize a diet that conforms to the nutritional recommendations taking into account the information of the products that appears in the Mcdonald’s website.
Despite the results, which may be encouraging for all hamburger lovers, I think the food should have been rather monotonous since the fast food chain’s low-calorie food supply is bland (something that would still be worse if it were made This experiment in Spain since, the supply of products, here is more limited). On the other hand, even if the diet tried to adjust to macronutrients (carbohydrates, fats and proteins) and cholesterol, it would probably be lacking in some nutrients, since food would be based only on products offered at Mcdonald’s (hamburgers, salads, Chips, fried fish, fried wings etc etc etc). So,
Guilty of being overweight and obese. The debate opens:
What this science teacher wanted to demonstrate with this study was not that you should go to Mcdonalds to lose weight but, what matters is not so much a product within the diet but the overall diet itself and that, and here it is Where the debate arises, the real responsible for what we eat and our possible overweight (or obesity in your case) is us and the decisions we make.
Obviously I think everyone has the last word when it comes to deciding who wants to eat and for that, two things are important: to have the information necessary to know what is really to be eaten, that is to say, nutritional education (something I consider Which can still improve enough among our population) and, on the other hand, want to eat well. Because we do not fool ourselves, sometimes we know that we are not eating well, but it is difficult for us to resist.
However, in spite of this, I think that not all guilt can be thrown at the individual. It is clear that if we are bombarded with junk food ads (have you seen many fruits advertised? Because the “5 a day ” may not have the same advertising budget as this great company), they surround you with fast food and there are You around offers that make this food much cheaper than healthy food, you can decide, but you are making it quite difficult.
And you do you think? Should advertising be limited or expensive with some kind of unhealthy product tax (as in some cases already proposed)? Or should the population be trusted to choose?