Is Fast Food Really that Bad for You?

It’s drummed into our heads over and over again: Avoid fast food. Health experts trumpet the evils of burgers, fries and soft drinks, with some taking the fight to Crusade-like proportions. Yet, Americans continue to consume the stuff on an epic scale. Our intake of fast food has steadily increased over the past 30 years, along with our waistlines.

Our growing taste for McMunchies, in parallel with the obesity epidemic, has led many people to come to a not-so-stunning conclusion: Fast-food restaurants are making people fat. In fact, one guy made a few bucks on that premise back in 2004. Independent filmmaker Morgan Spurlock’s documentary Super Size Me detailed Spurlock’s spiral into oblivion as he consumed nothing but McDonald’s for 30 days straight. He got fatter and sicker with each passing day, making a compelling case for skipping the drive-thru. The film earned Spurlock several awards and nominations, a big box office draw and the notoriety of being known as the guy who took on Ronald McDonald.

The unbelievers would strike back. One such critic was rookie filmmaker Tom Naughton. In 2009 Naughton released Fat Head, a film which contested Spurlock’s methods used in the filming of Super Size Me. Naughton consumed McDonald’s for 30 days straight as well, but he managed to lose weight and improve his health. Naughton didn’t stop with Spurlock. Seemingly a sucker for a good fight, he also lobbed volleys at mainstream health doctrine and even the government. Fat Head didn’t make nearly the same media splash as Super Size Me, but nevertheless Naughton’s message was compelling.

So who is right, and who is wrong, and is it really that simple? Let’s take a deeper look at each film and see what conclusions we can draw.

In February of 2003 Morgan Spurlock set out on his quest to consume McDonald’s food every day, for every meal. By his own self-imposed rules, he would eat three meals per day, and he would eat everything on the menu at least once during that time period. He was not permitted to consume any food that was not available at McDonald’s. At the time, McDonald’s featured a “Super Size” option on its menu, which provided more fries and a larger drink with a meal. Spurlock’s rules only allowed him to Super Size when the cashier offered him the option. With a team of experts in his corner, Spurlock established a baseline of his health, which at the beginning of the experiment was very good.

The film then chronicled the disaster that followed. Spurlock became physically ill after consuming his first meal, and vomited out of his car window. In thirty days his health declined to the point where the professionals monitoring his progress practically begged him to quit the experiment. He fell into a depression, adopted a physiological addiction to the food and experienced signs of sexual dysfunction. Spurlock persevered, and saw the experiment to the end.

All told, during the course of the 30 days which Spurlock ate nothing but McDonald’s every day, he gained a total of 24.5 pounds on a diet, which his nutritionist calculated at 5,000 calories per day. His cholesterol had shot up to 230 from his baseline of 168, and his body fat had increased by 9% One physician told him he was in the process of “pickling his liver” because of the diet. Lesson learned and point made, Spurlock then went on a cleansing diet under the supervision of his vegan-chef girlfriend, which helped him to lose the weight and, apparently, saved his life.

The resulting film, Super Size Me, was a real eye-opener for many viewers and critics. Everyone knew fast food wasn’t the best thing for you, but who had any idea it could impact the body in such a devastating manner? But many took issue with Spurlock’s approach, and began to poke holes in his experiment.

Though it seemed to take him a little while, newbie filmmaker Tom Naughton would fire back at Spurlock in 2009. In his film Fat Head, Naughton contested many of Spurlock’s findings and methods, including the fact that Spurlock has never made his food journal available for inspection. Naughton painted Spurlock as a man with an agenda who fudged the experiment to get the results he wanted. Like many critics, Naughton contended that a man who stuffed himself the way Spurlock did during the experiment would gain weight no matter what he ate, McDonald’s or otherwise.

To prove his point, Naughton embarked on his own 30-day fast-food diet, with very different rules. He would consume burgers, eggs, fried chicken, sausage, bacon and other foods he enjoyed, but he would keep his calories under 2,000, forgo the fries and sugary drinks, and get some exercise. Naughton would also keep his carbohydrate intake under 100 grams per day, far shy of the 300-gram Recommended Daily Allowance advocated by the government. Naughton emphasized personal choice throughout his experiment, and used what he continually referred to as his “functioning brain” to make decisions about his diet and lifestyle.

Like Spurlock, Naughton had a baseline health assessment taken before the experiment. Aside from high body-fat measurements, and a weight that technically put him in the “obese” category at 5’11 and 205 pounds, he was healthy. Following the experiment he had lost 12 pounds, slightly improved his cholesterol reading and lowered his body fat percentage.

Naughton railed against the government throughout the film, blaming special interests, questionable studies and shady politicians for the policies that have led to the obesity epidemic. Using his own team of experts, Naughton outlined a compelling argument against modern health dogma, particularly the Lipid Hypothesis which has served as the model of heart health for fifty years. Doctors Michael and Mary Dan Eades, authors of the book Protein Power, assisted in making the case for the errors of thinking prevalent in modern diet and nutrition practices.

Every bit as moving as Super Size Me, Fat Head swings us in the other direction. Could modern science be stuck in the dark ages when it comes to telling us what we should eat?

If you watch Super Size Me and Fat Head back-to-back you might find yourself enjoying an imaginary sandwich and a cold glass of air for lunch. It's hard to understand why, with the amazing advances in science that occur every day in the Western World, nobody can tell us definitively what we should eat. Even if they did, personal choice and individual rights come into play, as most people sure wouldn’t react well to the government telling them what they can and can’t eat.

Experiments like The Twinkie Diet further cloud the matter. In 2010, Kansas State University nutrition professor Mark Haub embarked on a 60-day diet which consisted primarily of Twinkies and other snack foods. Aside from a daily protein drink and some veggies to provide a good example for his kids, Haub basically lived on junk food for two months, though he did watch his calories. The results? He lost nearly 29 pounds and his health markers improved.

So, should the fast food companies be forced to change their ways, or is it all about people making better choices? Are the makers of junk food evil and killing us all? Should you cut carbs or cut fat, or just watch your calories? Does the government have some other agenda that dictates policy aside from our well-being?

Apparently, it depends on who you believe.