To think McDonald's isn't actually That bad...it's not cardboard and cows ears as people seem to think?

[WittiestUsernameEver]

Looking at the ingredients in most of it, it's fine??

They use organic milk, free range eggs, burgers are meat and salt, probably better quality stuff than the likes of Harvester burgers etc.

People talk about it like you're feeding your kids arsenic, rats piss and pig shit...

It wasn't obvious to be honest. The fact still remains, food is just food and classification which includes an element of shaming those who consume certain types is wrong. I do not agree to disagree. Up until this year, the acronym UPF wasn't even widely in use - it's just another marketing ploy to sell books by one of those twins. There's always somebody making money from fear mongering and demonising different foods - remember when artificial sweeteners were being touted as poison, when seed oils were called 'the hateful eight' or when salt from the dead Sea or Himalayas was supposed to be good for you? All of those claims were refuted in various studies (meta analyses for each group of studies are published and available) because there are no 'bad' foods or, for that matter 'good' foods - it is merely a matter of what you choose/are able to consume and in what quantities. If you avoid a diet which is high in processed foods then good for you, I'm happy that you have the facility to do so.

That’s fine if you don’t want to agree to disagree. But it does not change my opinion as I’m assuming it does not change yours either…

What a load of total and utter bollocks!

‘No such thing as good food’

‘To label certain foods as bad is to shame people’

there are no fat people that’s just a value statement and shaming

no such thing as truth etc etc

get a grip

It is absolutely fine that I choose not to agree with you. I also do not accept you trying to force me to agree to disagree by framing your demand as a disingenuous question. I am not seeking to change your opinion, I am stating my case and providing the reasons why I am correct. I am still happy for you that you have the privilege to eat the foods you choose in the quantities which you desire.

You have very confidently and aggressively stated that you disagree with the statements which I made in response to a different poster but I notice that you haven't provided any factual reasons why you disagree, nor have you even quoted me directly.
I wonder why you feel the need to be so angry and rude in your responses? I have been polite and clear in mine. If this subject is one which makes you uncomfortable, perhaps it would be best to unfollow this thread?

Yes and I am stating mine and the reasons I think I am correct 😊 think you are taking it a bit seriously…. There’s no ‘force’ I simply said we can agree to disagree. Which is what we’ve done….you have your viewpoint and I have mine and that’s fine. I think some foods are ‘good’ for us and some ‘bad’ for us. You don’t. Not really much more to say!

I am not taking this seriously, this is a conversation on MN. That being said, we have not agreed anything and there is more to say. You have gone from demonising UPFs and additives to stating that "some foods are good for us and some bad for us" but you're still missing my point. Any foods, in the wrong quantities can be bad (even poisonous) for us but, in the context of a varied diet, there aren't foods on sale in the UK which aren't safe for most people to eat in the correct quantities.

You THINK that saying a particular food is bad is rooted in a moral judgement and used to shame people.
That's very different than it actually being rooted in a moral judgement.

Wait.....what? Are you agreeing with me or are you disagreeing on the grounds of semantics? Calling something or somebody bad is making a moral judgement about that thing/person. When people call a food 'bad' they are making a moral judgement about that food and, by extension, the person consuming it. I don't agree with judging people via the food that they enjoy or, indeed, in any other way.

I am disagreeing with you.

I would consider moral judgements to be about things that people do or ways that people behave.

I wouldn't consider it to be a 'moral' judgement to say that a food is bad. I'm pretty sure that the term is not used in that way anyway to describe things, unless those 'things' are things are items like fur coats for example.

Some vegans may make moral judgements on food because eating meat or animal products goes against their beliefs about how people should behave and what is considered right or wrong, but when it's not related to ethics, then judgement of a food as bad or good does not mean that someone is by extension making a judgement about the person consuming it AT ALL.

Just because you say something doesn't make it true.

I think certain food is bad but I don't have any judgement about those who eat it.

I love the breakfast but with the other meals sure I like the taste but I feel unsatisfied after I eat them

I think certain food is bad but I don't have any judgement about those who eat it.

Thats just you, isn't it, though? You can't assume everybody thinks the same way you do!

Well I think by default we have agreed that we don’t agree… You are clearly missing my point too. I can have my opinion and you yours. I disagree entirely with you when you say there are no good foods (and also bad foods) and I do think there are ingredients in some products thet are sold here that shouldn’t be in our food.

Don’t understand why people go mad about McDs.

When it’s the school holidays, when I visit my parents I have to go to them the long way round as between me and them, is a McDs and the drive thru queue can go onto the road. The long way round doubles the distance due to one way streets

Did I say I spoke for everyone? No I didn't.

I simply corrected a poster who has assigned a meaning to something and tried to make out it's universal, that saying a food is bad is by extension making a judgement about a person. Maybe you should have directed your comment at that person instead?!

I do however believe that most who make a judgement about particular food being 'bad' don't extend that to judgement about a person....especially considering almost everyone eats some food that they consider to be 'bad' themselves occasionally anyway....so it would be bizarre for them to be going around judging people for it!

However I also know that if it's considered 'bad' food and the person eating it is obese then they absolutely are judged by many people, but again not all (and certainly not by me).

Mcdonalds french fries ingredients (from the website):

Ingredients: Potatoes, Vegetable Oil (canola Oil, Corn Oil, Soybean Oil, Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Natural Beef Flavor [wheat And Milk Derivatives]), Dextrose, Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate (maintain Color), Salt. natural Beef Flavor Contains Hydrolyzed Wheat And Hydrolyzed Milk As Starting Ingredients.

Ingredients like dextrose and sodium acid pyrophosphate are what makes it UPF.

It's not just cut up potatoes fried in oil.

I'm not saying it's evil or any worse than processed supermarket food (I enjoy a McD's as much as anyone) - but it is definitely ultra processed.

@Bringbackthebeaver that's the US website, not the UK one.

This is what's in the UK version:

Fries

Ingredients: Potatoes, Non-Hydrogenated Vegetable Oils (Rapeseed), Dextrose (predominantly added at beginning of the potato season).
Prepared in the restaurants using a non-hydrogenated vegetable oil.

www.mcdonalds.com/gb/en-gb/product/fries-medium.html

Ah yes I just saw this.

The point still is the same though - the dextrose still makes it a UPF, and even if it wasn't , most people don't go to McD's and only order fries. The buns and many of their other menu items are categorically UPF.

OP is right that it's not much different to a lot of foods you can buy at the supermarket - but you're definitely not getting a fresh, healthy, unprocessed meal from McD's.

but you're definitely not getting a fresh, healthy, unprocessed meal from McD's

Of course you're not - nobody is trying to say you are.

Dextrose is basically glucose - yes, it's artificial but I wouldn't say it was particularly awful for you in moderation.

It's no worse than most branded/supermarket food (excluding basic meat, fish, veg, fruit etc obviously).

Yet you never see threads about how McVities, Walkers or Warburtons are feeding people processed shite fake food. McDonalds seems to attract a disproportionate amount of venom over this, despite the people who eat too much processed food likely to be eating most of it from a supermarket compared with the amount of food they eat from McDonalds.

I don't really have the time to discuss your perception of food or this conversation so I think this interaction is ended.

Thank you for clarifying your position. I don't agree with you but I also don't believe that my word has a monopoly on the truth. Everyone has their own subjective understanding of the English language and mine appears to differ from yours.

I used to like it but can't eat it anymore - feels so processed it makes me feel ill. I prefer to buy minced beef and make my own burgers at home.