This forum is about wrong numbers in science, politics and the media. It respects good science and good English.
Isn't it wondrous that we can debate the merits of a hamburger vs a veggieburger? Isn't it wonderful to have that choice.
Eating a McDs twice a week is unlikely to turn you into a fatty. Overeating and under-exerting will.
Even though I disagree with the pure calories in/calories out mantra (since there is ever so much more in play), it is a factor. The problem with measuring c in/c out is that you better start collecting and analyzing all of the calories going out. Having done that once (in Germany to get my Visa during an exchange program), I really don't want to get in a habit of it, especially a full habit which would require collecting ALL of the calories not just the sample. Ya gotta know how many calories and the only way to do that is to measure it all...
I suppose we could make a device to do that without having to get your "hands dirty".
Apologies for the potty humor.
I base this need of measuring our calories out on the variances I have observed in quality, quantity, color, texture...
The variance is substantial. I am sure that a lovely bell curve would result.. Not sure what the SD would be though...
My understanding of this is that it's just a 'frivolous lawsuit' situation being pursued by an activist group called, rather misleadingly, the 'Center for Science in the Public Interest' (CSPI). They're threatening to sue McDonalds over providing free toys to kids given away as part of the 'happy meal'.
This news article gives details:
The lawsuit threat is a trick used by quite a few activist groups in the USA. There is a chance with some image-conscious organisations that they will back down and do what CSPI want, but this is probably unlikely with McD. The publicity that CSPI get from threatening the lawsuit also helps with their subscriber funding.
This link from the Activist Cash website gives some details of CSPI and their history:
Calories out are basically all burned. If you are pooing or peeing out more than single-digit percentages of extractable calories in, you need a doctor.
I agree with JWB's surmise (in one of the books?) that Hamburgers are fundamentally rather nutritious items and that the green objection is basically the old socialism thing. I prefer BK over McD, (better meat, more salad), but both institutions have nearly perfected the art of delivering cheap food of quality acceptable to the customer in the most efficient way possible (i.e. with the least possible waste).
At some point, some of these greens might realise that their aims and those of "big business" are essentially the same - efficiency.
I don't suppose regular chip eating is sensible from those of a sedentary lifestyle.