Food that looks bad for your health but isn't

I always tell my friends Coke Zero has zero adverse impact on your health but they never believe me, always saying "nooo it has le heckin chemicals"

This got me thinking about all the food that people think is bad for you, but in reality isn't

Aside from Coke Zero I'll mention

>McDonald's burgers (any fast food joint really)
The burgers are super healthy. The fries make the macros of the whole meal a bit unbalanced and the sugary soda is awful for you, but the burger itself is 10/10.

Whoever thinks McDonald's is dunking their burgers in "conservants" is a dumbass. They sell hundreds of these every day, they don't NEED to do that, it's not like the burgers are sitting waiting for someone to buy them after several weeks.

CRIME Shirt $21.68

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

CRIME Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Wendy's chili.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    coffee

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That depends on the water.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Literally Every food does

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >5 cups of coffee a day
      >moderate

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >2-5

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        they always use a short cup for these studies so 6 oz.
        No one is actually drinking less than like 12oz of coffee if you go to a dunks or starbucks or something. It makes sense because let's say a 6oz cup is 80mg caffeine, then the range from 2-5 cups is 160mg-400mg which is about what's recommended as the safe upper limit for daily caffeine use. obviously many of us go way further than that

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >linked to
      Correlation does not equal causation etc etc.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        So either coffee is good for you or coffee drinkers are superior to non-drinkers.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Obese people who never leave the house and live an obscenely sedentary lifestyle sustaining themselves purely on sugar are less likely to drink coffee, yes.
          Meanwhile the people who likely drink several cups a day are also the type of person to be working a regular job, staying somewhat active and likely maintaining some awareness of their general health.
          Drinking coffee is not suddenly going to make the former sort less likely to get diabetes, heart disease or depression.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Drinking coffee is not suddenly going to make the former sort less likely to get diabetes, heart disease or depression
            Or will it?

            Coffee gives you energy and increases your cortisol, aka the stress hormone that tells you to get your shit together. The new fad is to avoid cortisol, but that's stupid because without cortisol you have no motivation. Everything in moderation etc etc.

            Getting energy + cortisol in the same drink is a great combination if you want to get something done. From this perspective yes, coffee can lessen diabetes, heart disease and depression not because it is a magical drink that heals you from these things, but because it increases your motivation to fix them.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Coffee causes vasoconstriction and increased heartrate. If you're all clogged up from living like shit it's more likely to cause a heart attack or stroke than make you "get your shit together".

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                If you're one cup of coffee away from a heart attack you're already so dead that this argument becomes pointless.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                In what conceivable way does that relate to what I said about correlation =! causation?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >you say correlation != causation
                >I explain that coffee increases energy levels and cortisol, which enables you to get your shit together, so there is some causation there
                >you reply that obese people can't drink coffee without getting a heart attack
                >I point how moronic and absurd this argument is
                >you reply incoherently

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/aBwMyTR.png

          coffee

          I think it's because coffee provides moments of peacefulness and comfort.
          Making coffee every morning is one of the few habits I have. I'm fricking insane.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I'm sure there's absolutely zero confounding factors in a health study focused on diet.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I think it reduces those risks because all those diseases are linked to obesity and caffeine has a strong appetite suppressant effect. I eat way less on days I drink a pot of coffee. I can even notice the effect with decaf.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://raypeat.com/articles/articles/caffeine.shtml

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        as someone who can no longer drink coffee due to numerous digestive and liver issues, I gotta say you need to learn the difference between correlation and causation. the links between caffeine and health are because caffeine is so taxing on your body that when you stop being healthy you can't consume it anymore

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I don't understand the second sentence. If coffee reduces the risk of several conditions that vastly increase the risk of early death, then why is the second sentence phrased as though it's unclear whether coffee, in addition to the aforementioned benefits, reduces the risk of early death? Doesn't that trivially follow from the above?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Well at LEAST it's not sucralose.

        Because reducing risks for one disease will not necessarily guarantee that you won't swap it for another.
        Like you something may reduce risk of cancer - but then the cardiavascular problems step in so the total effect regarding life span stays the same. You don't die from cancer, you die from heart failure instead.
        Hence the reduction of risk of death is something that has to be looked at isolated.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      the only bad thing is it raises blood pressure a bit too much
      I'm a heavy coffee drinker and I just got bloodwork done last week for the first time in 5 years; every health marker is excellent except my blood pressure is usually in the mid 130s during the day following two big cups of coff. Gotta take breaks every now and then to reset tolerance tbh

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      coffee… good for you?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yes. We have this revelation every 5 years or so and everyone acts like it's news.
        Same with eggs.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    msg

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Coke Zero: Uses a combination of aspartame and acesulfame potassium as sweeteners.

    >A single study completed in the 1970s showed a link between a single artificial sweetener, saccharin, to bladder cancer in lab rats.

    >One study done on mice found that Ace-K caused weight gain and shifts in the gut microbiome, which could potentially lead to obesity and chronic inflammation.

    >Four weeks of Ace-K consumption caused decreases in multiple genera of gut bacteria, including Lactobacillus, Clostridium, and unassigned genera in Ruminococcaceae and Oxalobacteraceae (...) According to previous studies, bacteria in these genera play crucial roles in food digestion and polysaccharide fermentation

    >The FDA recommends using a maximum of 15 milligrams of Ace-K per one kilogram of your body weight each day. For a 132-pound person, this equates to 0.9 grams of acesulfame potassium in a day.

    And let's be honest, Coke Zero has several times that amount.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah apparently dunking rats in containers full of aspartame isn't good for them

      Now show a study that proves it causes cancer on humans

      >you won't find any

      Also

      >let's be honest, Coke Zero has several times that amount
      Source? A simple google and I found that no, they use hundreds of times LESS than that amount

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I always tell my friends Coke Zero has zero adverse impact on your health
      you don't know that you midwit
      t. drinks that shit too

      Yeah apparently dunking rats in containers full of aspartame isn't good for them

      Now show a study that proves it causes cancer on humans

      >you won't find any

      Also

      >let's be honest, Coke Zero has several times that amount
      Source? A simple google and I found that no, they use hundreds of times LESS than that amount

      Same question I posed to the other anon. Post the "chemical" that harms your health and post the study proving it harms humans (not rats, HUMANS).

      >Post the "chemical" that harms your health and post the study proving it harms humans (not rats, HUMANS).
      "has not been shown to" is not the same as "does not". point to where I claimed it causes any adverse effect? again, I said I drink it too

      Literally The same government that tells us no to eat cold cuts.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah ebavuse they've been shown to cause cancer

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          This was disproven

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It was recently reproven

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              They disproved it five minutes ago

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                My apologies, I Didnt hear

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You shouldn't eat cold cuts though

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >I always tell my friends Coke Zero has zero adverse impact on your health
    you don't know that you midwit
    t. drinks that shit too

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The real debate is Zero vs HFCS.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Same question I posed to the other anon. Post the "chemical" that harms your health and post the study proving it harms humans (not rats, HUMANS).

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Post the "chemical" that harms your health and post the study proving it harms humans (not rats, HUMANS).
        "has not been shown to" is not the same as "does not". point to where I claimed it causes any adverse effect? again, I said I drink it too

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Burden of proof my illiterate friend.

          It is impossible to prove any substance DOESN'T harm humans, this is called "diabolical proof"

          With that said, people have been testing this shit on humans for over 50 years and never found any indication it harms our health. This might as well be proof that it is safe, though scientifically speaking it is not.

          For argument's sake the burden of proof lies on the gays who think Coke Zero causes cancer.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Burden of proof
            exactly. YOU made the claim. I did not make a claim.
            sure, it is difficult to prove the negative here, but that does not mean that it is accurate to say that it does not cause adverse effects. just that it is not known to.
            overconfidence is probably the biggest mistake with health and nutrition in general in my personal opinion. fact is, nobody really needs to drink that shit unless it's really stopping you from uncontrollably chugging sugary soda because you have some legit brain disorder.
            you're just rolling the dice like everyone else who is drinking that.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              With that logic you might as well die since there is no proof anything is safe.

              You can't prove water is safe. You can't prove oxygen is safe (in fact, it isn't). Really rolling the dice here.

              If you test a substance with humans thousands of times and not even one single time you get a bad result, not even a 1% more chance to get cancer, then it is safe, period

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >You can't prove water is safe. You can't prove oxygen is safe
                but you can prove that people tend to die without those things. can you do the same with coke zero?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Oh okay so you will live off the essentials. Great idea. That'll be water and... what else? Go on anon, tell me what you eat

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Go on anon, tell me what you eat
                i already told you I drink the same shit
                anyway you've made it clear you're not having a good-faith discussion so i'll leave you to it

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >not even a 1% more chance to get cancer, then it is safe, period
                pretty interesting metric there. you do you, idc what you drink
                there's a reason 'expert opinion' appears to flip-flop constantly to the vulgar. it's very difficult to actually pinpoint what the effects of anything are, unless it is clearly and overtly directly causing something.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >there's a reason 'expert opinion' appears to flip-flop constantly to the vulgar
                There is no flip-flopping among experts, this is a non-issue among any educated person that can actually read the studies instead of referring to clickbait.

                You know what else kills rats when pumping them full of this shit, but doesn't cause any harm to humans in the concentrations we use? Chloride. Stop using rats as a parameter without even keeping in mind body weight proportions.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Anon you realize you're not supposed to eat chloride right

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >no no no no rat studies allowed!!!!
        >I don't care every study uses rats for a reason I need a study that intentionally poisons someone and monitors them for several decades to see what happens!!!
        OP is ignorant on how basic science works and thus his claims can be dismissed.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Coke Zero has zero adverse impact on your health
    incorrect.
    it's soda, therefore it's terrible for your body.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >paying for a Culinaly pass for 6 years
    Jesus

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >conservants
    Your Spanish speaking ass is right in the open, the Americans call them preservatives. Anyway, my mother is obsessed with this and will then turn around and buy random I unregulated internet wellness powders and pills.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I'm an euro and of course Americans would do things differently from the rest of the world.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >an euro
        Not an English speaking one, apparently.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          American hands typed this

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >y-you're american!
            Thank you.
            You drink literal candy, can't speak English, advertise for free, and think posting is a paid privilege.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Wait are you still rambling about how I said "conservants" instead of "preservatives"? Kek I guess when you have nothing going in your life you must cling to whatever shows up

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I pointed out what I was referring to when I quoted you, brainlet.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I'm nearly certain coke's acidity negatively impacts your teeth. If you drank lots of it religiously every day it'd absolutely ruin your enamel.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The artificial sweetener is bad for your gut bacteria and the acidity dissolves your teeth

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I'm nearly certain coke's acidity negatively impacts your teeth. If you drank lots of it religiously every day it'd absolutely ruin your enamel.

      You can make that argument for every beverage ever that isn't water

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        No, just beverages that contain high amounts of acid like cola and orange juice

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's exponentially faster with very acidic beverages.
        t. broke my front teeth because of lemon juice (which has same pH as coke btw)

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Lemon pH is 2.0, coke pH is 2.5. Meaning lemon juice is 5x more acidic than coke.

          Also, people have been drinking coke for over one hundred years. If drinking it every day could destroy your teeth, we would already know.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Buying a pass is not the same thing as buying ad space.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    RIP in peace your gut bacteria

    You will be obeast

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Eat a bunch of vegetables, probiotic supplements, fermented foods, and meat as well
      Who's gut bacteria is worse off?

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    shoo shoo slopmonger

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >it's not like the burgers are sitting waiting for someone to buy them after several weeks.
    Don't they flash freeze their patties anyways until they are thawed for use?

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I figure just like with salt intake, if you drink plenty of water and do your cardio then diet soda is fine.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Coke Zero and literally any other artificially sweetened garbage including “muh stevia”
    >awful aftertaste so companies have to use multiple artificial sweeteners to mask each other
    >just like you can see a man in a dress, you can’t hide the taste of artificial sweeteners and regular sugar is unironically better if you want to have a sweet treat.
    >aspartame is metabolized into formaldehyde in the liver which is a toxic chemical used in embalming and preservation of organs/dissection samples
    >Coke Zero has no upsides compared to regular ass watery coke, unironically would rather have Orangina or something better tasting
    >coke at this point doesn’t even have a discernible taste, even Chinese knockoff cola candies have a better and stronger taste than watery coke/pepsi.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >aspartame is metabolized into formaldehyde in the liver which is a toxic chemical used in embalming and preservation of organs/dissection samples
      Ah yes more 10/10 science. Can't prove it is bad for humans, so reaches for non-arguments like "but it is bad for rats when given at a dose equivalent to 10x their body weight", "but if you use 100000x more of it you can preserve organs".

      I hope this thread is educating at least some of you.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It still tastes like garbage and I’d rather have the real thing.
        Stevia sweetened ketchup is fricking awful.

        But yeah, if your going to pretend that soda “doesn’t have documented instances of causing excessive tooth plaque/decay” and forget about that one poor rural region of America that has to subsist off of soda because it’s cheaper than potable water due to corporation frickery, then it’s not worth arguing with you.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          You were saying that it literally kills you. Now you downgraded your argument to "it causes tooth decay" which yes it obviously does Mr. Sherlock Holmes, just like every single food and beverage in existence. Luckily if you go to a dentist every year you'll be fine (and you should already be doing this regardless of soda intake).

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You'll serve me as an example of how your brain rots if you only eat shit like the 2ravstuff you advertise.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Reading this thread it is evident that I am the only one with real science, yet the brainlets keep coming to this thread likes flies to say "BUT IF YOU FORCE A RAT TO DRINK 5 GALLONS OF COKE ZERO THEY DIE!!!"

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >can't handle any sort of real discussion because he only eats mcdonalds and fizzy aspartame
        >"I'M THE ONLY SMART ONE HERE!"

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >more non-arguments
          Either post proof that coke is bad for you or frick off.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I never said it was, schizo.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            see

            >Coke Zero: Uses a combination of aspartame and acesulfame potassium as sweeteners.

            >A single study completed in the 1970s showed a link between a single artificial sweetener, saccharin, to bladder cancer in lab rats.

            >One study done on mice found that Ace-K caused weight gain and shifts in the gut microbiome, which could potentially lead to obesity and chronic inflammation.

            >Four weeks of Ace-K consumption caused decreases in multiple genera of gut bacteria, including Lactobacillus, Clostridium, and unassigned genera in Ruminococcaceae and Oxalobacteraceae (...) According to previous studies, bacteria in these genera play crucial roles in food digestion and polysaccharide fermentation

            >The FDA recommends using a maximum of 15 milligrams of Ace-K per one kilogram of your body weight each day. For a 132-pound person, this equates to 0.9 grams of acesulfame potassium in a day.

            And let's be honest, Coke Zero has several times that amount.

            Also you opened the thread with a series of claims that you've yet to make any attempt to prove.

            https://i.imgur.com/o5Py1Id.jpg

            I always tell my friends Coke Zero has zero adverse impact on your health but they never believe me, always saying "nooo it has le heckin chemicals"

            This got me thinking about all the food that people think is bad for you, but in reality isn't

            Aside from Coke Zero I'll mention

            >McDonald's burgers (any fast food joint really)
            The burgers are super healthy. The fries make the macros of the whole meal a bit unbalanced and the sugary soda is awful for you, but the burger itself is 10/10.

            Whoever thinks McDonald's is dunking their burgers in "conservants" is a dumbass. They sell hundreds of these every day, they don't NEED to do that, it's not like the burgers are sitting waiting for someone to buy them after several weeks.

            >Coke Zero has zero adverse impact on your health
            >The burgers are super healthy
            >Whoever thinks McDonald's is dunking their burgers in "conservants" is a dumbass.
            The burden of proof lies on you, passcuck.
            Prove that coke zero has no negative impacts on health (already disproven by the above post), that McShit's burgers are "super healthy", and that their burgers don't contain preservatives.
            Good luck.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I already replied that post, you are yet to offer a retort to my reply.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >more non-arguments
                Either post proof that coke is good for you, and McDick's burgers are healthy and not full of preservatives or frick off.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                see

                OH forgot about the rest of your post sorry

                >Prove that coke has no negative impacts on health
                It has been tested for decades and no one ever found any adverse impacts in Coke Zero aside from tooth decay which yeah that happens with any food/beverage ever you dummy

                >that McShit's burgers are "super healthy"
                It's meat + veggies + carbs, a very balanced 100% natural meal

                >and that their burgers don't contain preservatives
                https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/our-stories/article/really-mcds-burgers.html
                "ingredient: 100% real beef. Our patties contain no preservatives or fillers, and the only thing we ever add is a touch of salt and pepper when the patties are sizzling hot on the grill."

                >inb4 noooo mcdonalds is lying I'm a schizo btw
                If they were lying some government agency would have shut them down about 50 years ago. Burden of proof is now on you to prove they use preservatives.

                Go on, reply specifically about the preservative point, I am dying to see you go full schizo and accuse McDonald's of lying and buying every government officer in the world (of all 100+ countries) to be able to keep these lies online

                By the way if you avoid that point in any way I will take it as a concession, you will lose and will get no more (you)s aside from those mocking you for being a sore loser

                Not replying to my post will also count as a concession which I will accept in a few hours

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Ok to all that but, why are you still fat?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              OH forgot about the rest of your post sorry

              >Prove that coke has no negative impacts on health
              It has been tested for decades and no one ever found any adverse impacts in Coke Zero aside from tooth decay which yeah that happens with any food/beverage ever you dummy

              >that McShit's burgers are "super healthy"
              It's meat + veggies + carbs, a very balanced 100% natural meal

              >and that their burgers don't contain preservatives
              https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/our-stories/article/really-mcds-burgers.html
              "ingredient: 100% real beef. Our patties contain no preservatives or fillers, and the only thing we ever add is a touch of salt and pepper when the patties are sizzling hot on the grill."

              >inb4 noooo mcdonalds is lying I'm a schizo btw
              If they were lying some government agency would have shut them down about 50 years ago. Burden of proof is now on you to prove they use preservatives.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                “100% real beef” is a registered trademark by McDonald’s and has no bearing on the content inside the patty.
                The patties are full of fillers like processed soy and other garbage, and the bun is also full of fillers. It’s just fricking disgusting and doesn’t taste anything close to beef.

                As for “why didn’t the government shut them down hurr durr” it’s cause they didn’t violate ((food safety)) violations you disingenuous moron, otherwise the FDA is happy to approve soy as a filler in foods and bullshit marketing terms like “100% real beef” which I’ll reiterate is just an registered trademark from McDonald’s.
                Do you not remember the pink goop either and how they had to pay someone from Mythbusters to shill that it wasn’t pink goop and was ackshually wholesome pieces of chicken coated in soy dust and stale bread fried in seed oil.

                There’s also a popular video that’ll show McDonald’s fries not rotting or decaying at all when compared to menu items, to the point of fricking months, McDonald’s fries barely are fries anyways and are probably a combination of potato dust, wheat dust, and whatever other garbage they throw in there.

                But I know OP is a moronic homosexual shill so he’ll just dismiss my points even if I provide evidence.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >“100% real beef” is a registered trademark by McDonald’s and has no bearing on the content inside the patty.
                >The patties are full of fillers like processed soy and other garbage, and the bun is also full of fillers. It’s just fricking disgusting and doesn’t taste anything close to beef.
                Post source.

                >As for “why didn’t the government shut them down hurr durr” it’s cause they didn’t violate ((food safety)) violations you disingenuous moron
                They violate false advertising legislation. You can't say it is 100% beef if it is not 100% beef. This would easily and immediately be shot down in Europe, but I think even Americans have enough consumer protection to stop blatant fraudulent information.

                McDonald's has gotten into legal trouble for false advertisement several times in the past. But not even once for claiming their burgers are 100% beef and have zero preservatives. Because it is true.

                Anyone can buy a McDonald's burger, take it to a lab, open it, analyze its contents and post the results proving there are fillers and preservatives. To this day not one single person has bee able to do that. Why? Because IT DOESN'T HAVE PRESERVATIVES AND FILLERS moron

                >There’s also a popular video that’ll show McDonald’s fries not rotting or decaying at all when compared to menu items, to the point of fricking months, McDonald’s fries barely are fries anyways and are probably a combination of potato dust, wheat dust, and whatever other garbage they throw in there.
                This happens with any burger or fries that are a) thin enough, b) properly cooked (with hygiene), and c) dunked in salt.

                >But I know OP is a moronic homosexual shill so he’ll just dismiss my points even if I provide evidence.
                I am answering every single one of your posts with coherent arguments, why are you pretending I am not taking you seriously?

                You won't post evidence because it does not exist. Go ahead, post the article proving the burger has preservatives. Should be easy to produce that evidence.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Anyone can buy a McDonald's burger, take it to a lab, open it, analyze its contents and post the results proving there are fillers and preservatives
                up until now I wasn't believing one single word from you but frick this got me thinking, why the frick hasn't anyone tried doing that yet, I bet you could get super rich proving shitburgers are full of preservatives

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >conveniently ignored my point about the pink goop.
                I’ll go find you some sources later

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Sorry anon I skipped over that

                https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/faq/does-mcdonald-s-use--pink-slime--in-burgers-or-beef-treated-with-ammonia.html

                Also the nuggets are obviously not 100% meat by definition. I never defended the nuggets, I defended specifically the burgers.

                >Anyone can buy a McDonald's burger, take it to a lab, open it, analyze its contents and post the results proving there are fillers and preservatives
                up until now I wasn't believing one single word from you but frick this got me thinking, why the frick hasn't anyone tried doing that yet, I bet you could get super rich proving shitburgers are full of preservatives

                That's the thing, this has been tried hundreds of times, but the result always turns out 100% real meat. Yet the world is full of people saying that mcdonalds burgers "do not taste like real meat". They are morons playing themselves with placebo. If they ate a burger actually compromised of fillers and preservatives they wouldn't even notice it so long as they believed it was real; meanwhile if they eat a real burger they don't believe it is real because they think it has preservatives. The human brain is a joke, isn't it?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >They violate false advertising legislation. You can't say it is 100% beef if it is not 100% beef.
                Subway literally does this and is still in operation. Their footlongs aren't "footlongs", they're "Subway Footlongs (tm)". And more pertinent to this discussion, they advertised their chicken meat as being over 50% white meat, but really they were over 50% soy filler, with over 50% of whatever chicken scarps inside were white meat

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Subway literally does this and is still in operation. Their footlongs aren't "footlongs", they're "Subway Footlongs (tm)".
                Okay so I didn't know this case but I googled it and you're wrong.

                Yes the footlongs aren't "footlongs", but the natural variation of bread size led to many footlongs being produced under twelve inches.

                Subway was sued for this and sentenced to either stop advertising it as footlongs or start adapting internal procedures to ensure every footlong sold is actually a footlong. They went for the later. If you find a footlong that isn't actually a footlong you can sue Subway and possibly get money from this, but chances are you won't find any.

                >they advertised their chicken meat as being over 50% white meat, but really they were over 50% soy filler, with over 50% of whatever chicken scarps inside were white meat
                Once again it took a simple Google to find that you were misrepresenting the case.

                Subway does not claim their chicken meat is "50% white meat", they claim it is 100% real chicken meat with no fillers.

                One lab test from a private company back in 2017 came up saying their chicken meat was actually 50% fillers.

                Subway firmly denied this and said the test was bullshit.

                Nothing ever happened after that. No one pressed charges, no government agency confirmed the accusations, nothing.

                Basic logic dictates that if Subway's chicken meat was really 50% fillers you would easily be able to prove this with another test and press charges.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >It has been tested for decades and no one ever found any adverse impacts in Coke Zero aside from tooth decay
                That just means coke zero specifically hasn't been tested. The components have been, as seen in the study posted above, and adverse effects were found.
                Even if that weren't the case (and it very much is), you're conflating the absence of evidence with the evidence if absesnce. You've only attempted (and failed) to prove that no evidence exists (it does), not that there are no negative effects (there are).

                >It's meat + veggies + carbs, a very balanced 100% natural meal
                A single McCuckold's hamburger contains 17% the daily recommended amount of fat, 9% DV of cholesterol, 10% DV of sugar, and 22% DV of salt, while providing negligible amounts of anything else. Not only is it demonstrably NOT a balanced meal, the bun alone excludes it from being considered natural.

                >marketing wank
                Even if we do believe this, salt is a preservative. As are many other ingredients included on the burger, the bun especially is full of them.
                >inb4 the bun isn't the burger!
                You yourself included it when describing it as a "balanced meal".

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >A single McCuckold's hamburger contains 17% the daily recommended amount of fat, 9% DV of cholesterol, 10% DV of sugar, and 22% DV of salt
                Are you suggesting this is a bad thing? You can eat five of these hamburgers and still be within the extremely conservative daily recommendations kek

                >Even if that weren't the case (and it very much is), you're conflating the absence of evidence with the evidence if absesnce
                No, I am using common sense. Normalgays say Coke Zero is awful for your health, causes cancer, etc etc; there is no study indicating any of this is true. It is not impossible that it could be true, but you can't just go claiming that shit without any proof.

                And the dozens of studies involving Coke Zero and finding zero adverse effects are more than enough for me to claim, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A CASUAL DISCUSSION, that it is safe, even though yeah, scientifically it is not evidence of absence.

                >Even if we do believe this, salt is a preservative.
                Now you are going full moron. The burger is salted ON THE GRILL to enhance the flavor. If salt was being used as a preservative it would be used before the patty is thrown on the grill.

                >the bun especially is full of them
                Like what? Here are the ingredients

                https://i.imgur.com/Qp7MUDq.png

                OP is absolutely correct when he says mcdonald's patties have no fillers or preservatives. And also correct regarding how funny it is to watch people squirm and deny this as if their lives depended on it. Pic related.

                which one is the cancer inducing preservative?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Are you suggesting this is a bad thing?
                I'm suggesting it's not a balanced meal, which was what you stated.

                >No, I am using common sense.
                That's neither evidence nor proof. Sorry, champ.
                >no study indicating any of this is true.
                Except the one posted above, of course.
                >you can't just go claiming that shit without any proof.
                You've been doing that all day. In this very post, even.

                >dozens of studies involving Coke Zero and finding zero adverse effects
                Souces?

                >Now you are going full moron.
                Nope. Salt continues to be a preservative.

                >Like what?
                Sugar, salt, vinegar, soybean oil, canola oil, and maltodextrin are all preservatives.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I'm suggesting it's not a balanced meal
                Under what criteria?

                This is so fricking stupid. You think a "balanced meal" needs to be under a certain threshold of the DV? Based on what? And by how much should it be? If you think a full meal can't even compromise 20% of your nutritional DVs, how many fricking meals do you expect someone to have thorough their day?

                >That's neither evidence nor proof. Sorry, champ.
                At least I have that on my side, you have nothing. No evidence, no proof, no common sense.

                >Except the one posted above, of course
                You didn't post any study.

                >Nope. Salt continues to be a preservative.
                Disingenuous moron.

                >Sugar, salt, vinegar, soybean oil, canola oil, and maltodextrin are all preservatives.
                Disingenuous moron.

                Your claim about salt and DV is so moronic that it might as well be considered trolling. I am not giving you any more (you)s. Concession accepted.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Under what criteria?
                A balanced meal is one that provides sufficient nutrition in proportional quantities. After eating 5 McChud's hamburgers, you'd be over your daily intake of salt without being anywhere close to your DV of key nutrients. A diet based soley on these would probably kill you.

                >At least I have that on my side
                That's true. You do have neither evidence nor proof on your side.

                >You didn't post any study.

                >Coke Zero: Uses a combination of aspartame and acesulfame potassium as sweeteners.

                >A single study completed in the 1970s showed a link between a single artificial sweetener, saccharin, to bladder cancer in lab rats.

                >One study done on mice found that Ace-K caused weight gain and shifts in the gut microbiome, which could potentially lead to obesity and chronic inflammation.

                >Four weeks of Ace-K consumption caused decreases in multiple genera of gut bacteria, including Lactobacillus, Clostridium, and unassigned genera in Ruminococcaceae and Oxalobacteraceae (...) According to previous studies, bacteria in these genera play crucial roles in food digestion and polysaccharide fermentation

                >The FDA recommends using a maximum of 15 milligrams of Ace-K per one kilogram of your body weight each day. For a 132-pound person, this equates to 0.9 grams of acesulfame potassium in a day.

                And let's be honest, Coke Zero has several times that amount.

                >Disingenuous moron.
                Genuine moron.

                >Your claim about salt and DV is so moronic that it might as well be considered trolling.
                It's listed right on your website.
                https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/hamburger.html#accordion-c921f9207b-item-842cb18782

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >passcuck
    >corporate shilling on a FREE vietnamese pig farming website
    sasuga moron-kun

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    imagine being this much of a homosexual
    and I thought amerimutt posters were bad

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Concession accepted.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I love going months without having soda and when I do have one the amount of sugar and caffeine hitting my face feels so euphoric

  21. 1 month ago
    Jericho

    >nooo it has le heckin chemicals"
    they're being paid by Big Corn Syrup, OP.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    OP is absolutely correct when he says mcdonald's patties have no fillers or preservatives. And also correct regarding how funny it is to watch people squirm and deny this as if their lives depended on it. Pic related.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      NO NO NO McDonald's is lying in their allergen information!!!!!! It's a lie it's a conspiracy!!!!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      yes, 100% beef... that is pumped full of hormones and preservatives at the slaughterhouse
      USDA is a fricking joke

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >pumping preservatives at the slaughterhouse
        Anon how retarededed can you be

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      1000 cow per patty shitgrade D tier beef thats oversalted and shoved down the maw of plebs who dont know better

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I love coke zero. Usually drink two bottles a day. Cherry coke zero is even better but its hard to find them in stock.

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I think you should shove a bottle of Coke Zero up your own ass. There are no studies or claims by anyone reputable that specifically shoving a bottle of Coke Zero up your ass will have any negative impact on your health. It might even have some health benefits.

    Please come back with results, be sure to take the cap off prior to insertion

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I am not going to partake in your hobbies but thanks

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    For what I gather it doesn't actually harm you but it makes you hungry

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    if you're going to drink diet shit you might as well just inject ozempic you troony

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why are you morons even replying to someone that pays to shitpost?
    Literal morons

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Because all I said is true and no one can prove otherwise

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You've yet to prove anything, passcuck.
        Plugging your ears and screaming is not valid discussion.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          At the very least I proved the mcdonalds patties have no preservatives, but then people moved goalposts to "but the nuggets are not 100% meat" which not only is pathetic bceause

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Ops sent automatically by accident.

            Not only is the argument of "nuggets are not 100% meat" pathetic because I never defended the nuggets, but also because yeah the definition of a nugget is that it won't be just meat.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            But your original claims go unproven, and even proven false.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Nope. I then proved the burger is a balanced meal and some moron claimed it isn't because it has no micronutrients.

              Like yeah, 100% beef meat with vegetables has no nutrients. I wonder what he eats to get his micronutrients.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The nutritional info is literally on the website. They posted it, and you ignored it.
                https://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en-us/product/hamburger.html#accordion-c921f9207b-item-842cb18782
                You shit yourself in the face of evidence, and then strut around like you've won.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Thanks for proving it is a balanced meal with all the micronutrients you'd expect from a burger with salad and bread.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Can you point out exactly where it says that? Because the link just confirms that it's a salt bomb on bread.
                And the only source of vegetables is onions.

                This link alone disproves the only thing you claim to have proven.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >salt bomb on bread
                >22% of DV of salt
                >reminder that the DV is made for 80yo people with hypertension, it's a non-issue if you aren't on death's bed

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >And the only source of vegetables is onions.
                Oh and that's because you went out of your way to pick the shittiest hamburger that doesn't even have salad my moronic friend

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You claimed McDogshit's burgers were healthy, and that THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY was a balanced meal.
                Not my fault you were so easily proven wrong.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Concession accepted

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >You shit yourself in the face of evidence, and then strut around like you've won.
                There it is again.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Now say this without crying

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                See

                Concession accepted

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    only a vipgay could have such wrong conceptions
    hidden

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The salt in Mcdonalds fries literally contains aluminum. Are you gonna try and tell us a little aluminum in your diet ain't that bad for ya? Also the fries are fried in SEED OILS! Which are terrible for you.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They are not terrible for me though.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Another moron appears.

      https://www.mashed.com/1377545/mcdonalds-fry-rumor-debunked/

      Basically no it doesn't contain aluminum, it contains "sodium silicoaluminate" which is present in a shitton of stuff including water and all table salt. It is proven to be extremely safe.

      >muh seed oils
      Safe

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >muh seed oils
        >Safe
        Prove it

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6179509/

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Tripgay unironically defending mcgoyslop

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    anti-fast food luddites still exist?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >he took off his badge to defend himself

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >youre a luddite if you dont like shit tier slop
      you arent using that word correctly and you probably primarily breathe out of your mouth

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How are you guys so moronic, the fact he says fricking mcdonalds is actually really healthy should already tell you it's a shitpost thread.

  34. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Perfectly healthy.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That's a big meatball.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You're a big meatball.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Four ewes.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          t-thanks Anon

  35. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Don't eat artificial foods they are post war hold over when corporations were discovering all sorts of chemicals and looking for a way to make money off of them.

  36. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    they need to change the hashbrown back to $2/4 paying 3.59 per hashbrown is too much

  37. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Shill thread. Obvious marketing intern shilling Coke Zero and McDonald's, probably for free.
    I don't eat or drink that plebfeed and no one else should.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *