Skip to comments.Fat Head: a Review
Posted on 01/02/2012 8:55:42 AM PST by Brookhaven
Im a huge fan of documentaries, especially those about food, health, and the physiology of the human body. Ive recently been suggested by a number of users to check out Fat Head, a documentary by Tom Naughton made in response to Super Size Me by Morgan Spurlock. As noted multiple times by Naughton, the purpose of the film is committed to proving that everything you think you know about food is, well, probably a load of bologna.
A Couple Great Points
Naughton drives home a couple good points about peoples perception on food.
First, he brings out some good points about insulin and its relationship with fat storage on different people. The point was brief in the beginning and revisited a bit down the line, and it does a good job at explaining how our cells function in relationship with increased glucose levels.
Next up, he raises some great questions about Super Size Me details, namely the food log. Doing the math, he determined that going over 5000 calories (a claim mad by Spurlocks doctor) wasnt possible if Spurlock stuck to his own rules, even after super sizing multiple meals. He notes that a few journalists have tried to get the food log, and they, like him, failed at getting the real details. This definitely sparks disbelief behind the merits of Super Size Me.
Naughton also does a great job at exposing some of the fear mongering behind organizations like CSPI, who has come out strongly against Chinese food, Italian food, and Mexican. As he points out, people wont stop eating fries, drinking soda, and ordering double cheeseburgers regardless of what youll see on TV. People dont go to McDonalds for the McBroccoli, as he puts it. That being said, not only is there a freedom issue bundled in the argument, but there also is a startling assumption by CSPI that people wont be able to make decisions for themselves. As an quick animation in the film describes, where CSPI man is talking fast food clerk and a consumer: Youre evil, and youre stupid.
Finally, I really like how he was able to prove you can be healthy while eating fast food regularly. What it really requires, as proven by the film, is proper use of the head on your shoulders and an increase in exercise. By being conscious of the needs of our body, we can eat almost anything and come out on top. Not only was he able to become healthier on his fast food diet, but as a kid, he was able to stay healthy by this strange phenomenon called playing outside.
It challenges the conventional wisdom about dieting (low-fat, calories and exercise is all that matters).
It also has a strong libertarian bent. It is in some ways an answer to the movie "Super Size Me", and shows how that movie was based on a lot of left wing ideas (individuals/parents are too stupid to make their own decisions, the government needs to regulate food, etc...)
It's available on Netflix as a watch it now. Whether you buy into his positions or not, it's an interesting film.
There are several clips from the file at the linked site.
We drove across the country when we were first married (20 years ago), from CA to Georgia. At first we were interested in trying the local places. After about the 5th dishwater-swill cuppa Joe, bad food, and surly waitress (we made it to Oklahoma), we decided that McDonald’s would be a known, consistent product, and only stopped there after that.
I agree, the quality of the food at McDonald’s is horrible.
CSPI are neurotic/psychotic individually and collectively.
Scratch a ‘nutrition advocate’ and you will expose just another Marxist. Google photos of these people and you’ll understand in less than the proverbial 1,000 words.
CSPI is a small group with a fax machine and an e-mail account.
An optimist would blame the media for simply being lazy in reprinting CSPI propaganda verbatim. A realist would point to the media’s vested interest in expanding and strengthening the nanny state.
I guess I could see where consistency would be a good thing. I was just talking to the wife about this a few minutes ago and she’s convinced that their Big Macs have gotten smaller over the years. I mean smaller in diameter. Could this be true?
Spurlock is a joke. You can tell watching the movie he was overstuffing himself at each meal. Not just a super-sized meal. Just look at the table in front of him when they show him eating. Of course he won’t release his food logs.
Maybe you've gotten bigger? [running for cover]
Bingo! We have a winner!
Since you posted this I’ve been hooked on all of Tom Naughton’s videos on his YouTube page:
(and gave me an excuse to finally hit a New Year’s resolution and sort my sock drawers while watching :>)
Weight loss/maintenance/gain has been, is and always will be very simple, calories in versus calories out.
Unless, your body has become insulin resistant.
On the youtube links above, he cites a study where they overfed mice to make the obese. Once they mice had packed on lots of fat, they started to injecting them with insulin (to keep the levels high) and quit feeding them.
The mice starved to death (duh), but something strange happened. The mice didn't process ANY of their fat. They processed their muscles and their organs, but not any of the fat. They starved to death and died, yet still retained a thick layer of fat around their body.
That's because insulin's job is to reduce the sugar level in your blood stream. It does that by preventing fat cells from releasing fat into the bloodstream, which leaves your cells only one choice for energy: process the sugar in your bloodstream (your muscle cells can process either sugar or fat for energy).
So, if you have high insulin levels you will not lose fat, even though you are calorie deficient. And, what produces high insulin levels?
In other words, yes fewer calories in means you will lose weight, but it doesn't mean you will lose FAT.
If too much of your food intake is stuff that makes your body produce insulin (sugar & carbohydrates like bread, potatos, etc...) you'll lock your fat in and prevent your body from processing it.
It is an interesting film. He hits several subjects (heart diesease, fat intake, coleserol, and weight loss). His underlying point is that health & diet research has become like global warming research--the government adopted an official line, and scientist that diverge from that line tend to lose their funding.
The theory he presents is outside the mainstream, but is gaining a serious following among scientist quickly. The insulin stuff he presents is pretty well documented and pretty much undisputed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.