A Challenge to Mcs - Blog Update

[Guest guest]

http://nutritionalnonsense.com

A Challenge to Mcs

Not too long ago I had the pleasure of dealing with a considerably large PR

firm who represent various food companies, including Mcs. One of their

claims to fame is that due to their marketing brilliance, Mcs did not

suffer a net loss following bad publicity they gained when " Super Size Me " was

released. I wonder if they represent the tobacco industry as well.

When Super Size Me was released in Australia, Mcs responded with a

television commercial arguing that the increase in weight and cholesterol

levels experienced by documentary maker Spurlock during the film were

not unexpected given that he consumed excessive amounts of the restaurant

giants products. Mcs quite rightly argued the " dose makes the poison "

line of reasoning, and appeared to be giving the suggestion that it was not

their intention for people to consume excessive amounts of Mcs food, but

that in moderation, Mcs meals are relatively harmless as part of an

otherwise balanced diet. This is technically true, and even I enjoy a

fillet-a-fish and chocolate sundae once in a blue moon.

Their other major response to the film was to introduce the " deli choices /

salads " menu, consisting of slightly less unhealthy but significantly more

expensive rolls, salads, wraps and burgers. I'm not sure how things go in other

areas, but in my neck of the woods, those salady rolls aren’t exactly flying

off the shelves; if you do ask for one, they almost never have one already made

(as they do their junk burgers) you have to wait " 60 seconds " for it (which

ends up being about 10 minutes, which defeats the purpose of " fast food " ). I do

not know what proportion of Mcs profits come from selling these newly

introduced menu items, but I can be relatively certain that it is very

insignificant, and given that almost all their recent television advertising

expenses go into promoting them, am I the only one who finds this a bit odd?

Wanna know what I think?

Well, my suspicion is that they know full well that these " deli choices rolls "

etc contribute negligible profits to them, but insist on making them the

subject of every single one of their television commercials simply to avoid

public criticism and make them appear to be promoting healthier alternatives.

And is it working? Well, before the time of the " deli choices " , Mcs was

frequently the topic of public health debate and criticism from public health

experts, on account of their major contribution to the growing obesity

epidemic. Now that they give the public impression of offering a healthier

menu, how much criticism have they subsequently endured? Not bloody much; after

all, they have the perfect defense - " but now we give people the choice " they

say - coughbullshitshitcough.

If you're already intoxicated, it is against the law for a bar tender to serve

you additional alcohol, but if a morbidly obese, hyperlipidemic, hypertensive

and type 2 diabetic patron walks into Mcs, there is absolutely nothing

stopping them from being served enough kilojoules, saturated and trans fats to

kill a brown dog. I really don't think that Mcs cares much about the

health of their patrons, nor the population, I do however think that they are

particularly concerned about their image. They may openly say that they don't

encourage people to scoff down excessive amounts of burgers and fries, but how

serious are they about doing something about it?

So here’s a challenge. If they do honestly admit that excessive amounts of

Mcs is harmful to ones health but is harmless if consumed only in

moderation and part of a healthy balanced diet, why not write that on the label

of their foods? How’s this sound:

" This food product should be consumed only in moderation, as excessive amounts

may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease and other health

complications. "

If of course Maccas were serious about promoting their more unhealthful

product only in moderation as they say, then they should have no problem with

printing words to this effect on the label of their foods. Anyone with a food

marketing background however will know that printing words like " cardiovascular

disease " on a product will make consumers run a mile, which is why I have no

doubt that Mcs hypocritical message is nothing but a load of PR

horseshit.

Don't get me wrong; I know that Mcs is no less problematic than other

fast food joints. The difference is however, that Mcs competitors don't

try misleading people with deliberate diversionary tactics to avoid criticism;

even tobacco companies have to print warnings on their labels, which makes them

less misleading than Mcs. Come to think of it, let’s compare the

similarities and differences between Mcs and a heroin dealer.

Similarities

* Both sell a product which can be relatively harmless if used in very low

doses, in moderation and only on a rare occasion.

* Both sell products which, when used frequently and in excessive doses (which

is the more likely habit among both customers) can be addictive and cause

damage to a persons health. Differences

* Heroin dealers don't try kidding their customers that their product is

anything but bad for them

* The law tries to stop heroin dealers from harming vulnerable victims.

In anticipation of the film “Fast Food Nation” being released in

Australia today, Mcs have come out with a new set of television

commercials promoting the website “makeupyourownmind.com.au”, dedicated to

dispelling health myths about Mcs foods. Unfortunately for consumers, if

the myths Mcs appear to be refuting were actually true but the only

problems associated with Mcs food (such as the meats containing

preservatives, which, contrary to popular lay perceptions, are harmless anyway)

then there really would be nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, the web site

doesn’t appear to be refuting the myths that their products are enormously

energy dense and full of hyperlipidemic fats (things which are actually

harmful). Oh wait, that’s not a myth