Fast Food Giants

I still think there are more important diseases to treat than obesity.

Just another comment: I appreciate McDonald's and other restaurants' attempts at introducing healthy food.

indeed McDonalds are by far and away the role models of this industry and of any corporate sector.

The only thing I'd reproach them for is their treatment of employees. Like take a little too much advantage of them...

Personally I think it is wrong to blame Mac Donalds for obesity, firstly it is people's own responsibilty to look after their health not a corporation's. Secondly obesity is not only down to bad diet, lack of exercise is also another factor. I think it is ridiculous to sue the fast food company, that's like blaming Guiness for not warning you you may get drunk if you drink to much and then go and smash up a window.
What I do think should be banned is advertising aimed at children, the happy meal, despite being an incredibly sucessful marketing gimmic sends out the wrong impression about fast-food to children before they can really understand the implications of excessive consumption of fast-food.

BTW anyone read that book Fast Food Nation, has some interesting stuff in it, like MacDonalds chips are actually made from 100% potatoe but they coat them is absolutely loads of flavourings creating the distinctive cardboard taste. Good read if your interested in the greater scale of the MacDonals's epedemic.

I disagree, obesity is a strong confounder for most of the 'important diseases'.

16 year olds get paid a very good wage, so one could not complain.

Don't know if you're being sarcastic. .

I was just wondering if everyone else on this site was disgusted with fast food giants like Burger King and McDonalds.

It seems that the government wants to reduce obesity and health problems in children, yet lets these companies put advertising on television that directly appeals to them.

The companies also treat their workers badly, leave the non-biodegradable litter that is piled high on our streets and I don't really want to know what's in the food.

Who actually eats this junk and supports these evil corporation?

no. since 2000 their efforts in waste management and recycling have won awards.

Among 10 Highest Ranked Companies for Governance Practices, Corporate Behavior, and Social Responsibility (2004)—GovernanceMetrics International
Most Respected Company in Food Service Sector (2003)—Business World (India)
Among "Most Respected Companies" for Social Responsibility (2000, 2003)—Financial Times of London
Among "Most Admired Companies" for Social Responsibility (2000 – 2002, 2004) (Top Ranked in Industry in 2004)—Fortune
Among the Top 100 Corporate Citizens (2001 - 2002)—Business Ethics
Number 5 in Reputation for Corporate Social Responsibility (2001)—Wall Street Journal
Among Top 10 Companies in Corporate Social Responsibility (2000 - 2002)—Exame (Brazil)


Environmental Leadership Award (2001)—Audubon Society
Recycling Works Recognition Award (2001)—National Recycling Coalition
WasteWise Partner of the Year (2000)—U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Vision For America Award (1999)—Keep America Beautiful
Green Lights Retail Partner of the Year (1998)—U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Queen Mother's Award for Environmental Improvement (1997)
Corporate Conservation Leadership Award (1995)—Conservation International

Human Resources Initiative of the Year (2004)—Initiative magazine (New Zealand)
Best Company to Work For (2003) (also ranked among best, 1996–2002)—Exame (Brazil)
Among Best Employers to Work For (2003)—Hewitt Associates (Australia)
Among the 20 Best Places to Work (2003)—Great Place To Work Institute (France)
Best Practices in Human Resource Management (2003)—Thailand Productivity Institute
Among the Top 10 Best Places to Work (2002)—Oxford Group (Denmark)
Among the 20 Best Places to Work (2002)—Great Place To Work Institute (Mexico)
Investor in Human Capital (2002)—Institute of Management & Institute of Labor and Social Affairs (Poland)
Among the Top 10 Companies to Work For (2001)—Globe and Mail (Canada)
Best Developer of People (1999)—PM kompetens (Sweden)
Employer of the Year (1997-1999)—Australia National Training Association

Hmm, but that's the person's problem, if they're susceptible to fast food promotion then hey, they should deal with it. A lot of people manage to avoid the ads, why can't they?

Most things in life are 'the person's problem' but it has now become a problem of society which needs positive action. Comparisons can be made to other addictions, and TV adverts where children are concerned are certainly proven to make an impact on choice.
Of course it's a stupid concept that people should beable to sue Fast Food companies, it only serves to increase the "someone must be to blame" culture that we unfortunately live in. But it has now got to the stage where we have to look at the reasons why people are becomming obese. I'd say the primary reason was because of lack of exercise. This is, in my opinion, a parental responsibility and the buck should ultimately lie with them.
Until then, getting rid of fast food advertising for kids (where the deception of 'free toys' etc. leads to lots of nagging towards the parents) and making healthy-eating food cheaper, even if that means imposing some sort of tax upon junk food would be a step, albeit a small one, towards tackling this epidemic.

Firstly, let's not make the fact that obesity is on the increase an excuse to pay yet more money into the exchequer's coffers. Why should each and every social ill present itself as a perfect opportunity to part with one's money?

Where adults are concerned it's about choice and individual responsibility. Only fools and naives do not understand that a diet of junk food and disregard for exercise will result in obesity. Fools and naives will be fools and naives however much you tax food.

As far as child advertizing goes I find the whole thing rather sad. Parents that use "pester power" as a bona-fide excuse for stuffing their children with junk simply isn't good enough. I would suggest that any parent who is not resilient enough to say "NO" really shouldn't be in the parenting business at all.

Frankly, some of these parents should IMO be prosecuted for child abuse. Bringing up a child on Big Mac's and permitting that child to spend 6 hours a day sitting in front of a monitor resulting in hideous obesity is IMO just another form of child abuse.

Because the tax would discourage people from buying junk food. It would certainly go someway towards making people who can't afford the tax look at alternatives to junk food.



I was referring to kids TV advertising. Adults would hopefully know better.



What about kids who watch the adverts and buy the products themselves? Child psychology doesn't purely rely on there being an adult around to persuade.



I agree. Parents should take most of the flack.

Again, this comes back to parents IMO.
Where did I get money from as a kid? My parents, in the form of pocket money. I imagine the primary source of revenue for most kids today is still pocket money.
Parents have to control how it's spent. If their kids are spending it on a gorge of Cadbury products and getting fat as a result then they as parents are empowered to simply stop financing it.
This really isn't a complicated issue in child psychology. It's about parents having the balls to take control of what their kids are doing.