Fat Head

I thought this documentary was all-in-all OK. I think the movie accomplished it's goal in a narrow-minded sense, which was to say that ultimately, consumers drive the market and it is up to the individual to make the correct decisions on what they are putting in their bodies. It is not the responsibility of the government to make our food choices for us. The other message that I thought was effectively conveyed was that having an occasional cheeseburger is not going to, in itself, give you a heart attack. However, depriving yourself from your biological urges can be stressful and can cause a backlash of overeating down the road.

I also appreciated the point that the movie made that simple sugars and refined carbohydrates with high glycemic indices such as high-fructose corn syrup are really the major dietary issue that our country should be focused on. Type II diabetes should be the target of our concern, and not animal fats (as far as dietary implications are concerned). Also, the sedentary lifestyle that the average American lives is a huge part of the problem, probably more so than what we are eating. Try telling Chad Ochocinco that the McDonald's that he eats before every game is going to make him fat or unhealthy.

On the negative side, I was off-put by the unsophisticated jabs that the movie kept taking at Spurlock and also the Vegetarian movement. I thought the movie did a poor and distasteful job of respectfully criticizing its opponents. The campy cartoons and name-calling really took away from the effectiveness of the film, and these tactics can quickly turn off an undecided audience, like me.

Also, the movie focused only on dietary/health issues. I thought the movie neglected the important issues of the environmental impacts of eating so much animal meat, the economic impacts, and the treatment of workers and animals.

The environmental argument: When humans eat animals, they are only utilizing 1% of the original energy in the ecosystem. When eating fruits/vegetables, we are using 10 x the energy from the environment. The rest is lost as heat/metabolic energy. Therefore, vegetarian diets are more efficient and sustainable for a large population than animal diets. The corporations also tend to be horrifically bad at keeping up to environmental and safety code, and usually find that it is more profitable to pay the fines and continue poor environmental/health safety practices, rather than correct the behaviors.

The economics argument: Most major corporations are milking the profits out of local economies and not paying it back to the communities or workers. Most employees of these companies can not live off of their wages and are not provided with decent benefits. In addition, many of these companies receive government subsidies for their ingredients and their employee benefits, which comes out of the taxpayer's paycheck. So there is a hidden expense to these companies and their affiliates that you are paying out of each pay check.

The animal ethics argument: The conditions that the animals live in are ridiculously poor. Most low-quality meat comes from just a few mega-slaughterhouses in the country, which is run upon the principle of "the more meat the better". The animal meat that you are eating is most likely from terribly unhealthy and mistreated animals (or in some cases genetically engineered), which hardly seems natural or healthy.

In the end, I thought the movie made some interesting points and deserves a watch if you are interested in nutrition, but still needs to be taken with a grain of salt (harharhar). Some of the points were good, but the movie was overall narrow in scope and a bit cheesy.

I'm going to start off by saying that the only reasons I give this movie an 8/10 and not a 10/10 are the sometimes overly corny and personal nature of the rhetoric. By personal I refer to how much this movie makes fun of individuals such as Spurlock (Super Size Me) and The Guy from CSPI (hehe).

With that aside, I have to say this an AMAZING movie. First of all, each negative review I have seen so far misses the point of this movie or simply criticizes it for its low budget nature.

What they do not admit is that, although it is a bit unprofessional to criticize him and others in such a personal fashion, Spurlock had it all coming. This movie clearing demonstrates that Spurlock's entire Super Size Me movie was a sham, was not only designed to prove a point, but was also highly deceitful.

I'm a big supporter of low carb dieting. Now before the reader gets ahead of me, I'm not suggesting you survive on steak and eggs alone. As the movie CLEARLY states, this would be unhealthy. The movie clearly argues in favor of controlling carb intake while maintaining healthy intake of fruits and vegetables. As well, I am not a low carb zealot. As an athlete and someone who takes a deep personal interest in diet, I understand that carbs have their place. However, most people I come across consume massively more carbs than what's appropriate. The movie correctly targets sedentary lifestyle, sugars, and snacking as being major culprits in fat problems.

On top of this, it does an exemplary job of busting the cholesterol, saturated fat, and low fat myths. One or more reviews I read complained that this movie ignores other aspects of a healthy diet beyond cardiovascular disease. That wasn't the focus of this movie, and by the very nature of it being a movie it must be limited in scope. What these reviewers don't mention is that low/moderate carb (100g give or take depending on activity level and goals) diets with plenty of fruit and vegetable intake have been shown to improve all markers of health, from blood pressure to cancer, stroke, arthritis, diabetes, you name it.

I find it sad that each review criticized the presentation methods or subjective opinion on the movie's humorous quality without addressing how incredibly scientifically and nutritionally insightful it is.

This movie presents a plethora of dietary information that is largely unknown by today's population and does so in a (personally speaking) entertaining fashion. For that I give it 8 stars, and will try and get everyone I know to watch it. If you're reading this and are not sure if you should watch it, just watch it, listen with an open mind, and research the points it makes on your own. You will not be disappointed.

Let's be honest-- at 500 pages most of us aren't going to read "Good Calories, Bad Calories." This film serves as a much easier introduction to the theories and realities about why we get fat, what causes coronary heart disease and diabetes, and what we can do to reverse those conditions. In an easy-to-understand and humorous way, the film explains why the "obvious" reasons we are fat (access to fast food, fat in the diet, etc) are often the wrong answers. If you are trying to lose weight, have heart disease or type-2 diabetes, or just want to live a healthier lifestyle, grab a friend and sit down to watch this film.

"Supersize Me" was an entertaining film about the guy who decided to eat only McDonald's for a month and see what happens. But in "Fat Head" this other guy complains the earlier film doesn't seem real, and wants to prove you can eat fast food and not only stay the same weight but even lose some. There is some good discussion about what actually makes you gain weight and what causes it. I recommend to watch it to get some new perspective on things.

The technical side of the film looks a bit rushed, like a Youtube video. But since I actually watched it from Youtube it didn't matter that much.

An interesting documentary. Check it out.

As a Fortean (Google that if you're not sure), and a follower of a high fat, low carb diet (Google The Primal Blueprint) I appreciate his efforts in debunking the Conventional Wisdom and looking at the real results of scientific studies, and deriding the "experts" who had thrown out data that doesn't jibe with their theories. I mean, he eats like me. Double cheeseburger and diet soda. Except I don't eat the bun.

I would object to his rebuttal against Morgan Spurlock's "Super Size Me" He derides Spurlock for being, I suppose, elitist. He claims that Spurlock thinks poor people are "stupid" because they don't know any better to avoid eating fast food if they are overweight. Spurlock never claimed poor people are stupid, but I am sure he would admit that they are low information. Just like many Americans. That doesn't make them stupid, that makes them deprived of information due to the lousy job done by our public education system and corporate driven media, but that's an argument for another day.

In regard to Spulock's point about availability of food options among the poor, I have news for you, guy. If you have never been in a poverty stricken area, sometimes the only food options are McDonald's. Not even a supermarket. Maybe some beef jerky and Doritos from the liquor store, where the shop owner has to jack up his prices to obscene levels because he's been held up at gunpoint multiple times and his insurance is through the roof. But it's either that, McDonald's, starvation, or drive 15 miles to an area with decent choices. All not the best options.

Overall, people need to hear most of this movie, but I did not appreciate his ragging on Spurlock.

As far as "following the money," as this movie suggests, with the fast food industry versus the weight loss industry, one getting fat off getting people fat, and the other getting fat off getting people skinny (or trying to and failing), who can the average person possibly root for in that competition?