McDonald’s weight loss experiment proves yet again that eating for weight loss and eating for health are not always the same thing.
Colo-Nesco high school science teacher John Cisna decided to try a weigh loss experiment. He told his pupils he could pretty much eat what he wanted at McDonald’s as long as he was careful with his choices and stuck to 2000 calories per day. He approached the local McDonald’s and they were so intrigued with his 90 day weight loss plan that they let him eat for free.
With three square meals a day from McDonald’s, Cisna proceeded to drop 37 pounds in weight, improving his cholesterol profile in the process.
In addition to his new diet Cisna added 45 minutes of walking each day. Miracle! Eh…no…
Cisna simply did what any diet needs to do to drop weight. He created a calorie deficit. Without getting in to the whole “calories in, calories out” argument, the fact remains, the recommended caloric intake for an “average” man is 2500 (we are talking generalizations here) and on that basis Cisna dropped 3500 calories per week. Add to that his 45-minute walk, a two hundred pound male might burn another 250 calories (again, talking ball park here). That’s another 1750 calories a week. So, around a 5000 calorie deficit each week.
How could he not lose weight?
Cisna wanted to teach his kids that McDonald’s isn’t the problem. It’s the choices you make. So effectively you can eat any old shit, just not too much of it. Really? In a country that so vociferously defends its rights, kids need to educated that they have a choice? What is going on in the rest of the classes?
Cisna isn’t the first to sing the praises of losing weight by eating junk. Chazz Weaver’s rebuttal of Morgans Spurlock’s Super Size Me was his own account, “Downsize Me.” Chazz created his own weight loss industry on the back of it by having lost 8 pounds eating McDonald’s for 30 days. Weaver, incidentally, was a well-trained individual, who simply followed the first rule of dieting, he created a caloric deficit and saw a marketing opportunity. Do you see the pattern here?
Twinkies anyone?
A couple of years back Professor of human nutrition Mark Haub substituted his regular meals with Twinkies (and Hostess and Little Debbie snacks, Doritos chips, breakfast cereals and Oreos, when he got bored.) Limiting his daily intake to 1800 calories he dropped 27 pounds in two months…you do the math. Haub is all about the calories when it comes to losing weight, and he’s not wrong. But here is the clincher…
Eating for weight loss and eating for health are not always the same thing but that doesn’t mean they need to be mutually exclusive.
You can lose weight by replacing a couple of daily meals with your favourite breakfast cereal, as long as you create a caloric deficit. The same rules apply to Ramen noodles, Cup-a-soup and caviar. It’s all smoke and mirrors. Make a change in the foods you consume, eat less than you require to physically function and your body will do the rest. Don’t hate me for not making it any more complicated than that. I could but this is weight loss 101. There are plenty of exceptions to prove the rule. But the fact is this: diets only work until they don’t. Just ask anyone who’s ever been to Weight Watchers. If all those powders, potions, interventions, ready meals, gimmicks and gizmos delivered we wouldn’t have a multi-billion dollar diet industry.
We need to eat for health and pleasure. But we also need to eat for purpose.
We are a physical and biological miracle. The body is designed to hold on to its energy supplies so we can survive through thick and thin. Fortunately for most of the western world it’s mostly thick. As a consequence we have to self regulate. Since most of us are not required to get up off our ass, hunt, gather and prepare our food from scratch we have lost the deficit that physical action requires. Add to that the fact that it’s so much easier to pierce the film and re-heat the contents and you can see why we are damn-near destined to effortlessly gorge until the next meal.
We’ve forgotten that it’s okay to be hungry, that hydrating doesn’t require extra flavoring and that leaving food on the plate is not a crime.
What’s the answer? If you want to lose weight you need to create a caloric deficit, also known as eating less. You can increase that deficit by moving more, but moving alone won’t don’t it. Cooking your own food from scratch is a great place to start. And I don’t mean watching endless cooking shows on TV and trying to replicate steamed sea bass with celeriac mash and a lingonberry jus. Cooking is possibly the single most important thing you can do for your health. Next up? Walk. What could be simpler. Get up, go out and walk. We are made to move, even if it’s just one step at a time.
You can gain and lose weight eating pretty much anything. But it’s a much harder to overeat vegetables and fruit and you’d need a laboratory to replicate what your favourite Ready Meal provides. There is no such thing as the perfect diet. But there is a way of eating that will suit your taste buds and your level of activity. My friend and wellness coach Craig Ali told me he’d found the Magic Bullet…it’s called balance. Yes, it comes down to choices, but it’s not one or the other. You can have your cake, just not all of it at once. And maybe after dinner you can go for a stroll…
Two books you might want to consider, books that put the pleasure back into eating, books that actually have your health rather than your wallet in mind:
Michael Pollan – Cooked a Natural History Of Transformation
Keris Marsden and Matt Whitmore – Fitter Food (available in the USA as Paleo Primer)
Like The Good Men Project on Facebook
See Also:
McDonald’s Shuts Down Website That Told Workers to Avoid Fast Foods
Photo Credit: Rannoch Donald
Great piece
It’s the wrong message. Teach children life skills, how to cook the importance of water , movement, self worth. Not how to lose weight by eating crap.
Food is the 3rd most important life fuel. We should eat to be healthy and energised first with a little food fun in there of course.
DMC
Great piece, Rannoch. Someday people will learn that losing weight isn’t the defining aspect of health. Plenty of fighters with amazing physiques cut weight in ways that put serious pressures on the liver, etc. And I must say that I disagree with those commenting here defending the teacher’s lesson about choices. He could have taught that same lesson any number of ways. The fact that he chose to do so through McDonald’s–his first “choice”– kills the lesson right off.
That is a great piece Rannoch.
Thanks Chris. Much appreciated.
Calories in < calories out = lost weight didn't work well for me. My doctor at one point recommended a diet for which a single PB&J sandwich on fresh home-made multi-grain bread topped the scales for lunch. I felt hungry and cranky all the time. He also said I had to exercise more, as if I wasn't already biking and walking several miles a day. Then, since certain foods were upsetting my stomach, I started experimenting with the CONTENT of my diet. Thinking I was lactose intolerant I removed all dairy products, which ended up removing almost all breads and… Read more »
Christina, you are of course right. It’s not as simple as calories in, calories out. It is very much down to the source of the calories and creating a deficit.
The calorie dense, nutrient deficient foods that you high light are regular culprits, the pastas and breads and once again, whole grains which are still touted as begin healthful.
Well done for taking the time and the steps you needed to, to feel healthier.
And if we take the approach that Mr Cisna was demonstrating that it’s about choice, and his choice was MacDonalds, and that he was not in fact promoting it as a way to lose weight, what are we left with?
Do as I say, not as I do? What a shitty lesson.
Life application: not everyone has a college degree, that need not mean he should live in poverty. Not everyone is going to live where they want, drive the car that they want, marry the person that they want. It need not be deterministic of outcome. Not. A. Bad. Lesson.
No college degree here QE. Life application is all about life skills. Life skills are all about informed choices. We listen to our teachers, we take on board what they have to share. It’s not about a car, a house etc. Self efficacy, a sample of one, personal choice, all for it. Why then choose to share the lowest common denominator?
When we set the bar low enough it’s a race to the bottom. When we let people feel just how capable they are we open the doors of possibility.#
It seems like you are intentionally confusing “should do” with “can do”. He’s demonstrating the latter. Or, perhaps, the former within a certain frame of reference (those who live where fast food is one of the only cheap sources of food).
I think you’re making a mountain out of a molehill here.
How we eat and what we eat is one of the most fundamental issues facing health care. He’s demonstrating the latter…or perhaps the former? Which is it?
The mountain is there in the spiraling costs of health care and the devastating effects of diseases of lifestyle. Which brings me back to my only real point…this is about education. And this is a well intention but ultimately failed lesson.
“I can eat any food at McDonald’s (that) I want as long as I’m smart for the rest of the day with what I balance it out with.”
What exactly is sinister with this point that the entire linchpin of our healthcare system will come undone if we adhere to it? I mean, how in any way shape or form does this differ with your point about balance. He has said EXACTLY what you have spent many keystrokes to say here.
Compare with the author’s own quote: Donald: “My friend and wellness coach Craig Ali told me he’d found the Magic Bullet…it’s called balance. Yes, it comes down to choices, but it’s not one or the other. You can have your cake, just not all of it at once. And maybe after dinner you can go for a stroll…” Cisna: “I can eat any food at McDonald’s (that) I want as long as I’m smart for the rest of the day with what I balance it out with.” Does anyone else agree with me that these two quotes are saying precisely… Read more »
QE, there is nothing balanced about eating breakfast, lunch and dinner at MacDonalds.
Can you point out specifically what is wrong with McDonalds if I skip fires and sugary drinks? and don’t just say “it’s calorie dense.” So is my home cooked fettuccine alfredo.
So far all I’m getting from your article and comments is “I don’t like fast food or big business, and this makes me view people who eat fast food with contempt.”
Some Guy… The issue is not specifically McDonalds. You want the fries? Eat the fries. Pizza? Cool. Ben & Jerrys? Go do it. But presenting your gross food intake based on eating pre-prepared, packaged, fast food or ready meals is not healthy long term. I don’t lead some ascetic existence on the margins of society. I like a burger and I live in a major European city. I don’t treat people who eat fast food with contempt…but seriously, if you are going to try telling me you performed a weightloss experiment eating fast food and nothing else, simply be restricting… Read more »
Right. It is about being happy, and if someone else is happy why can’t you leave it at being happy for them? You are like a modern day Puritan, finding evil lurking everywhere someone else is happy for reasons you do not understand.
QE, are we reduced to making this about happiness? Ok, happiness it is. That meal comes with a free toy…
If you missed that the whole point of life is to be happy then you’ve missed out on life. Anyway, continue away with disparaging others with whom you disagree … IIFYM.
If voicing an opinion that differs from the mainstream counts as disparaging then I will disparage away. Personal choice includes the benefit of a personal voice.
That a conversation about food choices can somehow turn into a discourse on the meaning of happiness tells me that we all have out own take on things.
P.S Who’s Cisco?
Brendon, thanks for the response. All I can say is the points you make simply reinforce my position. The USDA’s choose my plate is open to all sorts of interpretation and woefully lacking in meaningful information. The fact that whole grains still feature prominently, that protein is under represented and that fat is still demonized make no sense in light current research. To use fast food, whatever it might be as, the example is not helpful, it simply reinforces lousy eating habits. Fast food is designed to be calorie rich, it is by virtue of the manufacturing process nutrient depleted… Read more »
You should at least know how John Cisna’s project was carried out before you criticize it. You wrote, “Cisno wanted to teach his kids that McDonald’s isn’t the problem. It’s the choices you make. So effectively you can eat any old shit, just not too much of it.” ***CISCO DID NOT EAT “ANY OLD SHIT.” TIME magazine reported his typical day like this, “For breakfast, Cisna typically ate two egg white delights, a bowl of maple oatmeal and 1 percent milk. For lunch, he’d usually opt for a salad. And for dinner he’d order a more traditional value meal, including… Read more »
While I understand where you’re coming from, I don’t think it’s even remotely obvious to the American public at all that you can both eat McDonald and not be obese. It’s too fashionable to blame fast food restaurants for all of our ills when the reality is that most of the issue is personal choice. Yes, there are food deserts and we should fix them. Yes we should have nutritious school lunches. But what this demonstrates is that the blame game of Super Size Me is a fraud; people can’t abdicate responsibility for their weight when it’s quite possible to… Read more »
Bam Bam, thanks for the response. I feel it’s fashionable to promote ways of eating that are inherently unhealthy. Even McDonald’s recently went as far as discouraging their own staff from eating their food. If Supersize me might be a fraud but no more or less so than Downsize Me, the Twinkie Diet, 5/2 and this experiment. My issue is that all folk see here is the weightloss. He could have ahcieved the same results with Cup-A-Soup, Twinkies or…wait for it real food. So if it is about choices, how come he didn’t make the sensible one, as a teacher… Read more »
Because he’s creating a more univariate and worst case scenario. While I completely agree that a balanced diet made at home is better, he is proving that just because you live in a good desert doesn’t mean you can’t manage your weight. You haven’t miraculously lost personal responsibility or free will. And yes, its making a point that is different than “the best way”. Furthermore, while you might agree with me that Spurlock is a fraud, many use Super Size Me as THE defining result of eating fast food. And it’s flat out wrong, a way for us to castigate… Read more »
Univariate? This is a sample of one. So what is he proving? That he lost weight restricting calories. Him and every other person who drops weight. There is no “best” way. Each and every one of us is a unique and discreet ecosystem. We have to find what works for us in terms of health and well being and weight is only one aspect of that. Go eat MacDonalds for breakfast lunch and dinner and see where it leaves you in terms of over all health. Fast food has a very specific agenda. To keep you coming back for more.… Read more »
I don’t know how else to state it. He’s shown that despite your protestations to the contrary, he created a diet that was in no way an irresistible urge to scarff down an extra QPWC. He created a balanced diet from a very limited menu. He reduced his weight and his cholesterol to much healthier levels. So whether you choose to “like” it or not, the opportunity exists to eat a decent meal at McDonalds and not go about blaming the corporations for people’s bad health, which you do. So enough with the “woah is me! the food scientists made… Read more »
Bam Bam, he restricted his calorie intake. Restricted. Chose not to indulge. Good for him. It wouldn’t matter what he ate. He did dieting 101. Dieting is not sustainable. I don;t blame anyone here. I just state the obvious. If you think it’s as simple as telling people to restrict their calories then why do we have such a problem? Is it because everyone is fat and lazy? That 60% of the population simply can’t be bothered? No, it’s because the essential life skill of feeding yourself has been reduced to ready meals and fast under the guise that if… Read more »
Agree with you completely, BamBam. Twenty-five years ago, I lost 40 pounds and I have kept it off since, and yes I eat a healthy and satisfying diet. I would very much have been motivated by stories like this and demotivated by articles like this. So, honestly, the message that I have is that if this article is demotivating you from your goals, ignore it. Find whatever motivation you need to incorporate a healthy life, and live life the way your choose to live it.
The point of this is not to motivate anyone. It’s simply to state in the simplest terms that what has happened here is not some incredible achievement and certainly not a demonstration of of health and wellness.
I appreciate that I am not towing the line here. It’s so much easier to simply read this weeks feel good diet story and follow that line.
Every diet works until it doesn’t. If you have found a sustainable way of eating that keeps you healthy, then that is all the motivation you need.
Now if he was selling this as the amazing new Cisna McDonalds diet, I would agree with out. The incredible achievement aspect of this is that it was not a cookie-cutter diet. His own students picked the healthiest foods from a limited list of options. And the ultimate test for success of any lifestyle is whether or not the individual is happy. For a sizable portion of the American population, eating fast food will be a necessary part of budget or time. While it would be nice to live in a world where everyone has unlimited money or time to… Read more »
I don’t agree with Weight Watchers either. When they were exposed on prime time TV by Panorama, it was an eye-opening experience. My personal problem with them is that they focus on “losing weight” which is the completely wrong message to send people. Weight loss is easy. Fat loss (which people actually want but don’t like hearing it) is a harder, slower process. Weight loss doesn’t = fat loss. Our PT a few months ago lost 8lb in 24 hours, by following basic water manipulation, but 24 hours later, he had put on 8lb….of water. Most people ‘go on a… Read more »
Great article and couldn’t agree more. He could have quite easily done this creating a plan full of ‘good’ foods equalling 2000kcals and ended up, arguably, in better shape. A deficit guarantees weight loss, but what the food intake is made up of will determinate how much is fat loss, how much is muscle tissue and how much is water loss. I think we’re all familiar with the term “skinny fat” which tends to happen to people who go on one-food-group-only diets. The biggest problem in people trying to get in shape is they sacrifice sustainability for speed towards a… Read more »
Great points Neil. There are so many misconceptions out there, one of the key ones is understanding the difference between nutrient dense and calorie dense foods. The various Government recommended daily allowances for diet (essentially the macros of protein, fat and carbs) along with their suggested sources have long been skewed by research that has been debunked and by big business who have lobbied to ensure they keep their share holders happy.
You make some good arguments, but then you reference Weight Watchers twice (once in the comment above) that make it clear that you have no idea what their program is. Glaringly poor research in one part of the article doesn’t inspire confidence in anything else you have to say.
Michelle, thanks for the comment. Are you involved with Weight Watchers? I am very aware of their program, their methods and their appalling success rate (hence the reference). Whilst they might provide an on ramp for people looking to lose weight all they are doing is creating a calorie deficit with no consideration for health. There are plenty of overweight yet perfectly healthy people out there. Simply losing weight is not the answer. Making the basic human requirement for nourishment a joyless task is inexcusable. Masking it behind ready meals, shakes and snack bars is simply a good commercial avenue.… Read more »
I wrote a thing; it was long. tl;dr version (is still long): yes, I clicked your link; no, I can’t watch the video– I’m on my phone. Yes, I did WW. I have never purchased or eaten a single WW packaged food as part of the program, nor was I encouraged or pressured to do so. My doctor supported the program. I had done all my own research before joining and had only ended up more confused. On the program I was supported to create a healthy lifestyle and encouraged to eat within healthy guidelines– not just under a certain… Read more »
Michelle, far from calling you anything, I have to say you have done everything right. You’ve listened to your body, made informed choices and decisions and reaped the results. I am much more interested in what you have achieved using your critical faculties than the quick fix story of dropping 37 pounds eating junk food. So well done and I hope you share that experience with as many people as possible. On the subject of making money, I have no issue with that. Of course not. I sleep well at night knowing that I teach people skills they can use… Read more »
I don’t see this as motivational at all. I’d rather he stay fat and healthy, than thin and mcdonald-y.
I mean, even the McDonald’s website encourages its workers not to have fast-food as a regular go-to meal: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/01/08/mcdonalds-fast-food.aspx
Rannoch, I’m thankful to see how you presented this article, in my opinion, as the fraud and corporate scheme, that it is! I was on a rampage on another site earlier this week about how McDonalds FINALLY found a way to make itself look good again. This story isn’t a “feel good” story. It’s another horrific example of how a corporate monster can manipulate image, data and perception to fit its greedy agenda. I was actually appalled how this man could attribute his new healthy lifestyle to eating at McDonalds when eating there had very LITTLE to do with it.… Read more »
Losing weight and lowering cholesterol and two notoriously bad health markers, yet are perceived as the Holy Grail. I don’t read this and see that Cisna improved his health because there were reductions in those two markers. There are many more inspirational approaches he could have taken, like eating and cooking his own food as the author suggests. The inspiration of this article comes not so much from the message of eat any old junk and be fit, but rather the concept of adopting a healthy diet and combining that with movement – that’s an idea I will buy into……..
To Questionable Ethics:
This experiment was rather questionable, inded. I don’t think that promoting weight loss through the most nutrient-deficient food out there is a particularly inspiring story, especially to a culture in which weight loss is so desirable. Also, lowering one’s cholesterol as a lone aspect cannot be considered improving health. Many other factors should have been studied as well, such as the vitamins and minerals in his body. I am sure he would have failed miserably.
Glad that you have your own opinion on this, Marian. The message to me is make the most of your circumstance. I am inspired by it, and I am glad that you respect our difference of perspectives.
Typical of The Good Men Project, the writers can take any inspiring, motivational story and make you feel bad or guilty for liking it. The man lost weight AND improved his health by lowering his cholesterol. But Cisna wan’t trying to prove that you can eat whatever you want and lose weight or be healthy. He was trying to show that you can control your actions irrespective of circumstance. This would be a very good message to communicate to men. I was inspired by it. Let’s enjoy the moment without over-thinking it.
Hey QE. First off, thanks for the comment. Secondly, if you are familiar with the health and wellness section of GMP then you’ll see that we like nothing more than accentuating the genuinely positive. However, I can’t look at this story with anything less than contempt. He lost weight, I will give him that, but as for improving his health? No one in the interests of their health would stay on this diet. It’s no better or worse than Weight Watchers or Body by Vi. We need to look at this long term. The short term fixes don’t work. If,… Read more »
While I agree with the points that you make, understand that this was not the point that he was making, or at least not the point I am taking away from it. He is not suggesting anyone should stay on this diet. He is saying that you need not be a victim of circumstance I am inspired by it — moreso than reading your columns quite honestly — and, yes, I live healthy and have done so from small on.