Subway Just as Unhealthy as McDonald’s

[thefool_wa]

48. More sensationlist crap

This article doesn't actually describe how healthy/unhealthy the food is. It merely states that people CHOOSE to consume nearly the same number of calories at both establishments. No discussion the actual food content (other than sodium count). So what we are talking about here is an unhealthy CHOICE of the consumer, not an innate lack of nutritional content in the food itself.

The content and quality of Subway food can be easily replicated in a household kitchen making these same meals with the virtually identical ingredients (some even of POORER quality: how many of us have fresh, preservative free bread around all the time?). Whereas with McDonald's "food", while the FORM of the food can be replicated at home, store bought ingredients that resemble McDonald's ingredients will produce a significantly healthier and higher quality of said food. This says to me that McDonald's (with their preservative volume, cholesterol, pink slime, separated chicken, et al) is significantly less healthy than Subway.

Sure, Subway may serve you the same VOLUME of food as McDonald's, but saying that makes it less healthy, or even equally as unhealthy (and more sodium DOES NOT automatically equal less healthy) is really stretching the issue unless you are willing to ALSO claim that your kitchen is just as unhealthy as McDonald's (which can also be very true).

The heart of the problem discussed in the article is childhood obesity and the truth is that the fault rests squarely, and exclusively, on the CHOICES OF THE PARENTS, not on McDonald's, Subway, or anyone else. I don't have infinite means by any stretch of the imagination, but I manage to feed my children in a way that keeps them healthy (and yes, that includes both Subway and McDonald's occasionally), so I do not buy the "I'm too poor to eat right" crap either. The solution is to choose better food, not blame the people who are making food you can simply choose not to buy.