• Sarmyth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I shouldn’t eat ANY French fries for my health. Fortunately, my health isn’t a consideration when I’m having fries. Sounds like they found a good way to use grant money for lunches, though!

      • clb92@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I read it as hairdryer at first

        Ok, you’ve convinced me that I need a shitload of fries. Off to the hairdryer I go!

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      honestly it’s so overblown, you can eat fries it’s fucking fine.
      what’s important is that you also eat some damn vegetables, don’t eat tons of sugar, and go for a at least a 5 minute stroll every other day.

      if you really like fries, get an air fryer. they make perfectly fine freezer fries with fewer calories and no mess from oil.

    • Patches@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Reminder: Pam Cooking Spray is zero calorie, zero fat, and zero carb

      Because there are 746 Servings in a single can of Pam. A serving size of 1/4 a second - which is small enough I’m not sure most people could do it. Just enough to round down from a tiny fraction to zero.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Not a great example. Cooking spray is for making a pan or cover non-stick. You ingest very little of it.

        • panda_paddle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          You’ve obviously not spent enough time around gym bros. I have on multiple occasions overheard conversations about using it as a butter substitute because, "…it has no calories. "

      • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Tic-tacs say they are “sugar free” even though they’re almost entirely made of sugar, they’re just small enough that they fall under the report regulations.

  • Vahtos@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    10 months ago

    I can’t believe they didn’t include the unit. Are we talking 6 small, medium, or large fries? There’s variation on where you get them from too. That could be so many fries!

    /s

    • ares35@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      a small french fries at mcd is 71g, or 2.5oz, a medium is a bit over 4oz. various sources from a quick ddg place u.s.d.a. serving size for french fries at 3oz.

  • edgemaster72@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’ve never had a problem with having more than 1 serving at a time before and I’m not about to stop now

      • Death_Equity@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        You mean half a hollowed out Russet Burbank with cheese and load bearing bacon crumble right?

        Or do you mean a 1/4 pound bacon with 2 layers of pepperjack cheese and potato buns?

        How I am not fat or had a heat attack is a medical mystery. I admit I have a problem with bacon, but Inshallah, I can stop any time I want.

    • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      This is the information we need. Steak fries and wedges can be on the big side, amounting to something like half a typical russet potato: more than enough starch for a meal.

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I’ve given up eating at fast food places … it doesn’t make any sense when you think about it over a lifetime.

    You’re buying unhealthy food that degrades your health and the food is being prepared and handled by people being paid as little as possible while these same workers more often than not don’t like their job. The average person looks down on the fast food worker job and we make fun of them … but we all think nothing of expecting them to make our food. Even the food itself is not food as it’s scientifically engineered to be as addictive as possible, not make you immediately sick and produced with as cheap an edible food product as possible … many of McDonald’s items are known to use a cellulose food filler made from wood pulp … basically sawdust.

    And we pay a premium for it.

    The more I thought of it, the more reasons I had to not buy this crap let alone eat it.

    • 11181514@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Ok we’re talking about fries. Deep fried potatoes. Places like in n out literally make them in front of you. You aren’t going to do it any cheaper or healthier at home.

      The “average” person doesn’t “look down” on fast food workers and who tf is this “we” making fun of them?

      And what exactly is the problem with cellulose? It’s an extremely abundant plant based protein. It makes food have a better texture and doesn’t effect the taste. Do you not eat salad because it has cellulose in the lettuce leafs?

      • wunami@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s an extremely abundant plant based protein.

        Cellulose is a polysaccharide. Not a protein.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        The oil is the big thing that makes french fries unhealthy. That and salt. Potatoes in general are pretty nutritious (more so if you leave the skin on). You can air fry them at home, go easy on the salt, and they’ll be much better for you than fast food fries.

    • mynamesnotrick
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Its used because its cheap and people barely have time or energy to take care of themselves in the daily grind that is modern life thanks to capitalist exploitation.

    • Bipta@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      There’s no such thing as cheap food.

      Heard that in a TED talk and they’re words to live by.

    • MsPenguinette@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m gonna be honest, the more wood pulp they can put in there, the better. I’d eat fast food more often if it was worse for me but had less calories overall. We are always making tradeoffs when making any food decision and the calculus I’m using when I’m at a fast food place is hedonist.

      If I wanted something nutritious, I wouldn’t be ordering multiple crunchwrap supremes. Give me an option to make it Al Serrín instead of Al Fresca, and I would choose that as long as the flavor is there.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      it depends, at least here in sweden most fast food is honestly absolutely fine as long as that’s not the only thing you eat, and you get sugar free soda, and workers are generally treated okay (if not with great pay).

      just stick to eating fast food when you really want it, like a couple times per month when you’re out and about and really can’t be arsed to cook your own food.

  • Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Yeah, 6 per bite is really optimal. One at a time can be fun, but 6 is much more satisfying!

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Just go for the really chunky Belgium “pommes frittes” (something which the Dutch call “patates”) to follow the letter of the rule but not quite the spirit of it.

    Also, they’re amazing!

    Edit: turns out the Dutch call them “patate” (also friet and frieten) which I incorrectly pluralized in the French way because I also speak French so it just sounded wrong to me in the singular form and I assumed I recalled it wrong. Thanks to all that corrected me and explained it.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        That’s how were called in Dutch the delicious chunky, soft french fries that came with a big serving ot mayonaise, which I used to buy back whem I was living in A’dam.

        Maybe I incorrectly pluralised it from “patate” or we’re both thinking of different kinds of french fries?!

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I was under the impression that the plural of that word in Dutch was “patates” since it’s originally a French word so the plural is done the French way rather than the Germanic-way (which would yield the word “pataten”).

        • gentooer@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          That would be patatten. The Dutch call fries friet or patat (always singular), we (Flemish) call them frieten (plural). The Walloon probably call them frites?

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Thanks!

            That one showed some of my main problems with the Dutch language: if the word sounds French I process it in French (so patat being singular it just sounds wrong to me, hence it “must” be plural ;)) and when to use double consonants or a single one (I have the same problem in English).

            So cheers for taking the time to explain it all.

            • gentooer@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              I understand it can be quite confusing. There’s a lot of French loanwords, especially here in Flanders, and there’s a lot of regional differences, both between Flanders and the Netherlands, and within Flanders. We can pinpoint the province, sometimes city of most native Flemings even if they don’t speak true dialect but generic tussentaal.

        • brakenium@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Like the other commenter said, we generally use the singular form. Though I have heard plural, usually to refer to Vlaamse frieten or Flemish fries. I believe in those cases it’s generally meant to be a fun thing to say though

  • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I know how disastrously unhealthy french fries are, I also know how delicious and addictive they are. So I’ve learned to just not eat any at all. Because it’s impossible to eat just one. or six.