I don't eat McDonald's because of its shitty business practices, but why does it matter if it's real meat as long as the person eating it enjoys it? Also, they are actually 100% real beef, just basically a blend of different cuts merged into one.
I have had a couple sandwiches over the past few years since it's often times the last option available for food in airports when it's late. I used to eat it more when the dollar menu was still a thing. I've never once bought a mcdouble expecting something great. I think they have a fine taste, but it tastes like a 2 dollar burger. Now they're also over priced on top of my other issues with the company.
I guess if the person eating McDonald's loves to poison themselves with fake meat, then sure I guess it doesn't matter as long as I'm not the one eating poison.
Maybe you missed the part where it is 100% real beef in their burgers. There is 0 evidence that any of it's not real and all claims about it have been debunked. But if it weren't, what do you think is in this made up fake meat that's poisonous?
Haters gonna hate, but if you're going to make bullshit claims, at least put some effort into it.
I don't know why people feel the need to lie about things they don't like.
And I'm not even saying they knew beforehand what they thought was wrong. But, when confronted with other information, they doubled down. As if some harder-core McDonald's hater was going come along and mock them for conceding that one of their gripes with McDonald's was mistaken.
But also, why would it matter if it had filler if it's still enjoyable, and what would make that poison to eat? Poisoning one's customer base can't be good for business.
It's not fake, at least not in countries with food safety standards -- or standards in general -- but I can't confirm whether it's always 100% beef in the patties that they claim is.
There's not enough cows on this entire planet to supply all the different kinds of cuts of meat, and ground beef for all restaurants and businesses making "100%" ground beef entrées. Not to mention, all the grocery stores that sell prepackaged meat that looks nothing like meat straight from the cow. McDonald's uses fake meat, it is frozen paste imitation "meat" to make people think they are eating "100%" real beef.
This has been debunked a number of times. There is infact enough cows to do this.
It would only take about 1.5 million cows in a year to supply McDonald's with all the beef they use in a year. Assuming every patty they use is of their largest size they currently offer. Which obviously they don't.
So worse case your looking at 1.5 million cows, and realistically it's close to 1-1.25 million since they are also using their smaller patties.
Last year in the USA alone 36 million cows were slaughtered for meat.
So mcdonalds uses about 4 percent of just the usa beef production annually, and because mcdonalds operates off of local supply chains instead of single source.
That means that 1.5m heads is sources across the entire worlds supply. So that's about half of a percent of the world 300m ish production.
And keep in mind that's a conservative estimation of cows slaughtered. The real number is likely actually a bit higher, tho not enough to really be worth mentioning.
As it's going to be local small scale and home operations.
So unless you have a sizeable misunderstanding of the concept of numbers thinking that there isn't enough beef is objectively retarded.
Now McDonald's does use the cheapest lowest quality supply they can get their hands on. So calling it meat paste isnt entirely wrong. But it is BEEF meat paste.
Debunked or not, McDonald's is still disgusting and the amount of people who are coming in with comments backing up McDonald's instead of agreeing they are gross, really shows how many of you still live in the matrix and haven't woken up to realize that there is poison in everything. There's cancer in the food people. When you're buying your next round of groceries from the store, be sure to look and see how many items you buy that have "Contains a bioengineered food ingredient" on it.
Needless to say, I'm done with the McDonald's talk because it doesn't affect my life or my body because I make all my meals at home with carefully selected ingredients and everything organic.
Seems like every year I keep finding out some new development in the shitty old child food industry I used to eat back before I was old enough to feed myself
This uncited, unverified photo qualifies as "news & politics"?
[EDIT] Because confusion is ensuing:
This community's "name" is simply "usa@midwest.social," however its "display name" is "United States | News & Politics@midwest.social." See below thread for further explanation. I'm objecting to this content's being in this community based on the display name, which is intended to be the community's title and default descriptor (vs the name, which is just a url).
If you go directly to the community that we're in right now, you'll see that the community's "name" (basically its url) is simply "usa." However its "display name" (in other words the title most prominently displayed) is “United States | News & Politics”. See screenshot:
A community's "display name" is typically the more descriptive of the two, and unlike the "name" can be changed. See this screenshot from Lemmy.world's community creation page:
Depending on what client you're using to view Lemmy, you're going to have a different experience. I'm using the web app, the most default possible means of access, and apparently other clients show a community's name rather than display name (as seen in the other user's screenshot). However the display name is intended to be the more prominent of the two, the more descriptive of the two, and thereby the means by which a community's content appropriateness should be judged.
In this particular case, if "usa@midwest.social" wants to be a catch-all community for any USA-related content, they should change their display name to reflect this. Until then, the community is advertising itself as a place for "news and politics," and it's perfectly reasonable for me to object that the contents aren't matching what's on the lid.
Well yeah. The patty itself is one of the healthy parts of the burger. When you have to eat 3 of them not to be hungry that's a ton of bread/carbs and sauces consumed vs protein
Even with all the momentum it built over the years, I don't get how it hasn't started failing yet. I've stopped bothering even using it as a "it's the only place open and I'm hungry but don't feel like cooking" place because it's always disappointing, even going in expecting disappointment.
40 Comments
HisThiccness@lemmy.zip · 28 pts · 2d
Honestly who is still eating McDonald's knowing it's fake meat?
BassTurd@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 2d
I don't eat McDonald's because of its shitty business practices, but why does it matter if it's real meat as long as the person eating it enjoys it? Also, they are actually 100% real beef, just basically a blend of different cuts merged into one.
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 2d
Lol. You must have avoided it for quite a while. Nothing there worth enjoying.
BassTurd@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
I have had a couple sandwiches over the past few years since it's often times the last option available for food in airports when it's late. I used to eat it more when the dollar menu was still a thing. I've never once bought a mcdouble expecting something great. I think they have a fine taste, but it tastes like a 2 dollar burger. Now they're also over priced on top of my other issues with the company.
HisThiccness@lemmy.zip · -7 pts · 1d
I guess if the person eating McDonald's loves to poison themselves with fake meat, then sure I guess it doesn't matter as long as I'm not the one eating poison.
BassTurd@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
Maybe you missed the part where it is 100% real beef in their burgers. There is 0 evidence that any of it's not real and all claims about it have been debunked. But if it weren't, what do you think is in this made up fake meat that's poisonous?
Haters gonna hate, but if you're going to make bullshit claims, at least put some effort into it.
qarbone@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 8h
I don't know why people feel the need to lie about things they don't like.
And I'm not even saying they knew beforehand what they thought was wrong. But, when confronted with other information, they doubled down. As if some harder-core McDonald's hater was going come along and mock them for conceding that one of their gripes with McDonald's was mistaken.
BassTurd@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 3h
But also, why would it matter if it had filler if it's still enjoyable, and what would make that poison to eat? Poisoning one's customer base can't be good for business.
thenoirwolfess@fedinsfw.app · 5 pts · 1d
It's not fake, at least not in countries with food safety standards -- or standards in general -- but I can't confirm whether it's always 100% beef in the patties that they claim is.
HisThiccness@lemmy.zip · -5 pts · 1d
There's not enough cows on this entire planet to supply all the different kinds of cuts of meat, and ground beef for all restaurants and businesses making "100%" ground beef entrées. Not to mention, all the grocery stores that sell prepackaged meat that looks nothing like meat straight from the cow. McDonald's uses fake meat, it is frozen paste imitation "meat" to make people think they are eating "100%" real beef.
Holytimes@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 18h
This has been debunked a number of times. There is infact enough cows to do this.
It would only take about 1.5 million cows in a year to supply McDonald's with all the beef they use in a year. Assuming every patty they use is of their largest size they currently offer. Which obviously they don't.
So worse case your looking at 1.5 million cows, and realistically it's close to 1-1.25 million since they are also using their smaller patties.
Last year in the USA alone 36 million cows were slaughtered for meat.
So mcdonalds uses about 4 percent of just the usa beef production annually, and because mcdonalds operates off of local supply chains instead of single source.
That means that 1.5m heads is sources across the entire worlds supply. So that's about half of a percent of the world 300m ish production.
And keep in mind that's a conservative estimation of cows slaughtered. The real number is likely actually a bit higher, tho not enough to really be worth mentioning.
As it's going to be local small scale and home operations.
So unless you have a sizeable misunderstanding of the concept of numbers thinking that there isn't enough beef is objectively retarded.
Now McDonald's does use the cheapest lowest quality supply they can get their hands on. So calling it meat paste isnt entirely wrong. But it is BEEF meat paste.
HisThiccness@lemmy.zip · -5 pts · 12h
Debunked or not, McDonald's is still disgusting and the amount of people who are coming in with comments backing up McDonald's instead of agreeing they are gross, really shows how many of you still live in the matrix and haven't woken up to realize that there is poison in everything. There's cancer in the food people. When you're buying your next round of groceries from the store, be sure to look and see how many items you buy that have "Contains a bioengineered food ingredient" on it.
Needless to say, I'm done with the McDonald's talk because it doesn't affect my life or my body because I make all my meals at home with carefully selected ingredients and everything organic.
Peace. ✌🏻
BigDiction@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5h
There’s plenty of legit ways to shit on McDonalds without making stuff up.
BassTurd@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 3h
We're not in here backing up the quality of McDonald's, we're pointing out what you're saying if factually incorrect.
It sounds like you don't know what cancer is either.
Engineered ingredients used to preserve food for shelf life so that more people have access to food doesn't make it poisonous.
radiofreebc@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 58m
Isn't the "100% Real Beef" just a company name?
Saledovil@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 1d
What do you mean with fake? Is it not meat? Is it meat, but not of the animal advertised? Is it meat, but of abysmal quality? Is it cardboard?
lemmie689@lemmy.sdf.org · 21 pts · 2d
dan69@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
Diet.
bitteroldcoot@piefed.social · 21 pts · 2d
Where's the beef?
Original "Where's The Beef!?" Wendy's Commercial, January 10, 1984
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6_eWWfNB54
usernameofthisaccount@piefed.social · 13 pts · 2d
That is nearly vegan.
DeepDown@leminal.space · 8 pts · 2d
Seems like every year I keep finding out some new development in the shitty old child food industry I used to eat back before I was old enough to feed myself
dan69@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 1d
Just u wait, them pickles will be shredded to shreds.
fireweed@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
This uncited, unverified photo qualifies as "news & politics"?
[EDIT] Because confusion is ensuing:
This community's "name" is simply "usa@midwest.social," however its "display name" is "United States | News & Politics@midwest.social." See below thread for further explanation. I'm objecting to this content's being in this community based on the display name, which is intended to be the community's title and default descriptor (vs the name, which is just a url).
credo@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
Which sub are you in? ‘Cause I’m in usa@midwest.social, not “news & politics”
fireweed@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
Literally says "United States | News & Politics"
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Strange.
fireweed@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 1d
Because people are getting confused:
If you go directly to the community that we're in right now, you'll see that the community's "name" (basically its url) is simply "usa." However its "display name" (in other words the title most prominently displayed) is “United States | News & Politics”. See screenshot:
A community's "display name" is typically the more descriptive of the two, and unlike the "name" can be changed. See this screenshot from Lemmy.world's community creation page:
Depending on what client you're using to view Lemmy, you're going to have a different experience. I'm using the web app, the most default possible means of access, and apparently other clients show a community's name rather than display name (as seen in the other user's screenshot). However the display name is intended to be the more prominent of the two, the more descriptive of the two, and thereby the means by which a community's content appropriateness should be judged.
In this particular case, if "usa@midwest.social" wants to be a catch-all community for any USA-related content, they should change their display name to reflect this. Until then, the community is advertising itself as a place for "news and politics," and it's perfectly reasonable for me to object that the contents aren't matching what's on the lid.
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Huh. Interesting. I sort of figured it was something technical but I was at a loss for an actual reason.
minorkeys@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 1d
And they will keep degrading the food supply until we're eating something that barely counts as food.
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 1d
Yet somehow the customers still keep getting thicker.
Dnb@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 11h
Well yeah. The patty itself is one of the healthy parts of the burger. When you have to eat 3 of them not to be hungry that's a ton of bread/carbs and sauces consumed vs protein
Bluegrass_Addict@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 2d
don't eat it... return it for a refund citing theft and never return to 'fast' food ..
gianni@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1d
This is probably a good thing, health-wise.
Holytimes@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 18h
Honestly probably not. Your getting less useful protein. While likely still getting the same amount of bread and sauce.
So it's even less healthy. If the buns wernt just low grade white bread it wouldn't be the worse, or if the sauce wasn't just ketchup.
But your basically giving up protein for no return or replacement.
DarkFuture@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 8h
McD's is bottom barrel fast food. Literally anywhere else is better.
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5h
Even with all the momentum it built over the years, I don't get how it hasn't started failing yet. I've stopped bothering even using it as a "it's the only place open and I'm hungry but don't feel like cooking" place because it's always disappointing, even going in expecting disappointment.
Sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d
Stop going there. Honestly it's just an awful place to get food
OldChicoAle@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 9h
Thank goodness! Gotta make sure the rich fucks have enough to buy some slaves, fuck some kids, and ruin the planet.
DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social · 1 pts · 1d
They don't even have the decency to call it a smash burger when they stretch the patty into transparency
Blackfeathr@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
Stop going to McDonald's ❤️
your body will thank you