McDonald's CEO dead at 60

Remove all ads!

Here is the link.

Well what do you know, the CEO of this company thats fattening up the world has died of a heart attack! Sure, it is sad that he died, but I wonder if all these years working for McDonalds did this to him?

 

I would say the answer to that is probably yes but much more due to stress than due to eating his own products.

 

McDonalds isn't "fattening up the world", people are.

People are responsible for their eating behavior, not companies.

 

Agree with Darkwolf, blaming McDonalds for this doesn't hold any water. Should his heart atack be caused by eating too much greasy food, it's nobody else's fault but the man in question himself. McDonalds doesn't hold a gun to his head and forces him to eat Big Mac's, or whatever, that's his decision, and his alone.

And for that matter, people get heart attacks all the time, even the ones that work in saladbars. Are you gonna blame healthfood too, if an employer of a saladbar dies of a heartattack ?

 

It does suggest that a burger-'n'-fries diet might not be so healthy, though. Yep, I see a little cosmic irony.

 

Very funny/ironic...

I don't really see how one could blame McDonalds for the "fattening the world up" thing... it follows along with the saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." and all that mess.

 

As a young man who has lived alone in his own apartment...at 2 AM and with the munchies...McDonald's might as well of had a gun to my head.

It was only three blocks away...

...the blame is entirely theirs.

 

details are blur but,
two studies
60's in u.s. in Bell telephone company and
80's in u.k. in civil service
showed that a healthy lifestyle, non smoking, low blood pressure janitor at the bottom of pyramid is more likely to suffer heart attack than a fat, hypertensive, smoking chairman on top of pyramid.

(warning, biological chemistry involves boring and lengthy pathways)
Yes, the answer here is pressure. Pressure triggers a gene to encode for an enzyme which involves in the pathways in conversion of cholesterol into cortisol. Cortisol is a hormone that pulls mind and body together (to endure stress for example). However, cortisol also degrades your immune system in another pathway (think "enemies comes from east, all soilders in west go to reinforce east wall")

A healthy janitor at the bottom of pyramid is constantly under stress, being ordered to do this and that. A chairman on top though suffered much stress but this chairman can shift the burden to others, like ordering people around. So at the end, the unhealthy chairman suffer less stress than the healthy janitor. Constant stress results in constant cortisol results in bad immune system. (Everyone gets sick after big exam eh?)

How is this related to the topic? don't know. Just thought it is really cool and it somehow relates to JSBB's post earlier.

 

Wow, I don't buy that argument at all. Even if a janitor's job is very stressful (which I don't believe...repetative, dull work never stressed me out that much), CEOs still takes their jobs home with them, along with the constant worry and responsibility. The janitor can just pop a cold one, watch some TV, or play some BG2.

 

People have choice? OK, yes, at the end of the day, people do have choices as to their diets. BUT,

McDonalds and their ilk are slowly but surely monopolizing, or at least "oligopolizing" the food service industry, particularly the "affordable" food service industry. This eliminates choice. Also, working families are being forced by our culture to work 40+ hour weeks, double income, just to make ends meet.

This is not conducive to taking the hours required to shop at the supermarket and prepare healthy meals 21 times per week. Again, a situation outside of our control is pushing us towards the food service industry.

Finally, McDonalds, Pizza Hut, etc. spend BILLIONS of dollars every year on marketing. with an average at least one television in every home in Canada and the USA, not to mention print ads, billboards, transit ads, et cetera, this has a very hefty influence on our choices. again, viewing ads is virtually beyond our control. On the flipside, a pittance of your tax dollars are spent each year on promoting healthy living. I would wager that tax breaks to McDonalds alone exceed government spending on this mandate.

So, anyone can say that we have free choice as to diet and lifestyle, and technically not be wrong. However, with both Canada and the US weighing in statistically of some the world's most obese peoples, there are definitely some factors beyond individual choice involved.

 

Blaming McDonald's is the easy choice. Unfortunantly, American's have decided that want to do everything the easy way and not the hard way. Terrorists hate us because of our "freedom". Bull***t. They hate us because of our actions in thier countries. People are fat because of fast food and too long of work weeks. Bull***t. They are fat because they don't want to eat healthy becasue that takes work. It's easier to pick something up on the way home and sit in front of the idiot box and watch American Idol or Survivor. Exercise is hard. Cooking is Hard. And Americans are soft. And I am one of them. But at least I have the honesty to admit it is my fault. McDonald's has a monopoly because we gave it to them. Same for Wal-Mart. You vote with your wallet in a capitalist society. So don't you demean our country with bunk about advertising. Thats for kids. They don't know better. If you are an adult, you do. Eat at McDonalds all you want, just don't cry about it later. Funny thing, this documentary guy made a movie about this, gained all this weight, so another director did the same thing, and lost weight. Of course he did the hard thing... he exercised. So everyone do everyone else a favor, do something hard for once in your today, admit your mistakes are your own. Cause that my friends....is hard.

 

Well, I'm not American, and I'm not fat or soft. I do exercise. (so I have nothing to apologize for, according to you) Nevertheless, I am an advertising afficionado, and that stuff is not for kids. Example: Gravol for Kids slogan: "MAKES MOMMIES FEEL BETTER"

McDonalds advertising might target children, but the children target the parents. Saying that advertising targets children only is ludicrus. Adults do not know better. Read Fast Food Nation. please.

 

I never said advertising was only for children. Adults just understand what advertising is. And sorry, People get fast food because it is fast and easy. Not because it tastes so much better. And adults do know better, they just don't care. Thats like saying people who start smoking don't know they will probably get cancer. They know that. They just don't care. And that is the problem. Not McDonald's. I don't care how much your kid screams for it. If you don't think it is healthy for them, don't take them. Taking them is the easy way. Cooking a good meal is hard, but deal with it. Life is hard. And living a good life is even harder. So next time you wolf down a Big Mac, just realize you are eating it because you either wanted it or it was easier than cooking a meal for yourself. Ronald didn't make you eat there. You Did.

 

I agree with you completely, as far as your argument has gone. But I am saying we need to take it to the next level.. regardlessof the cause. There is an obesity epidemic in North America that needs to be addressed. The health of a given family is private matter, of course. But the health of a nation affects national spending. Medicare spending, welfare spending, length of employement, military service, worker productivity, birth and death rates are all national concerns that are adversely affected by a nation of obese people.

The government of Ontario, here in Canada, just repealed a proposed "fat tax". The idea was to apply the 8% provincial sales tax to meals under $4. This was touted by the governement as an encouragement to children and families to make smarter eating choices. The bill was correctly identified as a government cash-grab, (since it actually made no distinction between healthy and unhealthy food, and was to be applied to any prepared meal under $4) at the expense of low-income Ontarioans (since low income diners are typically the only people buying a meal for less than $4.) So while was opposed to this particular law, I think it is wise for the government to begin to plot strategies to promote healthy eating.

Please don't dismiss this with Liberatarian arguments. (I love Liberatarianism) Because this is an issue important enough for government intervention. A multi-faceted awareness campaign would be in order. As would a REAL "fat-tax" that a) made a distinction between healthy an unhealthy foods, and b) plugged the proceeds DIRECTLY into either the healthy living campaign, or the Healthcare system.

Yes, it is rosy, optomistic, and ambitious. But it is a worthwhile venture.

PS You did indeed infer that Advertising was for children

PPS Tying in an argument about fast food to any arguement to do with 9/11 as you did in your prior post:

Is a total cheap shot. You shouldn't do that. It is akin to obfuscation. as in "You're either with McDonald's, or you're with the Terrorists!"

PPPS The name of the Doc where the guy gained 25 lbs in a month on McDonalds is called "Super Size Me" what is the name of the documentary that you say find the opposite, with a bit of excercise?

Have a nice day

 

I wasn't trying to infer (although i might have accidently) anything political like the you're with us or agaisnt us mentality. Was just trying to make a broad example of "easy" false answers. Sorry about that. And again, it was mostly a failure on my part about the ads being for kids. I believe most younger kids could use the arguement, but they told me to eat this. Adults might find out about new foods or items or prices for food through ads but are not compulsed in the same way to eat it.
About the director, here is a link.

http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/04252004/news/12585.htm

 

I read the article.... It reads like a McDonald's press release. In face, I'd bet a dollar to a nickel that it IS a McDonald's press release. The article had one smallish blurb about Soho Whaley and her film; this is followed by a very coroporate sounding set of paragraphs detailing McDonald's new menu.

So while I agree with your arguments regarding personal choices and accepting responsibility for your choices, I cannot respect the integrity of Whaley's film. (Based on the article that you linked.)

I would be completely unsurprised if Whaley turned out to be a McDonald's employee from head office who always had a back-burner ambition to make a film.

To be fair, of course, the "Supersize Me" guy undoubtedly had his own bias before making the film.

The bottom line however, is that yes, anyone can MANAGE, with exercize, to lose weight while eating McDonald's food. However, when you walk into McDonald's look around. It isn't Bally's Total Fitness, if you take my meaning. MOST people that eat regularly at McDonald's are overweight. Some are obese. And when you look at McDonald's sales.... well it just seems as though MOST Americans are overweight, and too many are obese.

So let me apologize for putting you on the defensive re: your choice of argument. Tell me what your feelings are on a National campaign to create a healtier nation, including ads, and possibly a "fat tax"

 

While I fully support government puting out more information, telling people or punishing people for what the eat is taking social governance wayyyy to far. The government has no business involving itself into our personal livs to such a degree as long as it is only ourselves. I applaude pressure put on fast food chains to offer more alternatives because this is a harder choice. Its easier for them to do nothing and sell more fattening food. Will it make a difference in the long run. Probably not. Remember the salad craze during the 80's. Every fast food resteraunt had tons of salad offerings and you would see people eating it all the time. Until this newest fad came along though, salads had all but disappeared. I understand where you are coming from though, but a fat tax would simply punish poor people and I can guarentee that it would not be used only help cover medical expenses. Taxes on tabacco have been used to pay for everything, so it simply becomes another "sin" tax that does nothing but punish poorer people and helps pay for state's budgets. So I'm against fat tax, support more awareness advertising and research on eating, perhaps even incentives for people who enroll in health clubs or gym's, enspecially for thier children.

 

IS anyone else pleasntly suprised by this?! If only it had been more slow and painful!