FYI

The first one in the list is "Super Size Me." Just so you guys know, this is not science. 

Yeah, and network stuff like Primetime. 

NobodyHome said:

The first one in the list is "Super Size Me." Just so you guys know, this is not science.

Sure it is, unless you're using some weird definition of "science". 

NobodyHome said:

The first one in the list is "Super Size Me." Just so you guys know, this is not science.

Yes, seeing super size me as the first thing on the list was a really big let down. And it does a huge disservice to the other very scientific and informative videos on the list. :( 

Bubba said:

Sure it is, unless you're using some weird definition of "science".

By your definition everything is science, which at the basest levels is true, but I think you know exactly what was meant. It's like calling Michael Moore's drivel science.......................................oh wait they did. 

Paetrw said:

By your definition everything is science, which at the basest levels is true, but I think you know exactly what was meant. It's like calling Michael Moore's drivel science.......................................oh wait they did.

I didn't make the definition (or the website, for that matter), but thanks for the vote of confidence. 

NobodyHome said:

The first one in the list is "Super Size Me." Just so you guys know, this is not science.

Let's see:

Hypothesis: McDonalds is bad for you.
Experiment: Eat McDonalds for 30 days.
Observe: With baseline physical data gathered before, during and after the experiment.
Conclude: McDonalds is bad for you.

Yeah, it's science. It's silly science, but science nonetheless. Now, the results are still a hypothesis until we have about 1,000 others perform the experiment. Then we can formulate a theory based on the 30-day program. 

Oh, and good post, Bubba. 

haha 

/bookmarked

Awesome. 

Bookmarked as well, this site is freaking awesome. Sent it to a few buddies of mine. Thanks Bubba. 

Bookmarked here, too. I've been wanting to see Life After People after a friend told me about it. 

NobodyHome
Slut
Paetrw
Cream Soda

^^^fatties in denial 

just figured out why my kids get in trouble at school. I could only make it 12 min into a documentary about ADD.
/see, it's got a genetic component
//oh look, a bird 

fubuvsfitch said:

Now, the results are still a hypothesis until we have about 1,000 others perform the experiment. Then we can formulate a theory based on the 30-day program.

Or just have one person string all those together.
Conclude: http://freedocumentaries.net/media/81/The_Half-Ton_Man_Documentary/ 

string theory sux 

Hahahahaha, every single video about drugs is about how pharmaceuticals are bad
for you, or how methamphetamine is bad for you, or how ecstasy is bad for you.

And then there's a video about the benefits of medicinal marijuana.

Too bad we can't make weed in a lab with a shitload of expensive
equipment so we could charge people out the ass for it. I bet if that
were the case then we'd ALL be high by now. 

bFTE said:

Hahahahaha, every single video about drugs is about how pharmaceuticals are bad
for you, or how methamphetamine is bad for you, or how ecstasy is bad for you.

And then there's a video about the benefits of medicinal marijuana.

Too bad we can't make weed in a lab with a shitload of expensive
equipment so we could charge people out the ass for it. I bet if that
were the case then we'd ALL be high by now.

You mean like Dronabinol? 

Not really.

Dronabinol is just THC extracted and concentrated from a marijuana plant.

It's not actually synthetically created from scratch. It's essentially the exact same thing.

THC = in the plant still.
Dronabinol (or Marinol) = no longer inside the plant. 

fubuvsfitch said:

Let's see:

Hypothesis: McDonalds is bad for you.
Experiment: Eat McDonalds for 30 days.
Observe: With baseline physical data gathered before, during and after the experiment.
Conclude: McDonalds is bad for you.

Yeah, it's science. It's silly science, but science nonetheless. Now, the results are still a hypothesis until we have about 1,000 others perform the experiment. Then we can formulate a theory based on the 30-day program.

Uh, no. No, sorry, that's not how it happened. At all.

His experiment was to eat FAR TOO MANY CALORIES. THAT is what gave him the health problems. He chose the most unhealthy options available on the menu, and always supersized his meals if he was asked.

Oddly enough, people have followed up on his experiment by repeating it while taking care to eat only the maximum recommended number of calories per day, and they reported no health problems. 

bFTE said:

Not really.

Dronabinol is just THC extracted and concentrated from a marijuana plant.

It's not actually synthetically created from scratch. It's essentially the exact same thing.

THC = in the plant still.
Dronabinol (or Marinol) = no longer inside the plant.

And yet they're still able to sell it for hundreds of dollars more than regular cannabis. 

Sure it is, unless you're using some weird definition of "science".

I guess what I meant was that these documentaries are not even close to as adequate in teaching about science as a good college class as they seem to imply. These ones might fit the definition of "science" in a very very broad sense, but they are most certainly not good science. 

mediaphile said:

And yet they're still able to sell it for hundreds of dollars more than regular cannabis.

To the people that will buy it, I guess. Problem is there's still
regular marijuana on the market, even the medicinal one, so
that's probably not great for their profit margin. 

im glad im not the only one who dismissed the entire list based on the fact that "super size me" was first 

#21 is an eye opener. Saw it awhile back. 

lord_nightrose said:

Uh, no. No, sorry, that's not how it happened. At all.

His experiment was to eat FAR TOO MANY CALORIES. THAT is what gave him the health problems. He chose the most unhealthy options available on the menu, and always supersized his meals if he was asked.

Oddly enough, people have followed up on his experiment by repeating it while taking care to eat only the maximum recommended number of calories per day, and they reported no health problems.

Oh, and lets totally ignore that what he did was based on the average exercise the average American does on a daily basis. What I got from watching it is that he was testing to see if eating fast food (he chose McDonalds due to it being the largest fast food chain) for 3 meals a day for the average person was or was not healthy. He clearly stated that he had to order at least one of every item on the menu and would only super size if offered. He didn't go into the film by choosing to eat as many calories that he could, if that were the case, he would have super sized every meal/

Good science or bad, it did show that eating only fast food for three meals a day and not taking other methods to exercise or keep healthy for an average person may have far more serious health risks than a person realizes. To many, this would seem obvious... to others, it's a way they can sue a fast food company for their kids being unhealthy blobs after eating there, daily, for their entire lives. 

Some1OutThere said:

To many, this would seem obvious... to others, it's a way they can sue a fast food company for their kids being unhealthy blobs after eating there, daily, for their entire lives.

And to others, the film was absolutely pointless as anything other than a way to get publicity. 

I enjoyed it. That's what TV is for don't you know? Entertainment and such. 

scubaduba said:

I enjoyed it. That's what TV is for don't you know? Entertainment and such.

"Super Size Me" was a TV show? 

This is right up my alley. And not in an experimental rectal way either.

Hours and hours of interesting shit. Thanks Fazed! 

mediaphile said:

"Super Size Me" was a TV show?

Well, it spawned his show, 30 Days. And I do believe Super Size Me is aired on TV these days.

Everyone is correct! /throws confetti 

Here's some more appropriate links:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/view/ 

Some1OutThere said:

Good science or bad, it did show that eating only fast food for three meals a day and not taking other methods to exercise or keep healthy for an average person may have far more serious health risks than a person realizes.

Yeah, right. And "Leaving Las Vegas" was a scientific study showing that having a glass of scotch once a week leads to sclerosis of the liver and dying in a seedy off-strip hotel room.

"Super-size Me" was about stunt-eating. His eating behaviors were about as average as Hunter S. Thompson's drug behaviors. 

lord_nightrose said:

Uh, no. No, sorry, that's not how it happened. At all.

His experiment was to eat FAR TOO MANY CALORIES. THAT is what gave him the health problems. He chose the most unhealthy options available on the menu, and always supersized his meals if he was asked.

Oddly enough, people have followed up on his experiment by repeating it while taking care to eat only the maximum recommended number of calories per day, and they reported no health problems.

^^^This^^^ 

Additionally, I could go to the store, pick only organic food, intake the same amount of joules (calories) and garner the same results as Spurlock. 

Ole Prophet said:

Additionally, I could go to the store, pick only organic food, intake the same amount of joules (calories) and garner the same results as Spurlock.

But that's not what the movie is about??? 

Great link! Thanks Bubba!

I will definitely be sending this around to a few people! 

This is what the internet is supposed to be...free flowing info...thanks! 

BAHHH, terrible link! What a frightful collection of subjective waste! Hats off to the first batter on deck, Super Size Me, in which an intellectual wizard proves the supreme hypothesis "If you eat an obscene amount of food, your health will suffer"... An eggplant is capable of a more refined application of the scientific method!

AHHHH, Great link! If you ever feel too high and mighty to comb through a plentiful list of knowledge-expanding nuggets just because you spotted one or two you aren't fond of... maybe try reminding yourself that whether you choose to indulge or not, this amount information has never been so readily at your disposal since you became a champion speed reader and stood eying up the card catalog at the library downtown. 

WonkerSmack said:

BAHHH, terrible link! What a frightful collection of subjective waste! Hats off to the first batter on deck, Super Size Me, in which an intellectual wizard proves the supreme hypothesis "If you eat an obscene amount of food, your health will suffer"... An eggplant is capable of a more refined application of the scientific method!

AHHHH, Great link! If you ever feel too high and mighty to comb through a plentiful list of knowledge-expanding nuggets just because you spotted one or two you aren't fond of... maybe try reminding yourself that whether you choose to indulge or not, this amount information has never been so readily at your disposal since you became a champion speed reader and stood eying up the card catalog at the library downtown.

Speak English, fucking prat. 

Some1OutThere said:

Good science or bad, it did show that eating only fast food for three meals a day and not taking other methods to exercise or keep healthy for an average person may have far more serious health risks than a person realizes.

NO. IT. DID. NOT.

All he did was demonstrate that EATING TOO MANY CALORIES is bad for you! Do you honestly not get that? He ate MORE THAN TWICE the recommended maximum number of calories. It does not MATTER where they come from - you eat that many calories, you'll have health problems.

Meanwhile, there are people who have eaten nothing but food available at fast food restaurants, stayed below the recommended calorie limit, and been just fine. 

lord_nightrose said:

NO. IT. DID. NOT.

All he did was demonstrate that EATING TOO MANY CALORIES is bad for you! Do you honestly not get that? He ate MORE THAN TWICE the recommended maximum number of calories. It does not MATTER where they come from - you eat that many calories, you'll have health problems.

Meanwhile, there are people who have eaten nothing but food available at fast food restaurants, stayed below the recommended calorie limit, and been just fine.

DO. YOU. THINK. that people who eat fast food every day stay below the "recommended calorie limit"? 

lord_nightrose said:

NO. IT. DID. NOT.

All he did was demonstrate that EATING TOO MANY CALORIES is bad for you! Do you honestly not get that? He ate MORE THAN TWICE the recommended maximum number of calories. It does not MATTER where they come from - you eat that many calories, you'll have health problems.

Meanwhile, there are people who have eaten nothing but food available at fast food restaurants, stayed below the recommended calorie limit, and been just fine.

Some people that smoke and drink every day and live to be 100.

There are a lot more factors than simple calorie intake that contributed to his decline in the movie. You honestly think he deteriorated that fast from mere calories? Somewhere, there's a highschool health teacher crying into her bottled water and tofu. 

YES, actually. What is wrong with you people? Dude eats 4000 calories a day, he's going to have health problems. End of discussion! If you think it takes more than ridiculously high calories, you're just blowing smoke.

1. Sample size of one.
2. No controls.
3. Misrepresentation of findings.

NOT science. 

1. Sample size of one.
2. No controls.
3. Misrepresentation of findings.

NOT science.

A-Fucking-men.

If you had actually gone to your college science classes instead of majoring in philosophy and going to lambda epsilon fucktard parties the rest of you would have figured this out. 

Omg lambda epsilon fucktard parties are the best 

russxl said:

DO. YOU. THINK. that people who eat fast food every day stay below the "recommended calorie limit"?

Do you think the movie was marketed as an examination of what happens if you eat fast food every day, or just if it was bad for you in general? Hint: It was the latter. The entire promotion of this movie was for the idea that it was INHERENTLY bad for you. The movie didn't examine that at all. 

lord_nightrose said:

YES, actually. What is wrong with you people? Dude eats 4000 calories a day, he's going to have health problems. End of discussion! If you think it takes more than ridiculously high calories, you're just blowing smoke.

1. Sample size of one.
2. No controls.
3. Misrepresentation of findings.

NOT science.

I'm not arguing the science, or lack thereof, behind the movie. What I am arguing is that your failed blanket statement that a high calorie diet automatically equals poor health, (specifically, the rate at which he was breaking apart in the film), is blatantly false. Then again, maybe you were replying to a different Fazer. If so, I'll retract my claim and wait until you amend yours into something that isn't complete horseshit. 

IG88 said:

Some people that smoke and drink every day and live to be 100.

There are a lot more factors than simple calorie intake that contributed to his decline in the movie. You honestly think he deteriorated that fast from mere calories? Somewhere, there's a highschool health teacher crying into her bottled water and tofu.

If you ate 4000 calories of tofu every day, you would die. 

Also- Lots of questions being "answered" with questions in this thread.