PC game players protest the inclusion McDonald's false reality in their Gameplay

[Guest guest]

Hi Gang,

While I don't play computer games anymore I find this article and its

message to be right on target. Basically there's an enormously

successful computer game series called " The Sims " , in the Sims, as

you might guess, users simulate real life in their virtual world.

However, McDonalds wanting promote their product to this enormous

audience has decided to " add fries " to that virtual world (3).

Updated versions of the game will allow users to visit virtual

McDonalds restaurants to increase a character's fun score and

decrease the character's hunger level.

 

The article below talks about how users plan on protesting this clear

violation of reality and degradation of their game. McDonalds

doesn't enhance one's fun. Being sick and hardly able to move isn't

going to be more fun at a dance now is it? Nor can McDonalds claim

that their food satiates hunger, sure it'll fill your abdomen with

rancid garbage, but the stomach is no more full of nutrients than a

U.S. President is of morality. Hi George! Let's suppose someone eats

a McDonald's Big Mac. The denatured muck residing in the stomach

after a Big Mac fails to deliver required nutrients in recognizable

forms (1) and combinations (2). The body still requires nutrients and

is therefore still hungry. This can only lead to overeating and

stomach aches as continued consumption fails to satisfy nutritional

requirements and only worsens an already toxic state. This

discomfort serves as warning signal to the Big Mac victim not to

consume any more denatured gunk. Is this what not having hunger is

supposed to mean? Or has the digestive system of this unfortunate

McDonalds eater gone into emergency evacuation mode, thereby

disabling the hunger drive until the digestive system has mostly

recovered from " Burger Damage " .

 

(1). The processes of heating and refining foods modifies their

structure at a molecular level, thereby destroying its designed

function in the body. One of the core messages of Biology

is " structure determines function " . What happens when you cook

broccoli? It changes structure. A light green, stiff, and smooth

material becomes dark green, mushy, and grainy in texture. Didn't

the structure and function of broccoli change its no longer stiff,

it's mush. If every study ever conducted on heated fats shows them

to be carcinogenic shouldn't we conclude that denatured fat molecules

are toxic? If fat is supposed to be a source of energy and heated

fats cause cancer didn't the function of fat change with the

inclusion of heat? If heating broccoli and every other foodstuff

shows signs of molecular recombination (color changes, texture

changes, increased carbon content, you name it) shouldn't we stop

eating it for fear that it's function like its new appearance will

also be retarded. Isn't there a 500 million year track record

supporting the consumption of raw food in nature. Aren't all the

nutrients in their proper structure and combinations? Don't all

other creatures on this planet consume this way in the wild? And we

wonder why wild animals are so much healthier. Hmmm....

 

(2) The old saying goes " an Apple a day keeps the doctor away " . Well

not exactly, but an apple a day will do a far better job of that than

a multi-vitamin a day. The reason being nutrients aren't absorbed by

our organisms simply because they are the right kind. If that were

true there wouldn't be thousands of confused scientists who can't

understand why the lycopene in tomatoes has anti-cancer properties,

but the refined lycopene in a supplement does not. I'm simply

listing lycopene, because I remember doing a health assignment, where

we were supposed to extract a health related article from the

newspaper and write about it. I at the time was a 15 year-old boy,

but I understood something very simple that both the author of the

article and possibly the scientists conducting the study did not. I

understood that a single nutrient is no more useful than a single car

part without 5,000 other parts to accompany it. Not only do these

5,000 other parts have to be present, but they all have to be in the

correct combination. Simply put if I gave you a door handle and said

drive you wouldn't go anywhere. The same is true for multi-vitamins

they won't get you anywhere either. It's not the red pigment,

lycopene in tomatoes that fights cancer, it's not even the tomatoes,

it's all fruit. We're frugivores for crying out loud. Isn't eating

what our system is primarily designed for: fruit, going to cause our

engines to run as cleanly as possible, avoiding mishaps like cancer.

 

I think we are all in agreement that engineers cumulatively

understand how and why a car works, they've made millions of them.

Many of which are on the road today a testament of man's

understanding. While that's an impressive feat how many human beings

have been manufactured in a lab by machines? Zero. Could it be

possible then that we don't yet and most likely won't ever truly

understand the human body at the same level we understand

automobiles? After all a car might have +_5,000 parts, a human

organism has trillions of cells, each cell being just as complex and

potentially unique as a car model. If we lack an all-knowing

understanding of the human design, how can we possibly know the names

of all the nutrients or their specific functions? Sure Centrum might

be complete from A to Zinc out of what we know, today, but if we

don't know it all how can we create the perfect multi-vitamin? Isn't

Centrum and every other multi-vitamin company constantly adding new

nutrients to their arsenal. So if Centrum didn't have nutrient XYZ

last year, but it does now is it really complete? Or will Centrum

contain ten or more new named, identified, and refined nutrients next

year? So if Centrum isn't ever really complete from a to zinc why

not play it safe. We don't yet know every reason why fruits and

vegetables are good for us, we just have to accept that they are.

Why not consume what Centrum is trying to emulate: fruits and

veggies? If we're eating the real Mcoy it won't matter what new

nutrients they discover or fail to, you'll always be eating all of

them through effortless simplicity.

 

Isn't it also true that scientists don't know how a spider makes its

web or why a humming bird flies? If you could only eat A. an Apple

or B. a multi-vitamin and choosing the less healthy option would kill

you, which would you choose? Something that our species has been

consuming for millennia and is in line with our anatomical structure

or one of the unpalatable, chalky, science experiments we call

supplements?

 

Do these hard, dry, white, and chalky mixtures resemble life anywhere

on this planet?

No, they look like dust and in relation to both taste and nutrition

they score only slightly higher. I'm not saying that a vitamin C

tablet won't save you from dying of scurvy if you're every sailing

around the world and are stuck in the middle of the ocean without

food. Although what percentage of us are landlubbers? What I am

saying is that if you were dying of scurvy and you had your choice of

an orange or a multi-vitamin what are you going to want to take?

Which will be digested more easily by your system? Which will give

you more energy? What tastes better? What's optically more

appealing? So while a mutli-vitamin might be more useful than dust

there's always a better solution: Whole Fresh Ripe Raw Organic

Produce One at a Time When Hungry Until Full (Thank you Dr. Graham

for this wonderful saying .

 

 

-By Christian Blackburn

 

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=14530