Jul 7, 2009 10:51am
What Exactly Does a 6,190 Calorie Lunch Do to Your Body?
EmailAfter reading a report by a consumer group about the effects of unhealthy food from popular chain restaurants, ABC's Yuji de Nies and Jon Garcia conducted a test to see how eating these foods for lunch would affect their bodies.
Before they ate lunch, Yunji and Jon had blood samples drawn and an ultrasound done to test the health of their arteries. They then sat down to a meal of 6,190 calories and 187 grams of saturated fat – an appetizer, lunch and dessert from a popular chain restaurant.
To see what happened to their blood and arteries immediately following the meal, watch the clip below.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
that’s nothing we have ‘the heart attack grill’ here in phoenix that if you eat biggest burger they’ll cart you out in a wheelchair. but that’s just nasty thinking of eating that many calories @ one sitting.
Posted by: juniorsgv | July 7, 2009, 11:48 am 11:48 am
I had no idea that ONE meal would affect your arteries and blood such as that. This was the most educational eye-opener from ABC ever.
I always thought it was only cummulative, but I now know what ONE bad choice can do to your heart (let alone a lifetime of bad choices).
Thank you.
Posted by: ddg | July 7, 2009, 12:58 pm 12:58 pm
There was no mention of the number of grams of carbohydrates contained in this meal. From the looks of it there were probably at least 300 grams of high glycemic index carbs (sugar, refined flour, potatoes). Did Yuji and Jon have their insulin levels measured before and after eating? Elevated insulin levels could produce some of the observed results – especially since they disappeared after 6 hours.
Shame on ABC for broadcasting such a misleading report!
Posted by: skeptic | July 7, 2009, 3:33 pm 3:33 pm
Carbohydrates cause the spike in triglycerides, not the fat consumed. Dr. Miller is a low-fat proponent, which is fine. He’s also incredibly ignorant about the true effects of all types of foods on blood chemistry. The ABC news story perpetuates the “fat is bad” myth with sloppy reporting.
Posted by: ET | July 7, 2009, 5:23 pm 5:23 pm
Yup, yet another ignorant, non-scientific, lazy-journalism piece about the evils of fat.
All eating is temporarily inflammitory… processed refined carbohydrate is the real culprit.
Posted by: AnotherSkeptic | July 7, 2009, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm
AnotherSkeptic wrote: “All eating is temporarily inflammitory… processed refined carbohydrate is the real culprit.”
True on both points. But I have to feel that anything not done in moderation can’t be good, especially 6K+ calories at one sitting, which would have to have a lot of fat in order for a thin woman to finish it.
The NIH recommends roughly 50% calories from carbs, 25% from proteins, and 25% from fats. If you follow that, get a good portion of green veggies, stay away from bad fats, burnt meats and too much red meat, and be prudent in the number of calories consumed, you’re eating healthy. If you’re not – you’re not.
Posted by: The_Mick | July 7, 2009, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
It was still an eye-opener no matter what caused the change in the blood and how it affected the blood flow in the arteries.
Of course, carbs affect blood sugar, which is a big problem in today’s society.
The whole story is to educate people how a ‘popular’ meal in some restaurants can do a whole lot of damage – whether it’s for that day or over a lifetime of bad choices.
I still say ‘congrats’ to ABC.
Posted by: ddg | July 8, 2009, 1:28 am 1:28 am
Only thing I am hearing these skeptics and pundits talking about is carbohydrates and proteins and all that! Did you observe the effect of it? It does not matter what they did. There are ton of people out there need help. This is how they eat and these reports are worth every penny or they will not listen! May be you are the smartest people but rest may not be. If this kind of diet continues over time even not these many calories, you are bound to have your heart pound like that the way you saw in the video. Why would you do that? It is not just diet, insulin and fat that matters a lot but understanding the overall mechanism of the body, breath and mind that matters. I mean the whole person. This report is worth every penny! Wake up!
Posted by: NP | July 8, 2009, 9:08 am 9:08 am
Oh please, here come the low-carb crowd with all this about how it’s the processed carbs that wreck your arteries. Sure, process carbs are bad, but that doesn’t mean all that fat is good. Meals high in unprocessed carbs do not show the same results as this fatty meal, so it’s the fat people. What’s the only diet that has ever been clinically proven to reverse heart disease? Ornish and Esselstyn’s no oil plant based diet. Any other diet ever do that over the long term? The answer is no. What evidence is there that eating gobs of fat will reverse actual heart disease? Show us one study that’s ever done that. You can’t because there are none.
Posted by: aardvark | July 8, 2009, 12:28 pm 12:28 pm
NP posted: Only thing I am hearing these skeptics and pundits talking about is carbohydrates and proteins and all that! Did you observe the effect of it? It does not matter what they did.
Sorry, NP. It matters because the video completely ignored the harmful effects of excessive refined carbohydrates on the body. The clear message conveyed was that the meal was unhealthy because it contained 187 grams of saturated fat. Simply eliminating saturated fat and replacing it with refined carbs (eg low fat cheese, ice cream, etc) does not make it healthy.
Posted by: skeptic | July 8, 2009, 12:31 pm 12:31 pm
Here’s the breakdown for just the dessert: 2800 calories, 136 fat grams (72 grams saturated), 380 carb grams, and 28 grams of protein. So whatever type of calories you believe causes obesity and health problems, the saturated fat or the simple carbs, there’s more than enough of either to do you in.
Posted by: foodie | July 9, 2009, 12:30 am 12:30 am
Why do people have to sound like they know everything and point out that other people are wrong to make themselves look/feel better. Who gives a flying *#^& if the info was somewhat incorrect. If it helps someone make a better food choice then I think it is extremely beneficial and life saving. Some people are just pompous!
Posted by: Unknown | July 9, 2009, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm
Why are Americans so afraid of intelligent people and truthful answers? Being correct does matter. You assume that people who strive to be correct are pompous or arrogant, compensating for poor self-esteem. Why? Why aren’t people allowed to simply search for the right answer? Good enough is not good enough.
These mean-spirited attacks on people who only want the truth don’t make any sense. It’s shameful.
Posted by: Benjamin | July 20, 2009, 12:57 pm 12:57 pm
ESSENTIAL fatty acids
ESSENTIAL amino acids (protein)
There are NO essential carbohydrates.
So which of the 3 macro-nutrient categories do you think you should limit first, the ones we need to live, or the ones that make the ‘corn farmers’ lots of money.
Posted by: Chris | August 4, 2009, 8:17 am 8:17 am
THATS DISCUSTING!
i would NEVER eat that in my life-time.
Posted by: mic | January 16, 2010, 9:43 pm 9:43 pm
It’s ridiculous but who really eats like that? My suggestion is if you do go to one of those weekend hot spots, to drink a glass of water before the food and a small apple before you leave the house.
Also, Turmeric (curcumin) capsules and 1000 MG’s of Vitamin C and 400 IU’s of E taken 30 minutes before eating will prevent the triglyceride spike up. also lots of garlic, plenty of water, and avoiding sodium will help. The biggest problem not addressed in the clip is the salt. it’s probably 8000 grams and that’s what narrows blood vessels the most.
Posted by: michelle | September 23, 2010, 7:41 pm 7:41 pm
The real question is not only on good and bad food, but eating far far too much. Excess wight is a huge health problem in the wastern world.
Posted by: Heikki | September 28, 2010, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
Not simple carbs, if the couple sat down to a 6000 calorie fresh fruit meal, they wouldn’t have clogged arteries…no way.
Posted by: Shifrah | September 28, 2010, 6:00 pm 6:00 pm
Plus if fruit gave people diabetes, all the apes and monkeys in the wild would be on insulin.
Posted by: Shifrah | September 28, 2010, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm
If they sat down to a 6000 calorie fruit meal, they wouldn’t have clogged anything.
And let’s be frank. It’s not usually good to sit down and eat 6000 calories of ANYTHING at once.
That said, yes the carbs in 6000 calories of fruit is enough to cause a serious sugar spike, which is enough to raise your trigycerides.
Posted by: Honey | October 15, 2010, 5:04 pm 5:04 pm
A 6,000 calorie fruit meal would be impossible to eat. You would need to eat:
18 cups of cantaloupe 979 calories
10 seven inch bananas 1,050 calories
9 large apples 1,044 calories
12 cups of pineapple 990 calories
17 cups of grapes 1,020 calories
20 cups of strawberries 922 calories
For a total of 6,005 calories. This would be over 5 gallons of food.
Posted by: Daniel | October 27, 2010, 11:28 am 11:28 am
LOL what kind of idiot is going to eat that? That’s an extremely high fat meal. I’d be more interested in hearing about what a moderately high fat meal does, not the extreme of 187 g.
Posted by: Lisa | January 8, 2011, 3:52 pm 3:52 pm