Tuesday, February 06, 2007


McDonalds had some new food on the horizon. HealthiER food. Not healthy food. Although the heart foundation org sprout fine words about nutritional standards etc, how they actually measure a product for a big red healthy tick, it is by a comparative method. By allocating a red tick to some McDonalds food, what they are saying is that is that it is the best of a bad job.

Although I live almost opposite a McDonalds, I may only buy some of their food perhaps twice a year. For proper food during the day when I am feeling lazy, I go to the close by cafe and get a very fine salad roll or sandwich.

But there is just the odd occasion when I want lots of fat, sugar and salt, that is a big fat and greasy burger small, dry, tasteless and bland burger and I know exactly where to go. Apart from my loon mother who likes to buy a McDonalds salad to take on a picnic, why would anyone go to McDonalds for healthy food? I don't want healthy food from McDonalds. I want bad food and I don't want it to change.


  1. It's still bad... it's been a well known fact for years that the tick can be bought for the right price.

  2. "No, you can NOT have fries with that. You can have a salad, however"

    If I wanted a god damn salad, I wouldn't go to maccas.

  3. Why would you go to McDonalds when you can get more realistic (ie not plastic) hamburgers at Hungry Jacks. I whole heartedly agree with their advertising slogan "The burgers are better at Hungry Jacks".

  4. HJs are actually quite good, gotta agree with Ben there, though the best burgers I've had in a while are at the Happy Days diner at Highpoint. REAL burgers. With a proper fried egg. If I'm going to buy a heartattack-to-go, I want a decent one.

  5. Yeah, I prefer HJ. Vaguely near a proper Aussie hamburger