Monday, November 06, 2006

Calories are good!

Much hand-wringing amongst the health gurus over the new Burger King promotion in the UK:
It's the calorific equivalent of downing four and a half pints of lager, gorging on five chocolate bars or scoffing 13 digestive biscuits in one sitting.
Weighing in at a belt-busting 923 calories, Burger King's Double Whopper with Cheese is so fattening that a typical man would need to walk for nine miles to burn it off.
As a new advertising campaign for the Double Whopper targets the supersize burger at men fed-up with healthy "chick food", campaigners yesterday warned that Britain is going through a health food backlash.
The food group Sustain is so incensed by Burger King's "irresponsible" advert, that it has lodged a complaint with the industry watchdog.
The new campaign for the Double Whopper – which promotes the burger with the question "Are you man enough?" – comes just a few months after McDonald's unveiled the Bigger Big Mac for the World Cup containing 669 calories.
"Burger King's response to the obesity crisis seems to be to bury its head in the sand, and continue to produce larger and larger burgers," said Sustain's children's food campaigner Richard Watts.
"It is irresponsible to link stuffing your face with a burger that contains more than half your daily allowance of fat with 'manliness'."
The Double Whopper comes in two varieties – a plain burger with 841 calories, and a cheese version with 923 calories. The latter has 57g of fat and 3.5g of salt.
"This kind of advert shows the food industry cannot be trusted to regulate itself," added Mr Watts. "If the Government is serious about defusing the health time bomb of obesity, they need to end adverts for this kind of product before the 9pm watershed."
*rolls eyes*
Further signs of the decline in Western society is evident in this article about the new James Bond:
For decades, the debate among 007 fans has been who is the best Bond — Sean Connery or Roger Moore.
Now a new contender has arrived, in the shape of Daniel Craig — the blond 38-year-old, who despite being a cold-blooded killer, manages to fall in love with his Bond girl and show emotional vulnerability.
"It's terrific," said one critic. "This is going to be the prequel to all other Bonds. There are a lot of fans who prefer either Moore or Connery but Craig could be better.
"This will make Craig a worldwide star. The James Bond films are watched absolutely everywhere."
"Casino Royale is the story of how Bond got started, before he became 007," he said. "Daniel Craig is such a good actor. He plays him as strong but emotionally vulnerable. For the first time you see Bond's sensitive side."
There is no sexual innuendo in this film; Craig's Bond is more sophisticated than that. And the film makers have been sure to show the consequences of violence — he bleeds.
Now I grant that in the past Bond did (briefly) mourn his murdered wife, but 'emotional vulnerability'? No innuendo? No Moneypenny? What is wrong with Hollywood? It's only a matter of time before they produce a film about the retired 007 who gets in touch with his inner-self and settles down in a 'domestic partnership' with Q.

No comments: