Join 3,555 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)

Tags:

Some food with your sugar
May 1, 2009 11:02 AM   Subscribe

Would you eat a stack of 16 sugar cubes? SugarStacks makes it clear how much food you're having with your sugar. The McDonald's chocolate shake is particularly disgusting.
posted by up in the old hotel (100 comments total) 12 users marked this as a favorite

 
Do they have LSD in them?
posted by Horace Rumpole at 11:04 AM on May 1, 2009 [19 favorites]


Nice representation of the sugar in these foods - but I wouldn't say that I'm actually disgusted. I've made too many baked goods to be shocked by sugar content. Most sweet things do contain sugar, you know.
posted by The Light Fantastic at 11:05 AM on May 1, 2009


As someone who eats brown sugar when I get a sweets craving and nothing else is around, the answer is probably yes.
posted by pombe at 11:06 AM on May 1, 2009 [5 favorites]


McDonald's chocolate shake is particularly disgusting.

Huh, really? I mean, it just looks like a stack of cubes.
posted by delmoi at 11:06 AM on May 1, 2009 [5 favorites]


Don't tell us you've never eaten a whole pint of Ben & Jerrys in one sitting.

No, I haven't. Get a hold of yourselves, people.
posted by Adam_S at 11:07 AM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


That's a pretty great visualization.
posted by Pants! at 11:07 AM on May 1, 2009


The figures on the 40-oz. Blizzard have got to be wrong. It's 40 ounces! Of sugar and fat! They only list sugar values. If there really is a 40-oz. Blizzard, it's got to be around 1500 or 2000 cal.

And yea, shakes have a lot of calories and sugar and stuff. They taste good! But don't eat one every day.
posted by Mister_A at 11:09 AM on May 1, 2009


I would definitely eat 16 sugar cubes, but only as a reward for winning the Kentucky Derby.
posted by Lemurrhea at 11:09 AM on May 1, 2009 [60 favorites]


I am shocked, shocked to discover that many sweets turn out to be mainly made of sugar.

Also I'm a bit confused by the fructose=glucose thing implied. The site says We don't differentiate between different types of sugar - i.e., sucrose, fructose, cane sugar, corn syrup, honey, etc., although there are differences in how these sugars are metabolized. I know it's just a rough and ready visual aid but I did think the difference between fructose and glucose was quite important.
posted by motty at 11:09 AM on May 1, 2009


In this scenario I am a horse.
posted by Lemurrhea at 11:09 AM on May 1, 2009 [36 favorites]


Sugar cubes are so much more fun to eat that just spooning in the loose granulated stuff. When I was a kid, I'd always keep an eye out for them in waiting rooms that served coffee. Now all you get is those dumb paper packets.
posted by Devils Rancher at 11:10 AM on May 1, 2009 [5 favorites]


The McDonald's chocolate shake is particularly disgusting.

This is true, but not because of the sugar content.
posted by dirtdirt at 11:11 AM on May 1, 2009 [4 favorites]


*unwraps Sweet Chariot sugarcube*
ronch ronch ronch
posted by Bernt Pancreas at 11:11 AM on May 1, 2009 [11 favorites]


No, I haven't. Get a hold of yourselves, people.

Your gustatory failures are hardly cause for sanctimony.
posted by Devils Rancher at 11:12 AM on May 1, 2009 [40 favorites]


maybe its me, but sugar cubes make it look like not that much sugar. now if it were in a measuring cup, then maybe i'd be grossed out. this just makes it seem 'bite sized'.
posted by fuzzypantalones at 11:12 AM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


Sugar's not disgusting. It's delicious. That's the whole problem. If it were disgusting, it wouldn't be so wonderful and tempting, which is why these photos of sugarcubes actually make me want the stuff even more.
posted by MegoSteve at 11:12 AM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


McDonald's chocolate shake is particularly disgusting.
...
Huh, really? I mean, it just looks like a stack of cubes.


If you have the right greasemonkey plugin, the picture also displays a gangrenous rat leaking onto the sugarcubes.

Thanks, Plutor!
posted by Greg Nog at 11:13 AM on May 1, 2009 [11 favorites]


I am betting on you, Lemurrhea!
posted by Mister_A at 11:13 AM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


If they're part of a chocolate shake? Sure I would.
particularly disgusting
I haven't had a McDonald's shake in quite some time, and I wouldn't be surprised if they aren't very good as far as shakes go, but "disgusting" does not mean "bad for you".

If they tasted exactly the same as they do today, but had zero calories, would you still find them "disgusting"?

Say what you mean; it's bad enough as is. Trying to frame something that tastes good as "disgusting" only detracts from your message.
posted by Flunkie at 11:13 AM on May 1, 2009


Sugar cubes are good with bitters and champagne. Yum.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:13 AM on May 1, 2009 [4 favorites]


Would you eat a stack of 16 sugar cubes?

my friend jack would
posted by pyramid termite at 11:15 AM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


Thank you, Blazecock. The champagne cocktail truly is a thing of beauty. I find it helps to add a touch of cognac as well.

So, in answer to the original question, yes, I would eat a stack of 16 sugar cubes, provided there was champagne, bitters, and cognac on hand to help them go down.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:15 AM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


There are different types of sugar in food. Milk has got plenty of lactose and it comes from animals! It must be natural to eat that many sugar cubes, right? Of course, most of the things they show you here are spot on. Just sayin': does anyone really care that an apple has a lot of sugar in it?
posted by battlebison at 11:16 AM on May 1, 2009


Given that we are regularly told that these things are "full of sugar," those piles look small, relative to the whole. I am actually reminded that almost everything is full of water.
posted by palliser at 11:17 AM on May 1, 2009


Sigh. Modern manufacturing has apparently put HFCS into goddamned near everything. When will we learn?!
posted by barnacles at 11:18 AM on May 1, 2009


I agree with the message, but I don't like the site. In some of the pictures, eg the McDonalds chocolate shake one, one or more of the cubes are dirty. Not sure if this is pure carelessness or an attempt to make the stack appear more disgusting. If the latter, it's manipulative and annoying.

I don't like the stacking pattern - we are not used to evaluating quantities of anything stacked into strange gap-ridden pyramids, except perhaps cheerleaders, so again it looks like an attempt to mislead. Just stacking the cubes in a grid would be clearer.
posted by w0mbat at 11:19 AM on May 1, 2009


That's nothing. McDonalds also manages to fit 16 cubes of sugar into a single cube of sugar.
posted by zippy at 11:19 AM on May 1, 2009 [20 favorites]


C'mon, pictures of sugar cubes are not going to deter sugar crackheads from their monoclinic hemihedral crystalline based addiction. You need to go ogrish on those visualizations and put gruesome pictures depicting blood, wounds and the morbidly obese on every candy bar, dessert, ice cream and the occasional fruit. You know, like they do with cigarettes and republicans.
posted by Foci for Analysis at 11:20 AM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


Would you eat a stack of 16 sugar cubes?

Yes, I would. And I would enjoy it.
posted by Squeak Attack at 11:20 AM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


Sugar cubes are good with bitters and champagne. Yum.

Or the heady mixture of absinthe and champagne. Hic!
posted by ob at 11:20 AM on May 1, 2009


Sugar's not disgusting. It's delicious. That's the whole problem. If it were disgusting, it wouldn't be so wonderful and tempting, which is why these photos of sugarcubes actually make me want the stuff even more.

SugarStacks appreciates the feedback from readers that has flooded in since the site came online. From now on we will be illustrating sugar content according to equivalent number of Cadbury Easter Creme Eggs.
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 11:23 AM on May 1, 2009


... or an Old-Fashioned.
posted by uncleozzy at 11:23 AM on May 1, 2009


I dislike the shaming tone in the captions. Honey roasted? Sugar coated is more like it. NO RILLY?!

Hm, this might just be my fat-kid rage speaking. I do think it would be much more effective without the snarky captions and with a more normal arrangement--like w0mbat said. Because, yeah, holy crap there's a lot of sugar in the food we eat.
posted by Neofelis at 11:24 AM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


I have picked and eaten two or three oranges in a sitting from the tree in my yard which, according to that website, is more sugar than that shake. I must be a bad person.
posted by GuyZero at 11:25 AM on May 1, 2009 [3 favorites]


That's nothing. McDonalds also manages to fit 16 cubes of sugar into a single cube of sugar.

They even came up with Shaky McShakes, Ronald's older, sugar-addicted step-brother that few in the McDonald family like to talk about. After years of dental reconstruction in secret labs in Scotland, he comes back with a big smile and helps promote the McCube Happy Happy Really Happy Meal.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:25 AM on May 1, 2009


Or the heady mixture of absinthe and champagne.

I can't decide if you are a vile creature which must be purged from our midst with holy fire, or if in fact you are the holy fire itself come to purge us.

Quite the puzzle.
posted by aramaic at 11:25 AM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


Whoever made this page ruined the whole thing with the captions. Any interesting point they might have is ruined by the fucking hideous commentary.

Hey, why not cover that healthy salad with some sugar?

Is that brain freeze or a sugar rush?

Honey roasted? Sugar coated is more like it.


The comment attached to the Cheerios did amuse me though:

Of course, we just end up pouring sugar all over these anyway.
posted by slimepuppy at 11:29 AM on May 1, 2009


I feel like there must be some better way of showing the real relationship of sugar-by-volume, which is basically what they are trying to do.

An easy example would be to just have an soda bottle filled to the appropriate level with granular sugar.

If they want to get serious about it, they could do partial sugar sculptures of the solid foods.
posted by He Is Only The Imposter at 11:29 AM on May 1, 2009 [3 favorites]


Yes, I am now hungry.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:30 AM on May 1, 2009


Eat it? You need to shoot it in the mainline, son. You can smell it going in, clean and cold in your nose and throat then a rush of pure pleasure right through the brain lighting up those sugar connections.
posted by The Straightener at 11:33 AM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


Back in the late 80s I liked sugarcubes.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 11:35 AM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


It's nice that they have provided a handy reference so I can just replace my diet with the equivalent amount of sugar cubes, with maybe a vitamin and/or fiber supplement.
posted by owtytrof at 11:39 AM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


Dangit flapjax!

But still, who would not eat them up? They're so adorable!
posted by Mister_A at 11:45 AM on May 1, 2009


Would you eat a stack of 16 sugar cubes?

Can we deep fry them first?
posted by doctor_negative at 11:47 AM on May 1, 2009


Would you eat a stack of 16 sugar cubes?

You mean again? Before lunch? Well, ok, but let me finish my bag of marshmallows first.
posted by blue_beetle at 11:49 AM on May 1, 2009 [6 favorites]


How dense are sugar cubes, compared to loose sugar?
posted by smackfu at 11:49 AM on May 1, 2009


I thought it was an interesting visualization. Thanks for posting it.
posted by agregoli at 11:49 AM on May 1, 2009


Whoa, milkshakes have sugar?! Who knew!
posted by DU at 11:51 AM on May 1, 2009


Whatever you do, don't mention the Krebs Cycle.
posted by maudlin at 11:53 AM on May 1, 2009 [3 favorites]


Or the heady mixture of absinthe and champagne.
I can't decide if you are a vile creature which must be purged from our midst with holy fire, or if in fact you are the holy fire itself come to purge us.


You've never had a Death in the Afternoon? They're wonderful-- even better with a sugar cube.
posted by dersins at 11:55 AM on May 1, 2009


is there sugar in syrup?
posted by snofoam at 11:58 AM on May 1, 2009


Grandma Ople's Apple Pie:

1 recipe pastry for a 9 inch double crust pie
1/2 cup unsalted butter
3 tablespoons all-purpose flour
1/4 cup water
1/2 cup white sugar
1/2 cup packed brown sugar

8 Granny Smith apples - peeled, cored and sliced

1. Preheat oven to 425 degrees F (220 degrees C). Melt the butter in a saucepan. Stir in flour to form a paste. Add water, white sugar and brown sugar, and bring to a boil. Reduce temperature and let simmer.

2. Place the bottom crust in your pan. Fill with apples, mounded slightly. Cover with a lattice work of crust. Gently pour the sugar and butter liquid over the crust. Pour slowly so that it does not run off.

3. Bake 15 minutes in the preheated oven. Reduce the temperature to 350 degrees F (175 degrees C). Continue baking for 35 to 45 minutes, until apples are soft.

Detailed nutritional info:

Serving Size 1/8 of a recipe
Servings Per Recipe 8
Calories 521
Calories from Fat 243
Total Fat 27g 41 %
Saturated Fat 11g 55 %
Cholesterol 31mg 10 %
Sodium 241mg 10 %
Potassium 242mg 7 %
Total Carbohydrates 69.7g 22 %
Dietary Fiber 5.5g 22 %
Protein 3.4g 7 %
Sugars 43g
Vitamin A 10 %
Vitamin C 13 %
Calcium 4 %
Iron 19 %
Thiamin 22 %
Niacin 14 %
Vitamin B6 5 %
Magnesium 6 %
Folate 22 %

43 grams per slice!! Thats a whole cube more than a can of coke. Clearly Grandma Ople is a tool of Big Sugar.
posted by Pollomacho at 12:05 PM on May 1, 2009 [3 favorites]


I think this has some value, for candy and soda - everybody knows that those foods are mainly sugar, but it might help to see exactly how much.

Otherwise, it's not only useless, it's misleading. The site sort of implies, through its snarky captions and layout, that foods containing sugar are always worse for you than foods without sugar. That little note at the bottom about how they don't differentiate between different types of sugar? That makes the site pretty much useless, in my opinion. Nutrition is VERY COMPLICATED, and people have been getting incomplete, misleading, bad advice for decades. Although they don't say so anywhere, their site obviously disparages high-sugar foods, which easily gives the impression that they rank nutritional value only by sugar content (strawberries are "better" than grapes, etc). I'm sure they don't mean to do that, but there is ENOUGH oversimplified, unscientific and sensationalist nutrition out there... I don't think we need any more.
posted by Cygnet at 12:09 PM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


(Interesting post though - I'm glad to see it, even though I disagree.)
posted by Cygnet at 12:10 PM on May 1, 2009


Sugar is probably the least unhealthy ingredient in most of these food items.
posted by rocket88 at 12:13 PM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


I actually found myself more fascinated by the fruits and cereals section -- in a couple cases where I found that some things have LESS sugar than I thought. Pineapples have less sugar content than watermelon? Or oranges? That was very surprising.

And Cheerios and Special K have THAT little sugar? Keen! (No, I actually DON'T add sugar to my cereal. I didn't even add MILK to my cereal until the age of 35. I really, really didn't like soggy cereal as a kid.)
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 12:16 PM on May 1, 2009


How dense are sugar cubes, compared to loose sugar?

A sugar cube is a teaspoon of sugar.
posted by The Light Fantastic at 12:17 PM on May 1, 2009


Oh, and I would totally eat 16 sugar cubes, particularly if I had a glass of water to dissolve them in.
posted by He Is Only The Imposter at 12:17 PM on May 1, 2009


The comment attached to the Cheerios did amuse me though:

Of course, we just end up pouring sugar all over these anyway.


As a child I usually ate my corn flakes with sugar on them.

I didn't have any behaviour issues, but I have a loooooot of fillings.
posted by GuyZero at 12:17 PM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


As a high school freshman, I used to alternate between sucking on a sugar cube, then sucking on a buillion cube.
posted by nomisxid at 12:21 PM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


Nobody can eat 50 eggs 16 sugar cubes.
posted by total warfare frown at 12:29 PM on May 1, 2009


The McDonald's chocolate shake is particularly disgusting.

Back when I was 16 I worked for McDonalds for a few months. My experiences there have prevented me from ever eating their food again, but during my time working there I gained a reputation as the guy who would eat anything on the menu. We were permitted one free meal per shift, but in order to prevent us from wasting the valuable time of our co-workers (HA!) we had to make our own food if we wanted a special order. Thus was born the EVERYMEAT BURGER: One bun, one Big 'n' Tasty hamburger patty, one Filet o' Fish patty, one Grilled Chicken, one Crispy Chicken and a slice of bacon, with a slice of cheese between each meat layer.

Horrifyingly, this was not the worst thing that I ever ate from my place of employment. The chocolate syrup that McDonalds puts on their Sundaes comes in long plastic bags. I don't know precisely how much chocolate syrup is in one of these bags, but since each one filled the entire dispenser, I'd guess that it's somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 liters. One night, as I was leaving work, I grabbed on of these bags. I'm not really sure why. When I told my friends about it the next day, one of them decided to match my shenanigans by grabbing one of the Mountain Dew syrup bags that was used to fill the soda fountain at his work. That night, as my weekly gaming group got together to slay some orcs, we proceeded to eat the contents of both bags with spoons until we vomited.

There are two lessons in all of this. The first is that the notion that the amount of sugar in a McDonalds chocalate shake is "particularly disgusting" really depends on what your basis of comparison is. The second is that teenage boys are fucking idiots.
posted by Parasite Unseen at 12:44 PM on May 1, 2009 [25 favorites]


Of course, we just end up pouring sugar all over these anyway.

Count me as another who never put sugar on cereal. The idea never occurred to me, and my favorite cereals were usually things like Cheerios, Kix, and Rice Krispies as a kid. Also, it makes the milk all gritty and crunchy.
posted by cmgonzalez at 1:02 PM on May 1, 2009


That's about twice as much sugar as you would put on unsweetened cereal.

Three cubes! Ha! They never watched my dad eat breakfast. He puts that much on his sweetened cereal.
posted by katillathehun at 1:08 PM on May 1, 2009


They want to add vast amounts of sugar to our food. And again, our food is not something that you just dump sugar into. It's not a big bag. It's a series of cubes.
posted by oaf at 1:29 PM on May 1, 2009 [8 favorites]


The McDonald's chocolate shake is particularly disgusting.

Well, those of us of a certain age remember that they come from sewage lakes.
*hums "Mcdonald's is your kind of place, hamburgers in your face..."*
posted by TedW at 1:37 PM on May 1, 2009


Adam_S: "Don't tell us you've never eaten a whole pint of Ben & Jerrys in one sitting.

No, I haven't. Get a hold of yourselves, people.
"

You're probably the only one then. As far as I know, the caps don't even fit back on once you've opened the container.
posted by octothorpe at 1:47 PM on May 1, 2009 [5 favorites]


Also, it makes the milk all gritty and crunchy.

i.e. THE BEST THING IN THE WORLD. Oh sludgy sugar-milk, you wanton temptress!
posted by Horace Rumpole at 1:51 PM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


So what's the deal with McDonald's chocolate milkshakes? By which I mean, they just aren't very good. I can never taste the chocolate.
posted by These Premises Are Alarmed at 2:03 PM on May 1, 2009


Would you eat a stack of 16 sugar cubes?

Why yes, yes I would. Hand 'em over. I'll eat the whole fucking box. No water required.

Wait, what the fuck is this? A Coke? No thanks. No, I don't want a McDonald's milkshake. Can I trade that in for an In-n-Out shake? No? Look, just give me the sugar cubes and no one gets hurt, ok?
posted by loquacious at 2:04 PM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


From the site's description of McDonald's milkshake: That's more sugar than a whole pint of ice cream!

But it's a pint and a third of milkshake...
posted by the christopher hundreds at 2:27 PM on May 1, 2009 [3 favorites]


I'm never having a McD milkshake again. I had one last year, and though it wasn't any good, you can't get a proper milkshake in this country, and I had a massive craving for one.
posted by flippant at 2:55 PM on May 1, 2009


Can someone throw out some good links for me to read on sugar and imperialism, while we're sort of on the topic?
posted by aniola at 3:04 PM on May 1, 2009


I would like to note that I put sugar on pizza, and it is delicious.
posted by Kwine at 3:49 PM on May 1, 2009


Is it just me, or does everyone want to take all those little sugar cubes and make a sugar igloo out of them?
posted by misha at 3:59 PM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


I honestly would eat 16 sugar cubes. I have an incredible sweet tooth, so I can't really turn that down.
posted by nameinruins at 4:09 PM on May 1, 2009


I fucking love sugar.

I want some sugar right now.
posted by empath at 4:22 PM on May 1, 2009


I'm actually surprised that most of these don't have more sugar
posted by Holy foxy moxie batman! at 4:24 PM on May 1, 2009


I used to shoot sugar cubes at beavers. It's irritating so they leave, yet harmless so they're not hurt, and it sticks in their fur and if they eat it they need water, pretty much the perfect non harmful anti-beaver projectile. Then you move in with the roofing tar (uh, for the trees).
I think it's the animal equivalent of getting hit with $10 in change: "Ow! Hey! Oh...thanks!".
posted by Smedleyman at 4:49 PM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


I agree, pyramid is the worst choice to make the relative amounts clear. Better choice would be a single line and have all the images be the same width so that the most sugary item had a line of cubes all the way across the image.
posted by autodidact at 5:11 PM on May 1, 2009


It's weird, but sugar is kind of meh to me anymore. I think it's the lack of flavor-it's sweet, but doesn't have any other taste. I don't really like candies that are just sugar either. I prefer things that are savory (like PB & chocolate), and sour things.
posted by !Jim at 5:23 PM on May 1, 2009


Curiously enough, no one mentioned so far that a diet too rich of sugar/carbohydrates is a factor in Diabetes, which can slowly render your life miserable and kill you.
posted by elpapacito at 5:53 PM on May 1, 2009


The numbers for the Blizzard have to be wrong. It's a high fat & sugar item with twice the volume of the shake and it has half the calories? Somebodies got the facts wrong.
posted by chairface at 6:09 PM on May 1, 2009


Just for the record, they are now selling Snapple and Pepsi with "natural sugar" (i.e. not HFCS) and they have significantly more sugar than the info on the beverages page. More than 20% more.
posted by paisley henosis at 6:29 PM on May 1, 2009


Curiously enough, no one mentioned so far that a diet too rich of sugar/carbohydrates is a factor in Diabetes, which can slowly render your life miserable and kill you.

That's a myth perpetuated by the vegetable lobby.
posted by jimmythefish at 6:56 PM on May 1, 2009 [1 favorite]


Curiously enough, no one mentioned so far that a diet too rich of sugar/carbohydrates is a factor in Diabetes, which can slowly render your life miserable and kill you.

Meh. The alcohol will kill my liver long before that.
posted by dirigibleman at 8:40 PM on May 1, 2009 [2 favorites]


Elpapacito, I hate to break this to you, but from your link:

There is inadequate evidence that eating foods of low glycemic index is clinically helpful despite recommendations and suggested diets emphasizing this approach.[33]
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 8:48 PM on May 1, 2009


Someone needs to make this with butter to visualize the amount of fat... anyone want to register butterstacks.com?
posted by pineappleclock at 1:07 AM on May 2, 2009


I don't think I got out of this quite the lesson the site's creator was hoping. For example, I learned that so-called healthy beverages like juice and vitamin water have a fair amount of sugar in them, anyway. I learned that there's a lot less sugar in a milkshake than I would have imagined.

And most importantly, I learned that all those delicious, yummy cereals that my mommy would never let me eat when I was growing up because she called them "sugar shit" really have very little sugar in them at all.

WTF, MOM?!?!
posted by jacquilynne at 10:00 AM on May 2, 2009


Just for the record, they are now selling Snapple and Pepsi with "natural sugar" (i.e. not HFCS) and they have significantly more sugar than the info on the beverages page. More than 20% more.

isn't the idea behind that that natural sugar is "better" for you than hfcs? and so it is now "okay" for you to have their stuff again?
posted by misanthropicsarah at 10:17 AM on May 2, 2009


That's a very sad looking Cinnabon in the breakfast listings. If they actually looked like that, I'd find it easier to walk past them at the mall.
posted by sevenyearlurk at 11:38 AM on May 2, 2009


Would you eat a stack of 16 sugar cubes?

No, but I would eat a whole Bjork.
posted by ericbop at 6:17 PM on May 2, 2009


Bjork. The other white meat.

I'm so sorry.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:20 PM on May 2, 2009 [1 favorite]


My experiences there have prevented me from ever eating their food again

I doubled your time, at 4 months. It was like prison.

So what's the deal with McDonald's chocolate milkshakes? By which I mean, they just aren't very good.

Back when I worked there, anyway -- the 1980's -- they weren't milkshakes. They were just... Shakes. I'll leave you to puzzle out the legalese behind the peculiar nomenclature.

(All I knew was that it somehow involved some sort of emulsified oil and corn starch).
posted by Devils Rancher at 6:36 PM on May 2, 2009


it somehow involved some sort of emulsified oil and corn starch)

ewww...
posted by flapjax at midnite at 7:35 PM on May 2, 2009


I have a very high tolerance for sugar: I used to buy a four-pack of Cinnabons every Friday after work. I'd also get two little containers of extra frosting. I'd eat two rolls on Saturday morning and two on Sunday morning. Ah, those were the days.

Why yes, I am diabetic. Why do you ask?
posted by deborah at 9:17 PM on May 2, 2009


Eating a stack of sugar cubes will not do any good for your teeth LOL
posted by bennyzebs at 8:41 AM on May 3, 2009


One thing -- a thing that's entirely obvious, of course -- is that old-style (not that old, of course -- a decade or more, maybe) sweets and pastries and drinks here in Korea are not very sweet at all, but they're really good. These days, with the xtreemification of food and western habits and manufacturers gaining a foothold, it's changing. Same thing with salty snacks.

But once you get used to a little more subtlety in your unhealthy snacky junky food -- ironic given the in-your-face nature of most Korean food -- it's hard to enjoy the excessive salt and sugar in the stuff that's sold in the west.

I don't know. I usually just eat fruit.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:49 PM on May 3, 2009


No, but I would eat a whole Bjork.

You aren't a bear by chance are you?
posted by Pollomacho at 7:04 AM on May 4, 2009


Would it be better if the cubes were brown sugar? Cuz that's what me and my horse eat.
posted by Lesser Shrew at 5:30 PM on May 6, 2009


« Older For those who might be unaware: One of the great b...  |  At the mostly abandoned Moffet... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments