There's literally a section in the documentary where his doc is like 'You're getting liver damage from this diet. I don't believe it. I've only ever seen this from alcoholics.'
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
125 points (90.3% liked)
People Twitter
7670 readers
1496 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Tells you something about the impact it had that people would still try to discredit it all those years later! What's OP's point, eh? McD every day is gonna be healthy if you don't drink. Get outta here!
No, I think their point was more the fact that it's heralded by people as a great study but is massively flawed and with obvious outcomes. There wasn't really anything stringent done in the documentary. Any impact it had was purely from shit people already knew. He had no controlled experiments and was an active alcoholic during it.
My point, personally, is that people who reference Supersize Me in any capacity as a valid documentary or study is someone who is either uneducated or a fool. There's little difference in holding this documentary to your chest and referring to it or in doing the same thing to Joe Rogan or Bill Maher's Religulous. It's low-effort garbage that's not made for intellectual consumption but is still used for it anyway.
That's kinda problematic.
That's my point.
It wasn't a study. It was a stunt. The stunt worked. People ate less fast food, and laws were passed restricting the companies ability to market to children.
I'm not saying it was a study, I'm saying people refer to it as one or treat it as one with alarming regularity.
Some people are stupid and they will believe anything that they see on TV. With how this documentary was framed as well, a lot of people just went about their lives assuming it was something that was reviewed and unflawed. There is a reason it was such a big deal when it came out he was an alcoholic during filming. About half of the documentary becomes completely worthless because we now know he was seriously lying during filming about what he was consuming. Which suddenly calls the entire thing into question because if he's willing to slide on something as major as that, then what is the value of the rest of it?