Recommended Posts

If you watched the London Olympics last summer, you saw a parade of top athletes touting the nutritional qualities of their favorite eatery: Subway. Watching Apolo Ohno or Robert Griffin III bite into a veggie footlong with avocado or hearing that Subway is ?the official training restaurant of athletes everywhere,? you might get the idea that the food served at the chain isn?t that bad for you?that it?s even healthy.

Think again.

Researchers from the University of California Los Angeles found that despite claims to the contrary, Subway is just as unhealthy as the oft-reviled golden arches of McDonald?s?which long had the most locations in the country of any fast-food chain until Subway surpassed it in 2011.

?Every day, millions of people eat at McDonald?s and Subway, the two largest fast food chains in the world,? Dr. Lenard Lesser?who led the research while a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholar in the department of family medicine at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health?said in the UCLA statement. ?With childhood obesity at record levels, we need to know the health impact of kids? choices at restaurants.?

Lesser, who is now a researcher at the Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, did so by recruiting 97 adolescents, ages 12 to 21, to purchase meals at McDonald?s and Subway restaurants at a shopping mall in Carson, CA. The young people consumed an average of 1,038 calories at McDonald?s. They consumed an average of 955 calories at Subway?a statistically insignificant difference from McDonald?s. The Institute of Medicine recommends that students consume no more than 850 calories in school lunches.

While total calories were slightly lower at Subway, the average calories per sandwich purchased and sodium content were both higher at Subway. The Subway sandwiches contained an average of 784 calories, versus 572 at McDonald?s. The sodium content at both restaurants was three times higher than the IOM recommended daily dose: 2,149 mg at Subway versus 1,829 mg at McDonald?s.

While the results may surprise the average consumer, they did not catch nutritionist Lisa R. Young off guard. At fast-food restaurants commonly thought to be healthier, Young says customers may even eat worse than they would at a chain thought to be less healthy?a phenomenon known as the ?health halo.? Because diners assume they?re eating healthier overall, they may not pay close enough attention to the nutritional content of what they?re ordering. And at the end of the day, Subway and McDonald?s are still fast food.

?I do not recommend fast food if you want to eat healthy,? says Young, author of The Portion Teller?s Diet. ?With a few exceptions, fast food is still fast food?high in fat and calories.?

source

If you watched the London Olympics last summer, you saw a parade of top athletes touting the nutritional qualities of their favorite eatery:

No... No I did not. The BBC coverage did not contain adverts ;)

This study has a HUGE flaw which they kind of hint at. At subway you can make your sub a lot healthier. I usually get only vinegar on my sub which has 0 calories . I also pick the one with the least amount of calories listed to start with.

They basically wrote down the calories of what people were ordering. Based on this they say subway is just as bad. Also by the looks of it the fries were not counted in their calories counting for mcdonalds.

Subway you have the choice to eat healthy or unhealthy.

This review shows that consumers choice to eat unhealthy at Subway.

  • Like 2

True the caloric difference might be insignificant. But what about the fat content, cholesterol, oil? There are many, many other things that make food healthy or unhealthy. Did this "study" even bother to look at the other stuff?

  • Like 2

Calories are not really a problem unless they come from fructose, so it'd be interesting to know where these calories come from in Subway sandwiches vs a typical McDonald meal. If people order a large soft drink with their Subway sandwich then it's not really the sandwich that's the problem. ;)

I'm more worried about the sodium content, 2000+mg is an astounding amount, how do they manage to put that much? Extra salt? BBQ sauce?

As long as you do enough exercise to burn up the calories you don't need for normal respiration then the 'healthy' argument falls flat on it's face.

If you eat 5,000 calories (equal to 1lb of calorie mass) but, however do enough exercise (as a man 2,500, woman 3,000) to burn off the excess

then eat 5 big macs and a bucket of French fried if they equate to 2,500 (man) 3,000 (woman) respectively to calorific value.

Subway differs to the competition in that it offers customers what they want. That means it can be very healthy (e.g. a 6" low fat sub with low fat sauce) or very unhealthy (e.g. a 12" meatball sub with cheese and mayo). It really is up to the individual. The one area I would say criticism is due is the constant push to upsell larger subs and meal deals, which is little different to the "supersize" scandal that hit McDonald's.

You probably expect the people in the study that eat the unhealthy stuff to also eat unhealthy anyway so, just a normal day. they should of got ppl who were health freaks to unhealthy eaters to do the study and find out what they would have and what group ordered what. whether they chose to reduce what was on there sandwich or increase it etc

Looks like you guys covered it all pretty well. Not much more left to say. :laugh: Next thing you know they are going to come out with a revolutionary study that says that your salad is less healthy than McDonalds because they tested a salad loaded with fried chicken, bacon, cheese and salad dressing.

People that come out with assinine "studies" like this are just an insult to those of us with enough brain to comprehend these things without having to have someone tell us.

It's the same as any sandwich shop vs burger place. For example, just 30 minutes ago I walked to the cafeteria here at work. I thought for a second whether I wanted a burger or a sub. I could have gotten a small burger and nothing else, or a 12" sub filled with meat and cheese and mayonaise, and the sub would have been worse for me. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure that out. (I picked a 6" turkey sandwich with just mustard btw, I will NOT pass on cheese though :p)

The bottom line is, there is almost nothing at McDonalds which is "healthy", whereas there is a huge variety of options at Subway. What you decide is up to you!

Next thing you know they are going to come out with a revolutionary study that says that your salad is less healthy than McDonalds because they tested a salad loaded with fried chicken, bacon, cheese and salad dressing.

Or they can just take an unusually large serving of salad and determine it has more calorie content. :laugh:

cholesterol in food doesn't affect cholesterol in blood. high cholesterol in the body is mostly hereditary. high fructose corn syrup is not worse for you than any other sugar or carb for that matter. it gets a bad rap because its cheap and added to everything,and people overconsume. saturated fat is not bad for you and doesn't cause heart disease. its never been proven. its actually detrimental to cut it out. people on high saturated fat diets lose weight all the time and have really nice blood profiles.high sodium is also not a problem if you drink enough fluids and are active. the groups that say a 2000mg limit you shouldn't exceed is so dumb and can be dangerous if you are very active because not enough sodium will cause dehydration and your kidneys will take a hit.

what the problem is is over consumption of food that's not helped by the fact that its really easy to buy very high calorie,great tasting foods for so cheap. also not being active and not getting the proper circulation does way more damage. that's the problem,not this BS singling out of certain macronutrients and foods. mcdonalds is not your problem. subway isn't your problem. you are the problem. buying 2 bigmacs and a large fries and a drink the size of your head is.Buying a burger,a small or medium fries,and a medium drink,depending on your needs isn't that bad. We've seen people on low fat diets,high fat diets,low carb diets,high carb diets, low protein diets,high protein diets ALL lose weight,have awesome blood profiles and healthy as they have ever been.

... that Subway is ?the official training restaurant of athletes everywhere,? you might get the idea that the food served at the chain isn?t that bad for you?that it?s even healthy.

Think again.

lol of course that stuff is not healthy. none of that kind of food is. it might be healthy from a todays definition of the average. but it is far away from being really healthy.

6 months ago I started to begin eating healthy from an educated point of view. I can tell you that there is a HUGE difference of eating healthy from a marketing point of view compared to non industralized food.

heck i even made my own bred this weekend. where I live people eat lots of bred. we even have a bred culture. real bread, not that sandwich bread stuff. but even that quality bread sucks compared to when you make your own.

all food that is some way or another alleviated from its pure form is losing quality.

but tbh - i dont blame anyone. browsing the super market i realized how difficult it is to eat healthy. 80-90% of all you find in the super market is pure junk. it is sad really... i had to learn first to differentiate between "good" and "bad" food.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!