McLoophole: Do Fast Food Giants Get Away Too Easily?

Zachariah Konieczny

zachkonieczny1243@gmail.com

At the time of writing this, it is currently 6 pm, and I haven't had anything to eat yet today sans a morning banana. I start to think about what kind of meal I should go cook up. Should today be a chicken breast day or a salmon day? While I ponder this, I head over to YouTube to take a much- deserved break, as I've been working on other assignments for other classes for about four hours. Immediately upon opening the video, an advertisement for Subway plays, advertising the return of their $5 footlong. The classic jingle we likely all know, however, comes with an additional line. "Piled high with veggies." I guess the advertisement worked because now I am considering ditching my grilled plans and opting for a subway sub. After all, if the sandwich is piled high with veggies using fresh ingredients, it surely cannot be that bad for you, right? 

                                  Source: Subway.com

The Problem With Fast Food Advertising

Unfortunately, despite the sweetening of the health factor of the sub, "piling high with veggies" simply does not make the sandwich a healthy option. Even if I were to add enough vegetables to consider my sandwich a salad wrapped in bread, that still doesn't change the fact that a footlong of their popular chicken bacon ranch sub in its default state is still a whopping 1070 calories, 52 grams of fat, 2190 milligrams of sodium, and 81 carbohydrates. Comparing this to the recommended intake for the average person, this only leaves one with 930 calories, 110 milligrams of sodium, and over or almost over the recommended intake for fat. This, quite obviously, is not a healthy option. Yet the advertisement seems to imply that by adding these veggies, it can be a healthy option.

The issue lies completely in the fast-food industry giants' respective ability to find loopholes in the wording of the code of ethics to subtly manipulate the public into thinking their food is healthier than it is. Since the mid-2000s, very likely in response to the success of the 2004 documentary "Super Size Me", fast food companies have made constant efforts to promote their "healthy" options, and they do it in very smart ways. To my knowledge, these advertisements check all the boxes for both the PRSA code and the Principles and Practices for Advertising code of ethics. 

But Are These Practices Truly "High Ethical Standards In Serving The Public?"

I would argue that they are not. While yes, these fast food companies do, in a way, serve the public by feeding them an affordable option, the way in which they approach this option is exploitative at best, and consciously vile at worst. Fast food is inherently addicting, and the recipes are intentionally so. It is no secret that high fat, sugar, and sodium-packed foods work on your brain's reward system more than that of a healthier option, but when the general public cries out for healthy fast food options, the company naturally responds the best way they know: a sugar, sodium and fat-packed entree masquerading as a healthy, fresh salad.

Source: Cheatdaydesign.com

These practices are exploitative of what the public wants. I have witnessed it first-hand with much of my family and even myself many years ago. I am an overweight man, and I was tricked into thinking a fast-food salad was a healthy choice before. How many people without access to education resources have been fooled by these advertisements into a false sense of dietary confidence? Masquerading high levels of calories, fat, carbs, and sodium behind that of a healthy, fresh, protein-packed item is, in my opinion, unethical, yet is completely legal and even encouraged by many.