EEV: Hmmm if you disagree with their theory of nutrition. You are a ” Liberal ‘coalition of class snobs, locavore foodies and  militant anti-corporate types “ If its dollars per calories they believe in, why not cut to the chase and just drink High Fructose Corns Syrup straight? I guess they are just putting their macabre spin on poverty being cool. Let them eat “Mcdoubles” yea worked for Marie Antoinette also.

By  Daily Mail Reporter

PUBLISHED: 00:04 EST, 29  July 2013 |  UPDATED: 00:05 EST, 29 July 2013

In terms of ‘the cheapest, most nutritious  and bountiful food that has ever existed in human history,’ the golden arches of  McDonald’s probably isn’t the first thing to pop into your mind.

But they should – according to a New York  Post columnist and an economics blogger, anyway.

Post columnist Kyle Smith made a pretty  compelling case for the McDonald’s Mcdouble’s giving diners the most bang for  their nutritional buck.

 

Behold, the McDouble: ‘the cheapest, most nutritious and  bountiful food that has ever existed in human history’

At 390 calories, 23 grams of protein,  7-percent of the daily value of fiber, 20-percent of daily calcium and 19 grams  of fat – with a typical price tag of about a buck – the McDouble, its advocates  argue, is the most price-efficient food ‘that has ever existed in human  history.

‘For the average poor person, it isn’t a  great option to take a trip to  the farmers market to puzzle over esoteric  lefty-foodie codes. (Is  sustainable better than organic? What if I have to  choose between fair  trade and cruelty-free?) Produce may seem cheap to  environmentally aware blond moms who spend $300 on their highlights every month,  but if your  object is to fill your belly, it is hugely expensive per calorie,’  Smith writes.

‘Junk food costs as little as $1.76 per 1,000  calories, whereas fresh veggies and the like cost more than 10 times as much,  found a 2007 University  of Washington survey for the Journal of the American  Dietetic  Association. A 2,000-calorie day of meals would, if you stuck strictly  to the good-for-you stuff, cost $36.32, said the study’s lead author, Adam  Drewnowski.’

 

Bold: NY Post columnist Kyle Smith (center-right)  realizes his theory on the McDouble isn’t a popular one

Smith’s argument initially was made by a  commenter on the Freakonomics blog run by economics writer Stephen Dubner and  professor  Steven Leavitt, who co-wrote the million-selling books on the hidden  side of everything.

Adding fuel to the argument is the fact that  studies show that ‘people who eat out tend to eat less at home that day in  partial compensation; the net gain, according to a 2008 study out of Berkeley  and Northwestern, is only about 24 calories a day.’

Another factor in the argument is the rising  cost of organic foods, which Smith says are now becoming a ‘luxury  item.’

Smith realizes the theory isn’t going to be a  popular one amongst the Liberal ‘coalition of class snobs, locavore foodies and  militant anti-corporate types.’

But facts are facts – and ‘where else but  McDonald’s can poor people obtain so many calories per dollar?’

 

Lovin’ It: Poor people, Smith argues, can get the most  bang for their buck by eating at McDonald’s

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2380548/Is-McDonalds-McDouble-cheapest-nutritious-bountiful-food-existed-human-history.html#ixzz2aPqL07jm Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook