Hacker News Reader

Comment by inhumantsar | Hacker News Reader

Almost certainly this. Not just chicken but breading ingredients, the oil they fry them in, probably salt content. Maybe sauces too?

View on HN

McDonald’s does regional distribution that affects some of these factors too; different suppliers, etc.

It’s harder to see these days, but where I live in Albany, NY, McDonalds was in the New England region, and we would get the lobster roll “a New England favorite!”

Head a few miles away and you’d be in an area supplied out of New Jersey, Pennsylvania or Western NY. This sort of thing is noticeable if you live in a place that’s sort of a Venn diagram from a distribution standpoint.

In the Midwest where I grew up, a burger came with ketchup and mustard. East coast, just ketchup.

Almost certainly this. Not just chicken but breading ingredients, the oil they fry them in, probably salt content. Maybe sauces too?

Oil sounds like the likely culprit to me. About a decade ago a bunch of cities, including Chicago, started regulating the types of oil that could be used for frying in restaurants.

That's a nice idea, as if these nutrition facts are super specialized to your precise McDonalds location, and don't actually ya know come down to how much the kid in the back of the kitchen is using the salt shaker.

People don't actually believe these are anything more than averages with huge error bars right?

HN is full of propagandized technologists who have yet to realize how few of the world's problems are technical, and how approximately all of them are political.

I'm sure there are better essays with similar value, but the one that comes to mind is Heidegger's The Question Concerning Technology: https://www2.hawaii.edu/~freeman/courses/phil394/The%20Quest...

I disagree, I think most people here understand the problems are political they just not understand that the problem was CREATED by the politics, and instead believe the solution to the problem is political.

They refuse to believe that government thus politics is the problem, not the solution

I have seen your comments elsewhere on HN. It's refreshing to see some like-minded opinions. Do you have any other online presence or some way I might contact you? My email is in my profile here, if you're open to that.

Just because the numbers may be approximate, doesn't necessarily mean that you don't need to measure again somewhere where you're doing something different. It's far more defensible for regulators to require a measurement or new calculation than to accept "eh, it's about the same, I promise."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com