After exercise, fast food helps you recover just as well as sports supplements
qz.com
qz.com
That's 90%. What's the remaining 10% of nutritional content?
Also, the article links to a study from 2006 about chocolate milk, not a recent study about fast food. Here is the actual study (pdf):
http://journals.humankinetics.com/AcuCustom/Sitename/Documen...
Pretty shoddy editing.
Only 10% fat is particularly surprising, since many fast food items will have much higher fat content than that (hash browns have about 50% of caloric content from fat, Big Mac 45%, fries 43%, etc.). EDIT: apparently the distribution was broken down by weight, rather than by caloric contribution.
* Abstract doesn't mention fast food, just chocolate milk
* Study was small in scope (9 participants) and single blinded.
* Those aren't really "supplements"
For that reason, I'd downvote this if I had the reps.
Anyway, much of the fitness world has been shifting back towards the "quantity" side of things in the whole "Quantity vs. Quality" argument.
The gist has been that the occasional fast food meal is not going to ruin your hopes and dreams, but it goes a long way to make sure it fits into your caloric and macronutrient plan.
There are extreme ends on both sides of the argument:
Your local organic hippie vegetarian may think they're healthier, and by some parameters maybe they will be, but you can still extremely get fat eating nothing but "quality" foods, and you can still have zero muscle mass if you don't eat enough quality sources of protein (which leads to the unattractive skinny fat body type).
On the other end, you have people who can lose weight with nothing more than Subway or McDonalds, due to caloric restriction. You can get very extreme with the IIFYM (If it Fits your Macros) and eat zero fruits/veggies and still build a beautiful body (that's likely dying on the inside).
The best policy is likely somewhere in the middle, but for the time being, I'll stay a touch closer to the the quantitative science, which pushes you towards a proper calorie count, adequate protein, and plenty of fruits/vegetables (about 5 80g servings per day, doesn't really matter which ones).
Anyway, back to the study... I get tired of studies on "recovery". What are we really training for here??? For the most of us, we just want to stay athletic/sexy looking. So long as you meet your quantitative daily goals mentioned above, I'm not too worried about reloading my glycogen stores immediately. If you eat consistently well, your body will take care of the job.
No real athlete would consider a power bar, gatorade, or fast food to be a good post workout meal anyway, as the macros are pretty terrible (protein to calorie ratio sucks). Also, I don't see any comparison of fast food to the most popular post-workout supplement, protein powder, so making this hyperbolic of a statement with the title is kind of absurd.
That's not strictly true. Intense athletic activity will deplete a person's stores of water, electrolytes, and glycogen. Many "real athletes" will drink Gatorade or other sports drinks to recover from exercise because they contain water, sugar, and sodium.
Your focus on post workout meals, protein to calorie ratio, and protein powder suggests you're looking at this from the perspective of someone involved in weight training. Of course, athletics is much broader than weight training and exercise is broader than working out. After running an intense race, for instance, most athletes will seek carb replenishment before they reach for a protein shake or beef jerky.
Here is the actual study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25811308