Super Size Me is a film which tests the question: "Can man live by fast-food alone?" Writer, director and front man Morgan Spurlock sets out to eat nothing but McDonald's food for 30 days. His only guidelines are:

• He can only super size when asked.
• He has to have three meals a day.
• He has to eat everything on the menu at least once.
• He cannot consume what the restaurant doesn't offer. This includes water.

With a camera crew hot on his tail he visits 20 US cities, conducts numerous interviews with experts and professionals in the fields of food and nutrition, orders and eats 90 McDonald's meals, goes to work, and hangs out at home with his girlfriend. Interspersed with astounding statistics, such as "in the US we eat more than 1,000,000 animals an hour," a (perhaps overly) close-up look at gastric bypass surgery, and countless familiar fast-food sights, the movie is a humorous, slightly satirical but definitely heart-felt examination of America's "hunger for fast-food."

To really see the health effects that Spurlock suffered in his epic binge you need to watch the movie, but to give you some idea....Day three of the diet, Spurlock is sitting in the car having just polished off a McMeal. He doesn't look too good. A McGurgle, McBrick, McGas, McSweat and McTwitch (as he calls them) later, and it's all over ... the pavement. That's right; at least one meal didn't make it to his waist line!

After a week though, he gets used to the food. In fact, he begins to want more of it. "I feel bad, and then I eat it, and I feel 100% better," he says at one point. After five days, he's not only used to the food, he's also gained 10 lbs and increased his body fat by five percent. At thirteen days he's 17 lbs heavier, his cholesterol is soaring and he's made his previously perfect liver sick in a way that is comparable with alcohol abuse. At this point the dietitian and three doctors advising him certainly don't want any more of it - he's heading straight for "McLiver Disease." They advise him to stop. "I'd never thought of it," admits one doctor in relation to the liver, "but of course, it makes sense."

His vegan-chef girlfriend also worries about his suffering health, and it's not all altruistic concern either - his lagging sexual prowess during the super-feeding epic means un-supersized action in the bedroom. This aspect of the film could hit a sensitive note with overweight men who have seen their virility decrease (even to the point of impotence) as they've gained weight over the years. Good news though guys: recent research suggests that losing some weight and getting fit can restore virility.

One of the best aspects of the film is its focus on children's health. At one point in the film we're reminded that, if current trends continue, "one in every three children born in the year 2000 will develop diabetes in their lifetime." That's a frightening statistic when you remember that diabetes will cut 17-27 years off a person's life. It's also one heck of a legacy to leave for the next generation.

But we don't seem too worried about it, points out the film. Parent's continue to entrust the feeding of their children to whoever will do it fastest and easiest; whether that's the people who grind chicken into nuggets, school cafeterias that specialize in pizza, fries, burgers and candy bars, or Ronald McDonald himself. Of course busy parents need easy, stress free meals, but the film challenges us to stop and analyze our priorities: a child's health should surely be more important then getting their dinner "over and done with."

Put it another way: Would you offer your child a cigarette? And would you turn a blind eye to anyone who tried to convince them that smoking could be "part of a healthy lifestyle?" Of course not! Yet, we keep "unfeeding" our children with foods that could end up killing them, and turn a blind eye to Mr. McDonald when he holds out that happy box full of sugar and fat. All this, when obesity is set to become the leading cause of preventable death in the US, overtaking smoking.

It's been pointed out time and again that the food industry deliberately sets out to goad children into "brand loyalty"; it's a well known, and extremely effective marketing tactic. If you get them when they're young, they'll stay until they're old. And so, the film points out, we have McDonald's playgrounds, Happy Meals, parties, kid's clubs, and, of course, Ronald. We have a majority of children who, before they can speak, can recognize the golden arches. We have a nation of children whose nutritional education consists of 10, 000 food advertisements per year and school health "advice" to "choose wisely" from a selection of fries, burgers, candy bars and soda. We have kids convinced that "square meal" means food in a box. And, as revealed in one of the funniest scenes of the movie, we have children who can immediately recognize a picture of Ronald McDonald, but are all stumped when it comes to Jesus Christ (one of them says He's "George Bush").

It's not just the sugar that's addictive either, it's the comfort. Family, fun, good feelings, toys, yummy food, playgrounds - all these things will be associated with McyD's in the child's mind long after they can fit down the kiddy slide. When they need comfort as adults - where are they going to go? Back to the golden arches of course.

The question the film really asks us is: Where does personal responsibility end and corporate responsibility start? Well, of course people are responsible for their own health and well-being - anyone who goes on a 30-day McDonald's binge is going to pay; everyone should find ways to eat better and get more exercise - the film never disputes these facts. But can an industry that spends billions of dollars a year strategically trying to get more people to eat more of their food, then turn around and claim that they shoulder no responsibility whatsoever for the health crisis that has erupted from people eating their food? You don't need a super sized mind to answer that one correctly.