Absolutely brilliant

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

It is all in all a good documentary, but it misses the point and also starts out with something I and many nutritionists and physicians would consider dangerous.they fail to teach the view how to read labels and choose healthier foodsthey start out by saying that exercise more and eat less is nonsense when we all know that it actually kinda does work that way. Of course you cannot eat junk ALL DAY long and then work out for a bit and you stay in shape.BUT: They accompany a few children who are struggling to gain weight. In it a very populist approach which is said as they themselves try to fight the food propaganda by the big food companies.The children in this documentary eat nachos, cheeseburgers at school and they are being filmed while crying about their failure in losing weight!C'MON!!!!!!!!!!! Be fair, especially if you are the good guys.

The movie titled Fed Up is about the effects of sugar and its contribution to the worldwide obesity and type 2 diabetes pandemic, a situation so serious that children were beginning to get this disease, which was initially classified as adult onset diabetes. The movie does a good job of describing the politics of food and the complicity of the USDA with multi-national agribusiness/food companies, mostly revealed by Marion Nestle's, PhD in her Food Politics and Soda Politics. The movie breaks down in having revealed the evils of sugar, it failed to adequately discuss the alternatives to sugar. Just eating vegetables and fruits is an incomplete answer. This omission arises because there is eclectic group of scientist/doctors with conflicting view as to what constitutes a healthy diet. To that end, one needs to look at the cast of characters in this movie and those who are missing but should have been included.First and foremost there is First Lady Michele Obama with her "let's move" program, yet she does not want to "demonize" the food and beverage industries. Both Dr Nestle and Mrs. Obama seem to me to be proponents of the lipid hypothesis that saturated fat is bad promulgated by the 1977 McGovern Committee report. This has its roots Ancel Keys M.D. who was co director of the Framingham heart study. The other Co director, George V Mann, M.D. thinks, "This is the greatest public health scam perpetrated on the American public." Former President William Clinton pursues a vegan or perhaps lacto-vegan diet promulgated by Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr., MDin his book, Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease.Michael Pollan, in The Omnivore's Dilemma and Eat Real Food, Mark Hyman M.D. Robert Lustig's M.D. Fat Chance , Mark Hyman, M.D. and Gary Taube's Good Calories Bad Calories and Why We Get Fat all emphasize the importance of quality fats, both saturated and unsaturated from animals, properly raised, and plants. David Perlmutter, MD, not mentioned in this movie, in his Grain Brain notes primitive hunter-gatherers ate a ketogenic (high fat) diet. This is also confirmed in medical anthropologist Weston A. Price's DDS 1939 Nutrition and Physical Degeneration.Gary Taubes presents good historical data in the 19th and early 20th centuries. It was generally known one could eat all the meats, fats, vegetables dairy, and whole fruits desired so long as one avoided or strictly limited the consumption of starches (bread, potatoes, cereals, etc) and sugars By so doing, Lustig points out the hormone leptin, which tells one's body it can stop eating, would not be overwhelmed by the hormone insulin, which insists one must keep eating. Both Taubes and Lustig assert the calories in-calories out is a failed paradigm; it's not physics but biology. To push the matter into the absurd, if one over eats, even slightly, one ends up morbidly obese and if one under eats, even slightly, one ends up terribly emaciated!

I've been interested in nutrition for the past 15 years and I've never seen a mainstream documentary so much explanatory and spot- on.This documentary should be regarded as an invaluable informative masterpiece]. Every overweight person should erect statues in their living rooms in the likeness of the producers, writers and director of this movie and bow to them every morning. I can't possibly understand how anyone could have something bad to say about this movie. This person is either painfully ignorant or has some interest in promoting misinformation. No other option. There are tons of scientific evidence backing up what's narrated in the movie, you just have to stick your nose out of the massive misinformation you're buried under.I give this movie a 10 stars rating due to its outstanding unbiased information value. Everyone should tell anyone he/she knows to watch this film.

PlotThe villain of this picture is sugar and the story follows how three families come to term with it. Along the way there where several interviews that covered the subject quite well. There was some background on the history of the food/sugar industry itself that delved into the student lunch program and into the adverting that is directed to children. The narrative is that kids are targeted from infants to adults.Character DevelopmentThis film tried to throw you a curve-ball by first blaming obesity on overeating and lack of exercise.ActingNo Acting. This is a documentary.OverviewIt was impressive how the producers were able to get an interview with Bill Clinton. Throughout the course of the film parts of his interview were sandwiched into the storyline. A strong case was made against the sugar industry and the companies that use sugar in their products. It was really eye opening to take in the whole discussion. The makers did an effective job illustrating the amounts of sugar that are in each product they showcased and they made it seem that sugar was in most products. Ultimately they painted a grim picture with not one of the families featured having a happy ending, juxtaposing the cigarette industry with the food industry.