Last week, Burger King announced their “healthier” French Fry option called Satisfries. These new crinkle-cut fries are claimed to be 40% less fat and 30% fewer calories compared to BK’s regular fries. Below is a table comparing the nutrition facts of these two fries side by side. For this comparison, I used the nutritional information based on one medium fry.
|Total Fat (g)||18||14|
|Saturated Fat (g)||3||2|
|Trans Fat (g)||0||0|
|Total Carb (g)||58||51|
|Total Sugar (g)||0||0|
The definition of French Fries is “potatoes cut into strips and deep-fried.” MMM…doesn’t that just sound healthy? Fries by definition are not healthy.
Now, I am not saying that you shouldn’t eat them. I actually love fries, but try to eat them only once and a while. All I am saying is let’s not pretend they are something that they aren’t. A fry by any other name would still be a treat. If I eat a “healthier” brownie made with applesauce instead of oil I don’t pretend that I am eating applesauce for dessert. I know am eating a BROWNIE!
I appreciate the fact that a fast food chain is trying to make a “healthier” product, however, if they really cared about their customers wouldn’t they just remove the regular version? I would be surprised if these Satisfries were still on their menu in a year. If customers really want fries they are probably going to eat the regular ones.