I just read a USA Today article last night introducing Burger King’s latest culinary (if you can call it that) creation: Satisfries. My initial response: What the ____?!
So what are they? The article states they’re using the same oil, same potatoes and sam process, “the only change is a re-configuring in the amount of a few ingredients — Burger King won’t say what they are — so that less oil is absorbed by the thinner batter.”
My thoughts?
Ingredients they won’t mention = suspicious and scary
When you take the fat out of something that calls for fat you have to replace it with something. That something tends to be sugar and sodium. Why bother?
Buyer beware: if they’re using a fat substitute in their “secret ingredients” you may end up running to the bathroom
“Light” versions aren’t as satisfying therefore you’re more likely to eat more to get the same level of satiety.
Why not just use less oil or make serving sizes smaller for the real thing?
And what’s with all the emphasis on the fat content?! Yes, trans fats produced from frying are bad, but they make no mention of that in the article. They simply address how much lower fat these new freak fries are, which is sending us right back to the 80′s with the low-fat/no-fat craze. Fat is NOT the problem. It’s all the refined, processed, genetically modified, man-made crap on the market. Seriously, can the demonization of fat please die already?!
As for the RD who chimed in on the product, I really hope she’s cashing in on that endorsement because she just sold her soul to the fast food devil. In the article she says, ”it’s not realistic to ask people to replace french fries with carrots or celery sticks, this is like meeting people halfway.” Riiight. Meeting them halfway with a mutant food. Sounds like a horrible plan to me.
On a brighter note, writing about carrots and french fries in the same post is making me want to fiddle with a carrot fry recipe. Perhaps one day BK will try them! ;)
Xo
Jenny
The post SATIS-WHATS?? appeared first on PureForme.