We tasted them, and you may not miss the 40% fat and 30% calories stripped from the spuds.
When I was invited to taste test Satisfries, I was skeptical. A healthier fry? (The company is very careful not to say that their latest spuds are healthy, just healthier than the regular version.) Frying up anything isn’t the best way to make them good for you, and fries are sacred in that regard. So I was curious, but realistic.
The hotel rooftop for the french fry unveiling was decked out with Burger King crowns (but no King) and large-than-life cutouts of fries–and plenty of ketchup, which made me a little wary about just how appetizing this next generation fried potato would be. As soon as we were seated, Burger King’s North American CMO Eric Hirschhorn informed us that Burger King is rolling out a better-for-you fry.
Read - Have it the Healthier Way: Burger King Reveals Low-Fat Satisfries
Which is still bad for you over the course of the day.
I just found out how they do it: the "satisfries" are hollow! There's actually 30-40% less fry in there. They used genetically modified potatoes with tubelike holes in them and then slice them so each satisfry has a hole in the middle.
Anything's got to be better than BK's current fires. They are hands down the worst fries I've ever eaten.
According to my chart for diabetics, a medium potato contains 15 grams of carbs which is 3 teaspoons of sugar.. Of course you have to take into consideration your logic as to what medium means. Deep frying potatoes or any other food can be done properly if you adhere to the proper temperature of the oil. You can always tell if your local KFC is having a bad day. If the chicken is soggy that means oil is not at proper temperature, to cool. Chrispy not overcooked chicken indicates good temperature. And the debate rages on.
I tasted them. I agree with the report. They are not bad at all. Less crispy than the originals, but still tasty, with a true potato feel.
A healthier fry is a sweet potato fry, fried in healthy oils.
Yeah, but they're still....well....sweet potatoes. I just don't like 'em. Rather have onion rings anyway. Although BKs' "rings" are gross.
How right you are. A white or sweet potato of the same size contain approx. 15 grams of sugar. The differences come for example sweet has more fibre and they also turn into glucose at a different rate. However as someone else stated I am not a fan of sweet fries either.
It's not the oil that makes fries bad for you, it's the potato. It metabolizes into blood sugar faster than table sugar does. You would be better off eating the fryer oil with a spoon like soup than eating the french fries.
Someone is anti-potato and spouting off from the Atkins diet handbook.
Actually, if prepared well and not drneched in butter, potatos can be part of a healthy diet, re: vitamins, more potassium then a banana, etc
Actually I am spouting off 21st century advances in knowledge of what is really a healthy diet vs our 20th century misconceptions. Robert Atkins did not create this knowledge, but he played a large part in bringing it to our attention. Others have gone far beyond Atkins in advancing dietary science.
I refuse to take seriously a diet that says I can eat all the bacon I want as long as I don't have an apple. Because carbs.
The apple will mess with your blood sugar, making you crave another one soon after, and then another, and another, until you are obese. Because carbs.
Bacon doesn't do that. You can eat all you want, because unlike apples, you won't want more than you should eat.
Satisfry? Really? I hear that they dont cost money, only your dignity.
They couldnt pay me enough money to say "I'll have a regular satisfries" to another human being
Meh heh heh.