Burger King Debuts Healthier Fries. We Taste Test “Satisfries”

fries_verticalPhoto: Courtesy Of Burger King.
The average American eats about 30 pounds of French Fries a year. Which not only is sort of gross, it basically means that while, yes, we are eating more greens and less wheat and all that good stuff, that if you really if you look at food consumption from a national perspective, fast food joints may not be as popular as they once were, but they’re still going strong.
And, although Burger King (along with other fast food chains, too), have aimed to offer healthier alternatives to their burger/fry/soda bestsellers — from salads to apple slices — the truth is, they say, people still want to eat the former. And, it’s because of this that, after 10 long years of research, Burger King has decided to launch their new Satisfries. (Yes, the name is slightly cheesy but it gets the point across.) They’re a lower calorie and less fatty version of their original fries that were blind taste tested by 1000 consumers, so we are assuming that, yes, they were all satisfied.
The difference between this lower fat and calorie and all new crinkle-shaped version of their classic counterpart, you ask? First off, what many fry lovers might not know is that what makes fast food fries (and those that come out of all restaurants in general, usually) so yummy, and well, fatty is that they are battered before they’re steeped in oil. Burger Kings says their new Satisfries are still fried in the same blend of oils (which, depending on the location is either corn and cottonseed or corn, canola, and hydrogenated soy oils) that their classic kind is, but it’s the super thin, yet protective batter coating on the outside of each and every fry that allows only an itsy bitsy amount of oil to seep in, therefore plummeting the otherwise super high calorie and fat numbers.
[Note: I (as in the author of this article) attended a super top secret press event where I bit into a few of these Satisfries at an unnatural French Fry eating time of 9 a.m. and, honestly, I would have never known that these were not the standard BK fries. Not that I’m a fry expert in any sort of way, but I must say that they tasted no different than any diner fry that I’ve ever had.]
Now, to be clear, we (as in Refinery 29), nor Burger King, for that matter, are saying that these new Satisfries or any French Fries really, are healthier for you than, for example, eating a bowl of kale, lentils or whatever other super nutrient-dense food you can think of. But, if and when you are going to reach for these bad boys — like if you’re on a road trip and have no other options, have a hangover from hell or, well, just crave some classic fries — over time, a little less fat and calories (and sodium, too) might not be such a bad thing.
And, the numbers may speak for themselves: When comparing Burger King to Burger King — their original 87 gram size of French Fries to the same in Satisfries — there’s a 30 percent less fat and sodium as well as 20 percent less calories. And, if you looked at equal serving sizes to their main competitor — 70 gram serving size of Burger King Satisfries vs. McDonald’s fries, it would be 150.5 calories and 6.3 grams of fat and 226.8 calories and 11 grams of fat, respectively.
Right now, they’re considered limited edition and Burger King says America can decide if Satisfries are satisfying enough to be on the menu for good. As for why they are crinkle cut? They simply say, “Because everyone loves a crinkle cut fry.” So, what do you think of these subtly less fatty fries?

More from Diet & Nutrition

R29 Original Series