HOME > Chowhound > Chains >
What's your latest food quest?
TELL US

Fast-food items that are even unhealthier than you thought?

a
Agent 510 Aug 11, 2008 06:11 PM

While driving home late last night, I stopped off at In-n-Out for a vanilla shake. No complaints there. Then I checked the nutritional information online when I got home, just for curiosity's sake.

YIKES. 700 calories. 25g saturated fat (125% RDA). I knew it wasn't exactly health food, but I didn't expect that.

I'd be curious if any of you have had similar experiences with fast-food items you've ordered (or not ordered) that are surprisingly high on the unhealthy scale, even by fast-food standards. There have to be other "weapons of mass destruction" out there that we can be warned about.

  1. a
    Agent 510 Aug 11, 2008 06:33 PM

    (double post)

    1. f
      ferret Aug 11, 2008 07:42 PM

      That's a health drink compared to the Darth Vader of shakes -- Baskin Robbins' large heath bar shake:

      2310 calories, 108g fat (64g saturated).

      http://www.baskinrobbins.com/Nutritio...

      4 Replies
      1. re: ferret
        chowser Aug 13, 2008 07:41 AM

        Wow, check out the ingredients list on that--it goes on and on and on. Ironically the first ingredient is reduced fat milk. Why didn't they just go with whole fat milk after all that? I think it's funny that there's a crustacean notice on it--as if anyone might wonder if there would be lobster in it. Seaweed would be something else but crustacean?

        1. re: chowser
          jfood Aug 23, 2008 02:27 PM

          do you believe the audacity of BR ruining a perfectly good shake by throwing reduced fat milk into it? How dare they. Jfood understands that they have Lipitor and epi-pens at the counter.

        2. re: ferret
          k
          kmcarr Aug 14, 2008 02:56 PM

          Ferret, I was skimming your post too quickly and mis-read the name of the Baskin Robbins item as "health bar shake" (with an "L"). It hurt my brain trying to reconcile an food item with 2310 calories being labeled as "healthy".

          1. re: kmcarr
            f
            Fibber McGee Aug 15, 2008 07:52 AM

            That reminds me of the small non-fast food chain called The Chop House, which features a Classic Health Club that is actually a triple decker of turkey breast, ham and bacon with two kinds of cheese and slathered with mayo. At least the bread is whole wheat.

        3. f
          fallingup Aug 13, 2008 07:55 AM

          This is why I never drink a shake by myself! Or I make it my main meal of the day.

          1 Reply
          1. re: fallingup
            f
            ferret Aug 13, 2008 08:46 AM

            There are shakes and there are SHAKES. A small chocolate shake contains about 1/4 of the calories in the Heath Bar shake. Not "healthy" by any measure, but a far better choice. Starbucks new chocolate/banana "shake" is pretty good, has added protein and weighs in around 250 calories.

          2. s
            smarsh Aug 15, 2008 04:58 AM

            The chicken chili baked potato at Jason's deli. I wasn't expecting health food but I was a bit surprised at just how bad it was
            http://jasonsdeli.com/nutrition/Potat...
            Thankfully I could only eat abut 1/3 of it...

            1. madgreek Aug 15, 2008 05:18 AM

              I find that pretty much all fast food is unhealthier than I once thought. One case in point: Wendy's Junior Bacon Cheeseburger: http://www.calorie-count.com/calories... . It has about a third of your RDA of saturated fat and sodium and one fifth the recommended daily calories. These sandwiches are pretty small by burger standards, so that's the biggest reason why the nutritional info so surprising.

              1. c
                cstr Aug 15, 2008 05:39 AM

                Com'on, we don't go to fast food joints to count cals, we go for the pleasure! I'm sure you don't slug down a shake every day.

                3 Replies
                1. re: cstr
                  madgreek Aug 15, 2008 06:12 AM

                  Pleasure? IDK about that. Addiction is more like it. I had a Big Mac for the for first time in years not long ago, ant it was kind of disgusting, to be honest. Did I finish it? You bet. It was addicting.

                  1. re: madgreek
                    c
                    cstr Aug 15, 2008 08:56 AM

                    Yah, it was so disgusting you couldn't wait to pull in to the Mickey D's lot! Addicting??, time for therapy!

                    1. re: cstr
                      a
                      Agent 510 Aug 16, 2008 07:54 PM

                      Heh. cstr, you're right. madgreek, you're also right!

                      The thing about the In-n-Out vanilla shake, from which this thread was launched, was that it was good, but hardly good enough to justify those out-of-control fat/calorie numbers. Especially since consuming it through a straw while trying to navigate traffic on I-880 here in the Bay Area was a bit challenging.

                      The moral of this story? Buyer beware (especially for shakes)

                2. danhole Aug 20, 2008 12:51 PM

                  I have always liked the Chik-Fil-A chicken sandwich and thought it was a pretty healthy thing. I also thought their grill chicken was healthy, but man alive are these things full of sodium! Along the lines of 50+% of your daily intake. Darn, am I disappointed!

                  1. greygarious Aug 23, 2008 02:14 PM

                    AOL had one of those lists this week on their home page. Everything was worse than even a cynic would expect. Some of the larger bacon burgers had well over the RDA of calories, fat, and sodium. I think the most annoying part is the sodium. If you're getting something fried, meat, cheese, etc., you know you're getting calories and fat, but so much of the salt is added on purpose. They should be able to cut back a good bit without sacrificing flavor, especially as regards the fries. Put on little or none, and let people use the salt packets if they so desire. Yes, it would raise their costs a little bit, but if the workers quit throwing big handfuls of condiments into the bags that would offset the expense.

                    1. Chew on That Sep 5, 2008 12:45 PM

                      Oooh good topic. For me, I was surprised about Chipotle burritos.

                      I thought they weren't thattt bad since they had more heart healthy foods like beans, veggies, protein (instead of fried meat and carbs)...but no, it was listed int he top 20 worst foods! I don't remember the exact nutritional info but it made me never want to go back...

                      1 Reply
                      1. re: Chew on That
                        f
                        ferret Sep 5, 2008 01:52 PM

                        Chipotle can be fine, you just have to be smart. It's not like cheese, sour cream and guacamole are suddenly non-caloric when you eat there. They make it easy for you by offering burrito bowls (the tortilla can easily add a couple hundred calories):

                        Try this and see:

                        http://www.chipotlefan.com/index.php?...

                      Show Hidden Posts