Double Down

I have been pretty insulting of the new KFC Double Down sandwich since it dragged it's lard butt onto the American fast food scene.  For those of you who are not familiar with this monstrosity, here is a basic description.  The Double Down is comprised of two fried chicken breasts, which operate as the bun.  Inside, there is bacon, pepper jack cheese, jack cheese, and some mysterious substance known as "Colonel's Sauce."  (There is a "healthier" version that uses grilled patties instead.)  It is being marketed as a "man's sandwich" that is so meaty it doesn't have room for a bun.  The thing looks and sounds horrifying.  It's nutritional information is terrible (540 cal, 32 fat g, 1380 mg sodium -- 460/23/1430 for the grilled).  But, like a train wreck or a torture movie, many people are drawn to it.

Then I found THIS ARTICLE the other day.  (Click on the link if you want to read it.)  This guy is way smarter than me.  He wanted to see if the Double Down was as bad as it appears.  So he constructed a comparison between it and a bunch of other fast food sandwiches (and burritos, I guess).  He added the fat, sodium, and cholesterol in the Double Down and put it up against those same things in other sandwiches.  That is what you see in this first chart.

What you see is that the Double Down actually doesn't fare that poorly - largely due to the fact that there are so many horrible choices for foods out there.  When compared to other chicken sandwiches, the KFC DD has six options worse than it.  And, when burgers enter the argument, it pales in comparison.  Look at the Wendy's and Hardee's numbers!  So, maybe the KFC DD has gotten a bum rap, no?  Well, the writer than goes on to point out that the problem is that the KFC DD actually is worse because it has fewer calories than these other sandwiches.  You are only getting 1/4 of the daily recommended 2000 calories, but you are getting more than 1/2 of the fat, sodium, and cholesterol.  You are getting less bang for your buck.  With the burgers, you probably will feel full for a little while.  With the KFC DD, you will be hungry - maybe even want a second DD.  (Good grief.)  Also, there is absolutely no fiber in the KFC DD, whereas the buns that it abandons brings SOME nutritional value.  This is shown in the second chart - basically dividing the calorie/fat/cholesterol number by calories.

When you look at thing this way, the only thing worse than the fried KFC Double Down is the GRILLED KFC Double Down.  That is because the sodium is higher in the grilled version and the calories are less.  [Trust me.  I tried the regular KFC grilled chicken a few months ago.  It is as salty as beef jerky.  It is horrible.]  The Double Down is even worse that a TRIPLE BACONATOR!  That just makes my jaw drop.  

So, I could have just posted a link to this guy's site.  Why did I bother to write all of this?  Well, I want you to look at that list again.  I have had 27 of those sandwiches before.  While I never have had the triple Baconator, I always ordered the double Baconator when I went to Wendy's.  I have tried the Quad Stacker - but usually got the Triple Stacker.  At McDonald's I would always order a Double Quarter Pounder - with extra cheese.  But it would also include a large fries and large Coke - sometimes with a Frosty or ice cream too.  I never thought about the numbers.  I just ate the stuff because I liked it.  Look at what I would regularly order at these places.

DAILY RECOMMENDED DAILY ALLOWANCE

2000 calories, 65 g fat, 300 mg cholesterol, 2400 mg sodium, 300 g carbs, 25 g fiber, 50 g protein

WENDYS

Double Baconator, Large Fries, Large Coke, Small Frosty

2100 calories, 95 g fat, 245 g cholesterol, 2630 mg sodium, 245 g carbs, 8 g fiber,  73 g protein, 

MCDONALDS

Double Quarter Pounder with Extra Cheese, Large Fries, Large Coke

1650 calories, 74 g fat, 167 g cholesterol, 1777 mg sodium, 196 g carb, 9 g fiber, 55 g protein

BURGER KING

Triple Stacker (no sauce), Large Fries, Large Coke

1610 calories, 77 g fat, 140 g cholesterol, 2120 mg sodium, 200 g carbs, 50 g protein

SONIC

Supersonic with Bacon and Cheese, Mozzarella Sticks, Large Cherry Vanilla Coke

1775 calories, 80 g fat, 211 g cholesterol, 2562 mg sodium, 200 g carbs, 6 g fiber, 69 g protein

TACO BELL

3 Cheesy Gordita Crunch, Soft Taco, Large Pepsi

2220 calories, 108 g fat, 210 g cholesterol, 3625 mg sodium, 249 g carbs, 21 g fiber, 73 g protein

CHICK FIL A

Two Original Chicken Sandwiches with Cheese, Large Fries, Large Coke

1640 calories, 65 g fat, 150 g cholesterol, 3250 mg sodium, 200 g carbs, 12 g fiber, 73 g protein

I didn't go through and find worse case scenarios.  That is what I usually ordered at these places.  I didn't even look up Whataburger or Arby's or Checkers.  I think that the point is made.  It is ridiculous.  The sad thing is that I was not some solitary self-destructive fatso that was doing this alone.  People all over the country eat just like this all the time.  I see what my friends post on Facebook that they eat.  I have eaten with people and had them get the same stuff.  We just don't even think any more.

The point is not whether or not the KFC Double Down is the worst fast food item ever.  The point is that there is actually competition for that position.  I was consuming far beyond what a normal person should eat in a day at one meal!  And so you would have to add another of those numbers for dinner.  And, might as well toss in breakfast too.  Look at those numbers!!!  It is no wonder I was fat.  I'm lucky I wasn't pickled from the inside out.  From the other side, I am horrified at how I used to handle myself.  I guess that I just wanted to give my readers a moment to pause and consider what they actually are consuming.  Go on one of the fast food sites and use their nutrition calculator to see what you really are eating.  Don't take solace in the fact you would never eat a Double Down.  Actually evaluate yourself honestly and seriously.  I wish I had.