Just How Bad IS a KFC Double Down?

During the starvation I wrote about the KFC Double Down - a reviled yet popular sandwich that uses fried chicken in place of bread.

You read that right.

Think of the billions we could save in health care costs, life insurance, early funeral expenses, etc. if eveyone just kept that seven bucks in their pocket

Its 540 calories – more than 1/4 the recommended daily food intake for a woman, and almost 1/4 for a man – come locked and loaded with 5 milligrams of cholesterol. That’s twice the cholesterol of a Big Mac, and 1/2 the recommended daily intake. Of course there’s ‘good’ cholesterol and ‘bad’ cholesterol, so just saying it has lots of that category doesn’t say much… (though we are talking deep friend fast food here… ahem)

Then there’s the 1,380 milligrams of sodium. The only ‘good’ sodium is eating less than 2400 mg per day of it – and in the UK the RDA (recommended daily intake) is far lower. One DD would put you on the brink of going over. The DD also has about 1/2 your recommended daily intake of fat. Like Cholesterol, fat isn’t inherently evil – but when its transfats and saturated fats in a deep fried ‘sandwich’? Ho boy.

Many readers asked if the first thing I had when I started eating again was going to be one of these bad boys. Well, obviously not. But not for the reasons you think.

Yes, I’m against high sodium foods, and having a ton of fat and cholesterol after 100 days of barely eating just didn’t seem that appealing. But the main reason I didn’t break my fast on a Double Down? They’re not available in Canada.

I’ll probably try one of them at some point, just to say I did. Call it sleeping with the enemy, if you like. It’s a terrible sandwich and the fact that it’s selling so well is kind of depressing, but it does make me curious as to just what the appeal is.

But before we – okay I – crap on the Double Down too much it’s worth noting that it’s not the worst fast food sandwich out there. Nate over at fivethirtyeight.com ran the math. “In the fat category”, Nate writes,  “saturated fats are counted double and trans-fats are counted triple.” Based on his numbers, if you rate the KFC DD as 1.0 for fat, cholesterol, and sodium there are a few others in the same ball park – and one or two surprisingly far ahead.

Oh the Double Down is bad – but Burger King’s Chicken Tendercrisp, with less cholesterol, has more fat and sodium. Even burrito from Cipotle’s, once loaded up with the fixin’s, clocks in at more than one and a half Double Downs.

But the burgers dominate this category, and Wendy’s takes the crown. Stop crying, Burger King. A few of your offerings were close to Wendys and way ahead of KFC.

I was surprised to see a Quizno’s sandwich on there. Most of their offerings are fairly lean compared to burgers. Subway showed up too, far behind the pack. A 12″ sub will fill you up far more than a single DD, and has 1/2 the crap in it. I think a veggie sub from either Quizno’s or Subway would just look like a speck on the far left of the graph, barely registering.

A few other notable ones ahead of the DD, but missing from the graph, are:

BURGER KING
Triple Whopper:
1160 calories
76g fat
1170mg sodium

Tendercrisp Garden Salad:
670 cals
45g fat
1740mg sodium

note: yeah, I can’t believe a frakkin’ salad beat the DD either. WTH does BK put in that thing?

MCDONALD’S
Angus Mushroom & Swiss Burger:
770 cals
40g fat
1170mg sodium

WENDY’S
Chicken BLT Salad With Honey Dijon Dressing:
720 cals
51g fat
1540mg sodium

Baconator Double:
980 cals
62g fat
1740mg sodium

Southwest Taco Salad with ranch dressing and tortilla strips:
640 cals
36g fat
1590mg sodium

Another fatal salad! AAugh!

So there you have it. The Double Down is bad, but it’s not the worst. Which I think is scary in itself! What do you think? Gonna try one? Or do you think it’s insane that enough people buy this stuff that the fast food places keep making it?