Wendy's changed their fries.

Jstas

Calling them "Natural Cut with Sea Salt". Just cheap Russett potatoes, unskinned and fried in the typical oil. Nothing spectacular. I don't think I like them though.

That is all.

concealer404

I have to agree with you. Their old fries, while very hit or miss around me, were way better when at their best, and about the same in terms of enjoyment when at their worst.

Luckily, i'm not much of a fry person.

EndersShadow

Their fry's just get too cold too quick and then taste like crap....

Giving my Fry shout-out to McD's or even better Steak n Shake when paired w/ cheese

bobman1235

I never liked their fries (not that I go very often) so I'm guessing it's an improvement, but who knows. It's fried fast food, I don't exactly expect anythign but "cheap russet potatoes fried in the same old oil."

Knucklehead

@ Wendys I always opt for the Baked potato or side salad, not a fry person either.

nooshinjohn

Just about everyone's french fries suck, ever since the were forced to stop using animal fat to fry them in.

I prefer the taste of freedom fries anyway...

dkg999

Frying things in animal fat was never a good idea!

Not much for french fries either, I just drown them in the best sauce available.

Jstas

dkg999 wrote: »

Frying things in animal fat was never a good idea!

What are you talking about? It's the BEST idea!

nooshinjohn

dkg999 wrote: »

Frying things in animal fat was never a good idea!

Not much for french fries either, I just drown them in the best sauce available.

Tell that to the egg fried over-easy in bacon grease.


Isn't it funny that obesity has gone up since animal fat and sugar have been replaced by vegetable oil and corn syrup?

Demiurge

Burger King has surpassed all of the other large fast food chains for fries, IMO.

The worst are Krinkle Cut Fries...almost always a soggy mess.

nooshinjohn

Jstas wrote: »

What are you talking about? It's the BEST idea!

Mark this day Ladies and Gentlemen!! Jstas and I agree on something!:biggrin:

bobman1235

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Isn't it funny that obesity has gone up since animal fat and sugar have been replaced by vegetable oil and corn syrup?

Not everything is a causal relationship. Fat and sugar make you fat, no matter the form.

madmax

dkg999 wrote: »

Frying things in animal fat was never a good idea!

Not much for french fries either, I just drown them in the best sauce available.

There seems to be a trend in your post. Don't like fries/animal fat never a good idea. That reminds me, I've been wanting to save up enough bacon grease to do some fries in.

newrival

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Tell that to the egg fried over-easy in bacon grease.


Isn't it funny that obesity has gone up since animal fat and sugar have been replaced by vegetable oil and corn syrup?

I think the more telling correlation is that obesity gos up as the quality of life goes up.

nooshinjohn

Animal fats and cane sugar are proven to be more easily processed by the human body. Fats and sugars derived from plant sources must be used in un-natural states(heavily processed) for them to be useful as sweeteners and oils. This makes them more difficult for the body to process, and anything the body does not know what to do with generally gets stored as fat.

From personal experience, if I drink Coke made with cane sugar in the same quantity as the corn syrup version, I will LOOSE weight over that time. When I go back to the corn syrup crap, I will GAIN weight. The same occurs with me when I choose margarine over butter... margarine= gain/butter= loss

newrival

madmax wrote: »

That reminds me, I've been wanting to save up enough bacon grease to do some fries in.

There's a place here in Chicago called Hot Dougs that does french fries in duck fat once a week. I'm not a fry person either, but I have to admit they're flavor (read: fat) packed.

nooshinjohn

newrival wrote: »

I think the more telling correlation is that obesity gos up as the quality of life goes up.

Where do you get your facts from?

bobman1235

nooshinjohn wrote: »

From personal experience, if I drink Coke made with cane sugar in the same quantity as the corn syrup version, I will LOOSE weight over that time. When I go back to the corn syrup crap, I will GAIN weight. The same occurs with me when I choose margarine over butter... margarine= gain/butter= loss

HAHAHAHA, yeah, that's totally believable.

nooshinjohn

bobman1235 wrote: »

HAHAHAHA, yeah, that's totally believable.

That's why I said from my own experience. Your results may vary.:rolleyes:

Jstas

newrival wrote: »

I think the more telling correlation is that obesity gos up as the quality of life goes up.

That's backwards. Obesity levels usually rise as quality of life goes down. This has been happening very recently with the implosion of the U.S. Economy and subsequent jobpocalypse. many people are low on cash and struggling to get by. When they are living like they, they go with the cheapest stuff they can get that they need to live. The cheap food is usually very processed and that ends up losing nutritional value while cheap, nutritionally void cheap fillers are added to make up bulk. These fillers and preservatives are no good for your body but when you are unemployed and getting by on gubment cheese, you do what you have to do. Couple that with more downtime sitting in front of a computer looking for jobs or just watching TV and obesity rates go up. It's the nature of the beast.

You can see trending throughout the years. As poverty levels rise and unemployment levels rise so do health problems. When the economy does well and people are flush with cash, that stuff drops because people have the money to maintain a healthier lifestyle with less stress.

dkg999

Please note that I didn't say that vegetable fat/oil was better, preferred, or resulted in a superior taste experience

bobman1235

What Jstas said. Maybe 200 years ago the rich were fat and the poor were thin, but now it's more the opposite.

concealer404

bobman1235 wrote: »

HAHAHAHA, yeah, that's totally believable.

I'm actually with him. The less synthesized bs in your diet, the better, no matter how you slice it.

bobman1235

OK, to an extent that's true. But there's no way - and I will take this assertion to the grave - that he has simply swapped sugary soda for HFCS soda and seen appreciable changes. The differences between those two things are real, but almost negligible, and certainly not enough of a change in ones diet to cause weight gain or loss all by itself, which is his asinine assertion. It's pure confirmation bias at best, and an outright lie at worst. Your entire diet could be soda-based, and a switch from HFCS to cane sugar isn't going to be enough to cause you to suddenly go from gaining weight to losing weight.

Demiurge

concealer404 wrote: »

I'm actually with him. The less synthesized bs in your diet, the better, no matter how you slice it.

Synthetic? Yes, I would also agree with you that they're much worse for your health. The alternatives to natural fats are worse for your body than real fat. However, I don't know that I agree margarine is going to make you gain weight and butter lose weight.

maximillian

Back to the fries... used to love Wendy's fries. Now I hate them. I hate all fast-food fries now.

newrival

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Animal fats and cane sugar are proven to be more easily processed by the human body. Fats and sugars derived from plant sources must be used in un-natural states(heavily processed) for them to be useful as sweeteners and oils. This makes them more difficult for the body to process, and anything the body does not know what to do with generally gets stored as fat.

I'm sorry, but that's simply not true. I dont know what your background is, but mine consists of a bit of biochemistry. I have heard people say things like this, but I think that it comes from a dilution of some pseudo-truths and broad generalizations.

I'll generalize here as to keep from making it too technical. Animal fats are NOT better nor easily processed by the human body, they're saturated and highly dense (harder to break down). these are the ones that congeal on your plate at room temperature. not good. Fats in plants (plant sterols) are less dense and less energy, which means easier to be broken down.

I have never seen any study that shows animal fats are better than plant. I can only assume since you mention heavy processing that you are talking about hydrogenated oils and their trans fats. This is an exception, and is man made. Not an inherent quality of plant sterols. Additionally, they are less frequently used now, and don't have as much to do with weight gain as they do effecting ones cholesterol chemistry, which is why it increases coronary disease probability.

corn syrup (HFCS) is potentially more hazerdous, but it has nothing to do with the body's inability to "process" it. Fructose is an easily broken down sugar, the problem lies in that it does not cause an insulin response, which, inturn, does not tell you're body you've had enough. So a person consumes more of the sugars because the body is not signalling that it shouldn't have any more.

These are the reasons that I mention the corellation between increase in quality of life. Soda, sugary snaks, hamburgers, etc, have all become very affordable for people (raising the quality of life) and as such people can consume more of the cheaper product. The issue is still consumption and a function of it's availability (and affordability) and not the fact that it's from a plant or an animal.

Jstas

I eat sticks of butter like they are candy bars.

newrival

Jstas wrote: »

That's backwards. Obesity levels usually rise as quality of life goes down. This has been happening very recently with the implosion of the U.S. Economy and subsequent jobpocalypse. many people are low on cash and struggling to get by. When they are living like they, they go with the cheapest stuff they can get that they need to live. The cheap food is usually very processed and that ends up losing nutritional value while cheap, nutritionally void cheap fillers are added to make up bulk. These fillers and preservatives are no good for your body but when you are unemployed and getting by on gubment cheese, you do what you have to do. Couple that with more downtime sitting in front of a computer looking for jobs or just watching TV and obesity rates go up. It's the nature of the beast.

You can see trending throughout the years. As poverty levels rise and unemployment levels rise so do health problems. When the economy does well and people are flush with cash, that stuff drops because people have the money to maintain a healthier lifestyle with less stress.

It's not backwards, you just misunderstand. Youre talking about poverty levels and relative wealth in short term studies, not quality of life.

kevhed72

If you have a 5-Guys franchise near you....best fries ever.

Personally, I think everything at Wendy's sucks, especially since they attempt to market the food as 'fresh'...

newrival

Jstas wrote: »

That's backwards. Obesity levels usually rise as quality of life goes down.

Read any studies on westernizing and rapid-growth countries. Obesity RISES with quality of life. I see why you might think it is counter-intuitive, but you are over-simplifying the socio-economic issues.