Jump to content
This site uses cookies. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. More Info... ×
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Mcds Fries In The News


Moongirl

Recommended Posts

Moongirl Community Regular

here is something i found, not directly to the gluten-free issue but it is raising other issues..

Open Original Shared Link

2/10/06

McD's Fries: Great Taste, More Trans Fats

By George Anderson

Improvements in food testing helped McDonald's discover an unpleasant fact about the company's famed French fries. They have one-third more trans fats than the company previously thought.

The announcement by McD's comes at a time when the company begins disclosing the nutritional data for the items on its menu on new packaging. Federal guidelines for trans fats urge consumers to "just say no" to ingesting any trans fats, which have been show to increase bad cholesterol and the risk of heart attack.

Back in 2002, McDonald's pledged to reduce the trans fats in its fries but the company has been reluctant to tinker in a way that would dramatically alter the taste of the product.

Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), told The Associated Press, "Nutritionally it's a disastrous product. McDonald's could fry in canola oil or other liquid oil." The company already uses other oils in countries including Australia, Denmark and Israel, he said.

Cathy Kapica, global nutrition director for McDonald's said the company is proud of its menu options.

"It is important to note that McDonald's menu has a wide range of choice and variety, with an array of portion sizes, including three options with french fries - small, medium and large," she said.

Open Original Shared Link

McDonald’s french fries just got fatter

New test detects one-third more trans fats than previously thought

• McDonald's reveals high trans fats levels in fries

Updated: 7:14 p.m. ET Feb. 8, 2006

CHICAGO - McDonald’s french fries just got fatter — by nutritional measurement.

The world’s largest restaurant chain said Wednesday its fries contain a third more trans fats than it previously knew, citing results of a new testing method it began using in December.

That means the level of potentially artery-clogging trans fat in a portion of large fries is eight grams, up from six, with total fat increasing to 30 grams from 25.

Often used by restaurants and in packaged foods, trans fats are thought to cause cholesterol problems and increase the risk of heart disease. The dietary guidelines for Americans that were issued by a government panel last year said people should consume as little trans fat as possible.

The disclosure comes as McDonald’s Corp. starts rolling out packaging for its menu items that contain facts about their nutritional content — a move made voluntarily but with the fast-food industry under pressure from consumer groups and the government to provide more information.

McDonald’s said it updated the nutrition info on its Web site last month as soon as it discovered the new level of trans fat. It explained the increase by saying an improvement in the testing process has made results more accurate.

“As part of our ongoing voluntary efforts to provide our customers with the best science-based information, we continually enhance our testing,” said Cathy Kapica, global nutrition director for Oak Brook, Ill.-based McDonald’s.

Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, called the change “quite a dramatic increase.”

He renewed the nonprofit health advocacy group’s call for McDonald’s and other fast-food chains to make healthier food — and for the Food and Drug Administration to ban the use of partially hydrogenated oil, the source of trans fat. Trans fat is made when manufacturers add hydrogen to vegetable oil — a process called hydrogenation.

“Nutritionally it’s a disastrous product,” Jacobson said of the fries. “McDonald’s could fry in canola oil or other liquid oil” as it does in Australia, Denmark and Israel, he said.

Responding to the criticism, Kapica said the company is “very proud of our menu.”

“It is important to note that McDonald’s menu has a wide range of choice and variety, with an array of portion sizes, including three options with french fries — small, medium and large,” she said.

McDonald’s has been reluctant to risk changing the taste of its iconic french fries. It pledged in September 2002 to switch to a new oil that would halve the level of harmful trans fatty acid in its fries. But it has delayed those plans, citing product quality and customer satisfaction as priorities while continuing testing.

McDonald’s spokeswoman Anna Rozenich said tray liners and nutrition brochures containing trans fat and other info will be updated soon and the company Web site will reflect up-to-date information.

The FDA began mandating that packaged foods companies report trans fat levels last month, but the fast-food industry is not under similar requirements.


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



killernj13 Enthusiast

Why is there a press release about trans fat but no mention of the gluten problems with their fries?

We get no respect!!! :(

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      131,342
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    Setb1210
    Newest Member
    Setb1210
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.4k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • trents
      My reaction to a gluten bolus exposure is similar to yours, with 2-3 hours of severe abdominal cramps and intractable emesis followed by several hours of diarrhea. I don't necessarily equate that one large exposure to gluten with significant intestinal lining damage, however. I think it's just a violent reaction to a what the body perceives to be a somewhat toxic substance that I am no longer tolerant of because I have quit exposing myself to it regularly. It's just the body purging itself of it rather than an expression of significant damage. Before diagnosis, when I was consuming gluten daily, I had little to no GI distress. I was, for the most part, a "silent celiac". The damage to my small bowel lining didn't happen all at once but was slow and insidious, accumulating over a period of years. The last time I got a big shot of gluten was about three years ago when I got my wife's wheat biscuits mixed up with my gluten-free ones. There was this acute reaction after about two hours of ingestion as I described above. I felt washed out for a few days and fully recovered within a week or so.  Now, I'm a 74-year-old male. So, I'm not worried about being pregnant. And I don't want to contradict your physicians advice. But I just don't think you have done significant damage to your small bowel lining by one episode of significant gluten ingestion. I just don't think it works that way.
    • Skydawg
      Wondering about some thoughts on how long to wait to try to get pregnant after a gluten exposure?  I have been diagnosed for 10 years and have followed the diet strictly. I have been cross contaminated before, but have never had a full on gluten exposure. I went to a restaurant recently, and the waiter messed up and gave me regular bread and told me it was gluten free. 2 hours later I was throwing up for the whole evening. I have never had that kind of reaction before as I have never had such a big exposure. My husband and I were planning to start trying to get pregnant this month. My dr did blood work to check for electrolytes and white blood cells, but did not do a full nutritional panel. Most of my GI symptoms have resolved in the past 2 weeks, but I am definitely still dealing with brain fog, fatigue and headaches. My dr has recommended I wait 3 months before I start to try to get pregnant.   I have read else where about how long it can take for the intestine to fully heal, and the impacts gluten exposure can have on pregnancy. I guess I am really wondering if anyone has had a similar experience? How long does it take to heal after 1 exposure like that, after following the diet so well for 10 years? Is 3 months an okay amount of time to wait? Is there anything I can do in the meantime to reduce my symptoms? 
    • ShadowLoom
      I’ve used tinctures and made my own edibles with gluten-free ingredients to stay safe. Dispensary staff don’t always know about gluten, so I double-check labels or just make my own.
    • Scott Adams
      It's great to hear that there are some good doctors out there, and this is an example of why having a formal diagnosis can definitely be helpful.
    • RMJ
      Update: I have a wonderful new gastroenterologist. She wants to be sure there’s nothing more serious, like refractory celiac, going on. She ordered various tests including some micronutrient tests that no one has ever ordered before.  I’m deficient in folate and zinc and starting supplements for both. I’m so glad I decided to go to a new GI!
×
×
  • Create New...