Subway vs, McD's -- Which is Unhealthier? You May Be Surprised

Oh no, say it isn't so!  But a new survey has found that Subway is every bit as unhealthy as McDonald's.

In a study of young people from 12 to 21, a little over 1,000 calories were consumed by each participant at the golden arches, while at Subway, it was 955,  according to a story at  The Institute of Medicine (IOM) advises that students eat no more than 850 calories at lunch (and for people like me, on a 1,000-calorie-a-day diet, even that sounds decadent!).

Now, I was also under the impression that Subway was healthier.  There you could get a turkey sandwich (okay, rolled turkey), tomato and lettuce on a bun, hold the mayo, maybe a slice of swiss cheese, and that just had to be healthier than a Big Mac, no?

But the sodium content is higher at Subway (that's probably how they get away with making the food taste good), and the Subway sandwiches, one of the chain's most popular offerings, still had 200 more calories than a similar McDonald's meal.  The really bad news?  Both fast food purveyors had sodium contents three times higher than the IOM advises, reports.

And what about the "health halo?"  The Web site quotes nutritionist Lisa R. Young, who says some people eat more at fast food restaurants thought to be healthier.

“I do not recommend fast food if you want to eat healthy,” Young, author of The Portion Teller’s Diet. “With a few exceptions, fast food is still fast food—high in fat."


Popular posts from this blog

Think You're Pretty Smart? You May Actually Stink at Visual Skills, Crucial in Today's Digital World

Leave Your Ego at the Door

Did You Know Emojis Could Do THAT?