Re:McDonald's and other big brands warn that low-income cons...
by Asmod4n on Thursday May 02, 2024 @02:21PM
(#40239682)
The big mac had around 500 calories when it came out in the 70ies, in the 90ies that changed to 640, at the start of the century they changed it to around 705, now its down to 500 again.
Re:McDonald's and other big brands warn that low-income cons...
by jfengel on Thursday May 02, 2024 @03:01PM
(#40240173)
Interesting. I wonder what changed. Formulation of the bun? Or the "special sauce"? Or perhaps just a change in the way calories are calculated.
I recall a time when the Big Mac was the gold standard of "this product has too many calories", and articles would decry things that somehow managed to have more. Now, it's hard to find anything with a mere 500 calories.
When I made Big Macs in the late 80s, they were made of two "10 to 1" patties (i.e. 10 to the pound, 1.6 ounces each). That's still the formula, according to their web site.
I did see a Reddit post that claimed that the product was physically bigger from 1972-1975. It doesn't show the ingredients, and it looks from the picture as if it is bigger bread rather than more meat. (You can't see any meat in the photo of the bigger sandwich.)