Food Talk And Fabulous Finds Recipes, Healthy Cooking, and General Food Topics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-19-2007, 05:32 PM   #1  
Member
Thread Starter
 
aliceINonederland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 45

Height: 5'7

Default Salad dressing confusion

Recently I ordered a side salad at McDonalds and fell in love with the Newman's Light Sesame Ginger. Both CalorieKing and the package say that the dressing contains 90 cal. and 2.5g of fat for 1.5floz. However, when I purchased the bottle at the market, I was surprised to see that the calorie and fat content was lower. When I looked it up on CalorieKing, it said that 1.5floz contained 50 cal. and 2g fat. I am very confused.....it is the same exact product just different packaging.....does anyone know which is correct??


Thanks!!!
aliceINonederland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 05:40 PM   #2  
Member
 
AngelsEulogy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 55

Default

Could it be possible the one at McDonalds is not a Light version?
AngelsEulogy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 05:42 PM   #3  
Member
Thread Starter
 
aliceINonederland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 45

Height: 5'7

Default

I am looking at the package and the bottle right now...they are both the same version.....which is why I am perplexed...
aliceINonederland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 05:52 PM   #4  
Meg
Senior Member
 
Meg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 8,974

Default

That's a puzzler, for sure -- does your dressing bottle have contact info on it? I imagine Newman's has a web site and perhaps you could email them? Let us know what you find out!
Meg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 05:54 PM   #5  
Member
Thread Starter
 
aliceINonederland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 45

Height: 5'7

Default

I just finished emailing them...I'll post back if and when I hear anything.
aliceINonederland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 05:55 PM   #6  
Working My Way Back Down
 
WaterRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Alaska
Posts: 4,982

Default

I'm waiting to see. I really like this dressing, too.
WaterRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 09:14 PM   #7  
Member
 
AngelsEulogy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 55

Default

Yeah, one being the light version is the only thing I could think of.
I mean, not only is the calories WAY off, the fat is off as well.
AngelsEulogy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 01:08 AM   #8  
very small boned
 
girl81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 808

S/C/G: 110/107/104

Height: 5'3"

Default

I'm curious to hear their reply.
This is why I'm always skeptical of nutrition labels.
girl81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 12:48 PM   #9  
Member
Thread Starter
 
aliceINonederland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 45

Height: 5'7

Default

Well, I finally got an answer. Turns out that even though they are the same label, same brand, etc., McDonalds uses a slightly different recipe. Of course, the healthier version just wasn't good enough for 'em!
aliceINonederland is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:44 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.