Big Fish vs Filet-O-Fish: The Unsettling Truth About Burger King's Sandwich

A recent comparison between Burger King's Big Fish and McDonald's Filet-O-Fish reveals a significant difference in nutritional content. While both sandwiches feature a fried fish filet on a bun with tartar sauce, Burger King's Big Fish packs nearly double the calories of its competitor, at 570 calories compared to McDonald's 380.

The main culprit behind this disparity is the weight difference between the two sandwiches. A recent weighing showed that the Big Fish is approximately 50 grams heavier than a Filet-O-Fish, which directly contributes to its higher caloric count. Additionally, Burger King's use of panko-crusted fish and added lettuce and pickles also contribute to the increased calorie load.

However, for those looking to indulge in the Big Fish without sacrificing their health goals, there are ways to trim down the nutritional content. By asking for tartar sauce on the side or skipping it entirely, and opting for a smaller bun or loading up on extra lettuce and pickles, consumers can reduce their caloric intake.