They are everywhere: in the city center, on the outskirts, a stone’s throw from high schools or on motorway areas. Fast foods are an integral part of the urban landscape and the daily life of millions of French people. However, behind this promise of fast and comforting meals sometimes hides a much less appetizing reality: that of a blatant lack of transparency on what we really consume.
Quick, good last in the ranking
And it is Quickemblematic chain created in Belgium and located in France since the 1980s, which has received this catastrophic score. Unlike its competitors, Quick does not provide any information on allergens directly by restaurant. To find out if a product contains gluten, nuts or milk, you must go and ask an employee or search on his site in an illegible general table. A course strewn with pitfalls for allergic people, where other channels offer visible and accessible pictograms in the blink of an eye.
A Nutri-Score not found
Another black point: nutritional information. Quick simply does not play the game. No Nutri-Score is displayed on the product sheets, online, or on site. The consumer is left in the total blur, forced to navigate through nutritional analysis tables that are too complex to be useful. It is all the more regrettable that fast food is, by nature, an unbalanced offer where this information would be precious to better choose.
Recipes with invisible ingredients
But the most problematic point is undoubtedly the Product composition. Contrary to what is practiced in other countries such as Switzerland or Canada, Quick gives no specific details on the ingredients used. While McDonald’s Switzerland list up to 44 ingredients for a simple hamburger, Quick is satisfied with wave formulations, without mention of additives, emulsifiers or preservatives. An opacity deemed disturbing by the UFC-Que Choosing, especially since some of these additives-such as the E471 or E481-are suspected of deleterious effects on intestinal or metabolic health.
A comparison without appeal
In the ranking established by the UFC-Que Choisir, only McDonald’s manages to narrowly drop the average thanks to better management of allergens and a partial display of the Nutri-Score. Burger King and KFC arrive ex aequo in second place, penalized by incomplete or unclear information. Quick failed on the whole line, accumulating opacity, absence of sorting tools And No legibility for the customer.
Soon a compulsory display?
Faced with these worrying results, the association calls on the European authorities to intervene. In particular, she asks that the Nutri-Score and the complete list of ingredients become compulsory In all fast food chains. It also urges brands to show transparency, even in the absence of legal constraints.
Because for consumers, the question is no longer just to choose between a cheeseburger or a wrap. It is knowing, in all conscience, what they are about to eat.
FAQ-All about fast foods
1. Are fast foods bad for health?
Fast foods are often rich in calories, saturated fats, salt and sugars, which can contribute to health problems if consumed in excess.
2. How to recognize a fast food with good nutritional information?
Good chains clearly display the Nutri-Score, allergens and the full list of ingredients, easily accessible in restaurants or online.
3. What are the most common allergens in the fast food menus?
Frequent allergens are gluten, milk, eggs, hull fruits, soybeans and fish. Their presence must be clearly reported.
4. Do fast foods use dangerous additives?
Certain additives such as emulsifiers (E471, E481) are often present in processed products of fast foods. Their impact on health is debated, but total transparency is essential.
5. What is the most popular fast food in France?
McDonald’s remains the most popular channel, followed by Burger King, KFC and Quick, each with its strengths and weaknesses in terms of transparency and quality.
Photo credit: Shutterstock
