Just wanted to point out that b.good has adjusted some of the nutritional information on its website.
Many items have stayed the same, such as the hamburgers, four out of five of which are still under 500 calories. But some items, notably the turkey burgers and the sides, have changed quite a bit. A Carolina BBQ turkey burger, for example, is now listed as having 477 calories and 13g of fat; that's more calories than a McDonald's quarter pounder, and more fat than a McDonald's cheeseburger. For those counting calories, perhaps the most upsetting of all are the fries, which have leapt to 285 calories per order, more than a small fries at McDonald's (admittedly b.good's are vastly lower in fat).
As someone who leads a secret double life of health nut by day, chowhound by night, I liked b.good as a lunchtime compromise, a reasonably satisfying way to save up my daily calorie allotment for a delicious dinner. I viewed it as the food equivalent of a Diet Coke, something that was modeled after the real thing, didn't taste quite as good, but wasn't a bad way of fooling my brain into accepting a lower-calorie choice. But if a b.good turkey burger and fries are going to clock in at nearly 800 calories and cost nearly twice as much as a fast food combo, what's the point?
I never viewed b.good as a legitimate chow destination, but after the nutritional revision, I'm having trouble viewing it as much of anything other than another overpriced, unsatisfying lunch option in the Back Bay.
Updated 3 months ago | 8
Updated 2 years ago | 0
Updated 1 year ago | 0
Updated 4 days ago | 35
Updated 11 hours ago | 16