Is the Food at Subway Healthy and Good for Weight Loss? A Review.
There are so many food choices available on the market nowadays that it can be excruciatingly painful trying to ascertain what is “healthy” and what is “garbage”. There are low-fat, low-joule, high protein, sugar-free, lite, fat-free and plethora of other marketing terms used to communicate that a particular product is healthy.
So, I have decided to use Subway as a case study in this blog post. Subway’s catch phrase is “Eat Fresh” and a few years ago they began marketing within Australia quite heavily as a fast food chain that was highly appropriate for people seeking to lose weight. Do you remember Jared? Jared Fogle was somewhat of the “Subway mascot”, who lost a phenomenal amount of weight, as shown in Subway’s advertising campaign.
But the question at hand here is not whether or not Jared lost weight on the Subway diet, rather, whether or not the food at Subway is healthy and if the food at Subway is good for weight loss. In other words, is Subway’s marketing campaign accurate with the message that they seem to be implying?
As with any marketing in the nutritional field, it is not wise to rely on what the marketing campaign purports. Just because something may be low in fat, doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily “healthy”. After all, jelly beans are low in fat, but they are high in sugar and have a high glycemic index (or have very fast absorbing carbohydrates). Milk chocolate may have a low glycemic index, yet it is full of sugar and very high in fat. Low-fat butter may be lower in fat than regular butter, but it may still be 40% fat (and not the good fats either). So a good understanding of nutrition is vital when ascertaining whether or not food is actually “healthy” for you.
Coming back to Subway and whether or not it is healthy (or good for weight loss), it really depends on the actual food that you consider. Subway have a variety of foods available, all with completely different nutritional compositions. I have downloaded the nutritional information off the Subway website and am using this as my point of reference in writing this Subway review.
Let’s begin with the Subway cookies. The choc-chip cookie is 215 calories having a total of 10.5g of fat. It’s loaded with 18.2g of sugar. Other cookies from Subway are comparable and it really is a bit of a no-brainer that these cookies should generally not be consumed if you’re looking to follow a healthy approach to nutrition.
The salads, wraps and subs at Subway generally depend on the foods that you choose to add into the salad. The meat and sauces that you choose to add on can have a profound impact on the healthiness of the meal you consume. So rather than considering each item individually, let’s look at some of the fillings instead.
To begin with, all the vegetables are great at Subway! They are all fresh and packed full of nutrients. Plus, most of them are practically neutral in regards to net calorie intake. Go for your life with the veggies!
The ham, roast beef, roast chicken and turkey options are quite good, being minimally processed, relatively low in fat and good protein sources. These are all options on the “6 grams of fat or less”. Placed in a salad, you’re eating a very low calorie and high nutrient density meal. For example, a turkey salad without sauce equates to 107 calories (less than half of a choc chip cookie!). Yes, this is quite a healthy meal.
A low-fat 6-inch sub isn’t too much of a concern, assuming that you choose the correct bread and filling. Subway have just introduced a multi-grain sub, which would be a much better option than most of the breads that have available (being white breads). Multigrain will generally not only have a lower glycemic index, but also be more nutrient dense due to the wholegrains contained within the bread. A “6 grams of fat or less” sub will generally set you back around 200-300 calories. The exception is with the sweet onion chicken teriyaki 6-inch, being 352 calories; not a good option for weight loss. The high calorie content is due to the high sugar content in the sweet onion sauce.
Now, onto the Subway no-no’s for weight loss in this review.
There are a variety of add-ons that can really boost up the calorie content. For example, cheddar cheese adds in 42 calories to a 6-inch (double for a footlong). Bacon adds in 45 calories. Chipotle Southwest sauce adds in a whopping 98 calories from a very high fat content of 10.3g on a 6 inch sub! Thousand island dressing adds in 82 calories on a 6 inch – again, definitely one to avoid. The sauces at Subway can really boost up your calorie intake – so if you’re seeking to lose weight, be aware of the effect that this will have on your dietary program.
This is where it really pays to do your nutritional research. Something that is often conceived as low-fat is actually quite the opposite at Subway. Consider this – a tin of tuna in springwater found in your supermarket is typically around 80 calories. Meanwhile, a 6 inch sub at Subway with tuna contains 393 calories! Total fat content (with no add-ons) is a whopping 16.5g primarily from the tuna!
What may come as a surprise (I know it did for me) are some of the non-low-fat subs and how calorie dense they actually are. You may be shocked (and appalled) at how high in fat (and calories) a footlong meatball marinara with a couple of additives has. Let’s consider the following recipe:
- Footlong Meatball Marinara
- Cheddar Cheese
- Bacon
- Ranch Dressing
I chose these because I know someone who likes to order a footlong with this recipe! Let’s consider the calorie content of each of the above ingredients:
- 956 calories
- 84 calories
- 90 calories
- 120 calories
Total equates to 1250 calories. To put this into perspective, a Big Mac from McDonalds is 540 calories (according to the American McDonalds website). This footlong sub would be the equivalent of consuming 2.3 Big Macs (in calorie consumption terms)!! Alternatively, 1250 calories is possibly more than a female seeking to lose weight would consume in an entire day! I feel that this is fairly obviously not appropriate for anyone seeking to lose weight, let alone eat in a healthy manner.
So the lesson here is to do your research. Yes, there are certainly very healthy options at Subway, yet there are also very unhealthy options too. The same reigns true for nearly all food outlets and restaurants. It is most important to familiarise yourself with the foods that you consume from a nutritional point of view and to never (ever) rely on the marketing that is fed to you through advertising campaigns.
If you don’t feel confident in analysing the nutritional composition of foods, I highly recommend that you sign up to our free weight loss course where we discuss food in detail and interpreting this information for your own personal use.







Is the Food at Subway Healthy and Good for Weight Loss? A Review … | Australia Today says:
January 14th, 2010 at 7:05 pm
[...] Read more here: Is the Food at Subway Healthy and Good for Weight Loss? A Review … [...]
Deme says:
January 14th, 2010 at 7:33 pm
Finding the right food isn’t really that easy when everything tasty and heavy are accessible anywhere. We therefore should really be cautious in what to eat since everything we put into our mouths will be seen in our body in one way or the other. I appreciate that you’ve discussed about these matters here.
Is the Food at Subway Healthy and Good for Weight Loss? A Review … | Headlines Today says:
January 14th, 2010 at 8:50 pm
[...] the original post here: Is the Food at Subway Healthy and Good for Weight Loss? A Review … Share and [...]
Is the Food at Subway Healthy and Good for Weight Loss? A Review … | australianews says:
January 14th, 2010 at 10:32 pm
[...] weight loss. Whilst some food choices may be great, others are surpris. Read the original post: Is the Food at Subway Healthy and Good for Weight Loss? A Review … Share and [...]
Tweets that mention Is the Food at Subway Healthy and Good for Weight Loss? A Review. : Online Personal Training Blog says:
January 15th, 2010 at 9:08 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Sexy Healthy Tips and yolanda powell, maxwell. maxwell said: Is the Food at Subway Healthy and Good for Weight Loss? A Review …: Placed in a salad, you're eating a very low … [...]
Ron Green says:
January 17th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
I found that eating from the same place (subway) gets a bit boring after a while, but its still ok because even the other fast food places have healthy menus now. Maccas especially has alot of healthy meals, and they still have their ‘Heart Tick Meals’ which they advertised alot a while ago, which are a very very good choice, and in my opinion better than subway, as there is more choice, and you don’t have to work out the nutritional info and all that yourself, the heart foundation has already done that for you.
Theres also others, red rooster and kfc even have salads on offer now, just be careful you don’t get the chips and coke to go with it hahaha.
admin says:
January 18th, 2010 at 5:56 pm
Good points Rob.
I agree that the heart tick meals are much better than many of the other options available at McDonalds. However it still pays to do your research.
There are a number of these meals that, whilst “better” than your high-fat options, are still not all that great from a nutritional perspective. They may be relatively low in fat, but many of these heart ticked meals have highly processed white buns, lacking in vital nutrients and being of higher glycemic index than wholegrain alternatives. Further, a heart tick meal can exceed 400 calories (which doesn’t include the drink being possibly 100-200 more calories), being quite substantial in one single sitting.
I have obtained these figures off the McDonalds website.
I am not aware of what standards the Heart Foundation adheres to with their tick approval, but I do feel that it is very important, to understand the nutritional composition of foods and how it directly relates to your body.
I do agree though that the other fast food outlets are bringing in healthier alternatives which is excellent for people watching what they eat to make smarter choices.
Marcus says:
January 18th, 2010 at 7:53 pm
Excellent points on both sides of the coin,
Some McDonalds do represent a good overall choice, for example the McDonalds Seared Classic Chicken Salad with Bagel Chips does provide a good/better choice with 236cal, 27g Protein, 7.7g Fat and 11.8g Carbs again this doesn’t include dressing, but in this case the dressing offered is balsamic based so again offers a better choice. The downside is the addition of bagel chips and although are only minor are primarily composed of empty nutrients in the form of ingredients wheat flour, soy bean oil and sugar…..
More importantly whilst the tick meals do offer better choice, you actually pay to have items display the tick, although they still have to meet the various criteria of the ‘tick’. I remember this was discussed in the media in the past, in particular with regards to probably the most concerning pizza. There are multiple articles if you google the Crust Pizza chain.
This biggest concern of this is it may actually confuse people thinking they are eating something ‘healthy’ when in actual fact they are eating something healthier with respect the ‘regular’ versions. The next obvious issue comes in the context as Jay alluded to in the context of serving size. Nutritional information with regards to crust pizza is presented with respect to 100g which generally constitutes about a slice and a half of pizza. Again with the crust ‘tick’ menu a 100g of tick approved roast beef pizza provides 194cal, 12.1g Protein, 5.2g Fat, and 23g Carbs, However how many people do you know who would either just eat one and a half slices or more importantly just eat one and a half slices and be full? Let’s say an ‘average’ person might end up eating half a 10” 8 Slice pizza this ends up becoming a 517 calorie meal, not to mention I know many a friend who could and would easily take down the whole pizza on its own.
More food for thought really
Marc
admin says:
January 19th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
That’s a really good point with the Crust Pizza chain. I have investigated this chain myself due to their Heart Tick as i have had several clients ask me about their products. Not many people would assume that one serving size (which I assume is what the Heart Foundation considers) is only a fraction of the entire pizza. This is a problem when eating various highly processed foods – they are often quite calorie dense.
When you consider a whole food alternative, you can generally eat significantly more for the same total energy total. This is not to mention the fact that, due to less processing prior to ingestion, your body has to expend more calories to actually digest the food. Hence, the net calories will typically be much lower in the whole food alternative of an equivalent energy amount.