Talk:BK Veggie

CSPI says 1100 mg = low sodium?
I'm going to write CSPI and ask, but in the meantime: is it really the CSPI's opinion that a sandwich with 1100 mg of sodium is a low-sodium meal? GcT (talk) 06:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I wrote to CSPI and they wrote me back. I have mulled on this for a couple of weeks. I have looked at the 2002 citation (5th footnote) as well as another one, one from 2005, from CSPI. I see nothing to support the statement that CSPI ever thought that the Veggie was a low-sodium sandwich. I've decided to edit. Can't decide how. GcT (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

And I just noticed that in the 2002 citation, CSPI described the Veggie as "made from grains and vegetables (not soy)." Was this wrong then, or has soy been added since then? I can't tell from the BK website, which, AFAICT, lists soy only as an allergen -- which night just indicated traces. I didn't find a list of ingredients. I'd appreciate help: I don't know how to handle this. GcT (talk) 13:02, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The patty was reformulated since the original debut. Originally it did not contain soy, but now does. That is why the original statement about the sodium being low is correct. The new patty has higher sodium than the original. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 16:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'm going to let go of the soy.  But I don't see anywhere that CSPI said that the Veggie has low sodium -- especially in the cited document.  And the e-mail from CSPI emphatically asserts that CSPI never called such a sandwich low-sodium.  You say, "That is why the original statement about the sodium being low is correct," but I don't see it at all. Kindly get back to me on this.  GcT (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I have been reading up some on Wikipedia policies, to make sure I'm complying with AGF, Five Pillars, Wikiquette, Help: Edit Conflict, &c &c.  And having looked again at the cited material, I may be nuts, but I'm pretty sure that no citation from the Center for Science in the Public Interest's publications says that they said the BK Veggie is a low-sodium product.  So I am taking that snippet out again.  PLease don't revert it unless you can show me something. GcT (talk) 03:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * And the more I think about it, the more I think that my parenthetical edit about the CSPI's subsequent statements about the Veggie's sodium content, which was removed, is actuallly pertinent, encyclopedic, and notable. What would justify its removal from the article?  GcT (talk) 03:54, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * (Copied from post to Jerem43's talk page, for completeness. My apologies if this is excessively redundant.)
 * Thank you for leaving my removal of the statement that SCPI said that the Veggie is low in sodium.


 * I'm not wedded to my snipping of the three words, "that it claimed ", but since you did not mention that edit when you reverted all of my edits, I'll guess that you're not wedded to including them, either. It's not a matter of substance, just that I think they are unnecessary for the sentence.


 * And I'm putting the parenthetical statement from CSPI back: if it's pertinent that CSPI praises the low fat, then it is pertinent that CSPI has disliked the sodium content from the get-go, or at least, documentably, since 2005 (sorry, I still don't understand how to make links).


 * I still have the queasy feeling that it will be excessively redundant, but I'm gonna copy this into the Veggie talk page, for completeness. GcT (talk) 21:19, 21 June 2010 (UTC)