Jack in the Box debuts its bacon milkshake

• Scarlet_Buckeye

  

  Ladies and gentlemen, we have a new contestant in the who-can-top-this outrageous new fast food item: the bacon milkshake from Jack in the Box.
  
  The bacon shake is made with no actual bacon, just real vanilla ice cream, bacon-flavored syrup, whipped topping and a maraschino cherry, according to the website.
  
  A 16-ounce bacon shake weighs in at 773 calories, 28 grams of saturated fat, 2 grams of trans fat and 75 grams of sugar. Hankering for a 24-ounce size? That'll be 1,081 calories, 37 grams of saturated fat, 3 grams of trans fat and 108 grams of sugar. Mmmmm. We're saying that ironically.

  http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/08/news/la-heb-bacon-milkshake-jack-in-the-box-20120208
  
  Where's the corporate social responsibility?
• Raw Dawgin' it

  

  They tried this on the Jason Ellis Show, there were mixed reviews about it. Said it didn't really taste like bacon. I'd try it, but definitely wouldn't want 24oz of it. Too bad it doesn't use real bacon.
• queencitybuckeye

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1082149 wrote:http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/08/news/la-heb-bacon-milkshake-jack-in-the-box-20120208
  
  Where's the corporate social responsibility?

  Where's the personal accountability to say "no thanks"? Why is it the business world's place in our society to act as a parent/nanny? The "nutritional" information you provided tells me that I should pass, or at worst, try it once for the sake of curiosity but never make it a staple of my diet.
  
  See what I did there?
• Scarlet_Buckeye

  

  queencitybuckeye;1082171 wrote:Where's the personal accountability to say "no thanks"? Why is it the business world's place in our society to act as a parent/nanny? The "nutritional" information you provided tells me that I should pass, or at worst, try it once for the sake of curiosity but never make it a staple of my diet.
  
  See what I did there?

  Again. Yet another person who fails to understand what corporate social responsibility truly is/means. No one is saying that Jack in the Box shouldn't be selling bacon milkshakes. Instead, corporate social responsibility would suggest that IF Jack in the Box wants to sell some bacon milkshakes, let's try to produce one that's say 500 calories as opposed to 1,000 calories when we know that's not going to be good for anyone.
• queencitybuckeye

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1082183 wrote:Again. Yet another person who fails to understand what corporate social responsibility truly is/means. No one is saying that Jack in the Box shouldn't be selling bacon milkshakes. Instead, corporate social responsibility would suggest that IF Jack in the Box wants to sell some bacon milkshakes, let's try to produce one that's say 500 calories as opposed to 1,000 calories when we know that's not going to be good for anyone.

  What the term appears to mean to you is that it's somehow OK for people to be too lazy or stupid to be bothered with doing even a minimal amount of work to make an informed decision on some simple matter in their lives, and that because those of us who produce products for these dullard masses are neither lazy nor stupid, we have some moral requirement to not only think for ourselves, but for everyone.
  
  Seriously, how difficult is it to know that an 800 calorie milkshake isn't something that should be a regular part of one's diet. Are people actually being physically forced to consume them?
• Early Cuyler

  

  Simply put, if your a fat ass and worried about getting fatter than don't have one. Hope this helps.
• sleeper

  

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1082183 wrote:Again. Yet another person who fails to understand what corporate social responsibility truly is/means. No one is saying that Jack in the Box shouldn't be selling bacon milkshakes. Instead, corporate social responsibility would suggest that IF Jack in the Box wants to sell some bacon milkshakes, let's try to produce one that's say 500 calories as opposed to 1,000 calories when we know that's not going to be good for anyone.

  Why is it Jack in the Box's responsibility to regulate the diet of its consumers? If no one buys the shake, that signals JITB that the market rejects its heavy calorie/unhealthy shake. CSR would only be affected, if say, JITB was hiding either hiding the nutritional information or lying outright about it(although the later may be a matter of ethics not CSR).
• Early Cuyler

  

  sleeper;1082189 wrote:Why is it Jack in the Box's responsibility to regulate the diet of its consumers? If no one buys the shake, that signals JITB that the market rejects its heavy calorie/unhealthy shake. CSR would only be affected, if say, JITB was hiding either hiding the nutritional information or lying outright about it(although the later may be a matter of ethics not CSR).

  +1
• queencitybuckeye

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1082183 wrote:Again. Yet another person who fails to understand what corporate social responsibility truly is/means. No one is saying that Jack in the Box shouldn't be selling bacon milkshakes. Instead, corporate social responsibility would suggest that IF Jack in the Box wants to sell some bacon milkshakes, let's try to produce one that's say 500 calories as opposed to 1,000 calories when we know that's not going to be good for anyone.

  How do you know that their initial attempts at the product weren't more than the 773 calories and that they didn't make the decision to refine the product to make it a little less unhealthy? That's correct, you don't know.
• chicago510

  

  Its a bacon milkshake damnit, not a side salad. Of course its loaded with calories.
  
  McDonalds doesn't make people fat, people are fat because they choose to eat at McDonalds.
• Heretic

  

  Corporate social responsibility? Lol...if anyone gets one of these things thinking they're getting anything other than a fat/sugar-filled shake, they're too dumb to live anyway. If something like this needs this responsibility, what about 90 percent of the average fast food place's menu? Since most all of it's shit, but it's easier to pretend/delude yourself that you're getting some actual degree of nutrition from a lot of things. Not this product.
• thavoice

  Personal reponsibilit should trump corporate responsibility ever time.
  
  
  See no problem with this milkshake. It isnt like kids are gonna want this and beg their parents to get one. It MAY be diff if they come out with a 800 calorie food and their full marketing campaign is towards kids. Even in this case.....it wouldnt be the invention of the product that would be poor corp responsibility, but the marketing of said product to kids.
• queencitybuckeye

  Heretic;1082216 wrote:Corporate social responsibility? Lol...if anyone gets one of these things thinking they're getting anything other than a fat/sugar-filled shake, they're too dumb to live anyway.

  Never thought about the public service aspect of this. Make some money, thin the herd. Reps.
• sleeper

  

  The best question is Scarlet Buckeye going to come back to this thread and admit he was wrong. That's what a real man does.
• queencitybuckeye

  sleeper;1082231 wrote:The best question is Scarlet Buckeye going to come back to this thread and admit he was wrong. That's what a real man does.

  Since I own a corporation, I probably should do it for him.
  
  I'm sorry, I was wrong.
• Scarlet_Buckeye

  

  queencitybuckeye;1082186 wrote:OK for people to be too lazy or stupid
  Seriously, how difficult is it to know that an 800 calorie milkshake isn't something that should be a regular part of one's diet. Are people actually being physically forced to consume them?

  No one is saying that people are completely innocent in this matter.
  
  
  I guarantee you there are a # of people who will consume these without knowing they contain 800 calories. GUARANTEE IT.
• sleeper

  

  queencitybuckeye;1082232 wrote:Since I own a corporation, I probably should do it for him.
  
  I'm sorry, I was wrong.

  +1 reps, lol'd
• sleeper

  

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1082235 wrote:No one is saying that people are completely innocent in this matter.
  
  
  I guarantee you there are a # of people who will consume these without knowing they contain 800 calories. GUARANTEE IT.

  I guarantee it too. I guarantee people will actually go to the polls and vote for Barack Obama. Stupidity is the problem, not JITB.
• Scarlet_Buckeye

  

  Heretic;1082216 wrote:if anyone gets one of these things thinking they're getting anything other than a fat/sugar-filled shake, they're too dumb to live anyway.

  I'd agree with this actually, but sadly the majority of the society wouldn't.
• Raw Dawgin' it

  

  since when is a dessert suppose to be healthy?
• queencitybuckeye

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1082235 wrote:No one is saying that people are completely innocent in this matter.
  
  
  I guarantee you there are a # of people who will consume these without knowing they contain 800 calories. GUARANTEE IT.

  If I make this information available (which is required by laws I support, BTW), should I really have to constantly hammer it home to people? Doing so adds real and significant costs to the business. Do you want to pay higher prices for the sloth of such people?
• Early Cuyler

  

  Raw Dawgin' it;1082244 wrote:since when is a dessert suppose to be healthy?

  This.
  
  Also, I'm gonna guess that the OP is 300+ lbs.
• chicago510

  

  So do we blame the gun companies for murders?
  
  Car companies for auto accidents?
  
  Beer companies for DUIs?
  
  
• Raw Dawgin' it

  

  Fat people like to put the blame for them being fat anywhere but on themselves.
• Iliketurtles

  

  God there is so much I wish I could rep on this thread. I pretty much love everything that was said by everyone except for the OP.
  
  As for the milkshake itself I would try it. And I wouldn't even think, care, or try to find out how many calories it has. I don't pay attention to that stuff.