I should start by saying that I love McDonald's. Growing up in communist Czechoslovakia, McDonald's was more than just a fast-food chain--it was a prohibited symbol of America, of freedom, and of liberty. It represented everything good that we saw in the West, and to me, it still holds a certain iconic status that goes way above plain hamburger joint. To this day, McDonald's remains a nostalgic brand that I admire.

But let's get to the review of the Chicken Big Mac.

The Packaging: Like its classic counterpart, the Chicken Big Mac comes in a box, which signals its place among McDonald's flagship offerings. Ironically, the packaging also betrays the realities of today's fast-food marketing: While the ads boast a sandwich that's taller than it is wide, the box hints at a different reality.

First Impressions: Visually, the Chicken Big Mac holds up well. I was pleasantly surprised by the lack of expected greasiness, considering its substantial 38 grams of fat. In fact, my first impression was "a bit dry”.

The sandwich is composed of two Chicken Big Mac Patties, three pieces of Big Mac Bun, shredded lettuce, Big Mac Sauce, pasteurized process American cheese, and pickle slices.

The Patties: The patties look much like those found in the McChicken or McNuggets and, like them, they lack any visible meat fibers. You're getting the traditional, mechanically separated chicken—a mix of ground and processed meat bound together by non-meat additives. The resulting texture is softer, uniform, starchy and almost doughy. For kids, this works. I personally prefer the fibrous chicken found at KFC. It’s funny how producers must label other processed foods as “imitation” or “blended,” yet McDonald's just calls this “chicken” without a hint that it’s not the same as whole cuts. Of course, no loyal McDonald's customer will feel tricked here.

The Bun: McDonald's Big Mac bun delivers its classic taste that we know from the Big Mac. Compared to the regular bun, it is enriched with vegetable proteins and extra gluten. The result is increase in protein content and reduction in simple carbs. This is technically a good thing, but at this level of ultra-processing the difference doesn't amount to much. The real star here is the smell, with the bun contributing most of the sandwich's beautiful fragrance.

The Cheese and Other Toppings: The toppings are pretty much what you’d expect. Regrettably, my sandwich didn’t deliver in this department, as it had only very little sauce, just a few shreds of lettuce on the middle bun, and a single tiny pickle slice. While I wasn’t too bothered by the lack of sauce—given its fat content—the small amount of lettuce and pickles was disappointing, especially since I enjoy a mix of flavors.

Sure, you can add more toppings for an extra cost, but the sandwich is prepared properly, that shouldn’t be necessary. According to McDonald's official website, a standard serving of shredded lettuce on a Chicken Big Mac should provide 6 milligrams of calcium and 40 milligrams of potassium, which equates to roughly 17 grams of lettuce. A quick check on a kitchen scale will confirm that this is more than adequate. The same can be said about the pickles; based on the nutritional profile, you should receive three or four slices. Even the promotional ads show two. Receiving just one, I probably just had the misfortune of encountering a particularly stingy McDonald's employee.

The Taste: The limited toppings on my “chickenburger” compounded its relatively monotonous taste. Everything blended together too much, which isn’t what you want in a sandwich with several components. I enjoy when each part of a meal stands out in its own way. Think of how you can distinguish every element in a double cheeseburger—the beef, ketchup, and pickle all have their moment. But here, the chicken patty, bun, and sauce all merged into something too homogeneous. Frankly, I could barely taste the chicken. And on top of that, the breading didn’t deliver the crispy texture that its tempura-like coating suggested.

This all left me craving another flavor, and halfway through my meal, I grabbed an improvised side I had picked up earlier from the grocery store hot bar to complement the second half of the sandwich.

To sum up the taste, I found the Chicken Big Mac to be enjoyable enough to easily eat more than one. After all, most fast food tastes good. However, I didn’t love it. It was good, but not great. And that is also the crux of my experience—only something truly exceptional would justify indulging in a sandwich that packs 700 calories with so much fat and so little quality protein.

The Nutrition: There was some initial confusion about how energy-dense the Chicken Big Mac would be. The first numbers came from Europe, where they managed to squeeze the sandwich within reasonable 530 calories (see, for instance, the Nutrition Info of the Chicken Big Mac UK). But then the U.S. version arrived, upgreased to a whopping 700 calorie bomb (Nutrition Info of the Chicken Big Mac USA). For someone who eats 6 meals a day and tries to stay within 550 calories per meal, that's already bad enough. But consider how much worse it gets when you make it a meal:

You might think it unfair to criticize a Chicken Big Mac for being unhealthy. After all, fast food is generally expected to be unhealthy—no one goes to McDonald's expecting a vitamin bomb. But the Chicken Big Mac takes unhealthy to a new level, and that’s definitely worth noting. Unlike the beef burger lineup, where you can discard one bun to reduce the carbs and at least enjoy quality muscle-building protein, the Chicken Big Mac has practically no redeeming qualities.

This is particularly frustrating in an age when more and more people are embracing healthier choices. Free market dynamics are one thing, but a hint of corporate responsibility—specifically, consideration of the impact of products on consumers—can certainly coexist with it. The Chicken Big Mac feels like a throwback to an era where nutrition didn’t matter, and this is especially shameful in light of the European version of the sandwich, which has 170 calories less.

Conclusion: The nutritional properties of the Chicken Big Mac make it a sandwich with a lot of negatives and very few positives. High in calories, saturated fat, sugar, salt and added sugar, and relatively low in quality protein, the sandwich is quite hard to swallow. It's tasty, but not delicious. On a cheat day or a road trip, I'd sooner reach for a pepperoni pizza, KFC fibrous chicken, or a beef sandwich from McDonald's. My prediction is that McDonald's Chicken Big Mac will soon disappear due to low interest.

Weight Breakdown:

• Total: 240 grams (8.5 oz)
• Upper bun: 28 grams (+3 grams sauce)
• Upper patty: 58 grams
• Middle bun: 29 grams (+6 grams sauce)
• Cheese: 15 grams
• Lower patty: 49 grams (+6 grams sauce)
• Lower bun: 33 grams (+7 grams sauce)