Fast foods, chicken tenders
Fast foods, chicken tenders is a food at 271 calories per 100g. It is an excellent source of Niacin (B3) and Sodium, providing 51% and 51% of the Daily Value respectively. This food is a moderate protein source. Our database tracks 74 nutrients for this food, plus insulin index, environmental footprint data.
Top Nutrients
Data for 74 of 150 tracked nutrients
Nutrient Fingerprint
How this food scores across key nutrient categories, as a percentage of the daily recommended value per 100 g. Based on USDA DRIs for adults.
Complete Nutrient Profile
Macronutrients 9
| Nutrient | Per 100g | Unit | Per Serving | % DV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Water SR | 46.6 | g | — | 1% |
| Calories SR | 271 | kcal | — | — |
| Energy (kJ) SR | 1,136 | kj | — | — |
| Protein SR | 19.2 | g | — | 34% |
| Total Fat SR | 13.9 | g | — | — |
| Carbohydrate SR | 17.2 | g | — | 13% |
| Fiber SR | 1.2 | g | — | 3% |
| Total Sugars SR | 0.40 | g | — | — |
| Ash SR | 2.9 | g | — | — |
Minerals 10
| Nutrient | Per 100g | Unit | Per Serving | % DV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calcium SR | 17.0 | mg | — | 2% |
| Iron SR | 0.73 | mg | — | 9% |
| Magnesium SR | 28.0 | mg | — | 7% |
| Phosphorus SR | 282 | mg | — | 40% |
| Potassium SR | 373 | mg | — | 11% |
| Sodium SR | 769 | mg | — | 51% |
| Zinc SR | 0.71 | mg | — | 6% |
| Copper SR | 0.07 | mg | — | 8% |
| Manganese SR | 0.23 | mg | — | 10% |
| Selenium SR | 17.5 | µg | — | 32% |
Vitamins 24
| Nutrient | Per 100g | Unit | Per Serving | % DV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vitamin A (RAE) SR | 3.0 | µg | — | 0% |
| Vitamin A (IU) SR | 11.0 | IU | — | — |
| Retinol SR | 2.0 | µg | — | — |
| Beta-Carotene SR | 2.0 | µg | — | — |
| Alpha-Carotene SR | 0 | µg | — | — |
| Beta-Cryptoxanthin SR | 0 | µg | — | — |
| Lycopene SR | 0 | µg | — | — |
| Lutein + Zeaxanthin SR | 83.0 | µg | — | — |
| Vitamin C SR | 1.1 | mg | — | 1% |
| Vitamin D SR | 0.20 | µg | — | 1% |
| Vitamin D (IU) SR | 7.0 | IU | — | — |
| Vitamin E SR | 3.2 | mg | — | 21% |
| Vitamin K1 SR | 8.0 | µg | — | 7% |
| Thiamin (B1) SR | 0.11 | mg | — | 9% |
| Riboflavin (B2) SR | 0.18 | mg | — | 14% |
| Niacin (B3) SR | 8.2 | mg | — | 51% |
| Pantothenic Acid (B5) SR | 1.2 | mg | — | 25% |
| Vitamin B6 SR | 0.43 | mg | — | 33% |
| Folate SR | 19.0 | µg | — | 5% |
| Folic Acid SR | 6.0 | µg | — | — |
| Folate (food) SR | 13.0 | µg | — | — |
| Folate (DFE) SR | 23.0 | µg | — | — |
| Vitamin B12 SR | 0.16 | µg | — | 7% |
| Choline SR | 43.7 | mg | — | 8% |
Fatty Acids 9
| Nutrient | Per 100g | Unit | Per Serving | % DV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saturated Fat SR | 2.5 | g | — | — |
| Monounsaturated Fat SR | 4.8 | g | — | — |
| Polyunsaturated Fat SR | 5.8 | g | — | — |
| Trans Fat SR | 0.05 | g | — | — |
| Cholesterol SR | 48.0 | mg | — | — |
| Omega-3 ALA SR | 0.21 | g | — | 13% |
| Omega-3 EPA SR | 0 | g | — | — |
| Omega-3 DPA SR | 0.003 | g | — | — |
| Omega-3 DHA SR | 0.002 | g | — | — |
Amino Acids 19
| Nutrient | Per 100g | Unit | Per Serving | % DV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tryptophan SR | 0.22 | g | — | — |
| Threonine SR | 0.80 | g | — | — |
| Isoleucine SR | 0.84 | g | — | — |
| Leucine SR | 1.6 | g | — | — |
| Lysine SR | 1.6 | g | — | — |
| Methionine SR | 0.52 | g | — | — |
| Cystine SR | 0.28 | g | — | — |
| Phenylalanine SR | 1.4 | g | — | — |
| Tyrosine SR | 0.54 | g | — | — |
| Valine SR | 0.91 | g | — | — |
| Arginine SR | 1.2 | g | — | — |
| Histidine SR | 0.66 | g | — | — |
| Alanine SR | 1.0 | g | — | — |
| Aspartic Acid SR | 1.6 | g | — | — |
| Glutamic Acid SR | 3.2 | g | — | — |
| Glycine SR | 0.84 | g | — | — |
| Proline SR | 1.6 | g | — | — |
| Serine SR | 0.79 | g | — | — |
| Hydroxyproline SR | 0.04 | g | — | — |
Nutrient Density Score
The NRF9.3 score measures overall nutritional quality per 100 kcal. It rewards 9 nutrients to encourage (protein, fiber, vitamins A, C, E, calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium) and penalizes 3 to limit (saturated fat, added sugars, sodium). Higher is better; negative scores indicate the food is high in limit nutrients relative to its beneficial content.
NRF9.3 index: Fulgoni et al. (2009), J Nutr 139(8). DVs based on FDA 2020 reference values.
Nutrient Interactions in This Food
Nutrients in this food that enhance or compete with each other during absorption.
✔ Synergies — nutrients that help each other
Vitamin E is fat-soluble and absorbed alongside dietary fats via micelle formation in the small intestine. Low-fat diets reduce vitamin E absorption.
Traber, Free Radic Biol Med, 2007
Vitamin K is fat-soluble. Absorption increases significantly when consumed with dietary fat, particularly for phylloquinone (K1) from plant sources.
Gijsbers et al., Br J Nutr, 1996
Selenium (via glutathione peroxidase) and vitamin E work as complementary antioxidants. Selenium reduces peroxides while vitamin E prevents lipid peroxidation in membranes.
Combs, Br J Nutr, 2001
Vitamin B6 may enhance intracellular magnesium accumulation. Combined supplementation has shown greater benefits for stress and anxiety than magnesium alone.
Pouteau et al., PLoS One, 2018
⚠ Antagonisms — nutrients that compete
High zinc intake induces metallothionein in enterocytes, which traps copper and blocks its absorption. Prolonged high-dose zinc can cause copper deficiency.
Prasad et al., JAMA, 1978; Fosmire, Am J Clin Nutr, 1990
Zinc and non-heme iron compete for the same intestinal transporter (DMT1). High doses of one can reduce absorption of the other when taken simultaneously.
Rossander-Hulten et al., Am J Clin Nutr, 1991
High potassium intake promotes renal sodium excretion and attenuates the blood pressure–raising effect of sodium. A higher K:Na ratio is associated with lower cardiovascular risk.
Aburto et al., BMJ, 2013
Manganese and iron share the DMT1 transporter and compete for absorption. High iron status reduces manganese absorption and vice versa.
Erikson et al., Pharmacol Ther, 2007
Amino Acid Profile
Essential amino acid composition compared to the WHO/FAO adult reference pattern. The Amino Acid Score indicates protein quality — 100 means all essential amino acid requirements are met.
✓ Complete protein — all essential amino acids meet or exceed WHO reference levels.
All Amino Acids (19)
| Amino Acid | g / 100g | mg / g protein |
|---|---|---|
| Tryptophan | 0.22 | 11.6 |
| Threonine | 0.80 | 41.8 |
| Isoleucine | 0.84 | 44.0 |
| Leucine | 1.6 | 80.8 |
| Lysine | 1.6 | 84.1 |
| Methionine | 0.52 | 27.0 |
| Cystine | 0.28 | 14.8 |
| Phenylalanine | 1.4 | 74.8 |
| Tyrosine | 0.54 | 28.0 |
| Valine | 0.91 | 47.2 |
| Arginine | 1.2 | 63.2 |
| Histidine | 0.66 | 34.1 |
| Alanine | 1.0 | 52.8 |
| Aspartic Acid | 1.6 | 84.1 |
| Glutamic Acid | 3.2 | 166.0 |
| Glycine | 0.84 | 44.0 |
| Proline | 1.6 | 83.0 |
| Serine | 0.79 | 41.2 |
| Hydroxyproline | 0.04 | 2.1 |
Fatty Acid Profile
Breakdown of fat types per 100g. A healthy fat profile favours unsaturated fats (mono + poly) and a balanced omega-3 to omega-6 ratio.
Insulin Response
The Insulin Index (II) measures the actual insulin response to food on a scale where white bread = 100. Unlike the Glycemic Index (which only measures blood sugar), the II captures the full hormonal response — including the effect of protein and fat on insulin secretion. This is why high-protein foods like meat and dairy can have significant insulin scores despite having low or zero GI values.
Source: Holt et al. 1997; Bao et al. 2016; Bell 2014
Environmental Impact
Environmental footprint per kilogram of food produced. Data represents the global average for the “Wheat & Rye (Bread)” category.
- Global averages: These figures are production-weighted averages from a meta-analysis of ~38,700 farms across 119 countries (Poore & Nemecek, 2018). Actual impact varies enormously by farming method, geography, and supply chain.
- System boundary: Cradle-to-retail only — does not include consumer transport, home cooking energy, or food waste.
- Soil carbon not included: This data does not account for soil carbon sequestration. Some argue that well-managed regenerative grazing partially offsets ruminant emissions; however, full lifecycle accounting — including methane, land-use change, and the opportunity cost of using land for grazing vs. reforestation — typically makes the net footprint of ruminant meat higher, not lower. This is especially relevant in temperate grassland regions like Ireland.
- Not gospel: This data is informational and illustrative. It is useful for understanding relative magnitudes, but should not be treated as precise measurements for any individual product or farm.
Source: Poore & Nemecek (2018), Science 360(6392). Meta-analysis of ~38,700 farms, 119 countries, 46 product categories.
Related Foods in Fast Foods
Frequently Asked Questions
How many calories are in Fast foods, chicken tenders?
Fast foods, chicken tenders contains 271 kcal per 100 grams, making it a calorie-dense food. The energy comes from 19.2g of protein (28% of calories), 13.9g of fat (46%), and 17.2g of carbohydrates (25%). Fat is the primary energy source.
What is Fast foods, chicken tenders most nutritious for?
The standout nutrient in Fast foods, chicken tenders is Niacin (B3), providing 8.2 mg per 100g (51% of the Daily Value). It is also a notable source of Sodium (51% DV). Our database tracks 74 individual nutrients for this food, allowing detailed comparison across vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and fatty acids.
Is Fast foods, chicken tenders high in protein?
Fast foods, chicken tenders provides 19.2g of protein per 100 grams — a moderate amount. Protein contributes 28% of its calories.
How much fiber is in Fast foods, chicken tenders?
Fast foods, chicken tenders contains 1.2g of fiber per 100 grams, which is a small amount. To increase fiber intake, consider pairing with high-fiber foods such as legumes, whole grains, or vegetables.
What is the insulin index of Fast foods, chicken tenders?
Fast foods, chicken tenders has a moderate insulin response (II: 32) (estimated from macronutrient composition) on the insulin index scale (white bread = 100). This is a typical insulin response for most mixed foods. Note that the insulin index can differ substantially from the glycemic index — dairy products and high-protein foods often have higher insulin responses than their GI would suggest.