Skip to main content

POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading

Fast Food Per 100 g · Per 100g serving

POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading is a food, containing 433 calories per 100g. It is an excellent source of Sodium, providing 769.0 mg (51% of the Daily Value) per 100g serving. This food is a moderate protein source, high in fat. Our database tracks 77 nutrients for this food, plus insulin index, environmental footprint data.

433
Calories
kcal
14.0
Protein
g
32.3
Fat
g
21.5
Carbs
g
1.0
Fiber
g

Top Nutrients

💎
Sodium
769 mg
51% DV
💎
Selenium
22.6 µg
41% DV
☀️
Niacin (B3)
5.4 mg
34% DV

Data for 77 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 10
NutrientPer 100gUnitPer Serving% DV
Water SR29.6g—
1%
Calories SR433kcal——
Energy (kJ) SR1,811kj——
Protein SR14.0g—
25%
Total Fat SR32.3g——
Carbohydrate SR21.5g—
17%
Fiber SR1.0g—
3%
Total Sugars SR0g——
Starch SR20.2g——
Ash SR2.5g——
Minerals 10
NutrientPer 100gUnitPer Serving% DV
Calcium SR26.0mg—
3%
Iron SR1.7mg—
22%
Magnesium SR19.0mg—
5%
Phosphorus SR119mg—
17%
Potassium SR192mg—
6%
Sodium SR769mg—
51%
Zinc SR0.67mg—
6%
Copper SR0.07mg—
8%
Manganese SR0.24mg—
10%
Selenium SR22.6µg—
41%
Vitamins 17
NutrientPer 100gUnitPer Serving% DV
Vitamin A (RAE) SR84.0µg—
9%
Vitamin A (IU) SR25.0IU——
Retinol SR25.0µg——
Vitamin E SR0.20mg—
1%
Beta-Tocopherol SR0mg——
Gamma-Tocopherol SR0.14mg——
Delta-Tocopherol SR0.05mg——
Alpha-Tocotrienol SR0mg——
Beta-Tocotrienol SR0.13mg——
Gamma-Tocotrienol SR0mg——
Delta-Tocotrienol SR0mg——
Thiamin (B1) SR0.17mg—
14%
Riboflavin (B2) SR0.28mg—
22%
Niacin (B3) SR5.4mg—
34%
Pantothenic Acid (B5) SR0.74mg—
15%
Vitamin B6 SR0.11mg—
8%
Vitamin B12 SR0.38µg—
16%
Fatty Acids 9
NutrientPer 100gUnitPer Serving% DV
Saturated Fat SR11.8g——
Monounsaturated Fat SR14.2g——
Polyunsaturated Fat SR3.1g——
Trans Fat SR1.2g——
Cholesterol SR82.0mg——
Omega-3 ALA SR0.15g—
9%
Omega-3 EPA SR0.002g——
Omega-3 DPA SR0.007g——
Omega-3 DHA SR0.002g——
Individual Fatty Acids 12
NutrientPer 100gUnitPer Serving% DV
Butyric Acid (4:0) SR0g——
Caproic Acid (6:0) SR0g——
Caprylic Acid (8:0) SR0.005g——
Capric Acid (10:0) SR0.01g——
Lauric Acid (12:0) SR0.02g——
Myristic Acid (14:0) SR0.62g——
Palmitic Acid (16:0) SR7.0g——
Stearic Acid (18:0) SR3.7g——
Linoleic Acid (18:2) SR2.8g—
16%
Omega-6 LA SR2.6g——
Omega-6 GLA SR0.007g——
Linolenic Acid (18:3) SR0.15g——
Amino Acids 19
NutrientPer 100gUnitPer Serving% DV
Tryptophan SR0.11g——
Threonine SR0.46g——
Isoleucine SR0.41g——
Leucine SR0.85g——
Lysine SR0.61g——
Methionine SR0.20g——
Cystine SR0.16g——
Phenylalanine SR0.53g——
Tyrosine SR0.43g——
Valine SR0.51g——
Arginine SR0.79g——
Histidine SR0.33g——
Alanine SR0.80g——
Aspartic Acid SR0.95g——
Glutamic Acid SR3.3g——
Glycine SR1.2g——
Proline SR1.1g——
Serine SR0.54g——
Hydroxyproline SR0.32g——

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.

-7
NRF9.3 Score
Poor · per 100 kcal
Poor (<0) Moderate Good Excellent (100+)

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

Dietary Fat + Vitamin A●●●

Vitamin A is fat-soluble and requires dietary fat for absorption. Adding fat to a meal significantly increases beta-carotene and retinol absorption.

Ribaya-Mercado et al., Am J Clin Nutr, 2007

⚠ Antagonisms — nutrients that compete

Zinc vs Copper●●●

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 vs Iron●●●

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

Potassium vs Sodium●●●

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 vs Iron●●●

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.

93
Amino Acid Score
Good
Valine
Limiting Amino Acid
19
Amino Acids Tracked

Tip: The limiting amino acid is Valine. Pair with dairy, meat, and soy for a complete amino acid profile.

All Amino Acids (19)
Amino Acidg / 100gmg / g protein
Tryptophan0.117.7
Threonine0.4633.0
Isoleucine0.4129.4
Leucine0.8561.0
Lysine0.6143.4
Methionine0.2014.5
Cystine0.1611.6
Phenylalanine0.5338.3
Tyrosine0.4330.6
Valine0.5136.5
Arginine0.7956.5
Histidine0.3323.9
Alanine0.8056.9
Aspartic Acid0.9567.9
Glutamic Acid3.3233.8
Glycine1.284.0
Proline1.180.2
Serine0.5439.0
Hydroxyproline0.3222.6

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.

11.8g
Saturated
14.2g
Monounsaturated
3.1g
Polyunsaturated
1:16.5
Omega-3 : Omega-6 Ratio
Omega-6 dominant — ideal range is 1:1 to 1:4
Omega Fatty Acids
EPA (20:5 n-3)0.002 g
DHA (22:6 n-3)0.002 g
ALA (18:3 n-3)0.15 g
DPA (22:5 n-3)0.007 g
Linoleic acid (18:2 n-6)2.6 g
⚠ Trans fat: 1.2 g per 100g. WHO recommends less than 1% of total energy from trans fats.

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.

25
Insulin Index
Low Insulin Response
Insulin Index Scale 25
0 Low ≤30 Mod ≤60 High ≤100 120
Macro Model ●●● Estimated from macronutrient composition (R²=0.49)

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.

1.6
kg CO₂e / kg
Low Impact
3.5
m² land / kg
Land Use
648
L water / kg
Water Use
12.2
g SO₂e / kg
Acidification
How this compares (GHG emissions)
Potatoes (0.5)Chicken (9.9)Beef (99.5)
Greenhouse Gas Emissions1.6 kg CO₂e / kg
Land Use3.5 m² / kg
Water Use648 L / kg
Eutrophication7.2 g PO₄e / kg
Acidification12.2 g SO₂e / kg
⚠️ Important context about this data
  • 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.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many calories are in POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading?

POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading contains 433 kcal per 100 grams, making it a calorie-dense food. The energy comes from 14.0g of protein (13% of calories), 32.3g of fat (67%), and 21.5g of carbohydrates (20%). Fat is the primary energy source.

What is POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading most nutritious for?

The standout nutrient in POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading is Sodium, providing 769 mg per 100g (51% of the Daily Value). It is also a notable source of Selenium (41% DV). Our database tracks 77 individual nutrients for this food, allowing detailed comparison across vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and fatty acids.

Is POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading high in protein?

POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading provides 14.0g of protein per 100 grams — a moderate amount. Protein contributes 13% of its calories.

How much fiber is in POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading?

POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading contains 1.0g 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 POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading?

POPEYES, Fried Chicken, Mild, Skin and Breading has a low insulin response (II: 25) (estimated from macronutrient composition) on the insulin index scale (white bread = 100). This means it triggers relatively little insulin secretion, which may be relevant for those managing insulin sensitivity or following low-insulin dietary strategies. 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.