Lamelles de kebab vs Lasagna al forno
Overall, Lamelles de kebab has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. It wins on 4 of our comparison points versus 2.
Nutrition per 100 g
| Nutrient | Lamelles de kebab | Lasagna al forno |
|---|---|---|
| Nutri-Score | c | c |
| NOVA group | 4 | — |
| Calories | 154 kcal | 179 kcal |
| Fat | 7.6 g | 10.4 g |
| Saturated fat | 1.9 g | 4.7 g |
| Sugars | 2.6 g | 2.4 g |
| Salt | 1.8 g | 0.9 g |
| Fiber | 1 g | 1.3 g |
| Protein | 17 g | 11.1 g |
| Additives | 1 | 0 |
| Allergens | Gluten | None listed |
Green = better value for that nutrient (less sugar, fat, salt and calories; more fiber and protein).
Key differences
- Lamelles de kebab has 14% fewer calories (154 kcal vs 179 kcal).
- Lamelles de kebab has 27% less fat (7.6 g vs 10.4 g).
- Lamelles de kebab has 60% less saturated fat (1.9 g vs 4.7 g).
- Lasagna al forno has 51% less salt (0.9 g vs 1.8 g).
- Lasagna al forno has 23% more fiber (1.3 g vs 1 g).
- Lamelles de kebab has 35% more protein (17 g vs 11.1 g).
- Only Lamelles de kebab lists: Gluten.
Ingredients
Lamelles de kebab
Viande de poulet 76%, eau, épices et plantes aromatiques (coriandre, oignons, ail, paprika, muscade, cumin, poivre), dextrose, amidon de pomme de terre, sel, maltodextrine, arômes naturels, sucre roux, tomate, saccharose, amidon de BLÉ, huile de tournesol, extrait de paprika. Pourcentages exprimés à la mise en oeuvre. Elaboré à partir de viande origine UE. Traces éventuelles de lait et autres céréales contenant du gluten.
Lasagna al forno
Not available.
FAQ
Which is healthier: Lamelles de kebab or Lasagna al forno?
Overall, Lamelles de kebab has the better nutritional profile on the measures we compare. We compare Nutri-Score, processing level and seven nutrients per 100 g. Your own needs (for example low sugar or high protein) may make a different choice better for you.
Which has fewer calories?
Lamelles de kebab has fewer calories: 154 kcal versus 179 kcal per 100 g.
Which has less sugar?
Lasagna al forno has less sugar: 2.4 g versus 2.6 g per 100 g.