http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ishai/archive/2004/06/16/157298.aspxWell, probably not by nutritionists, but the USDA, backed by a court decision says they are. (Above link will probably expire in few days). [typo corrected 15:00]en-USTelligent Evolution Platform Developer Build (Build: 5.6.50428.7875)http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ishai/archive/2004/06/16/157298.aspx#157475Wed, 16 Jun 2004 20:16:00 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:157475Capt. Jean-Luc PikachuI enjoy eating French Fires.<div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=157475" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ishai/archive/2004/06/16/157298.aspx#157356Wed, 16 Jun 2004 18:14:00 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:157356Steve K.That's a poorly reported story: <br> <br>Additional info from the Chicago Sun-Times: <br> <br>&quot;But the department said Tuesday that the classification applies only to rules of commerce, not nutrition, and it doesn't consider an order of fries the same as an apple in school lunches.&quot; <br> <br><a target="_new" href="http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-fry16.html">http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-fry16.html</a> <br> <br> <br><div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=157356" width="1" height="1">