Perhaps a poorly picked example but generally they're not considered a healthy food item as they exist in the category of both fast and fried food. The implication being that they're more processed resulting in less good fasts and are higher in calorie per gram. Like most foods the dose determines the poison I suppose.

But nutritionally they are about the same as non lean chicken?

Chicken McNuggets Ingredients: Boneless skinless chicken breast, Water, Liquid vegetable oil shortening (canola oil, corn oil, hydrogenated soybean oil), Wheat flour, Yellow corn flour, Modified corn starch, Rice starch, Salt, Seasoning (wheat starch, yeast extract, salt, natural flavour), Spices, Baking powder, Sodium aluminum phosphate, Canola oil, Baking soda, Sugars (dextrose), Wheat starch, Corn starch. Cooked in vegetable oil (high oleic low linoleic canola oil and/or canola oil, corn oil, soybean oil, hydrogenated soybean oil, citric acid, dimethylpolysiloxane).

-- https://www.mcdonalds.com/ca/en-ca/product/4-chicken-mcnugge...

Yes but the macros are more or less comparable? It's chicken breast with extra saturated fat and stuff.

I think you are unfairly overly minimizing the impact of the "extra saturated fat and stuff".

It still comparable amount to e.g. chicken thigh. So the question is whether you consider vegetable fats more harmful.

This is precisely the point of the article.

Macronutrient profiles are, apparently, not the relevant axis of differentiation.