http://carbwire.com/

so... any guesses how this will affect sales? i wonder how quick people will change their minds on some of the "NET CARB " items that they BOUGHT (hook line and sinker) because they had a "net" carb count of 2 or 3 or whatever....

i ALSO wonder... if it will make them CHANGE the ingredients of any of those items...

any thoughts?

__________________
kims SECOND journal is HERE
kims new blog
KIMS BLOG !!
SUGARFREE BLOG

This isn't really "news" since they announced it a month ago, but it's worth noting.

The new "net Atkins count" medalian concept sounds even less informative than the net carb medalian, since it's not based on ingredients but a much more fluid concept of "testing blood-sugar levels of people who have just eaten it." Which people, how many? This is the same method, as I understand it, that they used to come to the conclusion that maltitol has a "negligible" effect on blood sugar levels, which is definitely not true for me. It has a major effect on my blood sugar.

I'll do what I usually do, ignore the hype on the front of the package and read the nutritional information on the back.

__________________

I wrote an article about this a few weeks ago:

http://www.lclmag.com/atkins_diet.php

Note that they've been working on this for three years, and even though the final results of the tests weren't in yet, as they were reformulating/developing product, they actually used the NEW METHOD to determine the "NET" carbs on their packaging. So for "most" of their products, the "net carbs" and "atkins net count" are exactly the same.

I haven't always agreed with Atkins corporate on things, but you do have to give them this: every single time their products have been tested, they've come out almost EXACTLY perfect as far as the nutritional info. They can't afford to be wrong.

I think this is probably why: they were working with actual human metabolic testing numbers!

On the other hand, those numbers are STILL JUST AN AVERAGE. So if you're very carb sensitive, or sensitive to one of the ingredients, you still might have a larger rise in BG than others.

As always, YMMV.

thanks for the extra info and the links! appreciate it much...
as for being old news..*L* uh,,, thats me to a T. .. day late and dollar short... sorry about posting old news gang...:-[

__________________
kims SECOND journal is HERE
kims new blog
KIMS BLOG !!
SUGARFREE BLOG

naw, don't feel bad at all.
i'm sure some folks didn't see it the first time around!

Kim, Andrea's right. I'm also SURE lots of folks didn't notice it the first time around which is why I thought it was right for this section.

The concept is especially interesting since they are, as far as I know, the first company using a whole new way to arrive on an "impact" number.

I'll admit, however, that getting out of the "net carb" labeling right before Big Brother is about to define "net carbs", is interesting. And I'm just skeptical about the applicability of this new number to various individuals who don't seem to fit the prototype of individuals who've been chosen for test subjects. I wonder about folks who already have blood sugar issues .... like those who've been obese for an extended period of time, or who have a certain genotype, or have some other kind of sugar/insulin dysfunction.

I'll admit, in some ways, it's personal. I discovered my dramatic blood glucose response to maltitol thanks to Atkins Endulge bars.

If I seemed judgmental, ya gotta understand that it wasn't a judgement on YOU, it was my general cynicism of Atkins Nutritionals leaking through.

__________________

I'm with you, Maggie. Right after the Atkins bars came out, I tried induction using them as a meal replacement. For the first time ever, I couldn't lose any weight on induction. I finally figured it out when reading one of the intermediate Atkins book that praised the new product, because it gave a "blood sugar boost" (or something similar) and was useful for people having an episode of low blood sugar. That clued me in to what the problem might be. I cut out the Atkins bars and everything was fine.

I was really disgusted that Atkins, of all people, would put out a product like that. I feel that people who don't know better and buy the Atkins' starting kit will never experience the true benefits of eating lowcarb. Atkins' book was a Godsend for me in my struggle with hypoglycemia. I felt very betrayed. Now they seem to be mainly sellers of lower carb junk food. Oh well. I hope that you and I are the exception in our blood sugar reactions.

__________________
Law1
Lowcarb since July 2001
296/211/150

Ya think it's a lawyer thing?

BTW, look at YOU, Law! You're approaching the 100 mark! WTG! It's not at all easy with blood sugar abnormalities and other kinds of metabolic resistance. You're an inspiration!

__________________

Hey Law - I know what you mean about feeling betrayed by Atkins nutritionals. I have never eaten the products, but it seems to me that sugar alcohols have a "negligible" (spelling?) effect on blood sugar the same way a tornado does "minimal damage" to a shack. I mean, come on!!! Look at all the people posting here who have had major stalls and set-backs and the culprit turns out to be none other than a name we trust.

I suppose it would behoove us all to remember that while Dr. Atkins himself may have had our best interests at heart, let's not forget that Atkins Nutritionals is still a business, ...and the interest of business is to make money!

I haven't read the transcript yet, but I'm wondering if anyone asked Collette Heimowitz her opinion on this issue.... ...just curious

I think it speaks volumes to the fact that the crew here at LCE are a group of smart, critical thinkers,...who, for those of us that follow the Atkins plan, are not following blindly behind a name only. We actually do our own research and studying,... and we don't bow at the altar of Atkins, but rather see it through eyes that have done the homework! WELL DONE GANG!!! :great:

__________________
Kelly
Highest recorded weight: 103.2kg/227.04lbs (03/15/08)
Current: 97kg/213.4lb-13.64
Goal:150
"Resensitizing myself to the urgency and severity of my weight problem is important in keeping myself motivated. I have to remind myself that my body will not tolerate this abuse forever." Jeannette Fulda, aka PastaQueen

Yes, well, I agree with you there. But if I had been working on this for three years, and the project was nearing completion, and I knew the FDA was going to make a proposed rule on "NET CARBS" (and might disallow it altogether) what would I do?

Here's my quandry here: while I haven't agreed with everything Atkins N. has done and said personally (as I said above) I also know that they take the lion's share of the heat when it comes to low carb.

Take the ongoing litigation with the PCRM (Physician's Committe for REsponsible Medicine- I hate even saying that phrase, because it's exactly opposite of what they are, but anyway...)

PCRM has publicly stated that they are going to keep going after Atkins until they "get them" in court. Pritikin, an Atkins adversary in year gone by, has also joined the legal effort.

And aside from the organized efforts, there is a constant stream of stupid drivel repeated by various irresponsible journalists, some of whom have their own agendas, and some of whom are just too lazy or stupid to actually do any research.

So, while I understand people's anger about the maltitol issue especially, I have to tell you that I have spoken at length to Colette Heimowitz (through the chat I did with her for the magazine), Stuart Trager (on many occasions) and Jacqueline Eberstein (just yesterday). I also sat in on some conversation with Mary Vernon and others at the Carb Aware Council (in September).

It's my personal opinion from these conversations that they are all genuinely passionate about people achieving health through a controlled carb approach. Colette and Jacqueline have been with Atkins for YEARS - J for 30 years, and C I'm guessing for 20. Mary Vernon has a list of accomplishments that is staggering: she clearly didn't need to join the Atkins staff to impress anyone. In other words, these are not just "corporate pr" people. In the case of Colette and Jacqueline, these are people who worked along side Dr. Atkins and fought the fight for years and years, long before most of us even knew what low carb was. That doesn't make them "right" all the time. But it does earn my respect, and give them special credibility.

Of course, as representatives of a big company, they have to be careful of what they say, and sometimes things even have to get cleared with the legal department - but in the current climate I'm sure you can understand why.

Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is, it's common practice in our society to "root for the underdog", and once atkins stopped being the underdog people seem to find it easy to turn on them. Maybe they've made it easier sometimes.


BUT - here's my fear......


If they go down, how do we benefit? Really? I mean, think about it. (and I'm not saying you should go out and buy Atkins products. I'm just thinking in broad terms here.) Because if that happens, who's next? You? Me? LCE?

Now, I will make this disclaimer, whether you believe me or not.

Yes, I do work for a magazine. Yes, Atkins advertises in the magazine.
But if I didn't believe what I'm saying here, I wouldn't say anything at all.
(And I assure you, the people I work for are going to come and read the posts here um, when pigs fly, but I don't care if they did. This is my site, and I say what I believe, if I think it's really that important!)

Anyway, this whole thing worries me. Not just the lawsuit, but the whole climate.

I think we SHOULD let them know our feelings about things. How the bars affect you. Why you think they should change certain products. etc. And most likely, you'll get a form letter back, withthe yada yada yada. BUT don't think for a MOMENT that someone isn't reading those, and listening, and keeping track. And as always, vote with your dollars. That's like SHOUTING

Keep up the conversation though. I admit I may be wrong. I've been in this fight since 1999, and I'm very emotional about it. I also am very indebted to the Atkins Diet, since that's what I've followed.

And I don't want anyone to take what I'm saying as directed at them. I hope we can have some good conversation on this matter, because I think it is going to be a very important issue in the low carb community in the months to come.


andrea

While the bars were not for me for other reasons, I do drink a shake every day. . .they are the only ones I like honestly. I am forever indebted to Atkins, I have followed this plan now for not quite a year, lost 70lbs, regained a positive sense of self and reclaimed my health. . .now maybe you can argue that it isn't all due to Atkins but a big part of it is--If I had never tried Atkins, I would still likely be struggling to lose weight and get control of my health. Though I would be on a diabetic diet for PCOS--and possibly medication as well and here I am 10 months after reading and beginning the Atkins WOE and no new meds-off most of my asthma meds and 70lbs lighter. I don't eat many of the Atkins products but as I said I do drink the shakes and I drink Hood Carb Countdown milk products and have tried the juices and I do eat the yogurt and drink the smoothies--I really like them!

I have trouble with sugar alcohols in general causing serious gastric distress! Erithritol seems to be the only one that does not that I have found so far!

__________________
Lori

232/190/130
My other journal http://www.lowcarbeating.com/bb/showthread.php?t=1130

Andrea, I agree with you on a couple of things. Remember, I'm still following Atkins, too. Robert Atkins was my total HERO! He fought the establishment when the medical profession was trying to destroy him with mockery. He was right, and he didn't give in and never gave up.

I don't have that kind of loyalty to Atkins Nutritionals. But I'll admit that there are people in the orgaization who probably really do mean well.

It's just so hard for me to understand the whole sugar alcohol and glycerine issue and how they've handled it thus far. I get the impression that their new method may result in upping the BGL "score" for polyols some as a result of their testing. Well, 'bout time, say I. Some of us knew, from our first blood sugar tests, that these items should be approached as carefully as sugar. What bothers me is the many folks who DON'T test and then had to wonder why their lc menu was "failing."

I can't help feel that there was a lot of "wilfull ignorance" going on (due to the difficulty of producing a market acceptable sugar free product) to accept the self-serving "tests" done by the polyol manufacturers to begin with.

So it's an "old" gripe. I'm willing to wait and see how these new labels go and whether or not they are (for ME) accurate or misleading.

****

Lori, the shakes are pretty much one of the earliest items in the product line. They do not contain anything like the suspect ingredients in some of the products which came later. I used the shakes in the beginning as "emergency rations" and never had so much as a blip in my blood glucose levels - even though I'd often "spike them" with a bit more cocoa and a squirt of heavy cream.

__________________

Maggie said:

Yes, but only two. From what I can see and what I am guessing based on talking to other industry people, if a product has enough fat, fiber or protein in it, the polyols don't have the same effect. But by themselves...

For a chart with all of the Atkins Nutritional products and a comparison of NET CARBS vs. NET ATKINS COUNT, go here:
http://atkins.com/about/netatkinscount.html

I agree with you Andrea. I have been a supporter of Atkins since 1981 and lived through the 90's when people screamed at me constantly that I was killing my self and you couldn't find lowcarb food anywhere. I used to have waiters in restaurants fight with me when I said to leave off the potatoes.

I feel like I owe Dr. Atkins my life and health. I maintained at 125 pounds for 10 years before lowfat took over everywhere. I started eating lowfat because I was warned I could harm my babies while I was pregnant by eating lowcarb (even at maintenance, which is what I wanted to do). I am now fighting to get my weight back down using lowcarb.

I just felt somewhat betrayed by Atkins when he put a product on the market that he knew would raise blood sugar without really warning people. That said, I know the bars effect me, but maybe they don't affect others like they did me. I just wish they were more explicit about some of their products. Many of their products are great. I love the shakes and they don't cause me any blood sugar problems. I don't blame them for making money. They should. They all stayed the course when they were being ridiculed and threatened with the loss of their licenses, etc. They held out for the truth through decades of hard times.

I agree also that we should vote with our dollars and let them know our concerns. I used to check the Newbies forum regularly and warn people who were stuck about the Atkins bars. Atkins products are still among the better lowcarb products on the market. They are certainly better than all the "carb conscious" products that remind me of the claims of "no cholesterol" on a box of cookies that came out during the low fat craze.

I certainly am very happy that Atkins is out there.

__________________
Law1
Lowcarb since July 2001
296/211/150