Here's an article that was emailed to me by a friend today. Of course, Atkins doesn't want to lose money in the food market.
As the low-carb fad fades, Atkins has altered its "net carbs" method by using parts of the latest trend from Europe -- a glycemic-index diet -- to target U.S. food companies for products bearing the new "net Atkins count" seal. The link below will take you to the full article.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/News/news...ODOLOGY-DC.XML

__________________
196/135-135

... further muddying the waters. Atkins Nutritionals is not doing so well, it seems.

__________________

Sad.

I have a copy of an OLD book by Atkins called Atkins SuperEnergy Diet. It has a number of funny things in it, like advocating the use of fructose (!!!) as a low-carb sweetener. No, I'm not kidding. He did include some caveats about it, including the fact that he hadn't had any patients lose weight while using it.

Maybe, when he changed his book to include sugar alcohols, he was similarly deluded and would have changed his mind given more information. But we will never know.

__________________
**************
"And so, in my State of the—my State of the Union—or state—my speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation—I asked Americans to give 4,000 years—4,000 hours over the next—the rest of your life—of service to America. That's what I asked—4,000 hours."

No, kidding! Fructose! Holy bleep.

My Atkins was the 1998 hardcover. That's the one where he warned that "polyols" (sugar alcohols) were NOT acceptable sweeteners. Must've been written right before Atkins Nutritionals started to branch out from shakes and supplements.

__________________

When I saw this on the news tonight I was surprised, but when I went to Atkins Nutritionals for more information (http://atkins.com/Archive/2004/10/5-366283.html), I realized that this change was something they announced a while back. It was discussed on this forum back in October (http://www.lowcarbeating.com/bb/showthread.php?t=11417).

As I understand it the Atkins diet hasn't changed. What has changed is the way Atkins Nutritionals tests and labels their products.

They now determine the blood sugar effect of their products by testing them on real people rather than just calculating the "Net Carbs" from the ingredients like they used to do.

The product labeling now says "Net Atkins Count" instead of "Net Carbs". If I recall correctly, when they did the testing they found that for most of their products the "Net Atkins Count" and "Net Carbs" were equivalent.

How convenient! They're the same!

Oops. That sounded sarcastic.

There's a horse somewhere missing its fecal matter.

__________________
**************
"And so, in my State of the—my State of the Union—or state—my speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation—I asked Americans to give 4,000 years—4,000 hours over the next—the rest of your life—of service to America. That's what I asked—4,000 hours."

Well, the good part for Atkins is that the testing was done by Wolever, who - though he stands behind his test results - doesn't particularly like the Atkins diet. So it kind of gives some extra validity to it, if you know what I mean.

Jeff is correct: this isn't a new announcement, just someone pulling a negative low-carb story out of his or her hat. By no means is it a change in the diet.

On the other hand, if I understand correctly, the metabolic testing represents averages: the BG reaction of the average of all the subjects. Which doesn't mean that you or I couldn't have a reaction much higher - or lower - than that average.

I give Atkins this: if you are going to make and market these types of products, the science they used is the best we have now to determine the actual BG reactions of humans.

But it still doesn't mean YOU can eat them with no reaction. Each person has to see for themselves. Which is why fresh, whole foods are always best!

BTW, that story, with its erroneous headline, is being used by Nutrisystem to make them look good:

23 Mar 2005 23:14 GMT






Atkins Shifts Gears to Promote Lower Glycemic Index Foods Over Carb Elimination


NutriSystem LGI Weight Loss Experts Now Available for Comment


HORSHAM, Pa., March 23 /PRNewswire/ -- NutriSystem took a risk two years ago by introducing a weight loss program based on the latest scientific evidence that eating a diet rich in lower Glycemic Index foods was the healthiest, most effective way to lose weight. Since then, NutriSystem's sales have skyrocketed and many dieters have shed their unwanted pounds, thanks to their own dedication and NutriSystem's pioneering efforts.


Now, Atkins nutritionals are adopting a similar diet, leaving behind its old regimen, which was based on eliminating carbs and emphasizing protein. News reports indicate that this recent move came as many people could not maintain the preliminary weight loss they experienced on Atkins, eventually deeming it a fad diet.


As you consider covering this shift in the Atkins diet, we encourage you to speak with the following NutriSystem representatives, who can give you the real skinny on why a lower Glycemic Index program is the way to go for sustained weight loss:

-- Kat Carney, the former CNN Health News Anchor who investigated
countless diets, lost more than 40 pounds on NutriSystem and can offer
a first-person account of how lower Glycemic Index eating has changed
her life.

-- Dr. Jay Satz, a weight loss guru who has been involved in the Battle
of The Bulge for the last three decades, created NutriSystem's lower
Glycemic Index weight loss program.

-- NutriSystem President George Jankovic, the visionary who led the
company to change to a lower Glycemic Index program.



Source: NutriSystem


You see why I get so mad about this stuff? All spin, and for who's benefit?
Not to defend Atkins products; I'm not.

But you see how it goes round and round.

Yes. *sigh*

This stuff gives me a headache. I, personally, hate the fact that some diet companies promote their plan by slamming others (and Atkins seems to be the universal whipping boy). IMHO, different approaches work for different people, and they all have their devotees. If it works for you, and you're healthy, then great. Unfortunately, these big companies have another agenda; to make money, and people's health seems to get shoved down the priority list. It's unfortunate, and confusing for those searching for an answer.

__________________
Trina

Vice-President of the Intergalactic Order of Brussels Sprouts Haters

[font='Times New Roman', Times, Serif, serif][/font]

As a veteran of many "diets," like many people here, I'm grateful that Dr. Atkins has handed me the key to ME.

I don't preach Atkins to anyone. I preach "real food, right amount." This is, of course, much more difficult than it sounds.

If people are struggling with addictions, emotional eating, and plain old hunger, Atkins provides advantages other programs don't. And it's a do-it-yourself plan. You don't have to pay anybody to be your watchdog.

If weight management were easy, everyone would be fit and thin.

__________________
Barb L.
Atkins since Jan 2003
Maintenance as of 4/05


My Fitday Journal

Amen, sister.

For some, that weekly meeting or that pre-packaged food is just the ticket. Been there, done that, have the XXL t-shirt.

It takes work to find what's right for you, and to stick to the right plan. And a big part of it is sifting through all the baloney out there.

__________________
Trina

Vice-President of the Intergalactic Order of Brussels Sprouts Haters

[font='Times New Roman', Times, Serif, serif][/font]

It's amazing how Nutrisystems refers to 'low glycemic' as being a major shift from 'low carb' as if they are diametrically opposing terms. In my understanding, low glycemic IS low carb, just with a more precise means of measuring inulin response. It's as if Nutrisystems is now saying "See, we were right all along."

It IS rather nauseating.

__________________
keep on keepin on

As of 1-3-2009
213/213/180

I used to work for Nutrisystems, back in the 80's. Actually, I worked for Gloria Marshall, which was bought out by Nutrisystem. Nutrisystem's claim to fame back then was their stupid milkshake. I wonder if they still push that.

Gloria Marshall Salons were famious for having computerized personal diet plans. Customers would fill out a Scantron questionairre with a #2 pencil about their likes and dislikes. That got fed into a Data General computer and my program would generate an eating plan detailing what they were to eat each day of the week. I just wrote the program; the GM nutritionist maintained a list of interchangeable food portions, basically a slightly lower fat "balanced" diet with vegetables, fruits, meats, whatever. I never had anything to do with that part. They could have fed them treacle and termite dung.

When Nutrisystem came in, they ordered us to change the program so that everybody still got a "balanced" diet, but they also had to drink at least one f'ing Nutrisystem shake. The nutritionist was in tears over it, but she went along with it like a good slave. But we all knew it was crap.

(What did Gloria Marshall do with the money from the buyout? She bought... [drumroll, please...] Granny's Donuts!)

So Nutrisystems is using the glycemic index, now? Somebody must have put his/her finger in the wind on that one.

__________________
**************
"And so, in my State of the—my State of the Union—or state—my speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation—I asked Americans to give 4,000 years—4,000 hours over the next—the rest of your life—of service to America. That's what I asked—4,000 hours."

Andrea, you say they are using the best science available.

And yet, they are advertising and selling Endulge bars as if they are low-carb foods.

Obviously something is amiss, here. They know it. They keep on doing it.

__________________
**************
"And so, in my State of the—my State of the Union—or state—my speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation—I asked Americans to give 4,000 years—4,000 hours over the next—the rest of your life—of service to America. That's what I asked—4,000 hours."

Look carefully: I said, the testing method they are using is the best science available for getting the GL of the foods in actual human subjects.

I'm not endorsing the food itself.

BTW, it was my understanding that the Endulge line was the one with the most "overages" (meaning the actual effect was above the original net carb amount).
Here's what I wrote in October when the announcement was first made:
http://www.lclmag.com/atkins_diet.php

Here is the page on their site about the announcement:
http://atkins.com/Archive/2004/10/5-366283.html

And there is a link on that page to the list of products that were being changed or discontinued due to the net carb/effective atkins carb thing as of that time. The edulge products figure prominently.