I'm torn between the original Atkin's idea of 20 total carbs vs. the more modern Atkin's idea of counting only net carbs. I do believe that counting only total carbs would result in a purer induction and OWL, but that would leave things like the OMM out of my reach.

What's your experience with counting carbs? Does counting net carbs, excluding sugar alcohols, which I will stay away from, work as well for you?

I love the OMM, just had one for breakfast today, then looked up the nutrition info on it and saw 18 or 19g of total carbs, 1g of net carbs after subtracting fiber. If I count only total carbs, I'm done with carbs for the rest of the day, which leaves only meat for my remaining meals.

So, I would like a consensus of those of you who've been low carbing for awhile. Please

__________________

The first time I did Atkins, I never heard of net carbs, and I lost quite well. (Then again, I was a lot younger!)

I did it again, using net carbs, and lost again, but life got in the way.

My third go round I did net carbs, lost 50 lbs quickly, 25 lbs very, very slowly. This time menopause got in the way. I sat at the same weight, or in a 5 lb range, for about a year.

I started doing very low carb, not deducting fiber, and also reducing my fat somewhat, and I have lost 9.5 lbs since 6/3. So, for me, doing the plain old carbs, not net, has been what has gotten the scale moving downward again.

Everyone needs to experiment with what works best for them. At this point in time, I'm going to stick with the very low carb, lower fat plan, until I take off a few more lbs., and then add in some fiber carbs. I still eat veggies, but not like I did before, and absolutely no fruit, it will stall me fast. I must be getting enough fiber, because I don't have any bowel issues, things are quite normal in that department.

I sure hope you find the plan that suits you best. It can be a trial-and-error issue, but you'll find your groove.

__________________
Nita