I believe the article of which David Brooks wrote is at
http://www.consumerlab.com/results/nutbars.asp the article does not
specifically mention Atkins, but instead reiterates the FDA's position that
all sugars be considered carbohydrates.  I have been using "low-carb" bars
to great success, and feel this is nothing more than  bureaucratic nonsense.
Here is the main point of the article (in my opinion):

"The most common problem among the products was finding undeclared amounts
of carbohydrates. In fact, a full one-half (15) of the nutrition bars
exceeded their claimed levels of carbohydrates, often by large amounts. One
product, which described itself as a low carbohydrate diet bar, claimed only
2 grams of carbohydrates, but was found to actually contain 22 grams. A clue
as to why this discrepancy existed was a statement written in small type on
the product's label indicating that it contained glycerin but that the
manufacturer was not counting glycerin as a carbohydrate (contrary to the
FDA's position that glycerin be considered a carbohydrate). Glycerin is
commonly used in nutrition bars because it adds a sweet taste and moist
texture. Many (14) of the products that exceeded their claimed levels of
carbohydrates listed glycerin as an ingredient and it is possible that they,
too, did not count it as a carbohydrate. The FDA has been sending warning
letters to manufacturers about this deceptive practice, informing them that
it is in violation of the law. Warning letters have also been sent to
manufacturers indicating that the term "Low Carb" is not an FDA-authorized
term and should not be used - unlike the terms "Low in Saturated Fat" or
"Low Sodium" which carry specific legal definitions.
The results indicate that none of the nutrition bars were particularly low
in carbohydrates. Among the bars that passed, carbohydrates contributed
approximately 40% to 70% of calories."

Slader
(381/339/175)

If they really do contain that much carbohydrate, shouldn't they taste a whole
lot better than they do?