 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / Low Carb / March 2004Entenmann's Low Carb Pamphlet
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/preesi/OutEntPam.jpg (Outer Pamphlet) http://mywebpages.comcast.net/preesi/InsideEntPamp.jpg (Interior of Pamphlet)  Signaturepreesi ~~~I wear my "Days Of The Week" undies on different days just to confuse my Master~~~ http://mywebpages.comcast.net/preesi/Portal.htm (All 5 Of My Sites Under One Easy To Use Link) http://pirateradionetwork.com/ (My Radio Show- Search Under Adult For 2 Nutz Variety Show- When Active) http://www.PetitionOnline.com/Splenda1/petition.html (Sign the Low Carb Splenda Petition-Get Liquid Splenda on the Market!) http://www.petitiononline.com/KeepTWBS/petition.html (A PETITION TO STOP THE CANCELLATION OF THE WAYNE BRADY SHOW) Hi Preesi, I find that text photographs better as a GIF. Good luck, Cubit 308/269.5/165 Chart: http://techmart.com/~cubit/Chart10.gif > http://mywebpages.comcast.net/preesi/OutEntPam.jpg > (Outer Pamphlet) > http://mywebpages.comcast.net/preesi/InsideEntPamp.jpg > (Interior of Pamphlet) so they acknoledge "sugar alcohols" are subtracted from carbs (along with fiber) to get "net carbs". I thought that sugar carbs were bad carbs.. Can someone explain this to me? Thanks > http://mywebpages.comcast.net/preesi/OutEntPam.jpg > (Outer Pamphlet) [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > http://www.petitiononline.com/KeepTWBS/petition.html > (A PETITION TO STOP THE CANCELLATION OF THE WAYNE BRADY SHOW) The Atkins Nutritionals people are to blame for the sugar alcohol explosion in low carb food. Although the documentation provided by the manufacturers and the FDA makes it quite clear that a significant portion of a sugar alcohol molecule (particularly maltitol) turns into glucose in the body, the Atkins people got around this by telling buyers they could ignore the carb counts which by law must be on the label since these sugar alcohols did not "significantly" impact blood sugar. This is not true, as my meter and that of many other people with diabetes can show. 3/4 of a maltitol molecule will turn into glucose. It just takes longer so many people miss it when they test their blood sugar too early. But since the Atkins folks put this crap on the front of the package not the legal label, they get away with it. The Entenmann's pastries are the Snackwells of the low carb diet and will go far towards keeping thousands of would be low carb dieters from losing any weight. Ironically, at least the Snackwells WERE low fat. These latest wheat and maltitol goodies are by no stretch of the imagination low carb. And with all the wheat they contain, most of the low carbers who saw their GERD go away (heartburn) will have it come back in no time. --Jenny - Low Carbing for 4 years. At goal for weight. Type 2 diabetes, hba1c 5.2. Cut the carbs to respond to my email address! Low carb facts and figures, my weight-loss photos, tips, recipes, strategies for dealing with diabetes and more at http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Looking for help controlling your blood sugar? Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/Newly%20Diagnosed.htm > so they acknoledge "sugar alcohols" are subtracted from carbs (along with > fiber) to get "net carbs". I thought that sugar carbs were bad carbs.. Can [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > http://www.petitiononline.com/KeepTWBS/petition.html > > (A PETITION TO STOP THE CANCELLATION OF THE WAYNE BRADY SHOW) > The Atkins Nutritionals people are to blame for the sugar alcohol explosion > in low carb food. Although the documentation provided by the manufacturers [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > This is not true, as my meter and that of many other people with diabetes > can show. I knew this rant was coming. Atkins nutritionals never advocated or marketed these products for diabetics. And if you read the Entenmann's brochure with the Atkins endorsement, it specifically says these products are only recommended for people in the MAINTENANCE phase of Atkins. God forbid that folks should have a better alternative than a sugar laden cake if we decide to have a piece occasionally. 3/4 of a maltitol molecule will turn into glucose. It just takes > longer so many people miss it when they test their blood sugar too early. > But since the Atkins folks put this crap on the front of the package not [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > > http://www.petitiononline.com/KeepTWBS/petition.html > > > (A PETITION TO STOP THE CANCELLATION OF THE WAYNE BRADY SHOW) >so they acknoledge "sugar alcohols" are subtracted from carbs (along with >fiber) to get "net carbs". I thought that sugar carbs were bad carbs.. Can >someone explain this to me? Sugar alcohols are a by-product of sugar and, in most people, aren't process by the body as a carbohydrate. So, like fiber, those grams of carbs may be omitted from the "net carbs." There are some people, however, who seem to process them as carbs. All you can do is eat something, see if it affects your weight loss and/or blood sugar, and make your own decision as to whether to continue eating foods sweetened that way. Dawn The sugar alcohols _are_ metabolized by the body, which is why the FDA makes them put the calories from the sugar alcohols into the nutritional information. And a certain percentage of each different kind of sugar alcohol turns into glucose. For maltitol, it is 75%. That is why the note for people with diabetes on the more honest sugar-free brands, like Hershey's tells you what the conversion factor is. For lacitol, for example, it is 50%. This information is given because people on insulin who count carbs can get into trouble if they don't count correctly. I salute Hershey's for avoiding the Net Carb crap on its sugar free candies and putting in the ADA carb information. To quote from the Reese's Sugar Free label: "Lacitol... is a slowly metabolized carbohydrate that generally causes only a small rise in blood glucose levels. . . .The exchange value for the carbohydrate is calculated using 1/2 of the normal value because Lacitol is the primary source of carbohydrates." Note: the rise may be described as "small" but it occurs. And the factor you use for calculating the carbs is 1/2 of regular. I don't have a problem with blood sugar rises from small doses of Lacitol. But I do with maltitol. Probably because more of the Maltitol molecule is metabolized to glucose than lacitol. To bad the Scarlet Letter company won't put the same level of honesty on it's sanctioned labels. Those who want to believe that the tooth fairy waves her magic wand over sugar alcohols and makes them -- Jenny - Low Carbing for 4 years. At goal for weight. Type 2 diabetes, hba1c 5.2. Cut the carbs to respond to my email address! Low carb facts and figures, my weight-loss photos, tips, recipes, strategies for dealing with diabetes and more at http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Looking for help controlling your blood sugar? Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/Newly%20Diagnosed.htm > >so they acknoledge "sugar alcohols" are subtracted from carbs (along with > >fiber) to get "net carbs". I thought that sugar carbs were bad carbs.. Can [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Dawn Note to the priginal poster: As you may have noticed by now, Jenny has something of a large bug up her butt about sugar alcohols. I think a sugar alcohol shot her pappy. Again -- how you react to them is an individual thing. You'll have to give them a test drive yourself and see what happens. Dawn >The sugar alcohols _are_ metabolized by the body, which is why the FDA makes >them put the calories from the sugar alcohols into the nutritional [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >Those who want to believe that the tooth fairy waves her magic wand over >sugar alcohols and makes them Here is noted Diabetes authority Rick Mendosa's contribution on the sugar alcohol question. http://www.mendosa.com/netcarbs.htm In particular see the table of the Glycemic Index for the various sugar alcohols and note this statement: "If the sugar alcohols had no impact on our blood glucose, they would have a glycemic index of zero. With the December 2003 publication of Geoffrey Livesey's amazing review of sugar alcohols, we now know a lot more about them than ever before. His article, "Health potential of polyols as sugar replacers, with emphasis on low glycemic properties,"; is in Nutrition Research Reviews 2003;16:163-91. Only two of the sugar alcohols have a GI of zero, according to Livesey's research. These are mannitol and erythritol. Several others have a very low GI, but two maltitol syrups have a GI greater than 50. This is a higher GI value than that of spaghetti, orange juice, or carrots. " Yup, maltitol has an effect on blood sugar higher than SPAGHETTI and OJ. But the folks with the The Scarlet Letter are telling you to ignore it. (Don't you just love it when people who can't support their arguments with fact have to call names?) -- Jenny - Low Carbing for 4 years. At goal for weight. Type 2 diabetes, hba1c 5.2. Cut the carbs to respond to my email address! Low carb facts and figures, my weight-loss photos, tips, recipes, strategies for dealing with diabetes and more at http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Looking for help controlling your blood sugar? Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/Newly%20Diagnosed.htm > Note to the priginal poster: As you may have noticed by now, Jenny has > something of a large bug up her butt about sugar alcohols. I think a [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > >Those who want to believe that the tooth fairy waves her magic wand over > >sugar alcohols and makes them >(Don't you just love it when people who can't support their arguments with >fact have to call names?) I assume you're talking about me. I didn't call you a name. I said that you have a major bug up your butt about sugar alcohols. Which, BTW, you supported by posting yet another extensive anti-SA rant. Which, um, pretty much supported the point for me. Dawn Well, no Dawn, you posted the rant, I posted a pointer to a fact-filled web page hosted by a very well respected authority on Diabetes. But anyone reading this thread can certainly make up their own mind about who is ranting and who is making well supported arguments. . . . 'nuf said. -- Jenny - Low Carbing for 4 years. At goal for weight. Type 2 diabetes, hba1c 5.2. Cut the carbs to respond to my email address! Low carb facts and figures, my weight-loss photos, tips, recipes, strategies for dealing with diabetes and more at http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Looking for help controlling your blood sugar? Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/Newly%20Diagnosed.htm > >(Don't you just love it when people who can't support their arguments with > >fact have to call names?) [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Dawn >Well, no Dawn, you posted the rant, I posted a pointer to a fact-filled web >page hosted by a very well respected authority on Diabetes. You pretty much see what you want to see, doncha? But then, given your history of playing fast 'n loose with the difference between fact and opinion, I'm not wholly surprised. >But anyone reading this thread can certainly make up their own mind about >who is ranting and who is making well supported arguments. . . . Oh, yes. Once they wade through your hundreds of lengthy posts where you froth about sugar alcohols ... yes, I think they can figure it out just fine. Dawn Jeez.. I'm almost sorry I asked the question.... >>Well, no Dawn, you posted the rant, I posted a pointer to a >>fact-filled web page hosted by a very well respected authority on [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Dawn I especially like the reference Jenny cites. As is often the case, the refutation for her arguments are contained in the very sources she cites and misrepresents: "Only two of the sugar alcohols have a GI of zero, according to Livesey's research. These are mannitol and erythritol. Several others have a very low GI, but two maltitol syrups have a GI greater than 50." Let's see, two sugar alcohols have a GI of zero, several others are very low. Does any of this get mentioned in Jenny's frequent rants against ALL sugar alcohols? Instead we get: The Atkins Nutritionals people are to blame for the sugar alcohol explosion in low carb food. Although the documentation provided by the manufacturers and the FDA makes it quite clear that a significant portion of a sugar alcohol molecule (particularly maltitol) turns into glucose in the body, the Atkins people got around this by telling buyers they could ignore the carb counts Clearly contradicted by her own source. BTW, it's interesting that the citation uses the term "maltitol syrup" Do we know what, if anything else, was in these besides maltitol? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.