 |
 | 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 2004Nutrition Label Police
I picked up a package of tortillas made locally. The nutrition label sounds wrong to me, but I thought I would post it to get others opinions....(it's in Cdn measurements) Per 34g serving (1 tortilla) energy - 118 cal protein - 3.5 g fat 3.1g poly un 0.7g monoun 1.6g satur 0.7g choles 0mg Carbohydrates 19g sugars 1.0g starch 16g dietary fibre 20g sodium 260mg potassium 100mg Ingredients: Whole wheat flour, water, vegetable oil, shortening, salt, calcium sulphate, dextrose, sodium bicarbonate, sodium alumininum phosphate, fumaric acid, mono and diglycerides, guar gum, calcium propionate, sodium metabbisulphite. Can this be true? Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this tortilla have a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) -- 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 > I picked up a package of tortillas made locally. The nutrition label sounds > wrong to me, but I thought I would post it to get others opinions....(it's [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Can this be true? Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this tortilla have > a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) I would venture a guess that the fibre count is a misprint and likely should read 2.0 Most of the tortillas I look at have fibre count near this. I am also Canadian. TJ It looks to me like this tortilla has a "net carbs" of at least 19 grams! Use the hidden carb calculator at http://www.lowcarb.ca/low-carb-tools/hidden_carbs.html The fiber has already been subtracted. -- 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 > I picked up a package of tortillas made locally. The nutrition label sounds > wrong to me, but I thought I would post it to get others opinions....(it's [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Can this be true? Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this tortilla have > a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) > It looks to me like this tortilla has a "net carbs" of at least 19 grams! then try adding up all weights and see how the sum is more than 34 grams. i > Use the hidden carb calculator at > http://www.lowcarb.ca/low-carb-tools/hidden_carbs.html [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > have >> a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) If you read the original post, it doesn't even say that these are labeled low carb...just think the poster got confused because of a misprint (or they were reading it wrong). I am quite sure that it is supposed to be 2.0 grams of fiber (+ 1g of sugar + 16g of starch = 19 g of carbs)...in which case they have 17 "net carbs" > > It looks to me like this tortilla has a "net carbs" of at least 19 grams! > [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > have > >> a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) >If you read the original post, it doesn't even say that these are labeled >low carb...just think the poster got confused because of a misprint (or they >were reading it wrong). I am quite sure that it is supposed to be 2.0 grams >of fiber (+ 1g of sugar + 16g of starch = 19 g of carbs)...in which case >they have 17 "net carbs" If you do the calcualtion you'll see that 17 is likely wrong and most likely this country does not consider fiber a carb. 118 total calories... 3.5g prot = 14.0 cals 3.1g fat = 27.9 cals That leaves 76.1 calories of carbs 19 g of carbs = 76 calories 17 g of carbs = 68 calories Canada may not count fiber in the carb total since it doesn't digest. (Which makes sense--why don't we do that!) It is possible that some large content has a higher caloric content than 4-4-9 rule. >> > It looks to me like this tortilla has a "net carbs" of at least 19 >grams! [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] >> > have >> >> a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) DiGiTAL_ViNYL (no email) 350/321/Mar-315/200 Atkins since Jan 12, 2004 > I picked up a package of tortillas made locally. The nutrition label sounds > wrong to me, but I thought I would post it to get others opinions....(it's [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Can this be true? <LOL> Sure. > Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this tortilla have > a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) <LOL> No. It has a net carb count of 19 grams. They've already subtracted the fiber. Calorie numbers work with 19 grams carb. Pastorio > I picked up a package of tortillas made locally. The nutrition label sounds > wrong to me, but I thought I would post it to get others opinions....(it's [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Can this be true? Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this tortilla have > a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) What country are you in? In some placed the fiber is already subtracted.  Signaturejmk in NC 20 grams of fiber in one tortilla?....very unlikely (even for a whole wheat tortilla) More likely?... it is a misprint and should be 2.0 grams. > I picked up a package of tortillas made locally. The nutrition label sounds > wrong to me, but I thought I would post it to get others opinions....(it's [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Can this be true? Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this tortilla have > a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) > I picked up a package of tortillas made locally. The nutrition label sounds > wrong to me, but I thought I would post it to get others opinions....(it's [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > sodium 260mg > potassium 100mg 19 grams of fiber is what you get after eating a couple of pounds of vegetables. And they say 19 grams of fiber in a measly 34 gram tortilla? Give me a f.cking break. Fiber is obviously not a part of their total carbs, as the fiber number os more than the stated carb number. And if fiber was already subtracted, then fiber +other carbs weigh more than the tortilla. So, this is one more fraudulent low carb product. That's why I do not even bother checking LC labeled processed food for myself, if it is labeled LC, I presume it to be fraudulent food. i > Ingredients: Whole wheat flour, water, vegetable oil, shortening, salt, > calcium sulphate, dextrose, sodium bicarbonate, sodium alumininum phosphate, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Can this be true? Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this tortilla have > a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) :: In article <4fE3c.113804$IF6.3652432@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>, :: BrightStar wrote: [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] :: :: So, this is one more fraudulent low carb product. It's obviously a misprint...the fiber should be 2.0 gram and not twenty. And they are counting fiber in the calorie count. It's probably not even a LC product. :: That's why I do not even bother checking LC labeled processed food :: for :: myself, if it is labeled LC, I presume it to be fraudulent food. You're just so f.cking full of yourself that you can't think. :: i :: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] ::: Can this be true? Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this ::: tortilla have a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) >:: In article <4fE3c.113804$IF6.3652432@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>, >:: BrightStar wrote: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > And they are counting fiber in the calorie count. It's probably not even a > LC product. It is funny how these misprints help sell those tortillas... >:: That's why I do not even bother checking LC labeled processed food >:: for >:: myself, if it is labeled LC, I presume it to be fraudulent food. > > You're just so f.cking full of yourself that you can't think. Ah, I am so upset... You are just angry that I finally publicly called you stupid. i > :: That's why I do not even bother checking LC labeled processed food > :: for > :: myself, if it is labeled LC, I presume it to be fraudulent food. > > You're just so f.cking full of yourself that you can't think. That may be, but... I ran across this today: http://cbs2.com/specialassign/local_story_036200059.html Apparently, some of the labels aren't just misleading with the "net carb" crap, but are outright *lying*. >> :: That's why I do not even bother checking LC labeled processed food >> :: for [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Apparently, some of the labels aren't just misleading with the "net > carb" crap, but are outright *lying*. Thanks for a great post. i :: In article <f7355fcb.0403112146.62af6e40@posting.google.com>, jpatti :: wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] :: :: Thanks for a great post. Many of those items have a lot to do with the person making and serving those dishes. If you get a subway wrap, how can you be sure the person making your wrap with make it just as the Subway people did? You can't. But it serves your ignorant agenda, Ig, to enjoy reading and responding to bullshit. > Many of those items have a lot to do with the person making and serving > those dishes. If you get a subway wrap, how can you be sure the person > making your wrap with make it just as the Subway people did? You can't. That's true... but if it were simply a matter of human error in preparation, I'd have expected at least *some* of the results to be low as well as high. Though granted, it wasn't a statistical study, but still it seems odd that in every case where there was a discrepancy, the carbs were higher than claimed. I found the most disturbing bit being the low-carb bagel with 55 g. I mean, that one is just flat-out lying - it was 3 times the carbs that they claimed. >> Many of those items have a lot to do with the person making and serving >> those dishes. If you get a subway wrap, how can you be sure the person [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >but still it seems odd that in every case where there was a >discrepancy, the carbs were higher than claimed. Again I think that is more part of the human equation. If a server in a restaurant shorts you you are likely to speak up, complain, ask for more. If they give you more you say nothing, and its unlikely that the server will TAKE IT AWAY. And you might even give a waiter a better tip for the larger portion (conscoiusly o unconsciously). If you were served too many onions in a Subway sandwich you might pick them out. However when they evaluate food content they don't do any such trimming. Can you see why, psychologically and business-wise, servers would tend to over-serve and rarely under-serve portions? >I found the most disturbing bit being the low-carb bagel with 55 g. I >mean, that one is just flat-out lying - it was 3 times the carbs that >they claimed. DiGiTAL_ViNYL (no email) 350/319/Mar-315/200 Atkins since Jan 12, 2004 >> :: That's why I do not even bother checking LC labeled processed food >> :: for [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Apparently, some of the labels aren't just misleading with the "net >carb" crap, but are outright *lying*. Actually restaurant portion and make up are naturally varied, largely because of the human being making the food. I *FULLY* expect a meal from a eating establishment to vary from visit to visit. I belive someone else commented on Subway employees offering choices on a their low carb wrap and the person was upset--well the point at subway is you can have anything you want and within low carb their are choices. The carb count is based upon specific toppings and a specific amount of condiments. I can tell you when the guy put sauce on he put more than the specified amount. He put on lots of olives, exactly two slices of bacon. Any variance in the random handfuls of stuff they use will send calories/carbs/etc high or low. Expecting machine-like accuracy from hand prepared food simply isn't realistic. While restauraants do have portion controls, variance is going to be introduced. I've ordered meals from chain restaurants and had variation from visit to visit. DiGiTAL_ViNYL (no email) 350/321/Mar-315/200 Atkins since Jan 12, 2004 >Can this be true? Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this tortilla have >a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) We wish! I saw some gum with a listed carb count of -5 online. If only. We could eat and chew our ways to thinness. > Per 34g serving (1 tortilla) > energy - 118 cal [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Can this be true? Am I reading this incorrectly, or does this tortilla have > a net carb count of -1? (carbs - fibre) Prolly a typo. |
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.