Rationale for "slowly metabolized carb" not counting?

cherbear1 · 09-21-2004, 02:45 PM

One of the pillars of AN's "recently devised net carb philosophy", is that "slowly metabolized carbs" should be netted out "because of minimal impact on blood sugar". But since these carbs ARE metabolized eventually during the day, it is only logical that they still should be counted in the day's total carbs eaten! As nutritionist Dr. Ellis said in his article about Net carbs, these "slowly metabolized carbs" don't just vanish into a black hole - they are in our system - and aren't netted out. How is AN able to continue this "justification" when so many of us learn the hard way that a carb counts as a carb (fiber excluded) no matter how slowly it breaks down? I for one think this is junk (food) science and feel very deceived by AN for being a leader in promoting this theory. It wasn't until coming to this board and reading countless posts, that I figured out this net key to my failure of reaching goal. Since following Atkins '72 proven theory, I have met success!

P.S. I appreciate the fact that some people can still eat frankenfoods regularly and still loose - but AN must look at the profile of who most of these people are: men and people who are a long way from a healthy BMI! While AN has the right to serve this customer base, food marketing theories should respect the bodies and souls of the rest of us working hard for success.

lkmjbc3 · 09-21-2004, 04:38 PM

I'll take a stab at this.....
There are two main ingredients which are used in "Lo-carb" foods that replace sugar. The first is glycerine. The second are sugar alcohols with the most common being malitol.

Glycerine is really a strange substance. It is technically a sugar alcohol. It's breakdown in the body is quite different from a standard carb. The body sees glycerine as a fat. It actually breaks down into fat like particles in the body. These are not processed to make blood sugar. They cause no insulin secretion. The idea here (supported by science) is that glycerine really is in a class by itself (kind of like alcohol).

Malitol is different. This sugar alcohol is a rather strong substance which your body has trouble breaking down. Your digestive tract is just barely able to render parts of it digestible (for some this causes stomach distress). Malitol in fact only provides about 2.5 calories per gram as opposed to 4 calories per a typical carbohydrate. Studies have shown that Malitol causes little or no release of insulin. Since insulin is the fat storage hormone, the theory here is that little of the malitol is actually converted into blood sugar and therefore body fat.

You are quite correct that many folks eat products made from these substances and lose weight.

You are not correct in assuming that most, any, all or even some of these folks were men or very far away from a health BMI.
This board is not a scientific or representative sample of the population as a whole or even low carb dieters in general.

Now, that doesn't mean you are wrong. It just means that evidence from an internet chat board (regardless of how wonderful it is...) should be used carefully in formulating opinions.

It really comes down to a matter of trust. I happen to trust the Atkins folks on this one.

Of course they could be wrong.....

lkmjbc3

Atkins_Nutritionist · 09-22-2004, 07:01 AM

Let me say that this is a good point but I do not think this is a matter of trust. I think it is a matter of doing what works for you.

Many people on the boards today were not around when there were no products and all anyone wanted was a bite of something or some type of snack to keep them from eating off plan.

Atkins filled that need, the products were created so that someone could have a bar and not have the devastating effect of a chocolate candy bar.

I do believe the Atkins products are better than these other products, however there are people who will need to monitor portions and use 1/2 bar/day or maybe less than that.

My point is that noone, not me or you should make the decision for another person. This is an individual matter.

There are people who cannot lose weight when eating higher carb onion or tomato, should I then tell everyone not to eat these vegetables even though I do not know who will be sensitive and who will not be sensitive.

In this case, If someone were to hit a plateau or was unable to lose weight, I would explain that I have seen a trend in people who stall when eating these 2 vegetables and it may be beneficial to avoid them for 2 weeks to see if this is the culprit.

If the endulge line of candy bars effects weight loss, it does not mean the shakes or advantage bars will. If the advantage bars effct weight loss, the shakes may not, or maybe unfortunately, you are one of the unlucky ones who absolutely cannot tolerate consistent amounts of the product.

It is almost impossible for someone to go their whole lives eating absolutely no dessert, snack...on special occasions and other events. For these people, I hope you do not deprive yourselves but eat a small amount and then get right back on track. It is too bad but there just are not a lot of options.

Catheryn · 09-22-2004, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by cherbear1
One of the pillars of AN's "recently devised net carb philosophy", is that "slowly metabolized carbs" should be netted out "because of minimal impact on blood sugar". But since these carbs ARE metabolized eventually during the day, it is only logical that they still should be counted in the day's total carbs eaten! As nutritionist Dr. Ellis said in his article about Net carbs, these "slowly metabolized carbs" don't just vanish into a black hole - they are in our system - and aren't netted out. How is AN able to continue this "justification" when so many of us learn the hard way that a carb counts as a carb (fiber excluded) no matter how slowly it breaks down?

AN Please answer this question.

Atkins_Nutritionist · 09-22-2004, 08:15 AM

They are 2 different philosophies.

The one you quote focuses on calories. Calories are important for some people.

ANI acknowledges this, however, the company focuses on carbohydrates and how it affects blood sugar (cravings/appetite) and insulin levels (fat storage/blood sugar and health). Only in certain circumstances (metabolic resistance, hormone imbalance....) has Atkins focused on calories.

There has been research showing that a calorie is not always a calorie. You can read about this on www.atkins.com, search the authors names (Feinman, Bailes, Green, Sondike). In these studies, participants consumed more calories and lost more weight. There are additional studies too. If you are interested, go to, "Science Behind Atkins", then look through the many folders that are availble to you. I suggest starting with "Research supporting Atkins".

I hope this better clarifies things for you. It all goes back to everyone is different and will handle food/food products differently.

Either philosophy may be correct. Which one works for you?

Catheryn · 09-22-2004, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Atkins_Nutritionist
Only in certain circumstances (metabolic resistance, hormone imbalance....) has Atkins focused on calories.

So what you're saying is that the many women who are perimenopausal and are doing Atkins, and still struggling to lose weight, need to focus on calories also? So would then, these net products be the kiss of death for these women?

Cinnabar · 09-22-2004, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Atkins_Nutritionist
There are people who cannot lose weight when eating higher carb onion or tomato, should I then tell everyone not to eat these vegetables even though I do not know who will be sensitive and who will not be sensitive.

In this case, If someone were to hit a plateau or was unable to lose weight, I would explain that I have seen a trend in people who stall when eating these 2 vegetables and it may be beneficial to avoid them for 2 weeks to see if this is the culprit.

Seriously?

why would this be? something in their enzymes or the kind of veggie they are? why these & not other veggies?

cherbear1 · 09-22-2004, 01:50 PM

Atkin's Nutritionalist

Could you directly address the issue of "slowly metabolized carbs" not counting in the daily limit - if it is metabolized at all, it seems logical that it needs to be counted.

Thank you

Catheryn · 09-22-2004, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Cinnabar
Seriously? why would this be? something in their enzymes or the kind of veggie they are? why these & not other veggies?

because these have a lot of natural sugar in them.

Atkins_Nutritionist · 09-23-2004, 04:56 PM

Catheryn, you are correct.

Cinnabar, it may have to do with allergies. I am not sure exactly why this happens but it did hold true for a good number of people who were resistant to weight loss.

cherbear1 · 09-25-2004, 08:22 AM

Atkin's Nutritionalist,

You still have not answered my orginal question - What is the rationale for "slowly metabolized carbs" not counting?

Lisa Rae · 09-25-2004, 04:56 PM

Just want to say..onions and tomatos are higher in natural sugar and have a higher carb count by size then many other veggies. Dark leafy greens tend to be best..followed by other green vveggies. Thes tend to be lower in natural sugar, higher in fiber and more vitamin dense.

It's the same idea why berries should be added first when adding fruit..vs something like an apple.

09-25-2004, 08:44 PM

As I understand it, even the diabetes association now recommends counting sugar alcohols as half of their total carbs..thus blowing the net carb theory right out of the water in my humble opinion

LindaSue · 09-26-2004, 06:42 AM

I thought that people who could handle eating candy/foods with sugar alcohols without gastric distress ARE metabolizing those carbs. It's when they're not metabolized that the gastric distress occurs, right?

Atkins_Nutritionist · 09-28-2004, 08:29 AM

Hope this answers everyones follow-up questions:

The focus of the Atkins Nutritional Approach is on carbohydrates and how they affect blood sugar (cravings/appetite) and insulin levels (fat storage/blood sugar and health). Fiber is subtracted from the total carbohydrates because they do not affect blood sugar and insulin levels the same way that other carbohydrates do and do not hinder your weight loss when following a carbohydrate controlled weight loss diet. Sugar alcohols are neither sugar nor alcohols. They are categorized as carbohydrates, although their chemical structure partially resembles sugar and partially resembles alcohol. They are incompletely absorbed, so they do not have the same affect on blood sugar and insulin levels as other carbohydrates do. In fact, the way they are converted by the body requires little to no insulin. They are also incompletely metabolized by the body, so they contribute fewer calories than carbohydrates do.

They are never metabolized completely, but the degree of gastric distress this causes depends on the individual. Total daily consumption is important to consider since it is the total intake that may drive the laxative effect. But it is also important to consider the time of day consumed, the amount eaten in one sitting, the type of food, and empty versus full stomach.

The focus of the Atkins Nutritional Approach is on whole foods. Vegetables contain fiber which would be subtracted to get the Net Carbs, but no whole food would contain sugar alcohols. We do provide meal replacements and occasional treats, which contain a minimal amount of sugar alcohols in order to maintain the quality and taste as close to the real thing as possible. Note that different brands contain different amounts. The Advantage line, for example, never contains more than 4 g sugar alcohols. These are great meal replacements, and are superior to other companies’ products who have up to 27 g of sugar alcohols! And of the 8 Morning Start varieties, 4 contain 0 sugar alcohols and 4 contain 1-2 grams, which is still far less than other companies’ products. The Endulge line does contain more, but these are for an occasional treat for those who are feeling deprived and should never be central to meal planning and the individual must determine if even on the few occasions they are eaten is it hindering their weight loss.

Hope this helps you understand why all carbs are not created equal. Fiber, which should always be included in the form of vegetables, and products with sugar alcohols, which may be included occasionally in meal planning do not have the same effect on blood sugar and insulin as other carbohydrates. If you are going to choose a product, it is also important to choose based on the amount of fiber in the product as well as the amount of sugar alcohols. And taste is also important as well!

09-21-2004, 02:45 PM	#1
cherbear1 Senior LCF Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Ankara Turkey or Lexington, KY - 5' 5.5" Posts: 120 Gallery: cherbear1 Stats: B4 176/134/140 From Jan07 166/133/130 WOE: Atkins '72 and BFL (cardio/weights) Start Date: Feb 1998 with many ups/downs	Rationale for "slowly metabolized carbs" not counting? One of the pillars of AN's "recently devised net carb philosophy", is that "slowly metabolized carbs" should be netted out "because of minimal impact on blood sugar". But since these carbs ARE metabolized eventually during the day, it is only logical that they still should be counted in the day's total carbs eaten! As nutritionist Dr. Ellis said in his article about Net carbs, these "slowly metabolized carbs" don't just vanish into a black hole - they are in our system - and aren't netted out. How is AN able to continue this "justification" when so many of us learn the hard way that a carb counts as a carb (fiber excluded) no matter how slowly it breaks down? I for one think this is junk (food) science and feel very deceived by AN for being a leader in promoting this theory. It wasn't until coming to this board and reading countless posts, that I figured out this net key to my failure of reaching goal. Since following Atkins '72 proven theory, I have met success! P.S. I appreciate the fact that some people can still eat frankenfoods regularly and still loose - but AN must look at the profile of who most of these people are: men and people who are a long way from a healthy BMI! While AN has the right to serve this customer base, food marketing theories should respect the bodies and souls of the rest of us working hard for success. Last edited by cherbear1 : 09-21-2004 at 03:21 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-21-2004, 04:38 PM	#2
lkmjbc3 Senior LCF Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 368 Gallery: lkmjbc3	I'll take a stab at this..... There are two main ingredients which are used in "Lo-carb" foods that replace sugar. The first is glycerine. The second are sugar alcohols with the most common being malitol. Glycerine is really a strange substance. It is technically a sugar alcohol. It's breakdown in the body is quite different from a standard carb. The body sees glycerine as a fat. It actually breaks down into fat like particles in the body. These are not processed to make blood sugar. They cause no insulin secretion. The idea here (supported by science) is that glycerine really is in a class by itself (kind of like alcohol). Malitol is different. This sugar alcohol is a rather strong substance which your body has trouble breaking down. Your digestive tract is just barely able to render parts of it digestible (for some this causes stomach distress). Malitol in fact only provides about 2.5 calories per gram as opposed to 4 calories per a typical carbohydrate. Studies have shown that Malitol causes little or no release of insulin. Since insulin is the fat storage hormone, the theory here is that little of the malitol is actually converted into blood sugar and therefore body fat. You are quite correct that many folks eat products made from these substances and lose weight. You are not correct in assuming that most, any, all or even some of these folks were men or very far away from a health BMI. This board is not a scientific or representative sample of the population as a whole or even low carb dieters in general. Now, that doesn't mean you are wrong. It just means that evidence from an internet chat board (regardless of how wonderful it is...) should be used carefully in formulating opinions. It really comes down to a matter of trust. I happen to trust the Atkins folks on this one. Of course they could be wrong..... lkmjbc3

09-22-2004, 07:01 AM	#3
Atkins_Nutritionist Nutritionist Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Atkins Health and Medical Information Services Posts: 684 Gallery: Atkins_Nutritionist	Let me say that this is a good point but I do not think this is a matter of trust. I think it is a matter of doing what works for you. Many people on the boards today were not around when there were no products and all anyone wanted was a bite of something or some type of snack to keep them from eating off plan. Atkins filled that need, the products were created so that someone could have a bar and not have the devastating effect of a chocolate candy bar. I do believe the Atkins products are better than these other products, however there are people who will need to monitor portions and use 1/2 bar/day or maybe less than that. My point is that noone, not me or you should make the decision for another person. This is an individual matter. There are people who cannot lose weight when eating higher carb onion or tomato, should I then tell everyone not to eat these vegetables even though I do not know who will be sensitive and who will not be sensitive. In this case, If someone were to hit a plateau or was unable to lose weight, I would explain that I have seen a trend in people who stall when eating these 2 vegetables and it may be beneficial to avoid them for 2 weeks to see if this is the culprit. If the endulge line of candy bars effects weight loss, it does not mean the shakes or advantage bars will. If the advantage bars effct weight loss, the shakes may not, or maybe unfortunately, you are one of the unlucky ones who absolutely cannot tolerate consistent amounts of the product. It is almost impossible for someone to go their whole lives eating absolutely no dessert, snack...on special occasions and other events. For these people, I hope you do not deprive yourselves but eat a small amount and then get right back on track. It is too bad but there just are not a lot of options.

09-22-2004, 08:15 AM	#5
Atkins_Nutritionist Nutritionist Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Atkins Health and Medical Information Services Posts: 684 Gallery: Atkins_Nutritionist	They are 2 different philosophies. The one you quote focuses on calories. Calories are important for some people. ANI acknowledges this, however, the company focuses on carbohydrates and how it affects blood sugar (cravings/appetite) and insulin levels (fat storage/blood sugar and health). Only in certain circumstances (metabolic resistance, hormone imbalance....) has Atkins focused on calories. There has been research showing that a calorie is not always a calorie. You can read about this on www.atkins.com, search the authors names (Feinman, Bailes, Green, Sondike). In these studies, participants consumed more calories and lost more weight. There are additional studies too. If you are interested, go to, "Science Behind Atkins", then look through the many folders that are availble to you. I suggest starting with "Research supporting Atkins". I hope this better clarifies things for you. It all goes back to everyone is different and will handle food/food products differently. Either philosophy may be correct. Which one works for you?

09-22-2004, 01:50 PM	#8
cherbear1 Senior LCF Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Ankara Turkey or Lexington, KY - 5' 5.5" Posts: 120 Gallery: cherbear1 Stats: B4 176/134/140 From Jan07 166/133/130 WOE: Atkins '72 and BFL (cardio/weights) Start Date: Feb 1998 with many ups/downs	Atkin's Nutritionalist Could you directly address the issue of "slowly metabolized carbs" not counting in the daily limit - if it is metabolized at all, it seems logical that it needs to be counted. Thank you

09-23-2004, 04:56 PM	#10
Atkins_Nutritionist Nutritionist Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Atkins Health and Medical Information Services Posts: 684 Gallery: Atkins_Nutritionist	Catheryn, you are correct. Cinnabar, it may have to do with allergies. I am not sure exactly why this happens but it did hold true for a good number of people who were resistant to weight loss.

09-25-2004, 08:22 AM	#11
cherbear1 Senior LCF Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Ankara Turkey or Lexington, KY - 5' 5.5" Posts: 120 Gallery: cherbear1 Stats: B4 176/134/140 From Jan07 166/133/130 WOE: Atkins '72 and BFL (cardio/weights) Start Date: Feb 1998 with many ups/downs	Atkin's Nutritionalist, You still have not answered my orginal question - What is the rationale for "slowly metabolized carbs" not counting?

09-25-2004, 04:56 PM	#12
Lisa Rae Way too much time on my hands! Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Venice, Ca Posts: 10,271 Gallery: Lisa Rae Stats: 250+/???/150 WOE: Atkins or Bust! Also Smoke Free! Start Date: September 15th, 2000	Just want to say..onions and tomatos are higher in natural sugar and have a higher carb count by size then many other veggies. Dark leafy greens tend to be best..followed by other green vveggies. Thes tend to be lower in natural sugar, higher in fiber and more vitamin dense. It's the same idea why berries should be added first when adding fruit..vs something like an apple.

09-25-2004, 08:44 PM	#13
MandyDee Guest Posts: n/a Gallery: MandyDee	As I understand it, even the diabetes association now recommends counting sugar alcohols as half of their total carbs..thus blowing the net carb theory right out of the water in my humble opinion

09-26-2004, 06:42 AM	#14
LindaSue Big Yapper!!!! Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Spring, TX Posts: 8,279 Gallery: LindaSue Stats: 167/117/120 - 5'7" WOE: Atkins Maintenance Start Date: July 2002	I thought that people who could handle eating candy/foods with sugar alcohols without gastric distress ARE metabolizing those carbs. It's when they're not metabolized that the gastric distress occurs, right?

09-28-2004, 08:29 AM	#15
Atkins_Nutritionist Nutritionist Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Atkins Health and Medical Information Services Posts: 684 Gallery: Atkins_Nutritionist	Hope this answers everyones follow-up questions: The focus of the Atkins Nutritional Approach is on carbohydrates and how they affect blood sugar (cravings/appetite) and insulin levels (fat storage/blood sugar and health). Fiber is subtracted from the total carbohydrates because they do not affect blood sugar and insulin levels the same way that other carbohydrates do and do not hinder your weight loss when following a carbohydrate controlled weight loss diet. Sugar alcohols are neither sugar nor alcohols. They are categorized as carbohydrates, although their chemical structure partially resembles sugar and partially resembles alcohol. They are incompletely absorbed, so they do not have the same affect on blood sugar and insulin levels as other carbohydrates do. In fact, the way they are converted by the body requires little to no insulin. They are also incompletely metabolized by the body, so they contribute fewer calories than carbohydrates do. They are never metabolized completely, but the degree of gastric distress this causes depends on the individual. Total daily consumption is important to consider since it is the total intake that may drive the laxative effect. But it is also important to consider the time of day consumed, the amount eaten in one sitting, the type of food, and empty versus full stomach. The focus of the Atkins Nutritional Approach is on whole foods. Vegetables contain fiber which would be subtracted to get the Net Carbs, but no whole food would contain sugar alcohols. We do provide meal replacements and occasional treats, which contain a minimal amount of sugar alcohols in order to maintain the quality and taste as close to the real thing as possible. Note that different brands contain different amounts. The Advantage line, for example, never contains more than 4 g sugar alcohols. These are great meal replacements, and are superior to other companies’ products who have up to 27 g of sugar alcohols! And of the 8 Morning Start varieties, 4 contain 0 sugar alcohols and 4 contain 1-2 grams, which is still far less than other companies’ products. The Endulge line does contain more, but these are for an occasional treat for those who are feeling deprived and should never be central to meal planning and the individual must determine if even on the few occasions they are eaten is it hindering their weight loss. Hope this helps you understand why all carbs are not created equal. Fiber, which should always be included in the form of vegetables, and products with sugar alcohols, which may be included occasionally in meal planning do not have the same effect on blood sugar and insulin as other carbohydrates. If you are going to choose a product, it is also important to choose based on the amount of fiber in the product as well as the amount of sugar alcohols. And taste is also important as well!