PDA

View Full Version : "The carb labeling lowdown"


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums

Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!



gotbeer
Mon, Aug-09-04, 09:40
The carb labeling lowdown

Packages can mislead; variety may encourage overeating

10:04 AM CDT on Monday, August 9, 2004

By LAURA BEIL / The Dallas Morning News

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/fea/texasliving/stories/0809dncarbclaims.2989.html

Food companies have made low-carb living easier, but dieters may not like the way the cookie crumbles.

Grocery stores are now Low Carb Nation, with chips, cookies, candy and drinks proudly touting their carb, or rather "net carb," content.

No longer must low-carbers pig out only on bacon. But one thing low-carb diets have going for them, researchers say, is monotony. When entire supermarket aisles are off limits, people tend to become bored and eat less. Studies comparing low-carb diets with other approaches have found that people ended up consuming fewer calories, at least in the short term.

"All those carbs which were a big part of most people's diets were suddenly wiped off the plate," says Bonnie Liebman of the consumer advocate Center for Science in the Public Interest. "Now there are low-carb versions of all those foods. They're back on the plate."

And, probably, on the thighs. Research shows that the more variety of foods offered, the more people eat. For example, in one study, moviegoers ate on average 31 pieces of M&M's when given a bowl with seven colors. With 10 colors, consumption rose to 52 pieces.

The same phenomenon occurred with jelly beans. With more color, consumption jumped from 12 pieces on average to 23. For whatever reason, choice encourages eating.

"That's one of the things that will be the downfall of low carb," says Brian Wansink of the University of Illinois, who conducts studies in food psychology. Even if dieters control the frequency of their low-carb snacks, "they will be eating them, when they would not have eaten anything before."

Define 'low'

Also, those products may not necessarily be "low" carb. Officials at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration haven't yet set a definition of low carb, reduced carb, or carb light. An FDA spokeswoman says the agency plans to begin the rule-making process soon.

Until then, "it's a marketing free-for-all," Ms. Liebman says. "It's back to the days before nutrition labels were regulated." Only now it's worse, she believes, because shoppers have come to trust what they read.

Her group asked the FDA in February to set a definition for low carb. So did the Grocery Manufacturers Association. Such rules already exist for other nutrients in food, such as fat and sodium. For example, a "light" food must have at least one-third fewer calories or less than half the fat of the regular version.

The regulation started because low-fat products of diets past were up and down the scale, and shoppers didn't know which claim to trust.

In a strict sense, many of the new low-carb packages violate FDA rules, says food industry lawyer Eric Greenberg of Chicago. No one is supposed to make a misleading claim – even an implied one – about a nutrient, he says.

Little action

Yet the FDA has not aggressively cracked down, Mr. Greenberg says. One of the few major companies to get a warning is Kansas City-based Russell Stover Candies, which makes treats that go by the name Low Carb. In January, the FDA sent the company a letter, saying that "these products are not lower in carbohydrate that other comparable commercial products." While the letter called the products "misbranded" because the carbohydrate content was not significantly different from comparable products, the document does not say what the carb level should be.

What companies can certainly do is state a carb number. This is the approach of Plano-based Frito-Lay, which recently introduced its own low-carb snacks. The chips, which include Doritos Edge, have a package that says nothing descriptive about carbs. It does include a display of the carb content.

"Consumers are looking for lower carbs, and putting the carb count on the package conveyed the message," says Charles Nicolas, Frito-Lay spokesman.

These Doritos and Tostitos may be lower in carbs. They are not, however, lower in calories. Neither are many other low-carb products. And there, too, the new snack foods may spell the beginning of the end for low-carb diets, doctors say.

Calories aplenty

When low-fat products were the rage, they became famous diet wreckers because people assumed that low fat meant low calorie.

"People said, 'Geez, Louise – if it's low fat I can eat three times as much of it,' " Dr. Wansink says. "People started overconsuming things."

Often, to protect taste, food manufacturers added sugar, making low-fat snacks just as fattening as regular versions. Some nutritionists even dubbed the trend "The SnackWells" diet, after the popular low-fat cookies.

Today, there are CarbWells. And Carb Solutions. And Carb Control. You can be Carb Smart or Carb Wise.

But because many low-carb foods are just as calorie-heavy as the original, they will counteract another low-carb advantage, experts say.

That full feeling

"If you have the same calories in a larger volume, you will eat fewer calories," says Dr. Donna Ryan of the Pennington Biomedical Research Center in Baton Rouge, which specializes in the study of nutrition and obesity.

A large order of McDonald's fries will deliver about the same calories as seven apples. When low-carb calories can be condensed into a few bites of potato chips, one benefit of the low-carb diet – feeling full easier – may be lost.

"There is no metabolic magic in low-carb diets," Dr. Ryan says. Successful long-term dieters also tend to make long-term changes in their eating and exercise habits. "Your weight totally comes down to calories."

Others agree. "You're not going to lose weight on a low-carb diet unless you watch the calories," says Dr. John Foreyt, an obesity expert at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. People may feel fuller longer on a low-carb diet, he says, and be less inclined to snack. However, if people continue to take in more calories than they burn, they will gain weight no matter how low in carbs they go.

"It still comes down to calories," Dr. Foreyt says.

Seeking disclosure

To avoid any confusion on this issue, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, in asking the FDA to set low-carb standards, has also asked that packages be stamped with the unambiguous reminder "Not a Low Calorie Food," if indeed the carb savings doesn't translate into calorie reduction.

Product manufacturers say they aren't trying to spoil diets, but to make it easier for people to stick with them.

"I think when people get into trouble with diets is when they're denied things that they normally eat," says Chuck Teater, vice president of quality at Russell Stover. He says he has started the Atkins diet and has shed 20 pounds and counting. If people feel deprived, they may be more likely to cheat, he says.

Russell Stover plans to continue making its low-carb products, under the new, nondescriptive name Net Carb.

Without a low-carb offering, Mr. Teater says, his company can't compete in the snack marketplace. But like many obesity researchers, Dr. Foreyt believes the low-carb marketplace may eventually collapse under its own weight. "Now what's going to happen," he says, "is exactly what we saw happening with the low-fat diet."

E-mail lbeil~dallasnews.com

adkpam
Mon, Aug-09-04, 09:46
I'm all for good labeling laws. But for heaven's sake, it's not rocket science! What's already on the label tells you a lot: are there transfats...what the net carbs should REALLY be...what kind of vitamins and so forth you are getting.

I just get exasperated with people who give important things, like what they are eating, five seconds of thought...when I started low carbing, twenty minutes of research on the web told me so much. Even reading ONE book tells you a lot.

Haven't people learned they CAN'T listen to a sound bite on the news and run around half-assed?

There...rant over.

Trinsdad
Mon, Aug-09-04, 11:05
"There is no metabolic magic in low-carb diets""

yes, there is.....

HoserLC
Mon, Aug-09-04, 16:43
I'm not a big fan of FDA intervention, but the whole Net Carb thing has gotten out of hand. The fibbing that is rife is keeping people from losing weight, and hurting the low-carb cause.

Trinsdad
Tue, Aug-10-04, 07:57
lbeil~dallasnews.com Here is her email adress

cc48510
Tue, Aug-10-04, 11:07
No longer must low-carbers pig out only on bacon. But one thing low-carb diets have going for them, researchers say, is monotony. When entire supermarket aisles are off limits, people tend to become bored and eat less. Studies comparing low-carb diets with other approaches have found that people ended up consuming fewer calories, at least in the short term.

First off, LC is not monotonous. Secondly, monotony does not mean you eat less. Even if you counted every different way of preparing Potatoes (Baked, French Fried, Mashed, Wedges, Boiled, etc...,) Bread (Sliced White, French, Croissant, Biscuit, Roll, etc...,) and Pasta (Spaghetti, Fettucine, Linguine, Angel Hair Pasta, Elbows/Maccaroni, Fusili, etc...) as a different food, my Diet Pre-LC was nowhere near as varied as my current diet. Since LCing, I've begun eating Eggs again, which I had stopped eating 13 years earlier after I'd gotten sick from some Eggs I'd eaten. I've also started eating new foods I'd never eaten before, including: Duck, Lamb, Spinach, Broccoli, Pork Rinds, Strawberries, Romaine Lettuce, and many others...

Yet the FDA has not aggressively cracked down, Mr. Greenberg says. One of the few major companies to get a warning is Kansas City-based Russell Stover Candies, which makes treats that go by the name Low Carb. In January, the FDA sent the company a letter, saying that "these products are not lower in carbohydrate that other comparable commercial products." While the letter called the products "misbranded" because the carbohydrate content was not significantly different from comparable products, the document does not say what the carb level should be.

The Carb Count is actually the least of the problems with Russel Stovers. They're loaded with Partially Hydrogenated Oils, which is a Definite No-No for LC. Even if they do come up with a definition for "Low-Carb," its not going to properly state whether a food is acceptable on a LC Diet. For example, if they set it at 9g Total Carbs per serving as has been suggested, an Atkins Bagel would not be considered "Low-Carb" as it has 18g Total Carbs (11g of those being Fiber,) but Sugar could be labelled as "Low-Carb," because a packet (which is 2 servings when in Granular form BTW) has 8g Total Carbs. Obviously any new labelling law would have to allow for the deduction of Fiber, strictly limit the amount of added sugars to only trace amounts, and outright bar the use of Hydrogenated Oils, in order to not mislead the public. Also, it would have to take into account how the food is eaten. For example, a serving of Coca-Cola C2 has 12g Total Carbs, as does some of Subway's Wraps. But, while a Coke intended to be a drink (empty Calories consumed many times a day,) a Wrap is the primary portion of a meal. Thus, the 12g in the wrap is more acceptable than the same 12g in a so-called "Low-Carb" Soda.

"If you have the same calories in a larger volume, you will eat fewer calories," says Dr. Donna Ryan of the Pennington Biomedical Research Center in Baton Rouge, which specializes in the study of nutrition and obesity.

A large order of McDonald's fries will deliver about the same calories as seven apples. When low-carb calories can be condensed into a few bites of potato chips, one benefit of the low-carb diet – feeling full easier – may be lost.

This has actually been scientifically disproven, yet its restated so often you'd think it was scientific fact. In studies done on Rats, it was found that when a portion of their Caloric matter was replaced with Non-Caloric matter, that they simply ate more volume of food and consumed the same number of Calories.

Hunger is far more complex than simply Caloric Density. The Hypothalamus regulates hunger. There's two parts of the Hypothalamus involved in hunger, one is the hunger center and the other the satiety center. When the Hunger Center was lesioned (damaged) in rats, they starved to death with food right in front of them. When it was stimulated, they ate to the point of Obesity. When the satiety center was lesioned, the rats ate excessively, becoming Obese. When it was stimulated, they ate less.

These two parts of the Hypothalamus work based on many different signals: Blood Sugar, Insulin, Glucagon, Leptin, Neuropeptide Y, Ghrelin, Somatostatin, Peptide YY3-36, Cholecystokinin, Amylin, Nutrient Density of Food, Caloric content of Food, Stomach expansion.

When Blood Sugar drops too low, you get a hunger signal. Insulin increases hunger. Leptin inhibits among other things Neuropeptide Y. All 3 of these have been scientifically proven. In fact, the researchers who proved Insulin causes hunger got some kind of scientific award for their research.

Neuropeptide Y increases hunger (cravings for Carbs,) decreases Metabolism, and increases Fat Storage. When rats were injected with NPY, they became Obese. Leptin appears to inhibit NPY, which is one major reason it makes you less hungry. There's some evidence suggesting NPY may also be linked to Alzhemier's, Hyperinsulinimia, and Insulin Resistance. NPY also appears to block pain signals from reaching the brain. Peptide YY3-36 counteracts the effects of NPY. It is released after eating in direct proportion to your Caloric intake. PYY3-36, supresses appetite and increases the secretion of digestive juices.

http://www.bioscience.org/news/scientis/obesity2.htm
http://www.bioportfolio.com/LeadDiscovery/PubMed-010320.html
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/G/GutHormones.html

"There is no metabolic magic in low-carb diets," Dr. Ryan says. Successful long-term dieters also tend to make long-term changes in their eating and exercise habits. "Your weight totally comes down to calories."

Actually, some studies have shown a Metabolic Advantage in the forms of increased wastage and increased postprandial metabolism.

To avoid any confusion on this issue, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, in asking the FDA to set low-carb standards, has also asked that packages be stamped with the unambiguous reminder "Not a Low Calorie Food," if indeed the carb savings doesn't translate into calorie reduction.

CSPI are Anti-Fat advocates. In fact, they petitioned the FDA a few years back to add Trans-Fat to the Saturated Fat content on Nutritional Labels and to rename "Partially Hydrogenated" Oils "Partially Saturated" Oils. These changes would have made it harder to know if a food contained Damaging Trans-Fat or Healthy Saturated Fat and would likely caused considerable confusion. Of course, since CSPI doesn't like Saturated Fat, they'd have succeded in tricking people into believing Saturated Fat and Trans-Fat are one in the same, which they aren't.

onehotmama
Tue, Aug-10-04, 12:22
Monotony? Give me a break!!! There are so many varieties of things to cook at eat it isn't funny! I can't imagine getting bored with this way of life, I love how good veggies and salads taste now that I have learned to eat them without all the sauces and stuff I used to use!!!!