Net Carbs

[CMCM]

What do you all think of the whole "net carbs" thing.

Personally, I don't know yet if I believe it. I'm wondering if there is any "real" science behind the idea, or was it just developed to sell bars etc.

I'm feeling very down on the bars. I'm fairly certain they stall me.

[Elizellen]

The 'net carbs' originally only meant deducting fiber from total carbs - and outside USA fibre is not counted as being a carbohydrate anyway ;).

I don't use the bars or shakes etc so take no notice of the 'effective carbs' the new atkins talks about.

The stuff I have seen about whether to count or not count carbohydrates from polyols leads me to believe that if they give me the runs then I could deduct their carbs, but if not then I need to count all of them.

And unless I have constipation why eat something that sends me to the toilet in a hurry?!?

I think I read that the American Diabetic Association tell people to count at least half the carbs of sugar alcohols, as they often see a 'rise' several hours after eating them, whereas the claim you can discount them resulted from seeing no rise within an hour or so.

[Zelocka]

Sugar alcohols are always mileage may very from person to person. They didn't stall me but I am young and male. Sugar alcohols (and each type may or may not stall you depending) should be a rare treat in weight loss phase.

[deirdra]

I found I had to count ~half the carbs in sugar alcohols, not 0, to account for the BG rise (I am not diabetic, but was tracking the effects of various foods), so what elizellen said seems to be true for me. I find I get hungry a couple of hours after eating whenever I eat something with hidden carbs; that is what tells me a certain food or product must be banned from my house. I do count net carbs by subtracting fiber (only).

But the main reason I don't eat SA-rich LC fake foods is they made me want more of the junk bars etc even if I didn't really like the taste. Now I rarely eat anything sweet and when I do it is something I make myself with real food ingredients and only add half the recommended amount of sweetener in the form of liquid or powdered stevia.

[CMCM]

I found I had to count ~half the carbs in sugar alcohols, not 0, to account for the BG rise (I am not diabetic, but was tracking the effects of various foods), so what elizellen said seems to be true for me. I find I get hungry a couple of hours after eating whenever I eat something with hidden carbs; that is what tells me a certain food or product must be banned from my house. I do count net carbs by subtracting fiber (only).

But the main reason I don't eat SA-rich LC fake foods is they made me want more of the junk bars etc even if I didn't really like the taste. Now I rarely eat anything sweet and when I do it is something I make myself with real food ingredients and only add half the recommended amount of sweetener in the form of liquid or powdered stevia.

Your comments are interesting, and reminded me that even FAKE sweets coming from any artificial sweetener I've had seem to do a number on my brain or something, and they definitely stimulate cravings and that leads to cheating. So I'm not going there this time around, I don't want to risk it. I'm about to start week 4 and I'm in control for the first time in years....I don't want that to change.

[katmeyster]

I'm only deducting fiber grams from vegetables for now -- just to stay on the safe side. That means no frankenfoods at all to keep under 20 - 25 carbs.

[Elizellen]

Your comments are interesting, and reminded me that even FAKE sweets coming from any artificial sweetener I've had seem to do a number on my brain or something, and they definitely stimulate cravings and that leads to cheating. So I'm not going there this time around, I don't want to risk it. I'm about to start week 4 and I'm in control for the first time in years....I don't want that to change.
Good to hear you are in control!! Long may it continue :cheer:

Somewhere on this board I think there is a post about how artificial sweetners affect the brain - something like 'the cephalic response' - maybe someone else can supply a link?