If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
As Low-Carb Craze Wanes, Atkins Revamps Its Diet
Updated: 02:43 PM EST
As Low-Carb Craze Wanes, Atkins Revamps Its Diet NEW YORK (March 23) - Atkins Nutritionals, which championed a dieting craze that made millions of Americans shun bread and other carbohydrates, wants a do-over. As the low-carb fad fades, Atkins has altered its "net carbs" method by using parts of the latest trend from Europe -- a glycemic-index diet -- to target U.S. food companies for products bearing the new "net Atkins count" seal. The new label has appeared on Atkins nutrition and breakfast bars since January. Atkins says the method more accurately gauges a dieter's blood sugar response to foods, and subsequent weight gain, and is far more precise than the net carbs subtraction method. "We see this as the standard and the next generation for measuring net carb and blood sugar impact," said Matthew Wiant, Atkins' chief marketing officer. Atkins says current partners HP Hood LLC and CoolBrands International Inc. (CBAsva.TO) are excited about coming up with new product lines using the new methodology. Ronkonkoma, New York-based Atkins, which has seen sagging sales of its packaged products and just pulled the plug on its British subsidiary, said it may even go after Kraft Foods Inc. (KFT.N) -- which has a deal with an Atkins rival, the South Beach diet. But food analysts say the bloom is off the rose for low-carb names like Atkins, as consumers have dismissed it as a fad that got rid of weight at first, but was unsustainable. "What Atkins is saying is that this is the new way of doing things, which is the same as saying the old way wasn't that good," said Bob Goldin, executive vice president with food industry research firm Technomic. "They're so well identified with net carbs that it may work against them because it can confuse people. "The aura has definitely left Atkins, so they're a lot less valuable as a corporate partner," he added. About 26 percent of Americans are trying to shed weight, 4 percent of those on a low-carb diet -- down from 9 percent in January 2004, according to data from The NPD Group, a New York-based market research firm. Atkins, sensing that it was losing currency with dieters, took the cue for the change from British food company Tesco PLC (TSCDY.PK), which has melded the glycemic index into its line of foods, said Ken Harris, managing director at consumer products and retail consultant Cannondale Associates. Harris was more optimistic that Atkins could pull off the switch than some other diet industry experts, as he noted that dieting by following the glycemic index is much more sustainable than the net-carb way. "Atkins is doing the right thing. But if Tesco hadn't done this, there'd be nothing. Atkins has its work cut out for it," Harris said. "Will it save the company? It's hard to tell. But they've got a reasonable shot at making it work." Among U.S. companies that could partner with Atkins are ConAgra Foods Inc. (CAG.N) or PepsiCo Inc. (PEP.N), he said. 03/23/05 10:37 ET -- preesi ~~~~~~~~~ "The Meek Shall Inherit The Earth? Yeah, after The Strong Kick The Enemies Asses For You Cowards!" ~~~~~~~~~ My Websites: http://tinyurl.com/yvw45 Where I Hang Out: http://www.there.com Lets go surfing together: http://www.lluna.de/ My Pogo and AIM name: PreesiGirl (Come play with me) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Without the leader and his vision, the Atkins business seems off track.
I have had good luck using the net carb numbers in management. However, my carbs are low enough that the non-net carb number is still below 50. Rather than the glycemic index, perhaps a label indicating glycemic load would be useful for some. Another factor, I would look at is that a food may be relatively low in total carbs, but the percentage of carbs in the product may be very high. Thus, it is the wrong kind of food, marketed as low carb due to a skewed interpretation. I suspect the study quoted by Dr. Greger, that 75% of people saying they are low carb actually have failed to restrict carbohydrates, is correct. It may be the failure of low carb diet *cheaters* that has contributed to the decline. "Ignoramus30418" wrote in message ... I find it rather amusing. This company used to sell crappy products using a bogus calculation (of net carbs). Now it is, apparently, going to sell same trash products, using just as bogus calculation (glycemic index, according to the article). My guess is that the experts are wrong in guessing that this change is happening due to changing consumer dieting preferences towards different types of diets. I think that the real reason for this switch is that the net carb fraud became too notorious. Too few people believe in "net carbs", and this fraud will probably soon be banned by the government food agencies. Hence the preventive action by "Atkins nutritionals". Glycemic index calculation is even more nebulous than net carbs, and is very easy to fake and lie about without the fear of being successfully sued. Unlike carb counts, which are at least based on objective lab tests, "glycemic index" is based on "blood sugar response of human subjects". That response is variable and depends on the person. So, al they have to do to fudge the numbers is find the human subjects with the least response. For a pdf of a good critique of Glycemic index, check out http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/gi.pdf -- 223/175.7/180 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Cubit wrote:
Rather than the glycemic index, perhaps a label indicating glycemic load would be useful for some. People don't stay on diet period. It doesn't matter which one. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Ignoramus30418" wrote in message ... I find it rather amusing. This company used to sell crappy products using a bogus calculation (of net carbs). Now it is, apparently, going to sell same trash products, using just as bogus calculation (glycemic index, according to the article). Atkins Nutritionals had a very short life in the UK and for good reason. Back in 2002, after seeing the 'Diet Revolution' book everywhere, I was tempted to give it a try. After losing what seemed like a huge amount of weight during the first two induction weeks, I got excited at the prospect of losing weight fast & still be able to eat pancakes, flour tortillas, bread, etc. as sold by this company. The Atkins website had a whole lot of 'low carb' versions of 'normal' foods but none of those things were available in the UK at the time. The products were overpriced to start with & after adding international shipping their cost skyrocketted but one wishes to try new things... When the products that have cost their own weight in gold arrived, they turned out to be highly disappointing. Whether you could eat them and still lose (I mean weight, I did lose a lot of pounds of the other kind) wasn't even an issue, most of the stuff was inedible anyway. The 'maple syrup' was as thin as water, I could have done better with artificial flavouring, water & edulcorant (which is probably all there was in it). The bars tasted awful & had 240 cals each. The labels were full of 'hocus pocus' calculations regarding what was carbs & what was not & the figures quoted for F/C/P didn't add up to the number of calories. My guess is that the experts are wrong in guessing that this change is happening due to changing consumer dieting preferences towards different types of diets. I think that the real reason for this switch is that the net carb fraud became too notorious. Too few people believe in "net carbs", and this fraud will probably soon be banned by the government food agencies. Hence the preventive action by "Atkins nutritionals". It must be rather difficult to make something that looks, feels, and tastes like a carb but has no carbs at all. A lot of the Atkins stuff is faked using glycerine & sugar alcohols which can cause digestive problems. Glycemic index calculation is even more nebulous than net carbs, and is very easy to fake and lie about without the fear of being successfully sued. Unlike carb counts, which are at least based on objective lab tests, "glycemic index" is based on "blood sugar response of human subjects". That response is variable and depends on the person. So, al they have to do to fudge the numbers is find the human subjects with the least response. For a pdf of a good critique of Glycemic index, check out http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/gi.pdf Sounds too subjective to be measurable, let alone legally regulate the claims... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
wendy wrote: Cubit wrote: Rather than the glycemic index, perhaps a label indicating glycemic load would be useful for some. People don't stay on diet period. It doesn't matter which one. Are you a fatalist, faddist or fatist? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
warehouse wrote:
People don't stay on diet period. It doesn't matter which one. Are you a fatalist, faddist or fatist? What's the problem? It's true. People don't stay on diets. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
equinox wrote: warehouse wrote: People don't stay on diet period. It doesn't matter which one. Are you a fatalist, faddist or fatist? What's the problem? It's true. People don't stay on diets. Prove it. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article , equinox
wrote: warehouse wrote: People don't stay on diet period. It doesn't matter which one. Are you a fatalist, faddist or fatist? What's the problem? It's true. People don't stay on diets. Many people do not realize that one a diet "ends" and food intake and exercise are no loger observed, weight changes. Those who are determined to protect favorable changes DO continue to give attentioin to their diet. -- Diva ***** The Best Man For The Job Is A Woman |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
warehouse wrote:
equinox wrote: warehouse wrote: People don't stay on diet period. It doesn't matter which one. Are you a fatalist, faddist or fatist? What's the problem? It's true. People don't stay on diets. Prove it. Take a look on pubmed for a number of studies on the subject. Up to 95% of people gain back every pound they lost on their diet, plus most gain back more. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Article: The TRUTH About Low Carb Diets by Keith Klein | Steve | General Discussion | 24 | June 7th, 2004 09:05 PM |
Atkins Diet | cc0104007 | General Discussion | 19 | April 11th, 2004 02:55 AM |
Uncovering the Atkins diet secret | Diarmid Logan | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 142 | February 14th, 2004 02:26 PM |
Low carb diets | General Discussion | 249 | January 8th, 2004 11:15 PM | |
Was Atkins Right After All? | Ken Kubos | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 5 | November 22nd, 2003 11:01 PM |