"Bob (this one)" > wrote in message
...
> fireman wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 May 2005 10:11:56 -0400, Andrew White
>>
>>>"MrPepper11" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>New York Times
>>>>May 15, 2005
>>>>Low Carbs? Who Cares? Sugar Is Latest Supermarket Demon
>>>>By MELANIE WARNER
>>>>
>>>>Last summer, as the low-carbohydrate dieting craze began to fade,
>>>>executives at Stonyfield Farms decided they had to make a change to
>>>>their Moove Over Carbs yogurt.
>>>>
>>>>What they came up with was simple and painless: In January, they
>>>>pulled
>>>>Moove Over Carbs from the shelves, and this month, Moove Over Sugar
>>>>takes its place. Except for the name, the product remains exactly
>>>>the
>>>>same - sugars are, after all, also carbs. Both yogurts contain a
>>>>sugar
>>>>substitute and have at least 40 percent fewer calories than
>>>>Stonyfield
>>>>Farm's regular flavored varieties.
>>>>
>>>>Low-sugar has become the new low-carb.
>>>
>>>Great! If nothing else, at least Atkins finally woke up the dumb
>>>American consumers to the fact that low-fat is meaningless, if the
>>>food is stuffed chock-full of sugar!
>>
>> And now that the Adkins craze is dead, low-sugar doesn't mean it's ok
>> to eat lots of carbs...
>
> Actually, the Atkins "craze" isn't dead at all. What's dead are the
> crappy products that tried to capitalize on it. They didn't do what
> they claimed they did and were rejected wholesale.
>
> People say the low-carb thing is past and gone when the reality is
> that
> there are still many, many people doing it. What's not happening is
> the
> purchase of snacks and other foods being hustled as low in
> carbohydrates
> when they really aren't. Low-carbers didn't fall for the same kind of
> hype that low fat dieters bought. It's easier to track results with
> low carb.
>
> The fact that those products didn't succeed isn't an indication that
> the
> idea is dead; it's that the products didn't deliver what they promised
> and were quickly dropped. Pastas that tasted like old socks and felt
> like plastic. Chocolates made with maltitol that were ostensibly low
> carb but mostly succeeded in being wonderful laxatives. Cereals
> peddled
> as LC were low*er* than most cereals. But not low. Same with
> smoothies,
> frozen entrees, meal replacement bars, and a million other products.
> The
> real indicator is that the bread and pasta manufacturers are still
> reporting much lower sales than a few years ago.
>
> So people who are genuinely concerned with maintaining a lower carb
> intake just went back to whole foods. Fish, meats (relatively small
> portions), cheeses (full-fat or not), green beans, chicken, broccoli,
> tofu, cauliflower, black soy beans, cabbage, etc. These foods (and
> this
> is just the tip of a large culinary iceberg) combined with other
> ingredients higher in carbs still can be the elements of a reduced
> carb regimen.
>
> Not every dish has to be low in carbs, just every day.

Bob I always agree with your posts... and this one is spot
on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bob (this one) wrote:
>
>
> Actually, the Atkins "craze" isn't dead at all. What's dead are the
> crappy products that tried to capitalize on it. They didn't do what they
> claimed they did and were rejected wholesale.
>
> People say the low-carb thing is past and gone when the reality is that
> there are still many, many people doing it. What's not happening is the
> purchase of snacks and other foods being hustled as low in carbohydrates
> when they really aren't. Low-carbers didn't fall for the same kind of
> hype that low fat dieters bought. It's easier to track results with low
> carb.
>
> The fact that those products didn't succeed isn't an indication that the
> idea is dead; it's that the products didn't deliver what they promised
> and were quickly dropped. Pastas that tasted like old socks and felt
> like plastic. [snip]

I bought a box of low-carb penne pasta for 40¢ at Big Lot's, and it sat
on the shelf for months. I finally used the stuff to make a casserole
much like King Ranch Chicken, but with noodles instead of tortillas.

The low-carb noodles were made with soy flour and semolina, and were
brown when dry. They lightened when cooked, but were still kind of
gray-brown. They were perfect in this particular casserole because the
taste and texture was reminiscent of corn tortillas. I was lucky. They
would have been very dissapointing in an Italian pasta dish -- the
taste wasn't quite right and the texture was nothing at all like real pasta.

If they still have any next time I'm at Big Lot's, I'll buy another
couple of boxes to use just like I used that first box. I wouldn't pay
full price for them.

Best regards,
Bob

zxcvbob wrote:

> I bought a box of low-carb penne pasta for 40¢ at Big Lot's, and it sat
> on the shelf for months. I finally used the stuff to make a casserole
> much like King Ranch Chicken, but with noodles instead of tortillas.
>
> The low-carb noodles were made with soy flour and semolina, and were
> brown when dry. They lightened when cooked, but were still kind of
> gray-brown. They were perfect in this particular casserole because the
> taste and texture was reminiscent of corn tortillas. I was lucky. They
> would have been very dissapointing in an Italian pasta dish -- the
> taste wasn't quite right and the texture was nothing at all like real
> pasta.
>
> If they still have any next time I'm at Big Lot's, I'll buy another
> couple of boxes to use just like I used that first box. I wouldn't pay
> full price for them.

I tried the soy pasta once. I'd rather change the subject entirely than
do an approximation this distant.

I've tried several different brands/formulations for a piece I wrote.
The only one that came close was Dreamfields. And I still don't get
their business of somehow sequestering carbs. I've seen comments from
diabetics that indicate that their BG levels stay pretty even with it,
but I can't imagine the technology.

Pastorio