low carb wine

Salut/Hi George,

le/on 30 May 2004 06:26:35 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

Whatever are you talking about?

Where is the wine from? What is meant by low carb?

Have a heart, George, we don't ALL live next door to you.

Salut/Hi Max Hauser,

le/on Sun, 30 May 2004 13:12:34 -0700, tu disais/you said:-

I followed the Atkins initiation diet rigorously for two weeks. At the end of it I had gained about 2 pounds. So it doesn't work for everyone. A fairly recent broadcast in the Uk showed that (grossly oversimplifying) in fact the scientific basis of the Atkins diet is so much hocus. It isn't true. What actually happens when it works for people is that going into ketolysis depresses the appetite, and so you eat less. That's all.

Grin!

Ian Hoare wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Well, Ian, considering that CGgeorgecox posted that "...the company said in the release that it already has sold more than 100,000 cases to retailers such as Wal-Mart, Target and Rite-Aid."

The kind of people who buy their wine from Walmart, deserve what they get (IMHO). ;) heh.

So - what will they call this "wine"? Anyone? Bill? We can have some fun with this...

Can you point me in the direction of these "Diabetiker" wines, s'il vous plait? One of my dining buddies is diabetic, and I'm trying (desperately) to wean her from "Chardonnay, only", danke...

"Those people"?

d:D

"Ian Hoare" in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

To clarify, in my comments I was not referring specifically to "Atkins" or his diets. One exponent of a low-carb-related regimen was named "Atkins." I have not read his work. He (and those who have turned his name into a buzzword) represent a particular (fashionable) interpretation of a broader set of principles and practices. These practices do enjoy serious, informed professional medical support. (Should existing theory and data prove mistaken, we will understand more. This is not the same thing as the people I'm seeing, who argue back and forth in mutual unawareness of even existing theory.)

I don't assume that my individual experiences apply to all mankind (another current fashion), but here they are. Some years before the current US fad, my personal physician, reasonably senior and respected in his field (he has US board certifications in internal medicine and cardiology), recommended restricting carbo intake to shed moderate unneeded body fat. He handed me a list of glycemic weights (not phrased as such) for common foods, and suggested keeping the total of my intake, weighted according to the list, below a certain limit. (Not zero.) I did so and steadily lost, in a few weeks, some 10 kg. I occasionally resume the regimen if necessary. I also read a bit on the general subject; for background. One friend, seriously obese, shed some 50 kg (110 pounds) this way in the middle 1990s. Every co-worker and friend I know of who has tried a sensible, usually medically-supervised carbohydrate restriction has been able to lose body fat steadily.

(Most of them, by the way, did not confuse restricting carbos, or glycemic index, with "eating a lot of fats," another distracting irrelevance by which some current talk clouds the picture.)

My serious condolences. Your regimen may not have been mine. And obviously we are individuals. This issue is keen among people attentive to food and cooking. (In the US I'd be glad to introduce you to my physician if you wish. He also happens to be a collector of fine wines.)

On the matter of the "low-carb wine" I see disagreement! Salut ! -- Max

Typo error correcion.

"Max Hauser" in news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com...

Should have been "no disagreement." WAS in fact "no disagreement" shortly before sending. How it got garbled, I don't know.

By the way, on a related subject -- someone asked about alcohol itself as a calorie source. I can't speak to its insulin effect, but:

According to Goodman and Gilman, along with familiar effects on the central nervous system (CNS), ethyl (wine) alcohol as a food is "a ready, albeit expensive, source of energy that is utilized more rapidly than most foods because it is quickly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract and requires no preliminary digestion," and it can end up as fat. The average human will metabolize about 10-15 ml per hour, and it is intake above this rate that causes alcohol in the blood and the consequent familiar CNS effects.

(Goodman and Gilman is a standard general medical pharmacology text in the US and Canada; I recommend it to everyone for their reference libraries if they lack it; past editions sell cheaply on the used market as it is a common textbook.)

Salut/Hi Cggeorgecox,

le/on 30 May 2004 21:19:25 GMT, tu disais/you said:-

They aren't as you may have read from subsequent posts. But you may also have read in this thread, that the concept of a "low carb wine" is only slightly less misleading than a "low carbohydrate cooking oil" or a "low fat jelly". Dry wines don't have much significant carbohydrate content anyway.

They DO have alcohol, of course, and the alcohol burns in the body to give calories which have to be added to the total calorie count of a meal. But only sweet wines contain carbohydrates in significant amounts. To give an example, A Brut champagne may contain up to (iirc) 7.5g/l sugar. For a 5 oz (150 mls) "serving" that works out to about 1.2 gms - but this is the MAXIMUM dose of added sugar in a Brut. many have less, and a Brut absolut has none.

Isn't all vodka zero sugar?

Humph I agree, it's not a comproimise, it's a total con.

The "Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution" was the first such diet manual I'd ever read (much less purchased), and I was particularly interested in the diet's view of alcohol consumption. That book describes the effect as follows:

"The body burns alcohol for fuel when alcohol is available. So when it is burning alcohol, your body will not burn fat. This does not stop weight loss; it simply postpones it." (pg. 181)

I consumed no alcohol during the initial two-week "induction" phase of the Atkins diet -- but then promptly restored a daily glass or two (or three...) of wine!

Again regarding the new "low-carb" wines -- the book also contains a table of carb contents (pg. 492), which indicates that a 4-ounce glass of red wine contains 2.0 grams total carbohydrate; white wine has only 0.9 grams (!)

Best Regards,

Bart

That is a good point.

Expanding on Ians point advertising Low Carb Beef is redundant since beef is low carb. So let advertise low carb broiled seafood. Oops, that already is too.

So when someone buy a dry wine it is already mostly low carb.

Redundancy is meant to educate in these cases.

I am a 10 year low carb person. Why? 10 years diabetes. But one needs to limit fat, eat in moderation, don't drink to much alcohol---the all you can eat prophecy is not the new atkins...that was the original atkins diet.

Last week on a show medical dieticians followed two separate control groups over 3 years. The people that watched what they ate, ate in moderation a balanced meat at the end of 1 year lost the same as the low carb Atkins, Sugarbusters and South Beach dieters. However at 3 years the Atkins had a very high % of persons that gained back vs those that learned to modify behaviour.

compromises.

I wouldn't be quite that dismissive, Ian. The object of these "low carb" diets is to suppress blood sugar levels such that ketosis must be induced and one begins to metabolize fat to produce blood sugar (glucose) through the tricarboxlic acid cycle. That's solid, if somewhat extreme, biochemistry -- the sort of thing that's more common in camels than in humans [digression: did you know that that's how camels get their water? They metabolize the fat in their hump to produce water]. There's also a growing body of science regarding satiation: the signals that suppress appetite do seem to be derived from certain fats, so a diet high in simple carbohydrates may not trigger those signals. However, the Atkins diet in particular is on shaky biochemical ground when not placing limits on fat intake. There's a very solid body of data that shows that diets high in complex carbohydrates and low in animal fats result in lower body mass indices than other diets. Additionally, there's little data on the long term effects of being in constant ketosis. The production of glucose from fat is far from perfect (that's why you can smell acetone on the breath of people in ketosis) and the various byproducts may have adverse long-term health effects. Humans were not designed to live off stored fat for long periods of time. Additionally, the brain is very sensitive to blood sugar levels and people on those "low carb" diets report some rather disturbing cognitive problems early on in the diets.

HTH Mark Lipton

Alas, there's a long tradition of that sort of misleading dietary information here. Many food products have for years boasted of "no cholesterol" long after it was firmly established that serum cholesterol levels have little to nothing to do with dietary intake of cholesterol (that's why eggs and lobster are no longer verboten). Many foods touted as "low fat" are almost entirely sugar! The list goes on and on.

"No one ever went broke underestimating the dietary wisdom of the American public"

Mark Lipton