Erythritol & Maltitol

[loriv19]

Here we go again. Another question but for me this time.

DH bought some products containing the above mentioned ingredients.

Steel's Vanilla Flavor Nature sweet sugar free sweetener
23 calories 0 from fat
11g carbs, 0g sugars, 11g maltitol, 0g fiber Wrapper has printed on it Net Effective Carbs = 0

Sugar free "Twist" Hazelnut Chocolate Spread
190 calories 130 from fat
19g carbs, 1g fiber, >1g insoluble fiber, 0g sugars 16g maltitol

Erythritol 100% pure natural sweetener ( according to the packaging )
0 caloies 0 from fat (what do you know )
4g carbs, 0g sugars, 4g sugar Alcohol

From my understanding of the net carb, you take the carbs and subtract the fiber, sugar alcohols. With these products do you subtract the Maltitol too?

May be useful for people with diabetes because it does not raise blood glucose or insulin levels
I picked this statement from http://www.caloriecontrol.org/maltitol.html

* All labels suggest that cexcessive consumption may cause a laxative effect. Sounds YUMMY.

I've decided not to try any of these products until I get some feedback and see the effects that DH experiences.

[cdfhstar7]

I don't subtract anything except fiber to determine net-carbs.

[ttdriver]

Um, Chris should be preachin' shortly ...

Betty

[Chris]

Yep. I'm gonna be late for work, so I'll just copy and paste from a post from yesterday. I know your DH meant well and was trying to help out your efforts, but if you're smart you'll throw all those items in the bin!

Here's the post:

Okay, here comes the post from the guy they used to call "The Preacher" because I wanted to damn all sugar alcohols to the fires of ****!

The reason that maltitol causes few gastric problems is because it has a glycemic index of 52 (not much left for the critters in the gut by the time it gets there). A baked potato has a glycemic index of only 60! Since gastric index is based on pure glucose having 100, you can see that maltitol is already half way there. If anyone tells you that you don't have to count those carbs, they're just fooling themselves. The only advantage that sugar alcohols have is that they don't tend to cause as much of a blood sugar spike as real sugars -- which makes them great for diabetics who don't have a weight problem, but useless for us.

Even the low glycemic ones, like lactitol, which has an index of 7, are really worthless. First of all, they cause the most gastric upset. But, they still have to be counted. Why? Well, spinach, for example, has a glycemic index of near zero, but nowhere are we told that we don't have to count the carbs in spinach. Why should the sugar alcohols be any different?!!

Avoid anything containing surgar alcohols like the plague!

[Chris]

Read my post "A very interesting article" for more information.

[2big4mysize]

dugar alcohols fall in those magical mythical counting noncounting carbs some folk with low metabolic resistance and a high CCLL can handle them occaisonally and ithers cant at all. Don't mess with your Atkins controls you have worked so hard to get. Low carb junk food is still junk food.

One thing to note is the Erythritol came from stuff kidney docs were using to test kidney function and 98% of the stuff they injected in the blood stream would be peed out in healthy kidneys in 24 hrs so you do absorb it and it floats arond in your bloodstream and then your kidneys filter most of it out. uh??? Do you want to load your blood stream with a compound that is just going to take up space.

Fiber by definition can not be metabolixed in any way by a human from mouth to rearend so subtraction that makes sense. The manufactures of the SAs and the low carb food folk tried to get the FDA to allow them to call SAs fiber but the FDA said Nope they didn't meet the requirements

Happy low carbing.