PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Andrea Hughett <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 1 Feb 2009 16:47:10 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
--- On Sun, 2/1/09, Keith Thomas <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> 
> Dagoba brand 100% cocoa chocolate bars are sugar-free:


So they say. So they say. On the other hand, the nutrition information on their 87% bar doesn't add up (protein x4 + carbs x4 + fat x9 = total calories) any way I figure it (counting fiber calories, subtracting fiber calories, rounding error...). So I wonder what else they have wrong...

Actually, a number of different exceedingly dark chocolates (84-100%) showed widely disparate nutritional information, and several did not add up, although the Dagoba was the furthest off. Once I get my bg stabilized, I intend to do my own glycemic index studies on the various chocolates, as that is really what I most care about anyhow.

Speaking of stevia, not only are there disturbing reports about its effects on blood sugar, but several brands and the new Zevia soda include undisclosed erythritol: not an encouraging development.

Andrea




      

ATOM RSS1 RSS2