RE: Re: As with most diets.......

[Guest guest]

Sounds like an incorrect use of the term, or they are using the wrong term

for what they appear to mean to be " absorbed " carbohydrate. Errors in

reports published, both in print and online are not infrequently in error.

>From: " Rodney " <perspect1111@...>

>Reply-

>

>Subject: [ ] Re: As with most diets.......

>Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 23:54:49 -0000

>

>Hi folks:

>

>From 's link. Does anyone think this is correct?

>

>NPD Group (or the author of the piece, whoever that is) appears to

>believe that " ........ Refined carbohydrates are total carbs minus

>dietary fiber ....... " .

>

>So by this definition ANY carbs that the intestine ABSORBS are

>defined as being refined????? (Since 'dietary fiber', as I

>understand it, is defined as carbohydrates that are not absorbed).

>

>Is it me that is out to lunch here?

>

>This may be the explanation: " The NPD Group provides sales and

>marketing information for helping our clients understand their

>markets and optimize their business " .

>

>If they are right then all the calories anyone ever consumes from

>carbohydrates are 'refined'. So if one believes that one should

>avoid refined carbohydrates', one should avoid ALL carbohydrates?????

>

>Rodney.

>

>

> > People talk the talk, but....

> >

> > http://story.news./news?

> > tmpl=story & cid=1896 & e=2 & u=/nm/food_lowcarb_survey_dc

> >

> > http://snipurl.com/5ivx

> >

> >

> > Don't walk the walk!

>