Im glad that health canada has decided to ban low carb advertisement.
One thing its easy to find in our society is ignorance. Sure maybe its hard to manipulate your weight but most low carb diets advocate high fat levels which in turn hurt your heart. Many people hear post that canada is crazy but never stopped to think that they can still make low carb food but now they cant use bad advertising tactics to lure in over people who dont think to study something and do it properly.

Bottom line is people can do whatever they want this ban just forces people to know what their getting themselves into.

Real weight loss isn't about the amount of carbs its about calorie reduction calories in - calories out = weight loss/gain so lift weights excercise and cut saturated and trans fats to lose weight.

P.S. Carbs and Protein = 4.5 calories per gram Fat = 9 calories per gram

Ahhhh - a troll! Welcome... to the dark side

Gee, thanks for the rocket science. What would we do without your wisdom

Sure, I've lost close to 40lbs and feel better than ever, but I've seen the light thanks to your post and will promptly quit LCing and go stuff my face with some high carb/low fat cr*p...

1) Insulin and insulin resistance, not dietary fat, harms your heart. The link between saturated fat and CHD is rather weak. There is a much stronger link between hyperinsulinemia, insulin resistance, and heart attack.

2) Damaged fat can contribute to physiological decay and aging, this is true. It's not a good idea to eat a lot of trans fats, or to eat a lot of fried/burnt fat foods (oxidized lipids). It's also not a good idea to eat too many processed oils or PUFAs either, as they are fragile and prone to oxidizing even if taken raw (which creates the free radicals that damage cells).

However, even though damaged lipids have a deleterious effect on health, compared to what sugar does they are practically saintly. Sugar is a very hot burning fuel, it produces a ton of toxic byproducts. Even if you pluck a banana from a tree, no processing whatsoever, that sugar inside the body has a very high metabolic cost and a decidedly negative effect on your long term health.

Ironically, it's the fats which are saturated which are the most stable, and produce less toxic byproducts than other kinds of fats and sugar.

3) Weight loss might be simple on paper, but in reality it's very complex. For example, if "take in less calories than you are consuming" feels like starvation because you're hunger is all messed up from insulin, it's going to be hard to lose and maintain weight. Also some people have a metabolic advantage when they eat protein and fat, they are able to eat several hundred more calories a day and still lose weight just as fast as less food from a high carb diet.

It's great that you are able to maintain a healthy weight naturally on a high carb diet. I cannot. I cannot eat grains and lots of fruit and other sugar foods and be healthy and thin naturally. I need a high fat diet with carbs not exceeding protein percentage to do that.

You said a mouthful...

I know we shouldn't feed trolls, but sometimes, it's just irresistible.

By that logic all calories are equal and the ratio of protein/fat/carbs in my diet shouldn't matter.

I thought low carbing was a lifestyle and not some fad diet? I have tried just about every diet out there and was never able to stick to it because of the terrible hunger that would set in! Since beginning low carbing in August I feel better than I have in years, have lots more energy, am exercising daily, and am eating a healthy diet of veggies, meats, etc... and will soon enjoy fruits again? So, what you are saying, is that I need to go back to the way I ate before? I had veggies maybe a few times a year before adopting this new lifestyle! Why on eath would I give all this up for pop tarts, pizza, cakes (from scratch), and all those yummy high carb items that made me fat? I do look forward to having those every great once in a while and in moderation, but go back to them on a daily basis! No way! I guess I'll just have to ruin my health with salads, turkey (am allergic to chicken), veggies galore, steaks, shrimp, and those yummy pecan tussies! Gosh, don't get me thinking about those! Until you have walked in our shoes you cannot begin to understand the benefits of low carbing! Did I mention I never get hungry and that I have lost 21 pounds and 24 inches in a month! What was I thinking!

Hmmm. Are there any forums for high carb low fat low calorie starvation diets? I wannna go be a troll on those forums and tell how eating 20-30 grams a day of SATURATED fat actually IMPROVED my lipid profile and helped me lose weight!

No. Wait, I forgot -- I lift weights and exercise. That must be the ONLY reason I'm healthy. The eating must just be a fluke.

oh, and the immense benefits low carb has on stabilising and controlling my diabetes must be in my imagination...

i am not entirely opposed to limiting 'low carb' claims on products. i think products are required to list the carb content and fibre content anyway, so a bit of simple math is all it takes to calculate the 'net carbs'.

in the unregulated world (as it is now), you have products with 'low carb' packaging slapped on them, which are not low carb at all, or only low carb if eaten in ridiculously small portions. coke's new product C2 is being advertised as lc friendly, it has 12 grams of pure sugar carbs per 240ml. that's one small glass of pop (less than a single can).that's a little more than 1/3 of my carb intake for the day with no redeming nutritional value whatsoever - NONE. this product should not be allowed to make health claims of any kind. it should not be allowed to even pretend to be part of a healthy low carb lifestyle.

similar problems have existed with 'low fat' packaging as well (low fat cookies that you can only eat one of, low fat yogurt that is in a container half the size of a regular portion, low fat potatoe chips - if you only eat 10 of them...).

in my perfect world, all packaged food would list the macronutrients (fat, protein, carbohyrdate) and break them down (sat/mono/poly/trans, fibre/sugar/artificial sweetener....) if possible. I don't like the % of daily requirement stats for nutrients, because they tend to be based on a 2000 calorie/day diet, which i think is misleading to people who require more and less sustenance and they use the high carb food pyramid as the basis for it.

just my 2 cents

I could care less what the "marketing/packaging" label says. I read the ingredients, and the nutrients on the back label. I don't buy something just because the package is saying, "I'm OKAY" because I know better.

Remember about 10-15 years ago when marketing first caught on to the whole "Low Fat" craze? Everything from a can of green beans to a package of candy had the label "LOW FAT" on it. (and still does) That has always annoyed me so much. Or what about the “No cholesterol” labels on the can of fruit or vegetables? Like DUH people. But they fell for it, and bought more, more, MORE, blindly pouring copious amounts of refined carbs and refined sugars into their systems because the label said it's “okay” for them to do so. Forget about all the research out there that tells us sugar causes tooth decay, cancer, and makes you FAT... Do you think that people researched the facts of these claims before digging into their favorite candy or what have you? Hell no.

Honestly, it annoys the crap out me that the US has jumped all over the Atkin’s craze in a marketing sense, because I know what that’s all about, Money. The “Lowfatters are still at it too. Just yesterday I noticed that Lays has a few new low fat chip products that they are pushing. A snack company that is pushing the health benefits of eating chips, cause hey, it’s “lowfat.” Riiiiiiiight. So sad that Frito Lay can take away the guilt with a word on their bag that means nothing but “Snacking is okay” “Pig out, it’s low fat!” Well you know what? People are getting fatter and fatter here in the US and Canada, and it’s not from a LC regimen! You know why? Well, for one, potatoes = SUGAR!!!

Now that it's finally out of the bag that SUGAR/CARBS are actually what's bad for you, and people are taking notice, and showing the real results of these claims, you annoying skeptics with no basis for your attacks come on here and harass people who the LC lifestyle has worked for, to do what? Defend your precious sugar? Yeah, sugar is yummy, but it’s poison for your system, EVEN NATURAL SUGAR!

Tell ya what, until you have tried LC eating, for at least two weeks, everything YOU say is just ignorant, critical, and irrelevant. Obviously the ones who are sugar addicted can't handle giving up their addiction to the point of having nothing better to do than come here and harass cyber strangers to make themselves feel self righteous. Spare us, or come back when you have something worthwhile to chip in. (hehehe)

Meanwhile, let’s read an article from the Canadian Institute for health information!

Overweight and Obesity in Canada: A Population Health Perspective

"Rising rates of obesity in Canada over the past 20 years have significant public health implications. Applying a population health lens to the problem of obesity may provide insight into potential means of addressing obesity and its determinants through a wide variety of policy options. The paper synthesizes the current state of knowledge related to: 1) the nature and extent of the problem of obesity, 2) the impact of obesity as a case for prevention and control, 3) a population health perspective on the determinants of obesity, and 4) effectiveness of strategies for addressing obesity and its determinants. The paper also identifies priorities for future policy-relevant research and presents the author's options for promising interventions for reducing population obesity levels."

http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispP..._page=GR_1130_E

"Ongoing data captured through a surveillance system are necessary to monitor risk factors in the population. The most recent national level data for risk factors that require personal measures such as blood pressure, blood sugar for diabetes, blood lipids, and weight and height for obesity, are over ten years old. This limits our ability to assess the impact of prevention initiatives. In addition, better data are needed on nutrition and the dietary habits of Canadians." – Ten years… Hmmmm, sounds like Canada needs to put their money where their mouth is.

http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispP...artdiseasesum_e

You have to give it to the bottom feeder/trolls out there. Their goal is to try and bad mouth LC but what they are doing is making more converters to the LC life. Once a person hears their misinformation then finds out the truth for themselves through reasearch they become stronger in their conviction in losing the weight the LC way.
Just my 2 cents

Although I kind of agree about the advertising. Many (most?) of those "low carb" products that have recently come out aren't low carb at all. Granted they are "lower carb" than the original version - like that Coke product with "half the carbs and calories of Coke" Like that's a good idea.

Now that they can't claim it, maybe more people will stick with "real food" including butter and making their own low carb versions from the great recipes here. I don't feel that I can trust commercial makers to keep the carbs as low as I want.

It must be my imagination that LC eating has made ME be in charge of my eating, and not a binge eater any more.

I'm not sure what it's like up there in Canada, but here in the USA most people with an IQ in the double digits refuse to purchase food ( or any other product, for that matter) just because an advertisement says to. There are laws about truth in advertising and labeling is regulated by the FDA. How hard is it to read the lable and decide for yourself whether or not this food is right for you? Can you say DUH!?

Sad to say, if any of that was true, there would be millions of people in Canada and the USA (and Australia) with IQs in the single digits, and a whole heap of advertising agencies and their high sugar/carb clients would be broke. Advertising is effective, whether you consciously believe each message or not. How else would the substantial majority of the population be convinced that complex carbohydrates are not only good for you, they are an essential part of your diet?

Unfortunately, it is the percentage of people who can read nutritional labels and put that information to useful effect, that is in the single digits. As for "truth in advertising" - when did the FDA or any other regulatory body last prevent an advertiser claiming the supposed heath benefits of high carb cereals and other junk foods?

Cheers,

Malcolm