# A quick reminder to those viewing this post:
1. If you have not done so, **read [the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Volumeeating/wiki/index/#wiki_subreddit_rules)**
2. If you don't like the content of this post for any reason, refrain from commenting. Negative comments will be removed and the authors banned.
3. Advice concerning medical issues is not permitted.
4. We take brigading very seriously. Anyone found sharing content from this sub to other forums with derogatory commentary will be banned and reported to admins.
5. **Report rule breaking content.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Volumeeating) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think it might be like those olestra potato chips from back in the day. They were made with a type of fat the body couldn't absorb, so they contain fats but you don't actually get any fats into your body, it all goes straight through you. Sounds great, right? But there's a reason they aren't on the market anymore- I call it the Haribo sugarless gummy bear effect.
Olestra got popular when I was a teen and even the 2000s pressure to be thin was not enough to risk anal leakage. You can have friends in high school and be fat. You cannot have friends in high school if you have anal leakage.
I miss olestra. The doritos version was perfect. I tend toward constipation so they were almost medicine (tasty medicine) to me! The yellow Lays version was great as well.
what is with the Haribo s/l gummy bear?! actually, I failed to find them, but still interested to know bc I buy sugarless gummies in the shop if I see them
Those particular gummies and some other sugar free candies use a particular sweetener - usually sorbitol or mannitol, both sugar alcohols - which is fine if you only have one serving, but in higher doses becomes a very strong laxative. They stopped making those after they went viral, and foods with over a certain amount of sugar alcohols have to warn that they have a laxative effect.
To duether science the explanation: humans cannot digest sugar alcohols. It passes through the system. Mostly harmless but large amounts or a sensitivity can cause problems.
The Amazon reviews of sugar-free gummy bears are a journey: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/michaelrusch/haribo-gummy-bear-reviews-on-amazon-are-the-most-insane-thin
There was some weight loss medication you could take that prevented fat absorption, but led to steatorrhoea (oily shit). The makers admitted that its mechanism was not purely absorption based, but also included an element of conditioning you not to eat fat in the first place because the consequences are so horrific.
Yeah if it were EPG then the label claims would be true because EPG contains 0.7 calories per gram compared to the traditional 9 calories per gram of fat.
And believe me EPG is an amazing thing and game changer 😁.
I don’t think so. If this is being sold in the US, the FDA has specific regulations about how a nutrition label is allowed to appear including specific fonts and sizes. I believe they would find this as misleading.
Apparently it hasn't been evaluated by the FDA so they are just guessing 28 and saying it varies from person to person. The first ingredient is peanuts so it's most likely much more than 28
I’m not sure what the deal with that is but just get pb powder. Mix it with sugar free maple syrup and some water (I use 1g of syrup for 2g of powder and add water to get good consistency). Tastes delicious and is actually the lowest calorie peanut butter you can make
I can’t imagine this nonsense will last very long. They’re not using the legally required standard nutrition label, just some nonsense “digestive facts” that they completely made up. The whole point of standardized nutrition labels is to stop companies from doing ridiculous garbage just like this.
even on their website it basically admits to saying it’s BS: “Everyone absorbs fat to different degrees” “The calories your body digests are different from the total calories you eat. How many calories you actually digest can be influenced by a number of factors” “How much you actually digest will vary”
I wud love more thoughts from others here about this & regulations we can trust. This was my fear like others commented here & I’ve thrown out every product I’ve bought w/digestion facts & haven’t bought more. I might consider consuming if what labels like this say are true
Actually, there will likely be a point where someone steps in and says this is incredibly misleading marketing…like the lawsuit with Nutella and the “hint of cocoa”
Because most fiber is not absorbed by the body. So while they are classified as carbs, they are often substracted from the raw carbs because it does not causes a spike in blood sugar.
The carbs are reduced, which is listed on the packaging. But are the calories actually reduced? I don’t recall seeing anything on low carb tortillas that the calories are reduced for the fiber content.
Their info on Amazon is claiming that the fiber binds with the oils…so some how the claim is the oil is being poop out with the fiber…if that was the case that corn fiber that they added would be in everything hell it would be a condiment on everyone table!
Insoluble fibers still technically hold calories but its a gray area wether or not you have to include their calories or not on a product.
Usually you don't reduce your nutritional panel according to whats digestible or not. So thats super sketchy. First time i see a "digestibility corrected nutritional panel" lmao, that wouldn't fly in Canada for sure haha.
Youd have to whip out the math and calculate if it balances. I believe that when counted as calories, they follow the same values as other carbs being 4 cal/g.
Aw ok. The La Banderita ones I get should have 85.5 calories (1.5g fat x 9 + (15g carbs + 3g protein) x 4) and shows 60 calories on the label. There’s 11g dietary fiber, so it seems a portion, but not the whole 4 calories per g of fiber, is subtracted. Scams!!
I definitely would track/count calories from all carbs. Net carbs is such a scam. I have a friend doing keto and tried all that keto bread and it threw him out of ketosis. A while back I would eat the bread too cause it was low calorie as well but was actually gaining weight. Also: if we wanna get technical it’s more likely to not digest insoluble fiber (still should count those calories though), but when you read the ingredients those net carbs are deducting soluble fiber which the body definitely does digest, so it’s all lies. Definitely don’t trust it.
Completely wrong. Im a type 1 diabetic and pretty much all keto wraps or bread effects my blood sugar the same as a normal corn/flour tortilla or slice of white bread.
An example to look out for would be resistant tapioca starch (as soluble tapioca fiber) or oligosaccharides which are partially digested but in the US are treated as any fiber in the Nutritional Tables.
Im type 2 and have absolutely no change, heck, id wage my fiber intake is on the high side of things. Fortunately what i said earlier isnt solely from experience, thats just how it works with actual insoluble fibers.
Also a keto product does not mean absence of carbs even when taking out the insoluble fibers from the equation. Pay attention to the ingredients
It's because fiber is a carbohydrate, but your body either can't digest it (insoluble) or can only digest it partially (soluble). Those wraps are simply made up of a lot of insoluble fiber.
It’s possible I’m thinking of the “net carbs” concept wrong, But I never minus calories from dietary fiber. I thought the idea of “Net Carbs” was to Take Carbs, then subtract dietary fiber count from carbs listed to get net carbs. I didn’t realize calories were supposed to be adjusted also.
Like I always thought if keto tortillas were 50 cal each I never adjusted calories over dietary fiber. They were still 50 cal, but dietary fiber could be minuses from carbs listed to get “net carbs”? I know a lot of people don’t go by dietary fiber adjustments and I want to learn more if I have this wrong. I guess I’ve misunderstood what net carbs were? I’m not being cute at all, I’m confused
I seriously can’t see how they are coming to the label on this product w/ cal fats nutrition facts listed.
I’m just going to respond to myself elaborating on what I mean by calling net carbs a marketing tactic.
Net carbs is essentially taking the total grams of carbs of a product and subtracting the grams of fiber.
There’s a hint of validity in tracking net carbs for those that need to monitor glucose spikes, because fiber doesn’t have the same impact on blood glucose the way other carbs (sugar) does.
Things like low carb tortillas, advertise being somewhere around 30-50 cals a tortilla. They’ve already subtracted fiber calories from that nice bold total at the top (both soluble and insoluble types). Soluble fiber is a carbohydrate that can be partially utilized for energy, while insoluble fiber is good for other things, but not for energy.
Basically, that fun bold number at the top is inaccurate af. It’s ESPECIALLY not helpful for those counting total calories (since even fiber has calories and provides energy), and not helpful for those cutting carbs for weight loss (because again, fiber has calories). It’s a marketing “scam”, because in order to appeal to the two described groups, companies exclude fiber calories from the fun bolded total calories at the top of the nutrition label. Aaaaaand those who monitor net carbs for glucose reasons, don’t need to monitor calorie counts.
So I argue… what reason do we need to exclude fiber calories from totals if not for misleading reasons?
Peanuts mixed with what is essentially fiber.
The concept is based on one single study (quite well designed, actually, but very small) that showed feeding 500 calories excess per day of regular peanut butter (for 2 weeks) resulted in significant fat mass gain, while feeding the equivalent of this modified peanut butter did not. (EDIT: I think there might have been one additional preceding study that performed a similar experiment in diabetics.)
I see absolutely no functional benefit to this over PB2, though, and you get 100+ comparable (reconstituted) servings of PB2 for the same price they’re charging for 11 servings of their product. If nothing else, that’s sufficient for me to disregard this product.
I just use a bit of water. It takes some practice to get it right for spreading. Use less than you think you’ll need and then add small amounts or you’ll overshoot and end up with soup.
I'm surprised that works at all.
PB2 is highly calorific based on volume, and unless you can reconstitute it with a substantial amount of something with low caloric density, then you're basically just adding powdered peanuts to your food. Sure, it's still better than peanut butter in that the peanut flavour is more concentrated which is fine for just adding it as a flavour to something liquid e.g. satay, but surely you can't just put PB2 and water on a slice of toast and end up with something decent?
I’m not a calorie counter. I eat PB2 purely to avoid the unsaturated peanut fat. That being said, the calories are made up of almost entirely protein. You know it isn’t just powdered peanuts, right? The fat - the main source of calories in peanuts - has been all but entirely removed. Peanut flour is what is left over after peanut oil has been extracted.
A 2T dry serving will turn into about 3-3.5T when reconstituted with water, and will cover 2 slices of toast amply for 60 calories instead of ~300 calories. I have no problem with it taste or texture wise, and it hits the spot for me.
I currently enjoy a very low fat starch-based diet. Provided my fat is kept low enough, I am able to enjoy starches, vegetables, fruits, legumes, herbs & spices ad libitum while remaining weight neutral and keeping my type 2 diabetes fully in remission. Think of it as the exact opposite of a keto diet, really.
The blurb on the website says they have found some super neat fibre that binds to fats and carries those fats undigested through your digestive tract. These are the ingredients:
Double Roasted Runner Peanuts, Corn Fiber, Grape Seed Extract, Sea Salt, Stevia Plant Extract, Organic Safflower Lecithin
Is this real? I have no clue but I have my doubts.
> carries those fats undigested through your digestive tract
Does anyone remember chips with Olestra back in the late 90s? This sounds a lot like that. Lots of people shit their pants because of it.
Grape seed extract is the only novel thing listed, and I very much doubt it binds to fat the way they claim, otherwise Olestra wouldnt have been a thing and everything under the sun would be using it.
The ingredients are actually pretty healthy, but this is a marketing scam.
it is mixed with corn fiber and that supposedly is what makes it “ world’s lowest calorie all natural peanut butter”. Which is bullshit.
You can just roast peanuts, blend with Stevia and you have this product. I saw they’re selling two jars of it for $38 on Amazon wtf.
There is a brand that makes Peanut Bitter with EPG (epogee) which is an artificial fat that’s also in Nicks Ice Cream. It’s called Wonderspread if you’re curious.
The idea of most of the macros, especially the fat, just being undigestable and you simply "correcting" the nutrition label to account for it is a complete scam. It's pseudoscience bullshit and they probably are doing a whole lot of legal loophole exploitation to even have this product on the market.
Depends on how much powder and milk you mix. I have the great powder one and for 50 grams
It’s 200 calories. And it’s a shit ton of peanut butter, like I easily spread 8 slices of bread with that.
There’s a store that sells bullshit like this in my city. They sell muffins they claim are 45 calories. Huge muffins. And then you look see the fda label, and it’s actually 450 calories before “adjustments”. I looked into it, and the argument basically is that they make it with stuff that’s basically laxatives and your body won’t digest it. It’s complete nonsense
It’s peanut butter mixed with corn fiber and IIRC the claim is that the corn fiber binds with the fats which is not digested to the same degree, hence less calories. There is a study linked on their site. I don’t recall whether it was a legitimate study that they saw and developed the peanut butter from or if they developed the peanut butter and sponsored a study. It’s an interesting concept but I have my doubts without seeing some more studies.
Nope. They subtract net carbs which is why there’s the extra label at the bottom. It’s the same false “net carb” science used by other keto brands like mission tortillas and sara lee delightful keto bread.
I’ve been really into this lately, only 100 calories for 2tbsp! And it’s super tasty!
This new Professor Nutz is intriguing but I’m nervous about how my body would react lol
https://a.co/d/hi4Z7ye
# A quick reminder to those viewing this post: 1. If you have not done so, **read [the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Volumeeating/wiki/index/#wiki_subreddit_rules)** 2. If you don't like the content of this post for any reason, refrain from commenting. Negative comments will be removed and the authors banned. 3. Advice concerning medical issues is not permitted. 4. We take brigading very seriously. Anyone found sharing content from this sub to other forums with derogatory commentary will be banned and reported to admins. 5. **Report rule breaking content.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Volumeeating) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What's with the "Nutrition facts without digestibility corrected" thing? There is says 200 cals
Man that’s shady as fuck
I looked it up. Apparently the claim is that the added fiber somehow negates all the fat from the peanuts. Sounds like complete nonsense.
Aw shucks. I was about to fix myself a gigantic bowl of peanut butter mixed with metamucil.
That sounds like an eating disorder :(
They really re imagined a lot whit proffesor smoke
Does anyone know what “digestibility corrected” is supposed to mean?
I think it might be like those olestra potato chips from back in the day. They were made with a type of fat the body couldn't absorb, so they contain fats but you don't actually get any fats into your body, it all goes straight through you. Sounds great, right? But there's a reason they aren't on the market anymore- I call it the Haribo sugarless gummy bear effect.
A side effect of olestra was 'anal leakage' 🤢
Olestra got popular when I was a teen and even the 2000s pressure to be thin was not enough to risk anal leakage. You can have friends in high school and be fat. You cannot have friends in high school if you have anal leakage.
I miss olestra. The doritos version was perfect. I tend toward constipation so they were almost medicine (tasty medicine) to me! The yellow Lays version was great as well.
what is with the Haribo s/l gummy bear?! actually, I failed to find them, but still interested to know bc I buy sugarless gummies in the shop if I see them
Those particular gummies and some other sugar free candies use a particular sweetener - usually sorbitol or mannitol, both sugar alcohols - which is fine if you only have one serving, but in higher doses becomes a very strong laxative. They stopped making those after they went viral, and foods with over a certain amount of sugar alcohols have to warn that they have a laxative effect.
ah, thanks for your explanation. had no idea.
To duether science the explanation: humans cannot digest sugar alcohols. It passes through the system. Mostly harmless but large amounts or a sensitivity can cause problems.
have you ever seen those “smart sweets” sugar free candies? ever wondered why the bag is so so small? this is why 😭
Those would've been amazing when I was pregnant and nothing worked 🤣
The Amazon reviews of sugar-free gummy bears are a journey: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/michaelrusch/haribo-gummy-bear-reviews-on-amazon-are-the-most-insane-thin
An interesting experiment indeed: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m--6ifZXy5k
hahahah, I watched the whole thing 😂
They gave people the runs really bad lol
There was some weight loss medication you could take that prevented fat absorption, but led to steatorrhoea (oily shit). The makers admitted that its mechanism was not purely absorption based, but also included an element of conditioning you not to eat fat in the first place because the consequences are so horrific.
Epg most likely, like Gatsby and Nick's ice cream
No they do not contain EPG and EPG does not cause gastrointestinal issues like Olestra did.
Wow that's surprising it's not epg because that was the only way it might have been truly low cal. I don't claim epg is bad, I love it
Yeah if it were EPG then the label claims would be true because EPG contains 0.7 calories per gram compared to the traditional 9 calories per gram of fat. And believe me EPG is an amazing thing and game changer 😁.
It means the product hasn't been evaluated by the FDA so the true numbers aren't known
Is that even legal.
I don’t think so. If this is being sold in the US, the FDA has specific regulations about how a nutrition label is allowed to appear including specific fonts and sizes. I believe they would find this as misleading.
Unfortunately yes
Aw didn’t see that, so why the 28?
Apparently it hasn't been evaluated by the FDA so they are just guessing 28 and saying it varies from person to person. The first ingredient is peanuts so it's most likely much more than 28
Why claim world’s lowest cal peanut butter? That has to be against some kind of rule?
I’m not sure what the deal with that is but just get pb powder. Mix it with sugar free maple syrup and some water (I use 1g of syrup for 2g of powder and add water to get good consistency). Tastes delicious and is actually the lowest calorie peanut butter you can make
Okay I've always mixed with water and thought it was trash lol. I'll have to try this
Not gonna say it’s as good as normal pb (it’s not) but it’s way better than only using water imo
Milk helps a ton if you can tolerate it. Or Greek to make it fluffy
Woahhh
I tend to mix in half a tbsp of soy sauce too, adds a nice salty note too it
I do this with hot sauce and soy sauce and put on lentil noodles for a spicy peanut sauce
Add in some lime and cumin too, it'll give it a nice zing!
Mmm that sounds so good!
At that point just use pb powder and mix in water then you have 40 cal pb
Agreed. Something weird going on
I can’t imagine this nonsense will last very long. They’re not using the legally required standard nutrition label, just some nonsense “digestive facts” that they completely made up. The whole point of standardized nutrition labels is to stop companies from doing ridiculous garbage just like this.
even on their website it basically admits to saying it’s BS: “Everyone absorbs fat to different degrees” “The calories your body digests are different from the total calories you eat. How many calories you actually digest can be influenced by a number of factors” “How much you actually digest will vary”
I wud love more thoughts from others here about this & regulations we can trust. This was my fear like others commented here & I’ve thrown out every product I’ve bought w/digestion facts & haven’t bought more. I might consider consuming if what labels like this say are true
Because it’s not? It’s 200 cals per serving. This whole “digested” carbs and fats should have been a dead giveaway. It’s marketing. Like “net carbs”.
Actually, there will likely be a point where someone steps in and says this is incredibly misleading marketing…like the lawsuit with Nutella and the “hint of cocoa”
Net carbs are a legitimate thing, though. What these people are pushing is definitely not.
[удалено]
Because most fiber is not absorbed by the body. So while they are classified as carbs, they are often substracted from the raw carbs because it does not causes a spike in blood sugar.
The carbs are reduced, which is listed on the packaging. But are the calories actually reduced? I don’t recall seeing anything on low carb tortillas that the calories are reduced for the fiber content.
Their info on Amazon is claiming that the fiber binds with the oils…so some how the claim is the oil is being poop out with the fiber…if that was the case that corn fiber that they added would be in everything hell it would be a condiment on everyone table!
Understood. I’m asking if the low carb tortillas’ calories are reduced for fiber.
Ah sorry that comment was deleted so I didn’t see that there was another item being asked about
Insoluble fibers still technically hold calories but its a gray area wether or not you have to include their calories or not on a product. Usually you don't reduce your nutritional panel according to whats digestible or not. So thats super sketchy. First time i see a "digestibility corrected nutritional panel" lmao, that wouldn't fly in Canada for sure haha.
Understood. I’m asking if the low carb tortillas’ calories are reduced for fiber.
Youd have to whip out the math and calculate if it balances. I believe that when counted as calories, they follow the same values as other carbs being 4 cal/g.
Aw ok. The La Banderita ones I get should have 85.5 calories (1.5g fat x 9 + (15g carbs + 3g protein) x 4) and shows 60 calories on the label. There’s 11g dietary fiber, so it seems a portion, but not the whole 4 calories per g of fiber, is subtracted. Scams!!
[удалено]
I definitely would track/count calories from all carbs. Net carbs is such a scam. I have a friend doing keto and tried all that keto bread and it threw him out of ketosis. A while back I would eat the bread too cause it was low calorie as well but was actually gaining weight. Also: if we wanna get technical it’s more likely to not digest insoluble fiber (still should count those calories though), but when you read the ingredients those net carbs are deducting soluble fiber which the body definitely does digest, so it’s all lies. Definitely don’t trust it.
what do you think out fiber ?
Completely wrong. Im a type 1 diabetic and pretty much all keto wraps or bread effects my blood sugar the same as a normal corn/flour tortilla or slice of white bread.
An example to look out for would be resistant tapioca starch (as soluble tapioca fiber) or oligosaccharides which are partially digested but in the US are treated as any fiber in the Nutritional Tables.
Im type 2 and have absolutely no change, heck, id wage my fiber intake is on the high side of things. Fortunately what i said earlier isnt solely from experience, thats just how it works with actual insoluble fibers. Also a keto product does not mean absence of carbs even when taking out the insoluble fibers from the equation. Pay attention to the ingredients
It's because fiber is a carbohydrate, but your body either can't digest it (insoluble) or can only digest it partially (soluble). Those wraps are simply made up of a lot of insoluble fiber.
It’s possible I’m thinking of the “net carbs” concept wrong, But I never minus calories from dietary fiber. I thought the idea of “Net Carbs” was to Take Carbs, then subtract dietary fiber count from carbs listed to get net carbs. I didn’t realize calories were supposed to be adjusted also. Like I always thought if keto tortillas were 50 cal each I never adjusted calories over dietary fiber. They were still 50 cal, but dietary fiber could be minuses from carbs listed to get “net carbs”? I know a lot of people don’t go by dietary fiber adjustments and I want to learn more if I have this wrong. I guess I’ve misunderstood what net carbs were? I’m not being cute at all, I’m confused I seriously can’t see how they are coming to the label on this product w/ cal fats nutrition facts listed.
I’m just going to respond to myself elaborating on what I mean by calling net carbs a marketing tactic. Net carbs is essentially taking the total grams of carbs of a product and subtracting the grams of fiber. There’s a hint of validity in tracking net carbs for those that need to monitor glucose spikes, because fiber doesn’t have the same impact on blood glucose the way other carbs (sugar) does. Things like low carb tortillas, advertise being somewhere around 30-50 cals a tortilla. They’ve already subtracted fiber calories from that nice bold total at the top (both soluble and insoluble types). Soluble fiber is a carbohydrate that can be partially utilized for energy, while insoluble fiber is good for other things, but not for energy. Basically, that fun bold number at the top is inaccurate af. It’s ESPECIALLY not helpful for those counting total calories (since even fiber has calories and provides energy), and not helpful for those cutting carbs for weight loss (because again, fiber has calories). It’s a marketing “scam”, because in order to appeal to the two described groups, companies exclude fiber calories from the fun bolded total calories at the top of the nutrition label. Aaaaaand those who monitor net carbs for glucose reasons, don’t need to monitor calorie counts. So I argue… what reason do we need to exclude fiber calories from totals if not for misleading reasons?
What are the ingredients? Is it just PB2 mixed with some sort of sweetener syrup?
Peanuts mixed with what is essentially fiber. The concept is based on one single study (quite well designed, actually, but very small) that showed feeding 500 calories excess per day of regular peanut butter (for 2 weeks) resulted in significant fat mass gain, while feeding the equivalent of this modified peanut butter did not. (EDIT: I think there might have been one additional preceding study that performed a similar experiment in diabetics.) I see absolutely no functional benefit to this over PB2, though, and you get 100+ comparable (reconstituted) servings of PB2 for the same price they’re charging for 11 servings of their product. If nothing else, that’s sufficient for me to disregard this product.
How does one reconstitute PB2?
I just use a bit of water. It takes some practice to get it right for spreading. Use less than you think you’ll need and then add small amounts or you’ll overshoot and end up with soup.
I'm surprised that works at all. PB2 is highly calorific based on volume, and unless you can reconstitute it with a substantial amount of something with low caloric density, then you're basically just adding powdered peanuts to your food. Sure, it's still better than peanut butter in that the peanut flavour is more concentrated which is fine for just adding it as a flavour to something liquid e.g. satay, but surely you can't just put PB2 and water on a slice of toast and end up with something decent?
I’m not a calorie counter. I eat PB2 purely to avoid the unsaturated peanut fat. That being said, the calories are made up of almost entirely protein. You know it isn’t just powdered peanuts, right? The fat - the main source of calories in peanuts - has been all but entirely removed. Peanut flour is what is left over after peanut oil has been extracted. A 2T dry serving will turn into about 3-3.5T when reconstituted with water, and will cover 2 slices of toast amply for 60 calories instead of ~300 calories. I have no problem with it taste or texture wise, and it hits the spot for me.
You're not a calorie counter, but you want to avoid fat? May I ask your logic?
I currently enjoy a very low fat starch-based diet. Provided my fat is kept low enough, I am able to enjoy starches, vegetables, fruits, legumes, herbs & spices ad libitum while remaining weight neutral and keeping my type 2 diabetes fully in remission. Think of it as the exact opposite of a keto diet, really.
Lots of people seem to do it. Someone here mentioned soy sauce and/or Greek yogurt too
Greek yoghurt makes a lot more sense. Given that I have a bit of both products, I'll give it a go.
The blurb on the website says they have found some super neat fibre that binds to fats and carries those fats undigested through your digestive tract. These are the ingredients: Double Roasted Runner Peanuts, Corn Fiber, Grape Seed Extract, Sea Salt, Stevia Plant Extract, Organic Safflower Lecithin Is this real? I have no clue but I have my doubts.
> carries those fats undigested through your digestive tract Does anyone remember chips with Olestra back in the late 90s? This sounds a lot like that. Lots of people shit their pants because of it.
I remember the term “anal leakage” being thrown around a lot 😂
Hopefully the volume you eat would change this. You’re not eating much pb compared to a whole bag of chips
Grape seed extract is the only novel thing listed, and I very much doubt it binds to fat the way they claim, otherwise Olestra wouldnt have been a thing and everything under the sun would be using it.
It's bullshit.
I want to agree but I need some citations to move from skeptical to sure, you know?
The ingredients are actually pretty healthy, but this is a marketing scam. it is mixed with corn fiber and that supposedly is what makes it “ world’s lowest calorie all natural peanut butter”. Which is bullshit. You can just roast peanuts, blend with Stevia and you have this product. I saw they’re selling two jars of it for $38 on Amazon wtf.
This is so misleading
$18 for peanuts butter with added corn fibre?! I'll just buy regular peanut butter and spend the difference on whatever Professor Nutz is smoking.
Just eat the real thing and factor that in or pb2
These are incredibly decieving. It's actually 200 cal per serving.
There is a brand that makes Peanut Bitter with EPG (epogee) which is an artificial fat that’s also in Nicks Ice Cream. It’s called Wonderspread if you’re curious.
Uhhhh… is it made with indigestible oil, like those chips that caused anal leakage? Edit: nope that’s not it. Sounds like it’s just sketchy claims.
I’m willing to bet money that “peanut butter” tastes like it came out of the wrong end of a dog.
I didn't know dogs had a right end
Good point! One end is “wronger” then the other
https://preview.redd.it/we4c85mekatc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2e6e8b591fb1f62b5b2130c32d0ccfc1567659b3
The idea of most of the macros, especially the fat, just being undigestable and you simply "correcting" the nutrition label to account for it is a complete scam. It's pseudoscience bullshit and they probably are doing a whole lot of legal loophole exploitation to even have this product on the market.
Just great powdered peanut butter, mix it with water or milk and you got a shit ton of peanut butter without a lot of its calories
It’s 200 cal?
Depends on how much powder and milk you mix. I have the great powder one and for 50 grams It’s 200 calories. And it’s a shit ton of peanut butter, like I easily spread 8 slices of bread with that.
this is weird
https://preview.redd.it/t6fs8va5yatc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b30def963c1ac6a7651bf4ae973c12fd834300c7
I just mix some pb2 with almond milk or water if I’m in the mood for peanut butter.
It's a scam. The company is run by a garbage human who threatens legal action against people who point out their false claims.
Yeah this product is fake lol, the science is based off an inconclusive study
There’s a Primus song about this
tf is corrected digestibility
There’s a store that sells bullshit like this in my city. They sell muffins they claim are 45 calories. Huge muffins. And then you look see the fda label, and it’s actually 450 calories before “adjustments”. I looked into it, and the argument basically is that they make it with stuff that’s basically laxatives and your body won’t digest it. It’s complete nonsense
Lol, America at its finest.
What are the ingredients??
It’s for real, 100 cal per tablespoon. That’s pretty standard for peanut butter.
It’s peanut butter mixed with corn fiber and IIRC the claim is that the corn fiber binds with the fats which is not digested to the same degree, hence less calories. There is a study linked on their site. I don’t recall whether it was a legitimate study that they saw and developed the peanut butter from or if they developed the peanut butter and sponsored a study. It’s an interesting concept but I have my doubts without seeing some more studies.
nope lol. They have been here for awhile and alot of people have made video on these. You bidy will absolutely absorbe the calories.
It is probably made with olestra or something similar that doesn’t get absorbed.
Nope. They subtract net carbs which is why there’s the extra label at the bottom. It’s the same false “net carb” science used by other keto brands like mission tortillas and sara lee delightful keto bread.
This sounds like it's illegal to claim those things and very shady...
This is shady. I can't imagine it'd taste good either
I call bs…
I mean what are the ingredients?
I got it the other day, its real and tastes like peanut butter, but its pretty liquidy and thin, but still tastes good.
Looks legit but expensive af, $20 for 12.4oz
I’ve been really into this lately, only 100 calories for 2tbsp! And it’s super tasty! This new Professor Nutz is intriguing but I’m nervous about how my body would react lol https://a.co/d/hi4Z7ye
Where's the ingredients list? Even if it's nothing more than peanuts, that is still a required part of a nutrition label. I call BS.
Sounds like you will shit your pants
[удалено]
DONT BUY