Bodybuilding Forums

I've found a dark chocolate with no added sugar. It has the following nutritional info per 100g:

Energy 502kcal -
Protein 9.1g -
Carbohydrate 36.0g -
Sugars 2.0g -
Polyols 29.6g -
Starch 4.5g -
Fat 41.0g -
Saturates 26.0g -
Mono unsaturates 14.0g -
Polyunsaturates 1.0g -
Fibre 10.0g -
Salt 0.1g -
Sodium 0.05g -

And ingredients:
Cocoa Mass, Sweeteners: Maltitol, Lactitol; Cocoa Butter, Cocoa Powder, Emulsifier: Soya Lecithin; Flavouring.

I've read that net carbs are total carbs minus polyols, which would make this chocolate bar about 6g net carbs per 500cals. Is that right? Apparantly dark chocolate is loaded with key nutrients and speeds up the metabolism. So would this be good for low carbers?

Par2 wrote:Apparantly dark chocolate is loaded with key nutrients and speeds up the metabolism. So would this be good for low carbers?

Only if you live by yourself, can stay next to your bathroom all day and don't mind your weight loss stalling. Sugar alcohols are known for causing "festive" digestive happenings. And if you're one of the people who do not experience digestive discomfort, that is because your body can digest the sugar alcohols, leaving nothing for your gut bacteria to ferment and inflate your intestines. You might as well eat the sugar and avoid the risk of sharting yourself.

I made the mistake Monday of eating a smoothie w/ erythritol (expired, no less! I am bold and rash sometimes...), a large bowl of no sugar added ice cream, and two helpings of sugar-free brownies all within about a three hour period. Oh, big mistake. The gut-wrenching pain was really the worst of the effects, but it's hard to laugh about the symphony of the wind instruments when you're doubled over AND asphyxiating!

If you just have to, then limit your portions (which can be tough!) and try taking some probiotic capsules with it. You might avert disaster.

marochka_raduga wrote:

Par2 wrote:Apparantly dark chocolate is loaded with key nutrients and speeds up the metabolism. So would this be good for low carbers?

Only if you live by yourself, can stay next to your bathroom all day and don't mind your weight loss stalling. Sugar alcohols are known for causing "festive" digestive happenings. And if you're one of the people who do not experience digestive discomfort, that is because your body can digest the sugar alcohols, leaving nothing for your gut bacteria to ferment and inflate your intestines. You might as well eat the sugar and avoid the risk of sharting yourself.

I made the mistake Monday of eating a smoothie w/ erythritol (expired, no less! I am bold and rash sometimes...), a large bowl of no sugar added ice cream, and two helpings of sugar-free brownies all within about a three hour period. Oh, big mistake. The gut-wrenching pain was really the worst of the effects, but it's hard to laugh about the symphony of the wind instruments when you're doubled over AND asphyxiating!

If you just have to, then limit your portions (which can be tough!) and try taking some probiotic capsules with it. You might avert disaster.

Yes, the description did also say:
"Excessive consumption may produce laxative effects"

I'm on a bulk with MANS and am currently about 11% bf, so fat loss isn't my goal right now, although I don't want to add any either so I'm more concerned with the insulin response to this. Are those sugar alcohols the devil? Is my plan to eat a full 500 cals worth in one sitting now a no no?

Oops, I always forget that not everybody is trying to lose weight-- how, I don't know, 'cause my husband's trying to gain weight!

I would avoid eating that much all at once unless you're just constipated and don't mind the gut-wrenching pain (seriously, I have a cast-iron gut and if I eat too much it affects even me)! There are really just two possible outcomes:

• Your body doesn't digest sugar alcohols, in which case, when they reach your gut flora, there will be a massive party that causes you painful bloating, flatulence and/or diarrhea, or
• You won't have any GI upset, in which case you know your body does digest them as sugars, which means there is an accompanying surge of insulin.

Neither one is really an attractive prospect.

Trust me, I LOOOOOOOOOOVE chocolate and I do miss it when I can manage to avoid it for long periods. So I feel your pain. Why don't you try making some chocolate bark out of cocoa, coconut oil, and liquid splenda? I can't do it, because I can't afford all the fat calories in the coconut oil. I have to save my calories for the most filling and nutritious foods like vegetables, egg whites, a few whole grains, and lower-fat meats and cheeses, but for someone who has 11% body fat, there's no reason not to indulge "safely!"

Damn it!

I knew I was missing something. Wishful thinking.

Anyway, thanks for the info marochka. I'll look into that chocolate recipe.

Chick knows her sharts. Listen to her. I think almost everybody who's tried low-carbing has tried sugar alcohols to get that sweet fix.

You're better off eating a moderate portion of the sugar than having your anus treat you to unending renditions of "Hava Nagila" in B-stink minor from inside your pajamas all night long.

--Matt B.

Malitol has a listed GI of 36, compared to 60 for sugar. Sugar alcohols are not a free ride, so I wouldn't remove the carbs all the way from your counts, as there is still an impact on blood sugar.

redgiki wrote:You're better off eating a moderate portion of the sugar than having your anus treat you to unending renditions of "Hava Nagila" in B-stink minor from inside your pajamas all night long.

You owe me one keyboard.

Lindt has 9o% chocolate. Sooooo good and very low carb.

My wife picked up some "Green & Blacks Organic Chocolate". At 1.3g of carbohydrate per individually-wrapped chocolate (12g net carb for 9 chocolates), if you can control your sweet tooth and not tear through the whole bag it's a great way to ration out some dark chocolate yet stay within your carbohydrate allotment for the day.

And it tastes better than Lindt to me. Though I still love the Lindt.

--Matt B.