CyclingForums
A community for cyclists, gear, training and racing.
General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion
Thread details
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=571&e=2&u=/nm/food_lowcarb_survey_dc
If the above link breaks, try this:
http://tinyurl.com/5ufjr
As I read the numbers in the article, it looks like the levels are about the
same as before the January surge.
"Cubit" <[email hidden]> pí¹e v diskusním pøíspìvku
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=571&e=2&u=/nm/food_lowca
rb_survey_dc
Quoted message said:
If the above link breaks, try this:
http://tinyurl.com/5ufjrAs I read the numbers in the article, it looks like the levels are
about the
Quoted message said:same as before the January surge.
Looks more like the people finally realized that LC does not mean buying
[censored] labeled as "low-carb".
Mirek
Mirek Fidler said:Looks more like the people finally realized that LC does not mean
buying [censored] labeled as "low-carb".
Actually, the article doesn't even address that LC sales, other than
Pepsi Edge and Coke C2, which aren't even LC products. In fact, I'm not
sure who those two products are marketed for.
--
How can someone "draw a blank?"
Now playing: the radio
"Mirek Fidler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:Looks more like the people finally realized that LC does not mean buying
[censored] labeled as "low-carb".
I bet it means that they thought they were on low carb and really
wern't, and have now wrongly concluded that low carb doesn't work.
brian
"Mirek Fidler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:"Cubit" <[email hidden]> pí¹e v diskusním pøíspìvku
news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=571&e=2&u=/nm/food_lowca
rb_survey_dcQuoted message said:
If the above link breaks, try this:
http://tinyurl.com/5ufjrAs I read the numbers in the article, it looks like the levels are
about theQuoted message said:same as before the January surge.
Looks more like the people finally realized that LC does not mean buying
[censored] labeled as "low-carb".Mirek
10% of the US is on LC vs 11% a year earlier, so what's the big deal?
It's amazing how writers can put together stories with facts that just
don't support the headline. And less than 20% of people not on a LC
diet would be interested in buying a LC product? That sounds pretty
damn high to me, what did anyone expect?
Active in the last 60 minutes
0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total
No signed-in users are active right now.
No known search crawlers active right now.