=?windows-1252?Q?Dietary_Supplements_=96_Fat_=26_Carbohydrat e_blockers=3F?=

There are numerous dietary supplements on the market that are alleged
to reduce the absorption of fats or carbohydrates in your diet. Here
are two that I am aware of, although there are probably many more:

http://www.naturopathica.com.au/shop...tail.php?id=11

http://www.naturopathica.com.au/shop...tail.php?id=20

Naturopathica Reducticarb is alleged to reduce the absorption of
starchy carbohydrates. If I were to take this product, and then
consume starchy carbohydrates, would it make sense that the
Reducticarb would cause me to excrete a significant proportion of
these carbohydrates? I am going by the logic that if you take a
product which is supposed to reduce the absorption of certain
foodstuffs in your diet....and then you consume those particular
foodstuffs....you are likely to go to the toilet (perhaps) a little
more than normal.....to excrete those "non-absorbed" foodstuffs? If
you are taking in certain foodstuffs, and their absorption is reduced,
surely they must go somewhere?
Also, would this same general principle apply to FatBlaster and
FatBlaster MAX?
In very simple terms, if you were to take some of these supplements,
and then consume the foodstuffs which they are alleged to "block", are
you likely to s.h.i.t. more often?

Gas Bag wrote:
> There are numerous dietary supplements on the market that are alleged
> to reduce the absorption of fats or carbohydrates in your diet. Here
> are two that I am aware of, although there are probably many more:
>
> http://www.naturopathica.com.au/shop...tail.php?id=11
>
> http://www.naturopathica.com.au/shop...tail.php?id=20
>
> Naturopathica Reducticarb is alleged to reduce the absorption of
> starchy carbohydrates. If I were to take this product, and then
> consume starchy carbohydrates, would it make sense that the
> Reducticarb would cause me to excrete a significant proportion of
> these carbohydrates? I am going by the logic that if you take a
> product which is supposed to reduce the absorption of certain
> foodstuffs in your diet....and then you consume those particular
> foodstuffs....you are likely to go to the toilet (perhaps) a little
> more than normal.....to excrete those "non-absorbed" foodstuffs? If
> you are taking in certain foodstuffs, and their absorption is reduced,
> surely they must go somewhere?
> Also, would this same general principle apply to FatBlaster and
> FatBlaster MAX?
> In very simple terms, if you were to take some of these supplements,
> and then consume the foodstuffs which they are alleged to "block", are
> you likely to s.h.i.t. more often?

You might consider looking into the Specific Carbohydrate Diet
advocated by Elaine Gottschall. She and her followers know all about
what can go wrong.

Here's a good starting point:
http://www.breakingtheviciouscycle.i.../beginners.htm

(By the way, grapefruit is said to block fat absorption, and I'm sure
it's cheaper than anything with a trademark.)

--
Marshall Price of Miami
Known to Yahoo as d021317c

On Jun 3, 3:28*pm, Marshall Price <d0213...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Gas Bag wrote:
> > There are numerous dietary supplements on the market that are alleged
> > to reduce the absorption of fats or carbohydrates in your diet. Here
> > are two that I am aware of, although there are probably many more:
>
> >http://www.naturopathica.com.au/shop...tail.php?id=11
>
> >http://www.naturopathica.com.au/shop...tail.php?id=20
>
> > Naturopathica Reducticarb is alleged to reduce the absorption of
> > starchy carbohydrates. If I were to take this product, and then
> > consume starchy carbohydrates, would it make sense that the
> > Reducticarb would cause me to excrete a significant proportion of
> > these carbohydrates? I am going by the logic that if you take a
> > product which is supposed to reduce the absorption of certain
> > foodstuffs in your diet....and then you consume those particular
> > foodstuffs....you are likely to go to the toilet (perhaps) a little
> > more than normal.....to excrete those "non-absorbed" foodstuffs? If
> > you are taking in certain foodstuffs, and their absorption is reduced,
> > surely they must go somewhere?
> > Also, would this same general principle apply to FatBlaster and
> > FatBlaster MAX?
> > In very simple terms, if you were to take some of these supplements,
> > and then consume the foodstuffs which they are alleged to "block", are
> > you likely to s.h.i.t. more often?



The only products I'm aware of that there is reason to beleive they
work are the ones like Alli, which is the OTC version of prescription
Xenical. Those do block absorption of some fat. They also can
produce more frequent bathroom visits, due to the undigested fat. And
even those are supposed to be used as part of a diet that reduces food
intake. The studies show that you will lose more weight on a calorie
restricted diet with them, then without

I don't know of any carb blockers that have any legitimate research to
support claims of doing anything. Most of the ones I've heard about
are based on some type of chemical activity that may be demonstrated
in the test tube, but that doesn't work in the body due to issues like
interference from stomach acid, etc.

I wouldn't believe the marketing hype from the typical companies
promoting this stuff. So, I think if you buy any of then except ones
from real drug companies, you won't have to worry about bathroom
visits. Your wallet will be lighter, but unless you change your food
intake, it's very unlikely you will be lighter.



>
> * *You might consider looking into the Specific Carbohydrate Diet
> advocated by Elaine Gottschall. *She and her followers know all about
> what can go wrong.
>
> * *Here's a good starting point:http://www.breakingtheviciouscycle.i.../beginners.htm
>
> * *(By the way, grapefruit is said to block fat absorption, and I'm sure
> it's cheaper than anything with a trademark.)
>
> --
> Marshall Price of Miami
> Known to Yahoo as d021317c- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -