News

The Dreamfields Pasta Fraud

Dreamfields’ Pasta: Proven a Fraud

Dreamfields pasta is promoted as a low carb product. But it’s made from durum wheat and it tastes great. Actually, it looks, feels and tastes just like…  regular pasta.

Now, regular pasta is anything but low carb. It’s mostly starch, which turns into glucose in the gut and is absorbed as blood sugar. Exactly what low carbers try to avoid. Dreamfields pasta has 41 grams of carbs per serving. How can that be low carb?

Well, Dreamfields claim that their “patent-pending” (since 2004) recipe and manufacturing process protects the carb from being digested.

It sounds fantastic. But is it true? I decided to find out and the results were shocking.

A beautiful tale

Can you be a low carber and eat all the pasta you want? Can you have your (low carb) cake and eat it too?

It sounds too good to be true, and two questions pop up:

  • If their “patent-pending” manufacturing really made the starch indigestible, would that not affect the taste? (It’s great).
  • If the starch really became indigestible, should it not end up being digested by bacteria in the large intestine, causing massive flatulence? (It does not).

Now it’s time for answers.

The package

Spaghetti

Here’s my package of Dreamfields pasta, bought in a “low carb” store.

Let’s take a closer look.

Big promises

Basically the idea is that the carbs will pass straight through your body:

bak-del

Side

There you have it: 36 grams of non-fiber carbs per 56 gram serving. It adds up to about 80 percent energy from carbs. That’s about as high carb a food as you could find.

Of course – most of it is supposedly indigestible.

I tested the pasta myself, eating it and testing my blood sugar 21 times. We’ll get to the test shortly.

A good idea?

It may sound too good to be true. But even if it was true, consider if it really is a good idea for the future.

Should the food industry manufacture food that our bodies can’t absorb? Do we really need to chew food that doesn’t make us satiated, food that gives us no energy, food that isn’t real food?

Is it environmentally sound to grow wheat and then chemically modify it so that it loses its nutritional value, manufacture pasta, transport it, sell it, cook it and then sit down to eat it, all of that to create some extra poop?

(Not to mention all the gas it would result in)

That’s an interesting philosophical question. But let’s leave it and find out if Dreamfields pasta works.

Real low carb food

First some real low carb food to get some perspective. Here is a common meal in my home:

LC

A steak, Béarnaise sauce and a pile of vegetables fried in butter. Possibly a glass of red wine. The result is long-lasting satiety and well-being.

A meal like this contains a few grams of carbs – perhaps five.

The result on my blood sugar? Hardly any at all. It usually stays at fasting levels, between 86 and 94. If you don’t eat anything that turns to sugar your blood sugar stays the same. Very logical.

The test

Now let’s test the Dreamfields pasta:

Here is one serving according to Dreamfields, 56 grams. It’s not a lot of food for someone who is 6’7” (me).

I had two servings:

These 112 grams of pasta contains 72 grams of starch and sugars according to the Nutrition Facts. But according to Dreamfields only 10 grams are absorbed.

After cooking

Efter

After boiling (according to instructions, exactly 9 minutes) it turned into a decent portion. About the amount I used to eat when I ate pasta.

I had the pasta without any other food, with a glass of water. It tasted fine, about the way pasta usually tastes.

The result

It didn’t start out too bad. My blood sugar did quickly rise to 108, but then it looked as if it was stabilizing. I was impressed, it didn’t look too bad.

But that was just the beginning. Then came a mountain of blood sugar. After two and a half hours the blood sugar was still as high as 131!

It turned into a long evening. I tested my blood sugar every 20 minutes and hoped that it would go down so I could have a real dinner. Weirdly enough I felt hungry at the same time as my blood sugar was high. Perhaps some other nutrient was missing in my blood giving me feelings of hunger. Protein? Fat?

I had no other food until the experiment was completed. After seven and a half hours (!) I gave up, even though the blood sugar was still a bit higher than normal. I ate some real food and went to bed.

Here are five different blood sugar curves to compare.

  • The green ones are big low carb dinners
  • The blue ones are “exceptions” with more carbs
  • The red is the fake low carb pasta

Blood Sugar when eating Dreamfields’ pasta

Verdict: Not low carb

The Dreamfields pasta contain slow carbs. Perhaps it’s OK to call it low glycemic index carbs. But it’s not low carb. It’s the opposite, it’s almost pure carbs. It’s absorbed slowly, but most (if not all) of the starch is absorbed.

There is no way only ten grams of carbs spiked my blood sugar for seven hours. I have eaten more than that with just minor effects (see above).

Dreamfields’ marketing claims are not true. Dreamfields are sabotaging the weight loss of low carbers just to sell more of their pasta.

Unless, perhaps, I’m a weird exception. Does it work for everybody else but not for me?

The real test

I did the test above last year, for my Swedish blog. I was convinced that Dreamfields pasta was a fraud.

This year Dreamfields pasta was tested more rigorously and the result was published in a trustworthy scientific journal called Diabetes Care:

Dreamfields test in Diabetes Care

The main authors of the article are Frank C. Nuttal, PhD, and Mary C. Gannon, PhD. They have previously studied the effects of low carb diets, so they were surprised by Dreamfields’ claims that pasta can be low carb.

After “numerous attempts” to have a look at the data that Dreamfields base their claims on (not allowed) the researchers decided to test it themselves.

Five participants ate the Dreamfields pasta (50g CHO) and tested their blood sugar. Then they ate the same amount of regular pasta and tested their blood sugar for comparison.

The result

Dreamfields’ pasta Vs regular pasta

Pretty shockingly the results on the blood sugar were just the same with Dreamfields’ and regular pasta. No difference!

The researchers were surprised so they recruited five new participants and did the test again. The result were the same once again – no perceptible difference.

The scientific article can be read for free here:

The Dreamfields Pasta Fraud

Dreamfields have been selling their fake low carb pasta since january 2004. It’s quite popular. There is no way to know how many people have failed to lose weight because of it, concluding that “low carb does not work”.

Low carb usually works just fine. But not if you eat a lot of pasta.

I’m willing to bet any amount of money that Dreamfields pasta is just the tip of the iceberg. Low carb in America has turned into special low carb pasta, low carb ice cream, low carb bread and low carb chocolate bars. And it’s mostly just marketing hype. There is nothing low carb about this junk food:

Low carb junk food

Real healthy low carb food is meat, fish, vegetables and butter, ideally from your local farmer. Dreamfields and companies like them have turned “Low Carb” into a joke, just to make money.

Obese people who trust them just gain weight. But diabetics spike their blood sugar and may end up amputating their feet and becoming blind.

There are a few possible explanations. Either Dreamfields and others like them are ignorant, evil or just plain greedy. Probably greed is the most likely explanation. Also, they probably think that consumers are stupid. But they are wrong about that.

The pasta fraud is revealed.

fiction

You can help your friends. If they eat fake low carb products and have trouble losing weight, chances are that’s why.

Spread the word. Let’s make low carb work again. Real low carb.

Continued…

Moore on Dreamfieldsgate – Interview with the Pasta President and even more evidence that Dreamfields pasta is just like any pasta: high carb.

Spreading the truth

Go to Dreamfields’ Facebook page and like the link to this post*. Let’s spread the truth to all of the 29 000 members. Dreamfields have gotten away with fooling overweight people and diabetics long enough.

*/ You have to like Dreamfields first, but then you can easily “unlike” it again: bottom left side of the page.

Of course you can spread this info via your Facebook, Twitter and blog too if you’d like. Feel free to copy any part of it. If you link to this post it will appear higher in the results when people search for “Dreamfields pasta” on Google. It’s already #14 or so. Spread the word so that fewer diabetics and others are hurt by these fraudulent marketing claims.

More

LCHF for beginners

Why Americans are obese

Why Americans are obese, part 2

Eating LCHF in America

How to cure type 2 diabetes

Low Carb Made Easy How to Lose Weight Low-Carb Recipes Low-Carb Success Stories
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

316 Comments

  1. b
    The verdict should have been in the first paragraph, now it looks like a promotion of the product. I fact, this article seems to promote the product until the last third of it. Internet doesn't have that long attention span...

    EDIT: OK, the subject is revealing the truth. I missed it.

  2. b,
    Congratulations on your extra long attention span though! ;)
  3. mcholst
    I have learnt that LCHF => eating good wholesome simply real food. Organic/free range/grass fed if possible. Take simple foods and cook tasty meals. Stop looking for mechanically commercially industrial substitutes for your favorite foods. They're not simple foods. They're manipulated so they taste great. Just like the original industrial foods they supposedly replace. AND, the bottom line is that without a doubt, they're no different. I tested the Carb#1 Julian Bakery Bread. Yes, just because It is so very tasty. My kind of bread. EXCEPT my blood glucose levels went way up and took forever to come down. Just like Andreas' experiment with Dremfields pasta. I no longer believe their claims. Maybe my body doesn't have a normal metabolism but Julian Bakery and Dreamfields are definitely marketing to me. NOT very good for the many people with metabolic problems who aren't skeptics. The people who BELIEVE the hype, the false claims. Oh, and the "low-carb" tortillas don't do much better!
    My answer is what's wrong with normal simple food cooked with coconut oil or butter, and/or homemade stock? Beats me. Why do I need to continue trying these false foods? I don't.
  4. When I was grocery shopping just the other day, I happened to pass the shelf with Dreamfields & there was just something about it that set off my internal BS meter. After having struggled with so many addictive food obsessions & compulsions before finally discovering "real" food after so many years (that sound...just my grandma turning over in her grave at her granddaughter's stupidity) and especially LCHF, that I'm loathe to give up my (relatively) newfound peace with food...especially when it comes to marketing of any sort by disingenuous food companies. I know I'm quite addicted to sugar and refined carbohydrate, so I just figured getting off the stuff altogether was the best way to go for long-term sanity rather than eating substitutes that keep these cravings alive. Sorry you had to go through an evening on the nasty Blood Sugar Rollercoaster, but a huge THANKS for doing this experiment & helping spread the truth.
  5. Grace
    I found this out too - being diabetic, I test my blood sugar after all meals. I get a spike with Dreamfields, the same as with regular pasts. I can't use the net carb number in general. The dietician said not to subtract fiber to get net carbs unless it is more than 10. Net carbs seems to be popular with low carbers - since it spikes my blood sugar, I wonder how net carbs affects someone without diabetes.
  6. kathy
    As a med student myself, I find it shocking that some "M.D.s" like yourself provide "research" to their patients/followers that severely lacks the use of the scientific method. Your personal metabolism is in no way significant sample to base your research on, and certainly does not prove that this product is in any way a fraud or lie.

    The scientific article, though from a seemingly reputable source, also seriously fails to cite significant amounts of trials. They tested on 10 people, with NO repeat trials! At least they had a disclaimer, citing their small sample size and lack of result reproduction. How can you spread these "findings" without significant evidence? Clearly this product has worked for a multitude of people whose lives depend on having low glucose impact, my grandmother (diabetic) is one of them.

    Everyone please, do your own research and be your own personal health advocate. Do not believe everything someone with an MD behind their name spouts- they are people with underlying motivations too! Oh and to Dr. Eenfedlt, remember your designation as a health practitioner places you in a position of power over other peoples lives. You may want to consider re-reading that hippocratic oath and wielding you power for bettering peoples lives, not for fear mongering and self-promotion.

  7. kathy,
    Wow, this post really must have hit a sore spot. Sorry about that.

    A published study testing the pasta on 10 subjects may be small. But it's something at least. And they DID repeat the test a second time with the same findings.

    Dreamfields' unlikely claims are just unpublished marketing, based on data that they chose to keep secret when researchers asked for it. Scientifically speaking I'd say that's worth nothing at all.

    Do not believe everything someone with an MD behind their name spouts- they are people with underlying motivations too!

    Well... the Dreamfields people have a fairly obvious "underlying motivation" in this case. I'm not sure what mine would be though.

    I do happen to dislike companies that lie and hurt people to make money, but I'm not trying to keep that a secret! :)

    Replies: #174, #201
  8. Nathan
    You should test Whey Low next, a sugar that is sugar, that says it's only absorbed at 1/4th the carb level.
  9. Alaskan
    Kathy,

    How much scientific research is one supposed to do the effects of this pasta? (This isn't a cure for cancer study) The Doc tested himself numerous times and came to a viable conclusion. The other researchers tested what, 10 other people and came up with a viable conclusion. The results from 11 people with different metabolisms came up with very similar conclusions... The product is not low carb.
    I did my research, thanks to other guinea pigs. No need for me to play my blood-sugar levels like a yo-yo.

  10. b
    Dreamfield just threw away every single piece of criticism from their facebook page and made impossible to post comments on their wall.

    ...and in a few minutes they have the same comments in their post as was previously on their wall, by the same people. And 42 likes.

  11. I'm surprised they took so long. :)
  12. b
    The same glorifying posts, that is.
  13. lmao
    Kathy, why do you believe a marketing gimmick is more scientific than multiple blood sugar tests on eleven different people? Why do you say that a doctor has an underlying motivation but conveniently leave out the obvious fact that people marketing expensive products to desperate diabetes patients have an underlying motivation too? Why do you cite the "unscientific" way this pasta was tested but then offer the anecdotal evidence of your grandmother's "changed life" to back up your own claim? Maybe you should explain how this product has "clearly worked for a multitude of people" in a scientific way instead of making an inflammatory argument based on fallacious claims.
  14. Jen
    Kathy, sample size and trial design are irrelevant here. A single glucose excursion in one individual is sufficient to falsify this marketing claim. The burden of "scientific" proof falls upon those making the claim. They have declined to provide it.

    You suggest that everyone should do their own research. I agree. Many diabetics have tested various low carb products and have found that some produce unacceptably high glucose spikes. Perhaps these tests are invalid and should be ignored because they do not follow the scientific method?

  15. Funderaren
    Kathy, how do you know that people get a good blodsugar value from dreamfields pasta? Have you tested the people you claimed have been helped, and could you please post the result.
  16. Paul
    Hi,
    Being diabetic, I was also interested in dreamfields and conducted my own experiments early on. My first try was similar to the results described earlier; that is, my blood sugar went quite high on just plain pasta. For a second try, I ate the pasta as I normally would: salad, homemade spaghetti sauce with sausage and hamburg, and a glass of chianti. The results were almost exactly what would be predicted if I consumed about 8 grams of sugar. My blood glucose went from 86 to 127 (about 30 minutes after eating). Two hours later my reading was 107. I am very sensative to carb intake, so the 127 reading was not too bad. I only eat spaghetti about once every two weeks, so I don't consider this too bad. One other thing: the glass of wine probably contributed to lowering the blood glucose, as alcohol does have that effect on me. In conclusion, I'll stick with dreamfields. Other pastas do indeed move my blood glucose up to over 200, so I don't use them anymore. Also, having other foods when eating the pasta may have an influence on them. I don't know too many folks who simply eat a plate of pasta with nothing on it for supper.
  17. Funderaren
    Paul, adding other food will of course prevent the blodsugar to spike as high, and I am sure Doc can do a new test with normal food added to the mix. But this is not how dreamfield market their pasta. If you buy what they are saying you could eat their pasta without any other food and still have low blodsugar.
  18. I found your site a few weeks ago via FatHead. Love it. And though my weight loss has stalled a bit (and my keto sticks are still red!), I'm not throwing in the towel. I feel better. My blood sugar is normal. My allergies have disappeared as have joint pains.

    I saw the Dreamfields last week at the store and was tempted until I realized it was wheat. If the company's claims were true, what "manufacturing process" would render pure carbohydrates undigestible? I like real food, thanks.

  19. Pompe
    Kathy:
    Exactly how many observations does it take to prove a marketing claim wrong? Ever heard of Karl Popper and the concept of falsification?
  20. Here's Part 1 of 3 of my interview with Dreamfields Healthy Pasta President Mike Crowley today Responding To The Low-Carb Pasta Comparison Study published in Diabetes Care and the criticisms of people like Dr. Andreas Eenfeldt: http://t.co/ndBPIgM
  21. Dana
    I saw the information in question and apparently they cooked the normal pasta and the Dreamfields pasta exactly the same way. It's been too long since I paid attention to the instructions for normal pasta for me to have it fixed in my mind whether or not the two types have the exact same cooking instructions. The researchers did say that perhaps a different method of cooking would produce a different result. I'm not saying the people who make Dreamfields are innocent of fraud, but I'm not saying they're absolutely guilty either--I simply do not have enough information. I *will* say that Americans are notoriously bad at preparing pasta correctly even when it is normal pasta. If you don't follow the package directions, *at minimum,* you will not achieve the desired result. Don't just dump the pasta into the boiling water, walk away, and come back when it's mushy.

    But... Wheat's notorious for spiking blood sugar well beyond what you would expect for the carbohydrate amount. I would say that any low-carber and/or diabetic who wants to incorporate low-carb pasta into their diet should test their blood sugar after eating it to make sure it's OK. That's the only way to know for sure.

  22. Sanddog
    Low carbers who try to replicate their high carb favorites remind me of Vegetarians/Vegans who eat abominations like tofurky. if you don't want to eat meat, stop faking it and if you want to eat low carb, don't eat crap made from wheat.
  23. Daniel
    I have loved and enjoyed Dreamfields for years and so have many of my friends. Everyone I know loves the taste of the product, the 5 grams of fiber and the lower carbs. This foreign doctor seems to have a grudge and the "science" looks at the level of an 8th grade science fair. We need to see a real clinical study conducted by real researchers before I stop eating one of my favorite foods.

    Hating on Dreamfields is silly.

  24. Daniel,
    I know. Pasta tastes good. Dreamfields' pasta tastes good. You're right.

    However: pasta is pasta, and pasta contains lots of carbs. Let's not kid ourselves and let's not allow ourselves to be fooled.

    Btw, this is a real clinical study conducted by real researchers. On the other hand, there is no published science showing that Dreamfields' marketing is true.

  25. lmao
    Daniel,
    It is science an 8th grader can do at a science fair! That's the whole point, Dreamfields can't even pull the wool over the eyes of basic testing methods. There's no need to do a test more advanced than that, seeing as it indisputably failed on the most basic level of home blood sugar monitoring. Also, as the Doc said in a previous comment, linked in the entry there is a real live scientific study conducted by.... wait for it..... REAL SCIENTISTS. Not that medical doctors (that's what the MD next to the Doc's name means, by the way) aren't real scientists.

    It is truly scary that the people disputing this claim are ready to believe a marketing team over scientists with health interests of the patients in mind. Why do these scientists get disputed while Dreamfields' scientists are not held to the same level of scrutiny? There's denial and double standards doing what they do best!

  26. Funderaren
    Daniel, have you ever wondered why dreamfields pasta taste as good as regular pasta?
  27. Jason
    This is a very interesting blog post. I'm not sure I'm completely comfortable with the underlying tone. I certainly feel the tone of some of the comments (on both sides) is unnecessary. Assuming this doctor isn't trying to shill a book or use hyperbole to generate viral traffic to his blog site, and that none of the poster on the other side own stock in Dreamfield, there is no reason to get unpleasant. It should just be about the science. It shouldn’t be personal, but I guess that’s the nature of the internet.

    I have been on low-carb about 5 months now and have been having occasional servings of Dreamfield pasta as a treat. I follow the cooking instructions and suggested portion size. I have been consistently losing weight but I can't prove I wouldn't still be if eating controlled portions of regular or whole wheat pasta. I have sceptical about Dreamfield pasta too (even though I’d say it has worked well for me), so I am interested in a real answer, but I don’t have a NEED to believe one way or the other.

    First, the cited study in “Diabetes Care”. It’s a pretty short article so there may be information that would answer my questions that I don’t readily see. However, a couple of things puzzle me.

    Trying to interpret the two blood sugar over time graphs is a little hard. I wish I had a spreadsheet. ;o) However, just looking at the regular pasta series, why did the first trial result in an initial 40 point jump and the second trial only result in a 24 point initial jump? That’s a pretty big deviation. Assuming the exact same brands of pasta, cooked of the exact same amounts if time, I would have expected a very similar response curve. Why the difference? Note the completely different curve profiles. It’s possible I suppose that the manufactured batches of pasta between the two trials varied in some way. However, note how both the Dreamfield and regular pasta curves deviate in almost exactly the same way between the 2 trials. It’s not likely that both brands would have had exactly the same batch variation. Something is fishy there.

    Also, the study states that both pasta’s were cooked for the same amount of time, but I could not find where they stated what that time was. It’s well known that over-cooking Dreamfield pasta will compromise its ability to protect those extra carbs. If you cooked both pastas for the same amount of time, but that amount of time was longer than is recommended by Dreamfield, then the experiment is invalid. I’m not saying they over-cooked the pasta, I’m just saying this article doesn’t prove they didn’t. It’s a vital question I would want answered.

    Answers to the above such questions are probably in the full length paper, but I don’t have access to it so I can’t know.

    Dreamfield pasta has been on the market for years now. Have any suits been filed through the FTC for false advertising? If the claims are blatantly, obviously, and demostratably false, I assume it would be a slam dunk to get them slapped down.

    In any case, I’d very much like to see much more rigorous and in-depth research done on this topic. I’m not sure I’ve seen anything meet that standard yet (at least to the level I’d feel comfortable using words like “lying” “fake”, and “fraud”), and I guess I have a natural distrust of trial by strident blog instead of dispassionate science.

    Regards,
    Jason

  28. carol
    can this product be bought in all grocery stores in connecticut??
  29. Jason,
    Regarding the difference between the two five-person tests of Dreamfields' vs regular pasta: the first group was on average older (and more insulin resistant). The second group was younger and did not get as big a blood sugar spike from eating pasta.

    However, in both cases the reaction to Dreamfields' and regular pasta was virtually identical.

    http://www.dietdoctor.com/more-on-dreamfieldsgate

  30. Funderaren
    Jason, Dreamfields can be used to lose weight. If you go down to "their" portionsize and avoid sugar at the same time. But there will have nothing to do with their secret matrix.
  31. Fia
    What people miss is that its in no way low carb but "slow carb", making it harder to test "properly" - you simply need to keep meassuring for many more hours than you would expect (something that was demostrated with the issue with the values for the doctor behind this blog, the "spike" goes down fairly fast or doesn´t go super high, but keeps the values elevated for a very long time, something that might in some cases be even worse than a short spike). This is an issue that has been overlooked in many cases with this product, if you meassure for only say 2 hours you will obviously miss that problem if it can cause 5-7 hours of elevated blood sugar. If you also combine it with that its marketed to low carb eaters who normally have an insulin resistance (the completey natural one that makes muscles not use up the limited amounts of carbs you eat but reserving them for the brain´s function, something that is reversible) it might be an even bigger issue.

    Just because Dreamfield´s claims are not true, doesn´t mean its impossible to eat their pasta occasionally and lose weight, so the fact that someone did doesn´t automatically make their claims true. If you keep it occasionally and in small portion size it can sure work, however that is also true for normal al dente and durumwheat pasta.

    If you want to call it deliberate fraud or if its rather a very long stretching of a grain of truth might be a judgementcall. Its the same issue with the "net carb"-issue with low carb products. Its true that if you live in US you need to subtract fibers from the total carb count (not the case in all countries, for example european countries this is already done and the carb count on the label already have the fibres separated out). So far so good. Then comes the companies that really want to sell "close to normal looking"-goods to low carbers, and low carbers that doesn´t want to give up things like sweets and in comes the stretching of truth and the bigger "net carb" issue noted on packages. No matter how much those companies and the people that think their products tastes nice want it to be true that all sugar alchohols have limited impact on blood sugar, it just isn´t true. How much impact they have varies a lot between the different kinds, but the kind most commonly used to sweeten chocolate (for taste issues), maltitol, has definitly significant impact equalent to about half the amount of normal sugar in best cases, in worst cases closer to 75%. Sure it has a bit slower absobtion ("slow carb" again like with the pasta) than sugar, but pretending it doesn´t count as a carb at all? That just simply isn´t true. (for sugaralcohols in general you can count backwards using the amount of calories that a gram of them gives and compare with that of sugar to get their relative absorbtion).

  32. shutchings
    So, if you're willing to eat the pasta again, I was wondering if you would eat it with a really wonderful fatty meat sauce and compare your blood sugar after that. I think it would be interesting to see the difference.
  33. Rob
    You should test Regular Pasta so we can compare the 2. We now know your sugar spiked up to 131 on Dreamfields, now let's see what it goes up too when you have Barilla Pasta. I would love to see the results. Thanks
  34. Rob,
    I'm not planning to eat a plate of only Barilla pasta anytime soon... Sorry! ;)
  35. Joe
    I don't believe a single one of the pro-Dreamfields posts. Not a single one.

    The company's employees are "sock-puppeting" your blog like crazy.

    Note to Dreamfields "Healthy" Pasta President Mike Crowley: You and your employees are both breaking US Federal law:

    FTC fines company $250,000 for sock puppet reviews

    and state law:

    Attorney General Cuomo Secures Settlement With Plastic Surgery Franchise That Flooded Internet With False Reviews

    Further, any intelligent attorney with class-action expertise should be gathering names for the lawsuit that you will soon be defending.

  36. D
    The *only* pasta substitute that worked for me (did not raise blood sugar abnormally) when I had gestational diabetes was "konjac" pasta. It is made out of a highly non-digestible fiber, 3 grams of carbs per liquid-pack serving. It is chewy (doesn't taste like much of anything on its own), and absorbs the flavor of what you simmer it in. It's been used in Asia for quite some time.
  37. Your analysis is over simplified. I think you are probably wrong. The Dreamfields pasta matrix will break down over a long time and you did the one thing in your test that would give you gut the time it needs to break the pasta down.

    Read this article for a primer for background.
    http://www.rawfoodexplained.com/carbohydrates/how-carbohydrates-are-d...

    The point is that ptyalin breaks down starch very slowly. If you eat pure Dreamfields pasta with nothing on it, it will basically sit in your gut for hours and hours while the ptyalin works on it. That is not the real world! Most people in the U.S. put meat sauce or something else with acid and protein on the pasta. This causes a number of effects that have the outcome of accelerating the processing of the pasta through the gut. Dreamfields matrix does not totally prevent starch breakdown, it slows it. Hence, the low-carb effect depends on not doing an oversimplified experiment. Redo the experiment with meat sauce and cheese and you will get a totally different result.

  38. Joe
    Joel, reread the post. It is referring to the Diabetes Care study which compared Dreamfields pasta with ordinary pasta.

    There was no difference in glucose excursion between ordinary pasta and the magic pasta.

    (As might be expected of a product made by a company that refuses to release any of the test data on which they base their claims.)

  39. Joel
    I think you miss my point. The experiment was not valid in terms of general conclusions. The diet doctor ate plain pasta on an empty stomach as did the people in the poorly conducted diabetes study. From my reading it looks like there is nothing in plain Dreamfileds pasta that will make your stomach secrete acid based on the way their matrix works. Acid breaks down the enzyme that converts starch to sugar. After eating the pasta the test subjects were given only water.

    Dreamfields does not claim that their matrix works perfectly to block all carbohydrate absorption, only that it locks up the starch long enough for it to pass through your system in normal use. Without some form of meat, fiber, or other food on the test subject's stomach, the dreamfileds pasta would just stew in the gut with the starch converting to sugar. However, if the subjects had been given normal red sauce, with meat cheese etc..., you know, the normal things people eat with pasta, their stomachs would have been active and had acid in them. This would have destroyed much of the enzyme that converts starch to sugar and would also have moved the pasta through the digestive tract fast enough that the protective matrix in the Dreamfields would have prevented sugar absorption. At least that is the Dreamfileds claim. I don't know if it is true.

    I am not convinced either way. Here is what I do know:

    1) Both the Diet Doctor's experiment and the diabetic study showed only that Dreamfields does not work on an empty stomach with only water as a chaser. Therefore it is clear that you should not eat Dreamfields that way. However, I don't know anyone who would, so both are fairly useless experiments. By the way the nearly exact agreement between the Dreamfields results and the normal pasta results is also highly suspect. Nothing in biology give such exact numerical results. I suspect some kind of dry-lab-ing going on (that means I suspect that the test data if fake).

    2) I agree that it is strange and suspect that Dreamfields will not release their test data. This makes me suspicious that it is a fraud, but it is not convincing. There are some very good legal and business reasons I can think of why they would not want to release their results.

    3) A high school kid should do this as a science fair project. The kid would need to test groups of people eating both Dreamfileds and normal pasta in double blind trials using carefully controlled normal meals (not plain pasta) and a crossover experimental design. Without such an experiment, independent from the Dreamfileds company, we simply don't know. However, I have seen many postings from folks on the internet who claim to have measured their blood sugar with Dreamfileds and who claim to have gotten good results. I will say also that my own anecdotal results with Dreamfileds are positive, but I don't overcook it, and I eat it with tomato sauce, cheese vegetables and meat.

    I honestly don't know if the stuff works or not, but I think it merits a careful test. Biology is very complex and these sloppy experiments don't clarify much.

    In addition, a good high school experiment would do some simple measures in a beaker of how fast Dreamfields breaks down in the presence of ptyalin in comparison to how fast normal pasta breaks down. If there is no difference there, then Dreamfields is probably a fraud.

    Finally, one low carb pasta that really does work is the Atkins Penne pasta which can be purchased on the internet. If is made with soy, is very good (not quite exactly the same as normal pasta), and there is no controversy around it.

  40. Funderaren
    Joel, no pasta works even better. ;)
  41. Joel
    I agree, but people like pasta.
  42. Danielle Mörlund
    Daniel says: "This foreign doctor..."

    That just discredited anything you had to say Daniel. Dr. Eenfeldt is from Sweden. You make it sound like he is a Neanderthal that was just defrosted from a block of ice. *roll eyes*

  43. Morris Older
    As one commenter noted, the experiment that truly matters is the one that you do yourself, on your own body, with your own meter.

    You may recall that in setting the glycemic index of a product they test 10 people (non-diabetic) and then average their glycemic response to that product. They go for ten people because in fact the response varies greatly, not only from person to person, but also from food to food. The person whose blood glucose responds minimally to rice may in fact be the same person who responds at the high end to corn or wheat, or garbanzo beans. Human digestion can be quite variable.

    Which means that with Dreamfields as with any other food, what should matter to you most is what your glucose meter says about how YOU respond to that food. Carb counts, nutrition labels and glycemic index are a good starting point to guess how you may react to a food, but your meter gives you more reliable feedback.

    Personally I despise all marketing claims on just about every product there is, and rarely buy foods that comes in a box, can or jar. There is virtually no regulation of marketing claims at all, so I tend to discount anything that is not stated in the nutrition facts label itself.

    For several years I resisted trying Dreamfields because I just assumed their marketing was hype. And there was a whole wheat pasta that I used to get, made wholesale and sold with a Trader Joe's and other labels that was somehow less than half the carbs of other pastas, but when the low-carb marketing fad went into remission a few years back, and yes, it does seem to have come back, they stopped making that pasta.

    And so I gave Dreamfields a very cautious try, starting with small portions, testing 1,2,3,5 7 hours later and noting trends the next morning as well. And all i can say is that for ME the stuff works as advertised. I can actually have a double portion, I can reheat it in the microwave, I can have it with sauce or tossed with shrimp, mushrooms, sundried tomatoes, walnuts, cheese and basil. I can cook a huge amount and serve a whole group of people and eat the same meal they do--without affecting my blood glucose. Regular pasta in similar amounts sends my blood glucose sky rocketing for a long period.

    In reading the study my first question was did they really cook it the same amount of time as you would regular pasta, because that might, as DF claims, negate the fiber-effect. My second thought was on the variability of each person's individual glycemic index. And of course I can recall many discussions of DF on diabetes forums, where many people have said it works for them, and some others have said it certainly does not.

    The doc does make a good point about making food that is not quite meant to be digested, and obviously one wouldn't want to make DF the staple of your diet. I could see it helping with weight loss, however, because even if it is not digested, it does fill you up..

    Bottom line, though is that, if it works for you, according to your meter, then the blog and the study don't really matter. And if doesn't, then I suppose you have confirmation of what your meter says.

  44. digby
    I decided to test Dreamfields, which I only had a couple times a month. I have never cooked my Dreamfields more than 6-7 minutes, since I had some reservations all along, but I remembered Dr. Atkins writing that if you cook pasta (of any kind) only to al dente it will not release most of the starch. So, cooking per usual, I tested before fasting, ate the pasta, then tested in 30" and my bg rose to 95 and dropped slowly from there over the next three hours. So, I think any advantage is not one they invented, but it just in the nature of the cooking. I have always made sure to cook only what is need, rinse in cold water to stop further cooking, and then no reheat. As nearly everything gives me problems due to insulin resisitance, I'm feeling like at least this is something I can have occasionally. Still, I feel you are correct that the Dreamfields marketing is a sham.
  45. Joy
    I think (and therefore it is my opinion only, no one has to agree with me) that everyone needs to make their own informed health decisions and test things for themselves. I use Dreamfield's regularly. If I use normal pasta, I get spikes to 230-250 within an hour of consumption, and it takes several more hours to come down to even about 130. If I use Dreamfields, cooked per package instructions, or erring on either side by two minutes or so, I spike to 115 MAX, and it returns to my normal (95-100) within two hours. I feel that me using it is no different than someone else taking a bulk fiber tablet or metamucil. It passes, I'm fine, and I truly enjoy my meals made with it. My weight loss has continued and I am pleased with the product. It works for me. I hope it helps others.
  46. Debra Medvedik
    As a long term low carber, I use this product, but sparingly. I don't gain weight, or get bloated. I weigh 132, am 5'4". Just use it in moderation, and stay with the meat and veggies to control cravings. It is a treat!! My Italian boyfriend is not cheating on me with food anymore!

    Just made an awesome Lasagna! I know me, and how tight my clothes get if I cheat.....

    We have it once a week, and it seems to fit into our lifestyle! Don't knock it!

  47. Funderaren
    Debra you can use any pasta in moderation. The effect would be the same. There is no magic here. But if it works for you please continue.

    Its the people that eat this thinking its low carb and eat it every day that should be careful because it does have alot of carbs, just like regular pasta.

  48. anna
    I agree with many of the comments. As an RN, specializing in diabetes and diabetic myself, I can say that Dreamfields is GREAT.

    I tested this by making 3 helpings of Dreamfields Pasta and forcing all three servings down my throat. Two hours later, my blood sugar was 118.

    Similarly, one helping of conventional pasta sent my blood sugar to 164 at two hours.
    Maybe Dreamfield has all those carbs, but I certainly can't digest them.

    And I don't have the gas problem with it either.

  49. anna,
    If you don't get the gas, that means the carbs are digested and absorbed.

    Like you can see in the graph from the Diabetes Care-article above, two hours after the meal you may have missed the real blood sugar peak.

  50. TomA
    Being a Type-2 Diabetic and Italian, this product seemed like a gift when it first came out. I tried it and the results were good regarding my readings. But, I must add that I was on Avandia and this medication was working very well. Fast forward a few years and we have the Government making waves about the Avandia. So, my doctor changed my medication. Soon after yhe change, my readings after eating Dreamfields skyrocketed! So, the claim about being low carb was challenged. I do eat the Dreamfields now and then, but I have the same results using any imported pasta, which doesnt claim to be low card. The readings are high and I test several times after eating. If the Dreamfields tests were performed with Diabetics, the results should have included the readings that specified the medications used per reading. We, the patients, have no way of telling if the low carb claims are true except by trying the product. Every person is different as is their medications and lifestyle. For the Company, this results in a profit since there are many Diabetics out there willing to try anything that claims to be low carb. Oh, one more thing: where was the Government meddlers when the test results were published?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Leave a Reply

Reply to comment #0 by

Older posts