I can attest to these as well, they are my go to keto wrap becasue not only are they made with decent ingrediants they also do not taste like cardboard. And they are not the overly large jumbo wraps and pack in a lot of fiber in a small size.
Yes, thanks. I’ve had these before and they are pretty good. I don’t really buy into the whole “net carbs” school of thought, though, and I am not eating any sort of bread/tortilla at this point.
I will eventually allow myself 1 or 2 of these wraps a few days a week, though. Not for tacos - romaine taco wraps are very tasty, IMO - but I could make egg/cheese/bacon “burritos” with the low carb wraps.
I have no interest in finding a keto bread. I’m better off not having any sort of bread at all. That’s just me
mmm
How come? Fiber is considered a carb for some odd reason, even though it’s not digested and used as calories by the body. So why not subtract the fiber carbs from the total carbs to get the net carb amount? Those are the carbs you want to avoid. Fiber carbs are ‘free’ carbs. You not only don’t want to avoid fiber, you want to keep your fiber intake fairly high, which can be difficult on a low-carb diet. If you’re on a 20 gram carb a day limit and that’s total carbs, fiber and all, you are on a super-duper low-carb diet.
Mainly because, in the past, when I allowed myself to include net carbs, my weight loss plateued. Plateud. How in the hell do you spell plateau-ed?
Also, I spoke (independently) with two Registered Dietitians I know about this very thing. They both feel it is hogwash.
I think it’s nothing but marketing, dreamt up by those who will profit from the many folks who would kill for a hunk of keto bread.
But, if it works for you, more power to ya.
mmm
ETA:
I think it is much more complex than this.
I mean, low-carb product advertising may be playing fast and loose with their actual carb content when they say “ONLY (X) GRAMS NET CARBS!”; that may be hogwash, but as far as I understand, the basic facts that fiber carbs are one, not digestible, and two, not to be avoided in a balanced diet, are pretty sound nutritional science. Not that I’m an expert by any means.
More power to you if it works for you. But I think in the long term a very low-fiber diet is not good.
This has always been my thought, as I stated, but there are studies that disagree:
mmm
I certainly agree with that. I do eat plenty of vegetables, though, so I think I’m pretty solid in the fiber department.
Now pass me that stalk of celery.
mmm
I cannot argue with this logic, if you can get your fiber from natural foods its better than getting from processed foods. But, I do love me some egg and bacon wraps in these Ole Xtreame Fiber keto tortillas and I can’t see where they have affected my weight lost progress, its usually other things that throw me off, like eating too much fat to the point where I don’t use my body fat for fuel.
It’s plateaued.
While I still feel in the very fibre of my being that your skepticism of ‘net carbs’ is somewhat misplaced, it sounds like your overall diet is sound. I wasn’t arguing the point for the sake of argument, but for a (however mistaken) concern for the health of your diet. I’m hoping you stay mean and vinegary for many years to come 
If you want toast with your eggs, for goodness sake have toast with your eggs! There is no need to pile on and torture yourself.
There are many good reasons for periodic fasting, and while it is an effective, simple way to shed excess pounds it isn’t required to remove 100% of carbohydrates. Something already alluded to, this must be pointed out - one should never use a fast as an excuse to gorge on junk food. With practice, it would seem most people start to gravitate naturally towards higher quality, better meals with a sensible mix. Restricting both how much, and importantly when, we eat also tends to give our bodies really good “feedback” on what tends to make us sick. Some foods don’t agree with me, and while they might be OK for you. At the same time, periodic fasting shows promise with improved allergies.
Any weight loss regimen ultimately involves calorie restriction. (And you’re going to have days where, for whatever reason, failure or “cheating” occurs). Plateaus - I’d be willing to bet that people trying to gain weight have the same problem? Is that a thing? Never thought about it too much. Just keep with your program, the laws of thermodynamics have not been repealed. If calories are restricted somewhere around the basal metabolic rate, the body will burn off excess fat.
One thing I haven’t seen addressed too often (TMI) restricting carbs entirely means a decided lack of bulk. The one uncomfortable thing that many people talk about is feeling bloated. It seems ironic to me somehow, one can shed 50 or 75 pounds and the chief complaint is often feeling fat. This can actually be a drive to eat more carbs. Osmotic pressure in the gut. I used to eat a lot of popcorn as a snack when fasting, it sort of works for the bulk & fiber angle.
AIUI, there is no daily minimum number of carbs and no essential carbs required for humans, as opposed to essential amino and fatty acids. The human body may prefer carbs versus fat for energy, but you can live just fine on a healthy zero carb diet as far as I know.
I believe that Eskimos (Inuit peoples) are used as an example of this working on a long term basis.
The “Lore” that usually follows, once they started eating lots of carbs and grains, they all ballooned out and got Diabetes, correct?
No, I beleive they started out with increased heart disease and high blood pressure. Eating carbs doesn’t cause diabetes, that is a myth.
Do you have a cite that isn’t written by someone promoting his own diet books and… organ meat supplements?
Yeah, obesity causing diabetes goes back, oh a couple thousand years. Very persistent “Myth”.
Eating whale blubber at a high level doesn’t sound all that great either. I’m just trying to emphasize that a certain amount of bulk, and fiber, is necessary along with adequate fats and protein. You know, a “balanced” diet. You can eat all your favorite foods in sensible amounts, “one meal a day” is well suited for this.
Many obese people are not type 2 diabetic. It’s more complicated than that and is kind of off topic.
What makes the OMD plan work is that too many people are constantly eating something all day long with few breaks in between. OMD gives them a chance to use the energy in what they eat and then start using the bodies stored energy during those “fastening” hours in between. Carbs or no carbs when you do eat, you have to give your body time to burn that off and then go after your body fat.
Not to hijack, but I assume that after a meal your body utilizes the energy derived from what you just ate, and when that is depleted, it next uses the glycogen in your liver for energy, and only after that is depleted does it use body fat as an energy source.
If that is correct, how long does it take to deplete your liver glycogen, assuming it was full at the time of your meal? If you’re using up and replacing glycogen throughout the day you’re not going to lose weight since you aren’t depleting your fat storage. Would that be true regardless of your daily energy balance?
Of course, once you deplete your liver glycogen, you will have to burn fat to provide energy for your body, and this happens during the night for most people I think.