Product Corner - Dreamfield's low carb pasta vs. whole wheat

I used to be very seriously into low carbing.  Now, I've progressed to monitoring calories, and carbs to a certain extent but not as militantly as I had previously, and I generally try to eat deliciously with an eye toward healthfulness.

That said, I started to wonder if paying extra for the "special" pasta produced by Dreamfield's (long story short: they claim to have a proprietary recipe and manufacturing process that prevents you from absorbing the carbs in the product, which is made with durum wheat semolina.)

So, I bought some of my grocery store brand's "healthy menu" whole wheat pasta to compare to Dreamfields, to see if maybe I can get away from spending the extra $ if not needed.

Here is my super-mathematical analysis:Dreamfields (375g box costs $3.79 CDN)--
serving of 2 oz dry (56g), it's:
190 cal
41g carb total
5 g fiber (3g soluble, 2g insoluble)

Whole Wheat (375g box costs $1.49 CDN):
serving of 75g dry (so, that's about 1/3 more?):
270 cal
54g carb total
8g of fiber (2g soluble, 6g insoluble).

I broke out calories/gram

Dreamfields: 190/56 = 3.39 (let's call that 3.4)
Whole wheat: 270/75= 3.6

so that's .2 cals per g difference.

If I work that back to the same size serving as the Dreamfields (56g), the whole wheat comes to about 202 cals.

So, it's about 12 cal more per serving (if 2oz is the serving) and perhaps a touch more fiber.

Given that Dreamfields is a bit iffy on the whole "our carbs magically don't get processed by your system" thing (your mileage may vary, I've heard the whole gamut on whether they impact blood sugar etc.)-- my conclusion is that I can buy the whole wheat pasta instead. And save $2.30 per box.

Did that make sense?  MATH! It wins every time!

btw-- pasta is a sometimes-treat for me (as Cookie Monster now says about cookies...). I'm pretty convinced about the whole gluten/wheat/wheat-belly-the-book thing, but I do like a little pasta now and then. Moderation is key.