• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Counting Carbs Question

I

iwhoadmin

Member
Messages
22
So I asked an artificial intelligence (Chat.openai.com) :
when counting carbs for Diabetes , do you subtract the fiber ?

this is the response:
When counting carbohydrates for diabetes management, it is generally recommended to subtract the amount of dietary fiber from the total carbohydrate count.

Fiber is a type of carbohydrate that the body cannot digest and absorb, so it does not raise blood sugar levels like other types of carbohydrates do. Subtracting the fiber from the total carbohydrate count gives a more accurate estimate of the impact of carbohydrates on blood sugar levels.

For example, if a food item contains 20 grams of total carbohydrates and 5 grams of fiber, the net carbohydrate count would be 15 grams (20g - 5g = 15g). This is the amount of carbohydrates that is likely to affect blood sugar levels and needs to be accounted for when planning meals and calculating insulin doses.

It's important to note that while fiber does not have a direct impact on blood sugar levels, it is still an important nutrient for overall health and can help regulate digestion, promote satiety, and lower cholesterol levels.


Do other carb counters include or subtract fiber ?
 
Hi,

This question cropped up for me when I read the book “think like a pancreas”. After researching online I established that uk food labelling has already deducted the fibre, so the carbohydrate value on the packet is already nett of the fibre. But in America and other countries this is not the case so then the fibre needs to be deducted.

Perhaps others might comment soon if they know something I don’t.
 
iwhoadmin said:
when counting carbs for Diabetes , do you subtract the fiber ?
Click to expand...
Depends where you are, for instance in the US yes you need to subtract it, if in the UK then no you don't (as has already been mentioned its already been subtracted).
For other countries you would need to find out whether it has or hasnt already
 
The hint is in the spelling.
You need to subtract the fiber (US spelling). You do not need to subtract fibre (UK spelling).

Talking to a friend who is a journalist, you need to be careful with ChatGPT. It does get one or two facts wrong.
Purely out of curiosity (not to submit to a newspaper), my friend tried writing an article on he latest ranking for a local school using ChatGOT, It said the schools was "Outstanding" when it was not.
 
Rokaab said:
Depends where you are, for instance in the US yes you need to subtract it, if in the UK then no you don't (as has already been mentioned its already been subtracted).
For other countries you would need to find out whether it has or hasnt already
Click to expand...
Thanks for that clarification. It never dawned on me that it would be different.
 
In Response said:
The hint is in the spelling.
You need to subtract the fiber (US spelling). You do not need to subtract fibre (UK spelling).

Talking to a friend who is a journalist, you need to be careful with ChatGPT. It does get one or two facts wrong.
Purely out of curiosity (not to submit to a newspaper), my friend tried writing an article on he latest ranking for a local school using ChatGOT, It said the schools was "Outstanding" when it was not.
Click to expand...
I agree on ChatGPT I have been testing it since it came out. I write code and in that arena it wrote entire programs in minutes that would have taken me day. I always trust but verify. Thanks for the tip on the spelling, I will keep that in mind in the future.
 
iwhoadmin said:
Thanks for that clarification. It never dawned on me that it would be different.
Click to expand...
Not just the fibre/carbs issue: they also use different measurement systems for blood glucose values, compared to the UK, and often omit the units used, being usually unaware that many other countries don't do what the US does.

So beware the US source that states eg "levels above 6.5 are considered diabetes" - that's a US percentage (6.5%) measurement for HbA1c NOT a UK fingerprick test result of 6.5 mmol/litre.
 
iwhoadmin said:
I agree on ChatGPT I have been testing it since it came out. I write code and in that arena it wrote entire programs in minutes that would have taken me day. I always trust but verify. Thanks for the tip on the spelling, I will keep that in mind in the future.
Click to expand...
A bit off topic , but my understanding is that any artificial intelligence gizmo can only be as accurate/complete as the original data it's fed and so works with....
 
Going back to the original question about fibre . Is the intent of the question about how to count or whether you should count fibre? The how is answered above.

Regarding whether you should count fibre :- I’ve found a core of USA based people swearing blind you should include fibre in your calculations but no explanation ever of why. Considering as you say fibre actually isn’t absorbed and can even help give a slower and smoother absorption of glucose (allowing insulin to keep up with it if limited in supply perhaps?) that makes no sense to me. Personally I think it’s about the fact that their labels include fiber and it’s simply easier than deducting it. These same people do often have a higher carb limit though which partially accommodates this. It can however mean you avoid things like vegetables which have high fibre and low carbs which again makes no sense to me. If they were right few fibre eating diabetics would ever get good control or keto followers seeking weight loss would achieve their goals. Again that’s not true so disproves their method imo.
 
On the subject of artificial intelligence, everyone used to have total faith in computers, to give accurate answers as they could not be wrong. The expression to explain obvious mistakes was.

s%^t in, s%^T out.

If the original programmed data was wrong, the calculation would be right, but the answer totally wrong.
 
ajbod said:
On the subject of artificial intelligence, everyone used to have total faith in computers, to give accurate answers as they could not be wrong. The expression to explain obvious mistakes was.

s%^t in, s%^T out.

If the original programmed data was wrong, the calculation would be right, but the answer totally wrong.
Click to expand...
AKA "garbage in garbage out", abbreviated to, and as I learned it: "GIGO". and which as far as I'm concerned doesn't necessarily just apply to computer data.... :banghead:
 
Back
Top