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

Carbs v Sugars

CatseyesQQ

CatseyesQQ

Newbie
Messages
2
Type of diabetes
Treatment type
Diet only
Can anyone explain what the traffic light system means regarding Carbs and sugar content please
I know that sugar is a carb, but if there are eg: 10g carbs of which 2g are sugar? What is this telling me?
Thanks
 
It is telling people who only care more about sugar (e.g. dentists) about sugar.
It is of little interest to someone with diabetes.
We are interested in the total number of carbs.
 
CatseyesQQ said:
Can anyone explain what the traffic light system means regarding Carbs and sugar content please
I know that sugar is a carb, but if there are eg: 10g carbs of which 2g are sugar? What is this telling me?
Thanks
Click to expand...
Practically all carbs turn to sugar once ingested. "Of which sugars" just means that is what went in as a sugar ingredient... The rest of the carbs are starches, usually. And those, too, affect bloodsugar. In the US you have to deduct the fibre content, but in the UK/Europe that's already been done. That's called "net carbs".

Basically you want to know the carb content. The "of which sugars" is rather useless for a T2. So if you want to know how many carbs to count, you count then 10, not the 2.
 
I really hate the way the labeling system works and because people are not too aware its easy for them to advertise something that seems to be healthy, which actually isn't.

A lot of the time they will say little, or no sugar, so you turn it over and look on the back 'of which sugars' is 0. But the carbs can be anything, this is dangerous for a diabetic. People don't see sugar as carbs and vice versa (sugar is just a simple form of carbohydrate which releases energy quickly). So its easy for them to pull the wool over peoples eyes by saying low in sugar.
 
The only difference that I can see is the the 'of which sugars' will hit the bg faster (but not by much) than the other carbs.
For instance if a food is 76g of carbs per 100g of which sugars is 55g then that is going to blow your head off.
But the carb count tells us which foods to avoid at a glance so of which sugars unless extrememly high percentage can be ignored.
 
CatseyesQQ said:
Can anyone explain what the traffic light system means regarding Carbs and sugar content please
I know that sugar is a carb, but if there are eg: 10g carbs of which 2g are sugar? What is this telling me?
Thanks
Click to expand...

Please ignore the traffic lights and instead get used to reading the nutritional labelling.
Try to find things that are lower than 10g per 100g carbohydrate or even better less than 5g per 100g and eat those. Your body and blood sugar levels will reward you aplenty. The "of which sugars" is pointless.
 
Last edited:
‘Carbohydrates’ are polysaccharides, a chain of monosaccharides. Sugar is a disaccharide, two monosaccharides. For the most part, all saccharides are broken down into a monosaccharide - glucose. Polysaccharides take longer to deconstruct into monos, but in the end, they still contribute to the same overall glucose burden in the body. If you’re insulin resistant - too much glucose in the body - then this is a major problem.

The traffic light system is a joke.
 
CatseyesQQ said:
Can anyone explain what the traffic light system means regarding Carbs and sugar content please
I know that sugar is a carb, but if there are eg: 10g carbs of which 2g are sugar? What is this telling me?
Thanks
Click to expand...

As type 1 with Insulin I carb count so I read the carbs in the nutritional value.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi. As others have said just ignore the Traffic Light labelling as it's remarkably stupid and useless for those who want to lose weight as well as for diabetes. Always look at the back of the pack and the (very) small listing.
 
I think we sometimes forget traffic lights are a generalisation for all members of the population not just those with one or more medical conditions.
As I mentioned above, knowing how much sugar in a food is relevant to dentists ... and few of us have had all our teeth knocked out!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
helensaramay said:
@Jim Lahey - I think we sometimes forget traffic lights are a generalisation for all members of the population not just those with one or more medical conditions.
As I mentioned above, knowing how much sugar in a food is relevant to dentists ... and few of us have had all our teeth knocked out!
Click to expand...

My point was that the traffic light system in general is balderdash. Mainly in its demonisation of fat, salt & sugar, whilst completely exonerating carbohydrate as a potential risk factor. Carbohydrate doesn’t suddenly become a problem after you’re diagnosed with diabetes (T2DM).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can we all please wait to see if the OP comes back to clarify whether she takes insulin and stop bickering about it. There is a known forum glitch which sometimes shows Type 2 Insulin dependent when in fact they don’t take insulin.
@CatseyesQQ if you don’t take insulin could you please go back into your profile preferences and select the other type 2 option, that should remove the insulin dependent status that some people are seeing on your avatar. Thanks.
 
If instead of "of which sugars" it was "of which added sugars" it might be of some use to chastise manufacturers who insist on adding sugar to foods that don't need it. As it is, as others have said, it is useless unless perhaps it is some help to insulin users as a rough guide to GI to help with their dosing.
 
CatseyesQQ said:
Can anyone explain what the traffic light system means regarding Carbs and sugar content please
I know that sugar is a carb, but if there are eg: 10g carbs of which 2g are sugar? What is this telling me?
Thanks
Click to expand...
It's a con to make high carb foods (basically sugar) appear less sugary by only showing added sugar. Within the body carbs are seen and metabolised as sugar (fibre is meant to be benign, but I recall reading some have an insulin rise with indigestible fibre).

For example, most breakfast cereal is around 70 grams of carbs per 100, to get the sugar (teaspoon) equivalent (maximally) divide the total amount by 4; this is how this clip of a BBC documentary was able to show that a large baked potato is the equivalent of 19 teaspoons of sugar (2 mins 43 secs).


When is the lying / deception going to stop, food choices for the metabolically challenged should be evidence based. "Prove it" campaign coming soon.
 
Mbaker said:
t's a con to make high carb foods (basically sugar) appear less sugary by only showing added sugar.
Click to expand...
That's not correct, the "of which sugar" refers to the simple sugars in the product as distinct from starches. If it referred to added sugar it might be of marginally more use.
 
Mr_Pot said:
That's not correct, the "of which sugar" refers to the simple sugars in the product as distinct from starches. If it referred to added sugar it might be of marginally more use.
Click to expand...
So how do "they" show added sugars. I searched the foods in my home and could only find 2 with the traffic system, there wasn't an area for naturally occurring sugars and added.
 
Mbaker said:
So how do "they" show added sugars. I searched the foods in my home and could only find 2 with the traffic system, there wasn't an area for naturally occurring sugars and added.
Click to expand...
They don't. It would be better if they did.
The traffic light system references the Recommended Daily Amount, since there is no RDA for carbs, there is no traffic light.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dear members,

Posts have been removed due to confusion about T2/T2 on insulin. It is a known forum glitch that sometimes a T2 can wrongly be shown as on insulin on some devices. Sadly, it seems to be one of those glitches that can't be repaired for now.

@CatseyesQQ , that seems to have happened with your profile. Some members saw T2, diet only, some saw T2 on insulin. It would be appreciated if you could tell us which one it is.

Other off topic posts have been removed as well, mainly because they were referring to edited or deleted posts and causing more confusion.
 
Back
Top