The Diabetes Forum Support Community For Diabetics Online banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Administrator
Type 2
Joined
·
1,997 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
When you are calculating your carbs, do YOU count total carbs or net carbs?

Have you tested your results both ways?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,076 Posts
When you are calculating your carbs, do YOU count total carbs or net carbs?

Have you tested your results both ways?
I no longer to count carbs, but when I did I used net carbs, subtracting fiber and sugar alcohols. I have never seen anything to indicate that it wasn't accurate. However, I don't eat a lot of fiber and try to keep it low, so it wouldn't make much difference anyway.

For those trying to figure this out using glucose meters, I think a few points are important and need mention. As we know, the meters are not very accurate. 10 to 20% off in either direction is "normal" and acceptable.

More importantly, unless your digestible carb to fiber ratio changes DRASTICALLY from day to day or meal to meal, making this determination with a glucose meter is well nigh impossible.

If you really want to know if fiber affects blood sugar or not, perform a home OFTT (Oral Fiber Tolerance Test). From a stable and fasted starting point, take 75g of pure fiber in a glass of water. Then, measure your blood sugar periodically for 4 hours. That's at least somewhat scientific.

I'm sure enough of what my result will be that I see need to do this test. But, if anyone does it, PLEASE post results. I'm very curious.

On the other hand, if you get better control by counting fiber as carbs like the way some people get to work on time by setting their clocks ten minutes ahead, then by all means carry on and don't let me disrupt that at all.

The science IS nevertheless interesting and I would really like to see it resolved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
830 Posts
I go by total carbs. Having eaten lots of whole grains, fruits and vegetables I figure I've got the intestinal "flora" to digest things people who've eaten mainly white starch and sugars would not have. And sugar alcohols do raise my BG and don't give me the "backdoor trots" as my gmom used to call it I figure I'm digesting them too. Anyway for me it's easier not to try to figure what to subtract and just go by the total carbs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,235 Posts
I'm another one that counts total carbs. I've tried counting net carbs and found some ugly results by using the net carb counts. Now if I just count all the carbs, I can figure my meals and insulin a lot closer to what's really going on in my body.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MaJoie and Cricket

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,076 Posts
I go by total carbs. Having eaten lots of whole grains, fruits and vegetables I figure I've got the intestinal "flora" to digest things people who've eaten mainly white starch and sugars would not have. And sugar alcohols do raise my BG and don't give me the "backdoor trots" as my gmom used to call it I figure I'm digesting them too. Anyway for me it's easier not to try to figure what to subtract and just go by the total carbs.
If you check into this, you will find out that there is NOTHING in your large intestine where that "flora" lives that can produce glucose from fiber or from anything else - even starch if it reaches there. Bacteria in your intestine can indeed digest some of the things that we cannot, but they cannot produce glucose from it. Mainly they produce SCFAs (short chain fatty acids, a kind of fat) and a few other things like butyrate, but never glucose.

Even cows can't do that! A large part of their nutrition is SCFAs which they make in their fermentation chamber (with help from bacteria) from plant fiber. Yes, they get "nutrition" even from cellulose (which we can do exactly NOTHING with), but not in the form of glucose.

Again, if you really want to know for sure, take them in isolation. Or, at least vary them widely. So, for example if you eat 100g "total" carbs, how much of that is fiber? If it's typically let's say 25g, try having a day where it's 75g out of the 100 and then another where it's 5g or 0g and compare the results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
I track both, but I use the net carb count to make an initial determination of whether I can eat something. (Net, as a practical matter, means that I subtract fiber. I don't consume enough sugar alcohol to know whether it makes a difference to me or not.)

I haven't formally tested total v. net, but since I've tracked every bite I've eaten since early October against blood glucose response, I have a pretty good sense of what matters. What nudges my blood glucose uncomfortably close to 140 is a net of over around 20 in any 3-hour period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MaJoie

·
Registered
Joined
·
394 Posts
On the other hand, if you get better control by counting fiber as carbs like the way some people get to work on time by setting their clocks ten minutes ahead, then by all means carry on and don't let me disrupt that at all.
I think if someone thinks they've fooled themselves by setting their clock forward 10 minutes to get to work on time...they're not actually awake yet. :vs_no_no_no:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,533 Posts
I set my clock up five minutes fast so I get up five minutes earlier, but 5:00 AM feels so much better than 4:55 AM

I don't count carbs everyday anymore either. When I do count, I count total because I'm lazy. I can see where it could make someone think 'well, that 25 grams is half fiber, maybe I can have that biscuit this morning.' Anybody doing that????
 
  • Like
Reactions: MaJoie and smorgan

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
I set my clock up five minutes fast so I get up five minutes earlier, but 5:00 AM feels so much better than 4:55 AM
:laugh2:- I used to say a quarter to six, because it felt so much better than 5:45. Now I have a job I can roll into on my own schedule, so I show up around 11 AM.

I can see where it could make someone think 'well, that 25 grams is half fiber, maybe I can have that biscuit this morning.' Anybody doing that????
I am experimenting with a variety of things (including bread) but it has nothing to do with net v. total carbs. Just testing how many carbs I can eat, and whether the source matters.

I seem to be able to occasionally have small amounts of bread. My tolerance for (net) carbs from grains seems to be the same as my tolerance for (net) carbs from most other sources. Bread is so carb dense it is unlikely I'll indulge much (I've had 3 small slices since October). But it is nice to know that I can occasionally enjoy a small piece of bread as part of an otherwise low/carb-free meal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mbuster

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,076 Posts
I set my clock up five minutes fast so I get up five minutes earlier, but 5:00 AM feels so much better than 4:55 AM

I don't count carbs everyday anymore either. When I do count, I count total because I'm lazy. I can see where it could make someone think 'well, that 25 grams is half fiber, maybe I can have that biscuit this morning.' Anybody doing that????
Well, I wouldn't be looking at that biscuit in the first place. But, if I was still counting and I was adding a cup of string beans to my dinner, I would definitely count the 10g of digestible carb and NOT the 5g of fiber because I know that I can't digest the latter, let along turn it into glucose.

Again, set your clocks ahead, by all means if that suits you. But, let's please refrain from starting an urban legend here about mystery beings that can do with plant fibers what even cows can't do! That's why I keep suggesting for anyone who believes this to subject it to a closer and at least moderately scientific look. I wonder why I never get any takers?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mbuster

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,076 Posts
Bounty:
I am not sure how you took something that I did not post and made it look like a quote from me. Whether that was done on purpose by you or by mistake it is surely bad form!

A persons quote should never be altered except by that person....:vs_shocked:

If you are not sure what I am talking about, please look at my only post in this thread. Then look at what you posted as a quote from me...!
Yeah, that quote was mine, actually. In any case let's assume it wasn't done intentionally and in any case, his post was a JOKE, so does it really matter?

But on that topic: Setting clocks ahead DOES work for people who do it, there's no denying that. It doesn't change what time it really is, but the PERCEPTION of looking at that clock really does help them to get to work on time.

Unless/until some real science confirms that there are people capable of turning fiber into glucose, I'll assume that counting "total" carbs is exactly analogous to this. I'm NOT knocking it by any means. If it works, it works. For that individual it really makes no difference whether fiber is becoming glucose or not, just like it doesn't matter that it's really 9:55 and not really 10:00 in the other case.

BUT, I feel it's different if we say or imply that we are indeed digesting fiber into glucose. That goes against established science, so IMO we really should have something better than "I do it and it works" before making such a claim. New folks seeking to learn here should be getting correct information as much as possible. My $0.02.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,076 Posts
Net carbs, gross carbs, doesnt much matter because in the final analysis your glucometer does the count and reports the result that matters.
Yeah, it sure does - with a 20% margin of error. What percentage of most people's "total carbs" on here is fiber? Maybe 10%, give or take? As I said, answering this question with your meter faced with a mixed diet (and a relatively stable fiber to carb ratio in most cases), statistically speaking is a LOST CAUSE.

If anyone is curious about the answer, DO THE TEST. If you don't care, no problem, just leave this issue to science. But, I don't believe any speculation about the answer to the question can be made by meter readings as described.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MaJoie

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Yeah, it sure does - with a 20% margin of error. What percentage of most people's "total carbs" on here is fiber? Maybe 10%, give or take? As I said, answering this question with your meter faced with a mixed diet (and a relatively stable fiber to carb ratio in most cases), statistically speaking is a LOST CAUSE.

If anyone is curious about the answer, DO THE TEST. If you don't care, no problem, just leave this issue to science. But, I don't believe any speculation about the answer to the question can be made by meter readings as described.
Am I understanding you to say that, bottom line, the fiber is irrelevant, that the total carb effect is what's going to show up on the meter?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
I don't count the carbs to precision either because I eat generally very low count of it. However, as I mentioned in my sugar post, I enjoy from time to time See's sugar free candy that includes sugar alcohols. I know from my BG reading that I seem to tolerate sugar alcohols rather well and see not much spike at all. Yet if I were to eat the same amount of carbs but mostly from sugar with a real chocolate, I will see a significantly greater increase in sugar. So I do pay attention to fiber and sugar alcohol, but never completely lose the sight of total carb number.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,076 Posts
Am I understanding you to say that, bottom line, the fiber is irrelevant, that the total carb effect is what's going to show up on the meter?
Current law requires that the figure for "carbs" on labels contains sugars, starches, fibers and any other polysaccharides that humans don't digest. Starch and fiber are both polysaccharides, but starch can be digested down to glucose where fiber cannot. The mono- and di-saccharides in food generally all be digested and become glucose.

So, as foods are currently labeled, to get an accurate of ideas of carbs in food which will turn into glucose, you subtract the fiber figure from the total carbs. That's assuming the labels themselves are accurate and honest according to the law.

So, yes, as things are currently defined in the science, the fiber content of food is assumed irrelevant to amounts glucose produced as food is digested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MaJoie

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,533 Posts
Well, I wouldn't be looking at that biscuit in the first place. But, if I was still counting and I was adding a cup of string beans to my dinner, I would definitely count the 10g of digestible carb and NOT the 5g of fiber because I know that I can't digest the latter, let along turn it into glucose.

Again, set your clocks ahead, by all means if that suits you. But, let's please refrain from starting an urban legend here about mystery beings that can do with plant fibers what even cows can't do! That's why I keep suggesting for anyone who believes this to subject it to a closer and at least moderately scientific look. I wonder why I never get any takers?
I agree with the indigestible fiber not resulting in glucose, I just don't subtract, or eat something based on fiber content. You did catch that I didn't say "anybody else do that???"
I think my 3 red blinks on the Ketonix and 1.0 blood ketones this morning hints that I don't look at the biscuit in the first place as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MaJoie and smorgan
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top