Carbs & Sugar

timfra

I'm confused. I track Carbs as a Macro and Sugar as Micro. Should I add them together to get the total carb intake? Should I subject the Sugar and Fiber to get Net Carbs?

lynn_glenmont

It really depends on the database entries you're using. The MFP database fields reflect the format of U.S. nutritional labels when MFP was designed, which included sugars and fiber in total carbs, but there's no way of knowing whether an individual database entry reflects that assumption, or nutritional labeling from a country where the requirement is to show net carbs, or a user attempt to create a net carbs entry, which may or may not have been a successful attempt.

Are you under medical advice to track net carbs, or are you following a dietary approach such as keto that requires you to track net carbs, or are you trying to do it because you read some stuff on the Internet that made you think it's important for you to track net carbs, but you don't really know why?

For purposes of controlling your weight, there's no need to worry about net carbs or total carbs. For that, tracking calories is sufficient. If you want to track something else, for general health purposes, just about every other macro or micro is more important than carbs, unless you have a medical condition (such as diabetes) that requires you to track carbs, or you have decided to follow a ketogenic WOE.

rheddmobile

You would definitely never subtract sugar to get net carbs, because sugar is a carb which your body uses the same as any other carb. Net carbs is total carbs minus fiber, which is indigestible.

Modern American labeling lists sugar, but that sugar is already included in the entry for carbs, so you don’t need to add it.

Hollywoods406

Follow on question here - about the database/MFP system. Not looking to get into the "right" way to count carbs.

The idea of MFP is to accurately account for the numbers you're taking in (calories, carbs, protein etc). Then, compare that to the pre-determined plan for weight gain/loss. For this MFP database, can I be confident that the sugar in a particular food is already accounted for in its carb count? Then, simply ignore the sugar column?
Or is it saying that, in addition to the recommended carbs, I should find an additional 50 g of sugar?

Sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but an additional 50 g of sugar is about 200 calories. That's a significant portion of your overall calorie intake. And would definitely change food choices (for example, handfuls of berries to get the carbs and sugar right, then much less chicken to keep the calories in check). That doesn't seem like a logical plan for weight management; whether that's to gain, lose or maintain.

Thanks in advance!

musicfan68

Sugar is carbs, and as stated above, is already included in the total carb count.

lemurcat2

Hollywoods406 wrote: »

Follow on question here - about the database/MFP system. Not looking to get into the "right" way to count carbs.

The idea of MFP is to accurately account for the numbers you're taking in (calories, carbs, protein etc). Then, compare that to the pre-determined plan for weight gain/loss. For this MFP database, can I be confident that the sugar in a particular food is already accounted for in its carb count? Then, simply ignore the sugar column?
Or is it saying that, in addition to the recommended carbs, I should find an additional 50 g of sugar?

Sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but an additional 50 g of sugar is about 200 calories. That's a significant portion of your overall calorie intake. And would definitely change food choices (for example, handfuls of berries to get the carbs and sugar right, then much less chicken to keep the calories in check). That doesn't seem like a logical plan for weight management; whether that's to gain, lose or maintain.

Thanks in advance!

Yes, if the entries are correct, sugar is in carbs.

It seems like you are thinking that MFP is doing something it's not, however. It does not give you a nutrient plan (i.e., protein, fat, sugar, sodium) for weight loss. It gives you calories for your goals that you tell it, and then applies a default percentage to give you amounts for protein, etc. Most of us think of protein as a minimum, fiber as a minimum, sugar as a max, etc., although many of us would also say ignore sugar, since obviously if you are within your carbs, hitting your protein and fiber, and getting most of your sugar from fruits, veg, and dairy, going over on sugar is not a big deal.

But certainly MFP is not saying there's some benefit to hitting your macros vs being under or getting the max amount of sugar that comes up in the default (which is 15% of total cals). What macros are actually going to work best for you will be personal, although on lower cals (which it seems you are) the protein number is probably good to hit or exceed.

lemurcat2

timfra wrote: »

I'm confused. I track Carbs as a Macro and Sugar as Micro. Should I add them together to get the total carb intake? Should I subject the Sugar and Fiber to get Net Carbs?

If you are using US or Canadian entries not labelled net carbs, then, if you care about net carbs you would subtract fiber from carbs. Fiber, sugar, and starch are all within US and Canadian carb counts.

rheddmobile

Hollywoods406 wrote: »

Follow on question here - about the database/MFP system. Not looking to get into the "right" way to count carbs.

The idea of MFP is to accurately account for the numbers you're taking in (calories, carbs, protein etc). Then, compare that to the pre-determined plan for weight gain/loss. For this MFP database, can I be confident that the sugar in a particular food is already accounted for in its carb count? Then, simply ignore the sugar column?
Or is it saying that, in addition to the recommended carbs, I should find an additional 50 g of sugar?

Sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but an additional 50 g of sugar is about 200 calories. That's a significant portion of your overall calorie intake. And would definitely change food choices (for example, handfuls of berries to get the carbs and sugar right, then much less chicken to keep the calories in check). That doesn't seem like a logical plan for weight management; whether that's to gain, lose or maintain.

Thanks in advance!

It’s actually simpler than that. Calories are calories and MFP counts them for you. You don’t need to know how many carbs, fat, and protein you are getting to know how many calories because it has already calculated the calories for you.

The macros - carbs, fat, and protein are additional information about where those calories are coming from. You don’t even need to worry about them unless you have a health-related reason such as diabetes or are doing a specific macro-based diet such as keto. Some people find some macros more filling than others, and this information can be useful for that reason, but calories are calories and as long as you meet your calorie goal you should lose weight according to plan.