Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by FHS on June 8, 2011 at 11:35am

I guess this was stated in the other thread, but since you are for the free market, free market forces will dicate whether or not we, as diabetics, have our needs met.

I suggest this:

Do you know of any restaurants with diabetic friendly menus? If so, start a thread and list them. encourage diabetics to go to those places and specifically request the diabetic friendly plates. When restaurants see that diabetics can be a economically powerful group, they will follow suit and start to offer products for our needs.

In-N-Out is very diabetic friendly in my opinion. You can request a meat patty grilled with onions wrapped in lettuce.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ivan E. Cao-Berg on June 14, 2011 at 12:09pm

i understand your point. i mean, there are gluten-free bakeries, why not sugar-free ones?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lila on June 14, 2011 at 12:28pm

Because 'sugar free' does not mean diabetes friendly!!!!

I did a google search for 'sugar free ice cream'. Of the first 10 results, two yielded sugar free ice creams that were commercially available and had nutritional information. The comparisons were very interesting. Using plain vanilla as my unit of comparison, these were the results.

The first was an ice cream made from oats. It is marketed as being 'sugar-free', 'low carb' and 'suitable for slimmers and diabetics'. For a serving of 100g, there is 2.28g of carb in this ice cream. Yup! That's low carb indeed.

The second ice cream brand I got was from a beautifully designed, flashy website selling 'all natural sugar free ice cream'. But click on the nutritional information and to my horror, this 'all natural sugar free ice cream' contains 27g of carb per 100g!

To compare, I went to my local supermarket online shopping site. The 'diabetic vanilla ice cream' contained 17.9 g carb per 100g. I then looked up a non-diabetic vanilla ice cream, and this weighed in at 20.2g carb per 100g serving.

So of the four vanilla ice creams I looked up, the HIGHEST carb count was the 'all natural sugar free ice cream'. Containing even more carbs than the ordinary, non-diabetic vanilla ice cream.

If these had been the flavours on offer in a restaurant, you would have been WORST off with the 'all natural sugar-free ice cream'.

Still think 'sugar-free' equals diabetes friendly?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BadMoonT2 on June 14, 2011 at 12:45pm

Just shows that you really can't believe simple labels like sugar free or diabetic friendly without looking at the ingredients. I personally am skeptical after seeing ingredient lists like you quote. I use a sugar free salad dressing which contains corn sugar, go figure. It's only 2g per 2 tablespoons so it works for me, but still....

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tim on June 15, 2011 at 3:21am

I did the exact same math you did Lila, about 15 years ago when "sugar free" ice cream first started showing up at the grocery store. And just like you, I found that the more they put "sugar free" in big letters, the more carbs the sugar free stuff had than the "regular" ice cream.

My conclusion was that "sugar free" was entirely a marketing trick and the manufacturers were slipping in sugars that somehow weren't legally counted as sugars. Maybe I'm too cynical but this and other comparisons have led me to the conclusion that "sugar free" rarely is a desirable characteristic in a food. (There are some exceptions of course. I wouldn't dream of drinking a can of non-diet soda, my bg would go into the 400's immediately.)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by neilin on June 21, 2011 at 9:58am

Good information! Thanks for reminding us that the carbs need to be counted.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gerri on June 14, 2011 at 1:49pm

We're up against a wall when items are listed "free" of any ingredient because something else is substituted that often is worse. For example, fat-free items typically have more carbs & sugar than its full fat cousin & as well as additional chemical flavor enhancers. Sugar-free usually contains sugar alcohols which can cause gastric distress for some & high BG for others who can metabolize sugar alcohols.

I stay away from packaged prepared food & chain restaurants.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BMD on June 14, 2011 at 5:25pm

Ice cream is pure evil. I ate out last night and decided to share a little bit of ice cream for dessert with my wife. I did not even have a full scoop. Anyway, my BGL 2 hours later was 228! Geeeez...it has been quite some time since I had broken through the lofty 200 plateau. I was angry with myself afterward for indulging in something in which I knew better. To add insult to injury, it wasn't even some specialty-flavor ice cream. It was plain vanilla!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by acidrock23 on June 14, 2011 at 6:08pm

I always just compare the labels of the same brand, apples to apples as it were and it's pretty consistent that "sugar free" ice cream ends up having more carbs.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by gphx on June 14, 2011 at 10:12pm

A trend that disturbs me is the appearance of 'Sugars' on the nutritional label. Not a big deal if listed with carbohydrates as well so one can avoid misunderstanding. The other day though I ran into my first product with 'Sugars' listed but carbs not listed at all. If you see this kind of thing and agree with me please email the food manufacturers and/or restaurateurs and share your viewpoint.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lila on June 15, 2011 at 2:41am

That irritates the hell out of me.

The leading (only) national chain of conveyor belt sushi here in the UK only lists sugars on their nutritional information. I emailed the company to explain why having only the sugar count was not enough, and why they need to state the carb count as well. I got a totally unrepentant reply saying 'we are only legally required to provide information on sugar, not carbs'.

Luckily, their sushi is also the worst I have ever tried on four continents, so they don't have to worry about their unhelpful attitude losing them a customer!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pastelpainter on June 15, 2011 at 3:08am

I went to a sushi and hot wok place for lunch today. I avoid sushi these days because of the rice, but the hot wok is very obliging, I had the requisite two stirfry meat dishes, without batter and batter and honey, then asked if I could have vegetable stirfry instead of rice. They obviously think me a bit odd, but then what Asian could live without his rice, and I got to enjoy my lunch with not a trace of guilt.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page