Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> As far as my doctor's diet guidelines go, that'd be 'effectively 17g of "sugar"'.

> I've been told to use an offhand rule of fiber vs sugar as a ratio. For every 1 gram of fiber 'up to' 50 of carbs ~ calories, with lower better.

I don't think this really captures the concept of "sugar". Here's ordinary sourdough bread: https://beckmannsbakery.com/collections/sourdough-breads/pro...

Serving size 38g, 22g carbohydrate, 0g fiber.

By the time you're saying that most of what everyone eats is nothing but sugar, you've taken things too far. Grain isn't sugar.

(I'm really curious what the rest of the bread is. The nutrition facts note 4g of protein, but that leaves 12 grams, or 32% of the bread (!) unaccounted for.)





Probably various forms of plant carbon compounds that don't count as fiber? Filler?

Maybe other minerals, salt is some but not 12g of it.


> Probably various forms of plant carbon compounds that don't count as fiber?

The difficulty I have with this idea is that they would have to also not count as "carbohydrate".

> Maybe other minerals, salt is some but not 12g of it.

Sodium is reported to the microgram, so we know that salt is 0.5g of it.

For one third of the bread to be "minerals", I'd start to worry that it'd be more like eating a rock than eating bread.

EDIT: it has been brought to my attention that the missing weight is water.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: