Mystery Carbohydrates??

[tim.tdj]

Hi Everyone

Often, when I am looking at Nutrition Facts labels, I find that the totals given for the different types of carbohydrate listed in the carbohydrate section do not fully add up to the total of all carbohydrates. This suggest to me that there are one or more types of carbohydrate which never get listed. Can anyone here therefore tell me if there are any carbohydrates which do not fall under any of the following four categories:

Sugars, Fibers, Starches and Polyols.

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Tim

 

[Bufofrog]

This is from wiki:

A carbohydrate is a biomolecule consisting of carbon (C), hydrogen (H) and oxygen (O) atoms, usually with a hydrogen–oxygen atom ratio of 2:1 (as in water) and thus with the empirical formula C_m(H₂O)_n 

Labels will give the total carbohydrates in a container.  People seem most interested in sugar and fiber content so this broken out for the consumer on the label.  

[tim.tdj]

51 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

This is from wiki:

A carbohydrate is a biomolecule consisting of carbon (C), hydrogen (H) and oxygen (O) atoms, usually with a hydrogen–oxygen atom ratio of 2:1 (as in water) and thus with the empirical formula C_m(H₂O)_n 

Labels will give the total carbohydrates in a container.  People seem most interested in sugar and fiber content so this broken out for the consumer on the label.  

Hi Bufofrog

Thank you very much for your reply. However, it does not fully answer my question. I would still very much like to know what carbohydrates do not fall under any of the four categories I mentioned in my original post. Does anyone here know?

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Tim

[chenbeier]

What about Formaldehyde CH2O, and its Polymers  Metaformaldehyd, 1,3,5-Trioxane and  Polymethylenoxide.

Edited January 3, 2021 by chenbeier

[Bufofrog]

1 hour ago, tim.tdj said:

I would still very much like to know what carbohydrates do not fall under any of the four categories I mentioned in my original post.

Here is a partial list of carbohydrates to help in your research:

https://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-carbohydrates.html

[tim.tdj]

1 hour ago, chenbeier said:

What about Formaldehyde CH2O, and its Polymers  Metaformaldehyd, 1,3,5-Trioxane and  Polymethylenoxide.

Hi Chenbeier

Thank you very much for your reply.

Aren't these toxic? I very much doubt they would be in food. Am I wrong?

1 hour ago, Bufofrog said:

Here is a partial list of carbohydrates to help in your research:

https://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-carbohydrates.html

Hi Bufofrog

Thank you very much for your this information. It may help.

[chenbeier]

Of course these are not healthy. I dont think in food toxic carbo hydrats added. I added this post to mention, which compounds fit to (CH2O)n.

[tim.tdj]

1 minute ago, chenbeier said:

Of course these are not healthy. I dont think in food toxic carbo hydrats added. I added this post to mention, which compounds fit to (CH2O)n.

Ok. Thank you very much.

[studiot]

The term 'Carbohydrates'  is strictly (c.H2O)₂ in Chemistry.

However this creates carbohydrate 'units' which form the basis or backbone of many bio-molecules.

These are therefore  part pure carbohydrate, part something else.

Sugars and so forth are pure carbohydrates, but the bio-molecules are not.

So the preparers of the food are giving you the % in terms of bio-molecules and in terms of those parts which are pure carbohydrate.

 

Edited January 3, 2021 by studiot

[tim.tdj]

5 hours ago, studiot said:

The term 'Carbohydrates'  is strictly (c.H2O)₂ in Chemistry.

However this creates carbohydrate 'units' which form the basis or backbone of many bio-molecules.

These are therefore  part pure carbohydrate, part something else.

Sugars and so forth are pure carbohydrates, but the bio-molecules are not.

So the preparers of the food are giving you the % in terms of bio-molecules and in terms of those parts which are pure carbohydrate.

 

Hi Studiot

Thank you very much for your reply.

I am currently looking at a packet of coconut flour and in the nutrition list  (given per 100g), it says the following:

Carbohydrates 27.2g

of which sugars 16.1g

It is a British packet so the fiber is counted separately to the carbohydrates.

To be honest, I am not sure I fully understand what you are saying, Studiot, but I think you seem to be saying something which if applied to the coconut flour would say that there are 27g of carbohydrate molecules and that each molecule consists of a sugar molecule with something else bonded to it and that if that something else was stripped away from the sugar molecules, the sugar molecules alone would be 16.1g. Am I correct?

In the case of the coconut flour, what actually is the something else?

Thank you very much.

[studiot]

I will try to find a fully explained example for you and also look at yours.

Meanwhile a photo or scan of the full data on the packet would be helpful please.

Edit

I also note my formula for carbohydrates got mangled

It should of course be (C.H2O)_n where is is usually counted as being greater than 4 and represents un unspecific multiple.

Sorry about that.

Edited January 4, 2021 by studiot

[tim.tdj]

53 minutes ago, studiot said:

I will try to find a fully explained example for you and also look at yours.

Meanwhile a photo or scan of the full data on the packet would be helpful please.

Edit

I also note my formula for carbohydrates got mangled

It should of course be (C.H2O)_n where is is usually counted as being greater than 4 and represents un unspecific multiple.

Sorry about that.

Hi Studiot

Thank you very much.

The manufacturer of the flour is called Lucy Bee. The following is copied and pasted from their website.

https://lucybee.com/products/organic-coconut-flour-500g
Ingredients
100% Organic Coconut Flour
Typical Values Per 100g
Energy (kj) 1757
Energy (kcal) 420
Fat 11.3g
of which Saturates 10.1g
Carbohydrate 27.2g
of which Sugars 16.1g
Fibre 36.5g
Protein 15.8g
Salt 0.3g
Iron 7.44mg
Potassium 2322mg

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Tim

 

[studiot]

I hope you noticed that the %ages do not add to 100% !

This is because suppliers in the UK are not required state explicitly the water content of foodstuffs.

Also the carbohydrate is often split into sugar and starch, with only one declared, so we have

Starch = Total carbs  27.2 - Sugars  = (27.2 -16.1 ) g

Your list also includes a lot of 'fibre'.
Now fibre covers a number of substances, some edible, some inedible.
Of that fibre most foods have fibre as "non starch polysaccharides" or NSPs.
NSPs are chemically also carbohydrates, some of which are edible (eg pectins) some are not (eg cellulose).

But some foods, and I think coconuts come into this category, have fibres material that are not strictly carbohydrates
So there is this category Fibre which crosses over with the Carbohydrates category.

So your lineup is

Fat              11.3
Sugars      16.1
Starch       11.1
Fibre           36.5
Protein      15.8
Minerals    02.6

Total           93.4

So the remaining 6.6% must be water.

You might like to compare this with standard bread flour which is kept to 14%

North Dakota State University has an analysis unit who might have also done coconut flour

https://www.ndsu.edu/faculty/simsek/wheat/flour.html

If you are interested  you might like to email them.

 

So  there are no 'missing' carbohydrates in your coconut flour, though some definitely are included under the fibre heading, not the carbohydrate heading.

Please also note that if you do  a web search to look for water content of foodstuff,
using 'moisture' is a better search word than 'water' as 'water' will return mostly recipe information of how much to add in cooking.

 

 

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by studiot

[tim.tdj]

45 minutes ago, studiot said:

I hope you noticed that the %ages do not add to 100% !

This is because suppliers in the UK are not required state explicitly the water content of foodstuffs.

Also the carbohydrate is often split into sugar and starch, with only one declared, so we have

Starch = Total carbs  27.2 - Sugars  = (27.2 -16.1 ) g

Your list also includes a lot of 'fibre'.
Now fibre covers a number of substances, some edible, some inedible.
Of that fibre most foods have fibre as "non starch polysaccharides" or NSPs.
NSPs are chemically also carbohydrates, some of which are edible (eg pectins) some are not (eg cellulose).

But some foods, and I think coconuts come into this category, have fibres material that are not strictly carbohydrates
So there is this category Fibre which crosses over with the Carbohydrates category.

So your lineup is

Fat              11.3
Sugars      16.1
Starch       11.1
Fibre           36.5
Protein      15.8
Minerals    02.6

Total           93.4

So the remaining 6.6% must be water.

You might like to compare this with standard bread flour which is kept to 14%

North Dakota State University has an analysis unit who might have also done coconut flour

https://www.ndsu.edu/faculty/simsek/wheat/flour.html

If you are interested  you might like to email them.

 

So  there are no 'missing' carbohydrates in your coconut flour, though some definitely are included under the fibre heading, not the carbohydrate heading.

Please also note that if you do  a web search to look for water content of foodstuff,
using 'moisture' is a better search word than 'water' as 'water' will return mostly recipe information of how much to add in cooking.

Hi Studiot

Thank you very much indeed for your very informative reply. I will check out the NDSU link you provided.

How sure are you that the 11.1g is all starch and nothing else?

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Tim

[studiot]

1 hour ago, tim.tdj said:

How sure are you that the 11.1g is all starch and nothing else?

 

In the UK they would have to tell you, though many EU and other foreign suppliers have been allowed to get away with inadequate food labelling in recent times.

 

If you are interested in what is in food and what sensible explanations of the terminology here are two books I recommend.

1) The current version of The Manual of Nutrition, published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO)

Lists official tables of contents/ingredients per 100g and per Kcal and provides a few pages of text explaining technical terms.

 

2) What Are you Eating ?  The food fact file     by Isabel Skypala

Again UK practice, but the tables are much more comprehensive and includes many branded products.

Isabella is a dietician and, as might be expected, offers more detailed advice in comparing.

Edited January 4, 2021 by studiot

[tim.tdj]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

 

In the UK they would have to tell you, though many EU and other foreign suppliers have been allowed to get away with inadequate food labelling in recent times.

 

If you are interested in what is in food and what sensible explanations of the terminology here are two books I recommend.

1) The current version of The Manual of Nutrition, published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO)

Lists official tables of contents/ingredients per 100g and per Kcal and provides a few pages of text explaining technical terms.

 

2) What Are you Eating ?  The food fact file     by Isabel Skypala

Again UK practice, but the tables are much more comprehensive and includes many branded products.

Isabella is a dietician and, as might be expected, offers more detailed advice in comparing.

Hi Studiot

Thank you very much indeed for your recommendations.

To clarify, do you mean that in the UK, they would have to tell you if the 11.1g consisted of anything other than starch?

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Tim

[studiot]

The rules are quite complicated, as you might guess.

Simply put, the basice rule is that every ingredient, except water, must be listed in order of %age composition.

So if it's in there, it must be stated.

I don't think actual values need be stated, but I would not think much for the reputation of a producer that wouldn't do this.

However something described as say beef stew must have more beef in it than anything else ie beef must be the largest single ingredient.

The complication comes where there are statutory regulations requiring the inclusion of a certain substance eg B vitamins in bread.

Or the regulations may require a minimum content as in pork sausages.

In these cases our good government assumes that everybody knows all the regulations, therefore there is no need to print them.

So if your 11.1g of non sugar and some of it it was not starch they would have to tell you what it was since edible food ingredients don't contain other carbohydrates, such as the aldehydes chenbeier listed.

Do you have reason to believe there is something nasty in it ?

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by studiot

[CharonY]

I do not think that the guidelines are that strict in the UK.

Going off https://www.food.gov.uk/business-guidance/nutrition-labelling#mandatory-information 

Quote

When providing nutrition information, you are required to declare:

• energy value
• amounts of fat, saturates, carbohydrate, sugars, protein and salt

The content of the mandatory nutrition declaration can be supplemented with an indication of the amounts of one or more of the following:

• monounsaturates
• polyunsaturates
• polyols
• starch
• fibre
• certain vitamins or minerals present in significant amounts as outlined in Regulation 1169/2011 - Part A of Annex XIII

So at least based on that, they are not really compelled to tell you what carbohydrates you actually have in your product other than sugar. Starch is optional. The longer form of various guidance documents provide details (e.g. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/595961/Nutrition_Technical_Guidance.pdf) 

I am sure you can find more info on those pages, including how things are labelled but of note the minimum information seems to be 

carbohydrate of which

- sugars

-polyols (optional)

-starch (optional)

 

[studiot]

6 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I do not think that the guidelines are that strict in the UK.

They certainly are for ingredients.

Perhaps I did not make the distinctionbetween ingredients and chemical analyses clear.

7 minutes ago, CharonY said:

When providing nutrition information, you are required to declare:

• energy value
• amounts of fat, saturates, carbohydrate, sugars, protein and salt

 

As I said you are not required to declare the amount of say protein where there is a statutory minimum or a statutory addition.

[Sensei]

3 hours ago, studiot said:

Again UK practice, but the tables are much more comprehensive and includes many branded products.

Isn't purpose of E-numbers table? e.g.

https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/analytical-chromatography/analytical-products.html?TablePage=109806885

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_number

 

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by Sensei

[studiot]

3 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Isn't purpose of E-numbers table? e.g.

https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/analytical-chromatography/analytical-products.html?TablePage=109806885

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_number

 

 

I could point out that the Uk is not a member of the EU or necessarily subject to the  E-numbers system.

But yes, the E-numbers table certainly contains a lot of compact (hidden from the public ?) information.

But E-numbers refer to additives not basic ingredients.

[tim.tdj]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Do you have reason to believe there is something nasty in it ?

Hi Studiot

Thank you very much for the new information you have provided.

No, I have no reason to think that there is anything nasty in it. I am just very interested to know what non-sugar carbohydrates are in the coconut flour. I am actually trying to estimate how much "net carbs" are in the coconut flour so that I can roughly predict what effect it will have on my blood glucose. Without a complete breakdown of the carbohydrates, this is not easy.

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Tim

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

They certainly are for ingredients.

Oh I think I know where the issue is. You are referring to the ingredient list, which actually has its own set of rules. I was referring to the nutritional labelling indicated by OP, which follows other rules and is mostly an indicator of nutrients. That part (i.e. the quantitative elements) are very superficial nutrient information in the outlined format above. 

14 minutes ago, tim.tdj said:

Hi Studiot

Thank you very much for the new information you have provided.

No, I have no reason to think that there is anything nasty in it. I am just very interested to know what non-sugar carbohydrates are in the coconut flour. I am actually trying to estimate how much "net carbs" are in the coconut flour so that I can roughly predict what effect it will have on my blood glucose. Without a complete breakdown of the carbohydrates, this is not easy.

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Tim

With regard to blood glucose, the EU definition of sugars are mono or di-saccharides but excluding polyols. So polysaccharides such as starch, as Studiot pointed out, would fall outside that category. I know that in some countries dietary are included into carbohydrate section (e.g. Canada/USA) and others it is not. I am not sure how it is in the EU, but since the labelling indicates a separate category it seems that all fibres are excluded from that group, although most chemically are carbohydrates.

Edit: I overlooked the part where tim.tdj actually said that the fibres are counted separately. 

I will say that the ratio from fibres and sugars seems to be bit off in the listed product. I was under the impression (i.e. friend with celiac disease told me) that coconut flour was fairly low on sugars (usually around 1:5 ratio). 

[tim.tdj]

21 minutes ago, CharonY said:

With regard to blood glucose, the EU definition of sugars are mono or di-saccharides but excluding polyols. So polysaccharides such as starch, as Studiot pointed out, would fall outside that category. I know that in some countries dietary are included into carbohydrate section (e.g. Canada/USA) and others it is not. I am not sure how it is in the EU, but since the labelling indicates a separate category it seems that all fibres are excluded from that group, although most chemically are carbohydrates.

Hi CharonY

Thank you very much for your reply.

I have read that starches can vary quite a lot in their Glycemic Index. I therefore suspect that it may be best when looking at the nutrient lists on British food packaging (where fiber is not treated as carbs) in order to calculate "net carbs" to count the total of the carbs listed unless there are polyols in the ingredients. It is easy to find lists of polyols on the Internet which give their GIs.

Can anyone here confirm to me that there do not exist any edible carbohydrates other than Sugars, Fibers, Starches and Polyols?

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Tim

[CharonY]

3 hours ago, tim.tdj said:

Hi CharonY

Thank you very much for your reply.

I have read that starches can vary quite a lot in their Glycemic Index. I therefore suspect that it may be best when looking at the nutrient lists on British food packaging (where fiber is not treated as carbs) in order to calculate "net carbs" to count the total of the carbs listed unless there are polyols in the ingredients. It is easy to find lists of polyols on the Internet which give their GIs.

Can anyone here confirm to me that there do not exist any edible carbohydrates other than Sugars, Fibers, Starches and Polyols?

Thank you very much.

Kind regards

Tim

Actually I asked the same friend regarding starch and he mentioned that typically coconut flour should be virtually starch free. Based on the EU definitions, virtually any oligo and polysaccharides would fall under that category (though many of them would also fall under fibre).