Can someone interpret this nutrition label for me?

(Aaron Rotert) #1

2671_1527898960264
2671_1527898960264.jpeg1791×3184 879 KB

I don’t understand this carb count. I thought that fiber plus sugar equaled total carbs. How can total carbs be less than fiber?! I fear i may be sucked into a wormhole if i open this. Anyone have any insight into this? Thanks!

(karen) #2

Some countries - the UK is one, I believe - list the NET carbs in the ‘total carbs’ spot. so this item would have what the USA would call 5 carbs - 3 of which are fiber, so 2 net carbs. If that’s not the case, this label is simply wrong.

(Doug) #3

No way that “Dietary Fiber” should be less than “Total Carbohydrate,” as far as I know. Fiber plus the digestible forms - sugars and starches - should equal the total carb count. If there is 0.4 or 1.4 grams, for example, the final label figures get rounded down to zero or 1 gram. But that lable is just plain wrong - somebody messed up.

(Ron) #4

The Vegan label on it suggests a marketing strategy that appeals to the masses as opposed to the few that take time to do the math.:angry:

(TJ Borden) #5

That’s out of Oceanside CA USA, so it’s just a fucked up label. Sadly, it’s not that uncommon. I’d search the company website or online. You know it’s at least the one for the sugar shown.

(Aaron Rotert) #6

Thanks for feedback everybody. I remember reading about the European labeling differences. However, this was found in Arizona and distributed from California, so I’m assuming this was just a labeling error. Pretty embarrassing to send out many thousands of units across the country with such an egregious error on the label!

#7

I suggest eliminating the entire issue by replacing with a double scotch

(Aaron Rotert) #8

Now there’s an idea!:laughing:

#9

Can anyone help me interpret this one? In particular, I’d like to know how much fat I am getting per 100g of product:

image
image.jpg1504×2016 869 KB

(Aaron Rotert) #10

Looks like 107g of fat per 100 grams of product. Everything under the total fat is a breakdown of the specific lipids by chain length. And a very thorough breakdown at that! For macro calculation, you would be only concerned with the 107g total fat value.

(Alec) #11

That’s some good shit right there if I am getting 107g of fat in every 100g of product. I want some right now!

(Ron) #12

All fat, what is that???

(Alec) #13

Coconut oil?

(Ron) #14

That’s probably a good guess with the palm trees in the background.

#15

Yeah, it’s coconut oil. Really special stuff you only get in big town Asian supermarkets :wink:

(Aaron Rotert) #16

Took a closer look at that label. Lol. Yah that doesn’t make a whole helluva lot of sense does it? I would have to assume the 107 is an error. Should obviously be 100. The calories per 100 grams show 882 and I’ve found coconut oil can vary in calories per gram from 8 and change to 9 depending on the ratios of the different chain lengths. Either way, 100 grams of fat is going to be 100 grams of fat!

(Aaron Rotert) #17

And sign me up for a tub of that goodness. That stuff is off the medium chain!

#18

Wish I kept the jar so I could tell you what brand it was. Next time I go to the supermarket, I’ll check and let you know.

(Aaron Rotert) #19

I’d appreciate it! Thanks.

(bulkbiker) #20

plus in the UK we know how to spell fibre… ducks…!