Are Carbohydrates the Enemy?

By Christopher Gehrke

3 min read

Carbohydrates, the topic of debate amongst people with diabetes and other members of health-related communities. A subject that has many personal experiences mixed with sketchy data that can show both sides as winners of the debate. As I like to say, when both sides can show supporting data on a topic, it means results are more personalized than general. It is up to you to test your blood glucose and see how carbohydrates affect you.

Fast vs. slow-acting carbs

Another area of debate is fast vs. slow-acting carbohydrates. Fast-acting carbohydrates, also known as simple carbohydrates, are immediately released into the bloodstream. Slow acting carbohydrates, also known as complex carbohydrates, need to be broken down in the digestive system into simple carbohydrates in order to be absorbed. This is why a spike in blood sugar happens easier and faster in fast-acting carbs. With this spike, you want to avoid ingesting fast-acting carbohydrates regularly because that spike can easily put your blood sugar at a dangerous level where damage to your body can occur.

Carbs and type 2 diabetes

So, are carbohydrates the enemy? No, carbohydrates are not the enemy. It’s the number of carbohydrates and what surrounds the carbohydrates that are the enemy. The carbohydrates in a candy bar will act in a similar fashion as the carbohydrates in a piece of fruit. They are both simple carbohydrates, and eating the same amount of carbs in fruit, compared to a candy bar, will have similar blood sugar spikes. The difference is what surrounds the carbs.

Fruit is loaded with minerals and vitamins necessary to a healthy body. You would also need to eat more fruit to reach the same carbs as a candy bar. This makes fruit a good snack food or part of a healthy meal. Similarly, there are vegetables that are higher in carbs, which many diabetics are advised to avoid. If your doctor or nutritionist has told you to avoid them, please continue to do so. If it is just a friend or random person on a social media site, take it with a grain of salt. Different vegetables offer different nutrients. Instead of avoiding them, try smaller portions, and adjust carbohydrate intake from other food you eat more regularly.

What types of carbs are best for blood sugar control?

Slow-acting carbs are better for blood sugar levels as long as they are eaten in moderation. The time needed to break them down before absorption allows your body to regulate your blood glucose levels more efficiently. This does not mean you can eat limitless amounts of complex carbohydrates. The more you eat, the more of a spike your blood glucose will have.

One downside to complex carbohydrates is the process of breaking down the carbs before absorption means carbs will be released into your bloodstream for a longer amount of time. For those with a controlled fasting blood sugar reading, this may not be bad at all. People that have high fasting numbers may have more of an issue with this as blood sugar readings could be in the danger level zone longer, whereas people with controlled sugar readings may not reach the danger zone at all with complex carbs.

Personalize your carb intake

As I said, this is all very individualized. Carbs are not the enemy if you take the time to know how your body reacts to them. Learn how fast and slow-acting carbs affect you. Do not copy what a friend or social media group tells you to. They don’t know you and could be offering dangerous opinions. Diabetes is a trial and error disease. It’s all about finding out what works for you and continuing that lifestyle.

This article represents the opinions, thoughts, and experiences of the author; none of this content has been paid for by any advertiser. The Type2Diabetes.com team does not recommend or endorse any products or treatments discussed herein. Learn more about how we maintain editorial integrity here.

Join the conversation

Please read our rules before commenting.

richard-morris Member
Diabetes is a disease characterized by an inability to homeostatically regulate hyperglycemia using insulin. It's not controversial to any biochemist that the liver homeostatically regulates hypoglycemia. When plasma glucose goes low, the liver makes glucose. But the liver can't lower plasma glucose if a diabetic eats carbohydrates. You make the claim that there are two equally supported sides to the argument of whether to eat carbohydrates. But that really isn't true now is it? How many studies have shown in frank type 2 diabetics with an average time since diagnosis over 8 years, a greater than 50% decrease in HOMA-IR (a biomarker of insulin resistance), a greater than 90% reduction or elimination of insulin therapy, and a 25% remission of type 2 diabetes ... on a high carb diet? <a href='https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13300-01😧373-9' target='_blank' rel='noopener noreferrer ugc'>https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13300-01😧373-9</a> Why would you recommend any type 2 diabetic eat any carbohydrates if the only way their liver can modulate plasma glucose is if they eat 20g of carbohydrates a day or less? Case studies supporting management of type 1 diabetes using low carbohydrate and ketogenic diets with exogenous insulin are rare, but they exist and show a level of glucose control unmatched by any study of type 1 diabetic management on high carbohydrate diets.
feinman Member
The total amount of carbohydrate in the diet is the major determinant of blood glucose. The ADA says so, everybody says so. There may be exceptions and special cases but there is only one side on that. Now, when I was in college, it was said, as in the article, that simple sugars raised blood glucose rapidly and complex carbohydrate, which at the time meant polysaccharides, primarily starch, more slowly. When I was in graduate school, somebody (Jenkins among others) asked whether that was really true and when measurements were made, it was not so simple. (Potatoes were faster than ice cream, e.g.) This gave rise to the idea of a glycemic index (GI) which I embraced because it was a measurement rather than somebody’s “common sense, and did emphasize the importance of blood sugar. When I started teaching medical students, I taught that it was best to reduce carbs but “if you have to eat carbs, eat low GI carbs,” which I now find embarrassing because it is too simple an idea and seemed to be intended to pay some attention to the science — the need to lower blood glucose in diabetes and metabolic syndrome — but was a way to get people to avoid low-carbohydrate diets, that is, you could still eat “slow” carbs. The recommendation in the article about moderation tells you that a low-carbohydrate diet is still the best approach. Individualizations allows you to decide whether you want to do something else, or if you are not comfortable with reducing carbs, but the science is not subject to individualizations. Nobody except people putting words in our mouth, says carbohydrates are an enemy but the research especially in the past two years from Virta health is both overwhelming and consistent with all previous research that low-carb is the best approach. Again, it may not be very best for everybody and there are alternatives but it is still the first choice. If you strip away all the disclaimers, it may be that that is what this article is saying.