Sugar-Free Does Not Mean Carbohydrate-Free, and the Biscuit Knows That Even If You Do Not

No added sugar means nobody put sugar in during manufacturing. It says nothing about what was already there. A no-added-sugar fruit juice is still concentrated fruit sugar in solution, absorbed rapidly, with the fibre removed. It is not a low-glucose product, it is a product to which nothing was added, and those are very different claims sitting in similar-looking type.

Similarly, reduced sugar means less than the original version, which may still be a great deal. It is a comparative claim with an unstated reference point.

Why did regulators lose patience with this?

Because the category was judged to be doing more harm than good.

European regulation eventually moved away from permitting a distinct diabetic foods category, on the reasoning that these products offered no demonstrated benefit over ordinary foods eaten sensibly, that they encouraged consumption on the basis of a health halo, and that they cost more while frequently delivering similar energy and carbohydrate.

The judgement was that a person with diabetes is better served by understanding ordinary food labels than by a special aisle implying that certain products are exempt from the arithmetic. That position has aged well.

How should you read a label?

Four lines, in this order, and ignore the front of the packet entirely.

1. Total carbohydrate per serving. The single most useful number, and the one the marketing works hardest to distract from.
2. The serving size itself. Manufacturers set this, and they set it small. Check whether the stated serving resembles what anyone would actually eat.
3. Fibre. Higher fibre for a given carbohydrate load generally means a slower response, and it is the number that separates two products with identical carbohydrate.
4. The ingredient list. Ordered by weight. If refined flour is first and a sugar alcohol is second, you are holding a biscuit, whatever the front says.

What is the better approach?

Eat ordinary food, in sensible amounts, and spend the premium elsewhere.

A small portion of real dessert, eaten at the end of a meal that contained protein, vegetables and fat, will often produce a gentler glucose response than a larger portion of a sugar-free product eaten alone in the belief that it is free. The order and context of a meal does more than the label on any single item in it.

The health halo is the real mechanism here. People eat more of something they believe is permitted, and the extra quantity comfortably erases the modest advantage the product had. That is not a failure of willpower. It is the predictable result of a label designed to remove a decision, which is precisely what the sweetener aisle is selling as well.