Chemistry Reference
In-Depth Information
In general terms, low-calorie sweeteners can be categorized into two groups. The irst group of
sweeteners consists of substances with a very intense sweet taste and are used in small amounts to
compensate for the sweetness loss due to the replacement of a much larger amount of sugar. One
of the examples is the use of stevia/steviol glycosides as a sucrose replacer in the manufacture of
chocolate (Shah et al. 2010). These sweeteners lack in bulking properties, with some of them either
not globally approved due to the lack of the safety data or having a differing degree of aftertaste.
Although these compounds are commonly applied in weight management strategies, an emerging
body of evidence contradicts these intentions by suggesting that these substances provide little or
no advantages in the weight control, and, in some instances, may even contribute to weight gain
(Hampton 2008). The second group of sweeteners provides for not only sweetness but also physical
bulk substation. This group includes the sugar alcohols (polyols) such as sorbitol, mannitol, xylitol,
isomalt, erythritol, lactitol, maltitol, and hydrogenated starch hydrolysates, and hydrogenated glu-
cose syrups, which are often termed as “sugar replacers” or “bulk sweeteners.”
It has long been recognized that the ideal sweetener does not exist. The golden standard, sucrose,
is not perfect either and has limited use in some applications. The industry has recognized these
limitations and has been on a search for alternative sweeteners. Any sweetener should satisfy a
number of criteria, including relative sweetness comparable to that of sucrose. Ideally, it should
be odorless with a pleasant taste, with immediate onset and no lingering, colorless and noncario-
genic, highly water soluble, and stable over a range of different processing and storage conditions
(temperature, pH, and water activity). It must comply with rigorous safety criteria such as nontoxic-
ity and normal metabolization and excretion. Therefore, it appears that the search for sweeteners
alternative to sucrose must not only match the properties of this benchmark sugar but also comply
to additional criteria recognized by the market and industry trends. It is known now that alternative
sweeteners should provide speciic or expand existing food and beverage choices by controlling
the intake of a speciic carbohydrate or energy density. As such, these novel ingredients contribute,
thus, to the weight management, prevention, and treatment of the metabolic syndrome and assist in
the prevention and control of dental caries. In addition to price and availability, the main factor in
any application is the relative sweetness.
The sweetness of any sweetener is very subjective and affected by a number of intrinsic and
extrinsic factors. The intrinsic factors include the chemical and physical composition and proper-
ties of the system in which the sweetener is dissolved. These include the pH and presence of taste
enhancers or depressors and the concentration of the sweetener. An important extrinsic factor is
temperature. The intensity of the sweetness of any substance is made on a weight basis relative to
sucrose. The relative sweetness of some common alternative sweeteners is provided in Table 13.1. In
many instances, the use of an individual sweetener may not be effective; thus, a multiple sweetener
approach may be required. A variety of approved sweeteners is available, mainly due to the limita-
tions of each individual compounds. Each sweetener, thus, can be used in the application where it is
suited the best, or these sweeteners can be used in the mixtures. It has been recognized that the use
of more than one sweetener provides a tool for overcoming mainly taste limitations. Very early, it
was recognized that the sweetness intensity of many commercial sweeteners was reversely related
to their concentration, that is, it decreased with increased concentration. However, by combining
several sweeteners, this limitation may be overcome, mainly due to the compounding effect of
relative sweetness resulting in the use of lower sweetener concentrations. The advantages of sweet-
ener blends are many, and some of them include the formulation of products that closely resemble
sucrose-sweetened products, lavor enhancement using a combination of different sweeteners, and
cost effectiveness.
The irst commercial sweetener blend was saccharin and cyclamate. The primary advantage of
this blend was that saccharin (300 times the sweetness of sucrose) enhanced the sweetening power
of cyclamate (30 times sweeter than sucrose). At the same time, cyclamate masked the lingering
aftertaste associated with saccharin. Cyclamate was the major factor in launching the diet segment
Search WWH ::
Custom Search