The market for natural sweeteners is ripe for growth, as the federal government and other experts have warned against the persistent trend of dangerously high consumption of refined sugar and as consumers have been more mindful of overall carbohydrate intake. Keys to continued growth of the sweeteners market include defining what constitutes a “natural” sweetener, innovation in the use of such sweeteners in functional products, and customizing sweetener blends for focused use and optimal benefits.

Society’s love affair with sweet things borders on obsession. Americans alone consume around 80 grams of sugar per day, according to various experts. At 320 calories per day, this accounts for a substantial portion of daily intake, considering its primary food function as a flavor and texture enhancer.

Sugar, also called sucrose, is a carbohydrate combining two other simple sugars, fructose and glucose. Sucrose, a disaccharide, is derived from sugar cane or beet root but is often refined to remove the cane juice, which contains trace nutrients. Turbinado sugar, or raw sucrose, is not refined and, therefore, retains the original nutrient and color properties of the sugar cane. Thus, pure, unrefined cane or beet sugar is a natural substance utilized by many natural food products.

Cane sugar, the most popular form of sucrose, is the benchmark against which all other sweeteners are measured. Its texture (or mouthfeel) and magnitude of sweetness are most familiar to people, and bakers have grown accustomed to its low melting point, absorption of few extraneous and undesirable odors, its ease in blending and its disinclination to foam up. Cane sugar is available in many forms, such as brown sugar, molasses and various syrups.

Fructose, a monosaccharide, is found in fruits, vegetables and honey in low levels and offers a premium profile of sweetness, color, stability and energy production. The American Dietetic Association (ADA) noted fructose, compared to sucrose, may lead to a slower rise in blood sugar and is more rapidly cleared from blood serum, thereby improving glycemic control.

High fructose corn syrup (HFCS), not to be confused with fructose, contains an almost equal combination of fructose and glucose. It has been both vilified and exonerated by different sets of researchers for its theorized contribution to the growing epidemic of obesity in this America. HFCS is made from corn, most of which is genetically modified. Thus, natural products tend to use rice or grain syrups.

Non-Nutritive Sweeteners

Born from natural sources, so-called natural sweeteners are nutritive, although they are low in calories relative to common sugar and deliver many health benefits. Conversely, non-nutritive sweeteners struggle to win natural status or consideration from the natural products market, because they often void their natural origins with chemical alteration or processing. Saccharin, the largest volume, lowest cost high intensity sweetener used in the world, according to the ADA, is derived from a constituent of grapes and petroleum, and has been mired in carcinogenic accusation since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed a ban in 1977. Aspartame, currently the most popular sugar substitute, is made from amino acids and phenylalanine and has continued to be shown nontoxic by research. Acesulfame potassium (Ace-K), made from acetoacetic acid and potassium, blends well with other nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners and is still considered safe. Sucralose (trichlorogalactosucrose) is currently the most controversial non-nutritive sweetener. Johnson & Johnson markets sucralose under the brand name Splenda as being made from sugar. Opponents, including the Sugar Association and the natural products industry, have charged the company misleads consumers into thinking Splenda is natural sugar without calories, when it is actually manufactured in a chemical plant. In one of the many lawsuits filed recently against Splenda makers by various plaintiffs, the Sugar Association noted the sweetness of Splenda originates from a chlorocarbon chemical that contains three atoms of chlorine in every molecule. “We feel the public needs to be aware that Splenda is an artificial chemical sweetener,” said James Murphy, counsel for the Sugar Association.

Another conflicted non-nutritive sweetener is stevia, which comes from Stevia rebaudiana, a plant in the daisy family. Unlike Splenda, stevia’s struggle is not with being considered natural but with gaining approval from FDA for marketing as a sweetener or food additive. FDA contends there is not enough data to show stevia is safe for food consumption. Thus, it has been sold as a dietary supplement.

Nutritive Sweeteners

It makes sense that alternative substances offering preferred levels of sweetness and mouthfeel with fewer calories and, often, more nutritional benefit would be much needed relief from high caloric, simple sugars. Whether such alternative sweeteners are truly natural is becoming a more complex matter.

There are nutritive sweeteners and non-nutritive sweeteners, with the major difference being calories (nutritive), which are convertible to energy. Each class of sweeteners also offers various unique flavoring, volume and production properties. Defining any of these substances as natural depends on specific criteria including origin/source, methods of manufacture or processing, function or use, and health benefits.

“We define natural as coming from nature, meaning the sweetener has not been chemically altered or enhanced,” said Brent McKinley, vice president of corporate development for Xlear, which produces a xylitol sweetener made from 100-percent pure xylose, a naturally occurring sugar found in birch trees, as well as fruits and vegetables such as plums, strawberries and corn cobs. Xylitol and erythritol are polyols— carbohydrates, but not sugars, that are very low in calories per gram, compared to sucrose and other nutritive sugars. Other polyols include maltitol, lactitol, mannitol, isomalt and sorbitol.

Even if a substance is naturally derived, how that substance is processed affects its natural status. “NutraFlora is a sweet, soluble fiber that contains the same short-chain fructooligiosaccharides (FOS) found in a variety of fruits, vegetables and grains,” noted Linda Douglas, Ph.D., R.D., scientific affairs manager with GTC Nutrition. “It is made from sugar using naturally occurring enzymes.”

Still, calling a sweetener natural, especially on a label, is not so cut and dry. “Litesse, polydextrose, xylitol and lactitol from our sweeteners are all made from naturally occurring materials, but due to processing methods can not be called natural on the finished goods package,” reported Donna Brooks and Craig Ross, product managers for Danisco. They further explained because Danisco polyols are used as functional ingredients to provide texture or mouthfeel in addition to sweetness, they are often combined with high intensity sweeteners that are not natural, thereby diminishing the requirement for polyols to be natural.

A leading indicator of a sweetener’s appropriateness for the natural market is how it functions and in what capacities. Sweeteners derived from natural sources, processed minimally without unfavorable chemicals and proven to promote health and wellness are more likely to find favor in the natural market. Improving the nutritional profile goes a long way to this end.

Considering the recent low carb craze, that alternative sweeteners can reduce caloric intake without sacrificing sweetness was instrumental in the recent growth of the sweetener category. However, some manufacturers noted while the low carb trend provided a noticeable boost in sales and interest, the fad did not have much of an effect on product development. “The development of the low carb market has not influenced our product development as much as it has enhanced our ability to market products to a more health-conscious audience,” McKinley said. “As long as people are concerned about carb-counting, there will be some impact on our positioning; however, our xylitol products are aimed at a more health conscious group, from diabetics to parents of small children that suffer ear infections.”

Larry Martinez, chief operating officer of Amax NutraSource Inc., which produces a natural flavoring system featuring a powdered extract from the Chinese fruit Luo Han Guo, agreed on the lack of impact to product development. “Luo Han Guo concentrate and extract were offered in the marketplace long before the low carb popularity, and our company has been actively selling the product for five years,” he said. Adding to the sentiment, Brooks and Ross explained Danisco has historically aimed its polyols and related sweeteners towards the sugarfree and diabetic categories, and the low carb movement simply opened up another marketing avenue.

Now with the low carb trend leveling off, the effort to retain those health conscious consumers, as well as develop new consumer groups for natural sweeteners has turned to additional health benefits.

“Due to consumer interest in improving health and wellness, our sweeteners have played a key role in improving the nutritional profile of many products due to their reduced caloric and low glycemic nature, their ability to add fiber and improve oral health,” Brooks and Ross said. Douglas indicated consumers are demanding innovation. “Consumers now expect to receive benefits beyond calorie reduction,” she said. “The use of alternative, nutritional or nutraceutical sweeteners or sweet prebiotic fibers such as NutraFlora can offer such benefits as enhanced oral health, increased mineral absorption, greater resistance to intestinal disorders and overall contributions to health and well-being.”

Some very specific and poignant benefits have been attributed to polyols. Xylitol has demonstrated both passive and active cavityfighting ability¹ and has even shown promise in alleviating ringing ear syndrome (otitis media).² McKinley outlined xylitol’s many dental benefits: inhibiting the ability of cavity-causing, plaqueforming bacteria to adhere to teeth; reversing early cavity formation; abating gum tissue inflammation; reducing the number of cavities in children when their mothers use xylitol during and after pregnancy.

A favorable benefit of many sweeteners positioned in the natural market is having a low glycemic index. Such sweeteners, including polyols, FOS and Luo Han Guo, do not significantly raise blood sugar levels, making these products safe for people with diabetes or hypoglycemia.

As influential as health benefits are to consumers, functional benefits to product production are equally valuable to manufacturers. That these sweeteners are all many magnitudes sweeter than sucrose means manufacturers can use less to achieve the desired end—sweetness. The less obvious benefits to production include improved flavor profiles, the ability to mask undesirable tastes from other ingredients and a high degree of blending capabilities.

Douglas noted FOS can enhance the fruit, chocolate and savory notes in many applications, while it also masks soy and metallic notes associated with artificial sweeteners. “NutraFlora is also synergistic with other sweet ingredients and is known to limit the acid note in yogurt products and increase acceptability,” she said.

Vitafoods, a division of the Arnhem Group, reported its Oh! So Sweet natural sweetener derived from Citrus aurantium dissolves easily in water, is acid and heat stable (even at baking temperatures), has a minimum shelf life of three years and maintains a pH balance of 6 in a 30-percent solution.

According to Mckinley, many products that use alternative sweeteners also incorporate a blend of other traditional and/or non-traditional sweeteners. “To take advantage of the carb- and sugar-conscious crowd, manufacturers are experimenting with a combination of sweeteners that makes the product taste as close to the real thing as possible,” he said.

Triarco’s BeFlora is one such blend, combining oligofructose, mung bean extract and a very small amount of Ace-K. BeFlora adds enhanced taste, low-calorie sweetness and improved gastrointestinal health as a function of the prebiotic fiber. Mark Anderson, Ph.D., director of R&D at Triarco, reported Beflora also affects mouthfeel, holds moisture and adds texture to finished products.

Another reason for combinations is functionality. Douglas noted FOS is used to replace part of the traditional sweetener. “A complete replacement of the sweetener is not recommended, as FOS is effective at 1 g to 3 g per serving,” she said.“However, FOS is synergistic with other sweet ingredients.”

Ross and Brooks noted sugars provide many functions—sweetness, texture, spread, volume and humectancy—so a formula often needs to be modified when using polyols as replacements. “Other ingredients such as colors stabilizers, flavors and high-intensity sweeteners are added to compensate,” he said. “A blend of polyols often works best since they each have different characteristics.”

“Polyols vary in taste and functionality,’ Ross and Brooks added. They explained polyols are typically used to replace all sugars, such as in sugar-free and and ‘no sugar added’ products, but recent market trends are demanding innovation via combination. “The advent of the low carb segment, along with recent increased interest in sugar reduction, has spawned the possibility of combining traditional sugars with polyols to reduce, rather than remove, all sugars,” Ross and Brooks said. According to polyol manufacturer Rochem International, polydextrose, a 90-percent soluble fiber, can help minimize off-notes contributed by high-intensity sweeteners, soy, vitamins, minerals and other nutritional supplements.

While most sweeteners, regardless of status as natural or artificial, offer benefits as alternatives to table sugar or sucrose, the natural label or status for various sweeteners is not easy to unequivocally award. As their use in functional foods and products expands, the complexity of sweetener blends and product processing will further blur the line between natural and artificial. However, the dire need to significantly and urgently reduce sugar consumption may well create a more flexible acceptance of the unclear nature of many alternative sweeteners. Those searching for the most natural alternatives must carefully research the origin and processing of each potential sweetener product, in addition to the health benefits and manufacturing advantages the sweetener might possess.

References