The sensory properties and metabolic impact of natural and synthetic sweeteners

Abstract

The global rise in obesity, type II diabetes, and other metabolic disorders in recent years has been attributed in part to the overconsumption of added sugars. Sugar reduction strategies often rely on synthetic and naturally occurring sweetening compounds to achieve their goals, with popular synthetic sweeteners including saccharin, cyclamate, acesulfame potassium, aspartame, sucralose, neotame, alitame, and advantame. Natural sweeteners can be further partitioned into nutritive, including polyols, rare sugars, honey, maple syrup, and agave, and nonnutritive, which include steviol glycosides and rebaudiosides, luo han guo (monk fruit), and thaumatin. We choose the foods we consume largely on their sensory properties, an area in which these sugar substitutes often fall short. Here, we discuss the most popular synthetic and natural sweeteners, with the goal of providing an understanding of differences in the sensory profiles of these sweeteners versus sucrose, that they are designed to replace, essential for the effectiveness of sugar reduction strategies. In addition, we break down the influence of these sweeteners on metabolism, and present results from a large survey of consumers’ opinions on these sweeteners. Consumer interest in clean label foods has driven a move toward natural sweeteners; however, neither natural nor synthetic sweeteners are metabolically inert. Identifying sugar replacements that not only closely imitate the sensory profile of sucrose but also exert advantageous effects on body weight and metabolism is critical in successfully the ultimate goals of reducing added sugar in the average consumer's diet. With so many options for sucrose replacement available, consumer opinion and cost, which vary widely with suagr replacements, will also play a vital role in which sweeteners are successful in widespread adoption.

Exploring the Mystery of the Sweetness of Baijiu by Sensory Evaluation, Compositional Analysis and Multivariate Data Analysis

“…In addition, the sweetness intensity of the volatile fraction was much higher than that of 50% (v/v) aqueous ethanol (3.0), confirming that there are other volatile compounds contributing to the Baijiu sweetness besides ethanol. Previous studies [8,25] mainly focused on the contribution of non-volatile compounds to food sweetness perception; however, the above findings demonstrated that volatile compounds made a much larger contribution to sweetness perception in Baijiu.…”

“…Sweetness is perceived when a target molecule binds to a sweetness receptor (T1R3 and T1R2) [7]. Compounds such as sugar, synthetic and natural sweeteners, and sweet proteins, or amino acids are all capable of activating sweetness receptors [8,9]. Baijiu is a distilled liquor with relatively few non-volatile compounds, although some non-volatile sweet polyhydroxy compounds (glucose, glycerol, fructose, sucrose etc.)…”

Formulating a novel fermented soy milk functional meal replacement among overweight individuals: a preliminary weight loss clinical trial

“…It has been reported that the sweetness of Luo Han Guo is up to 300 times greater than that of sucrose. The compounds in Luo Han Guo providing the sweetness are triterpene glycosides, known as mogrosides (Mora & Dando, 2021) .…”

The effect of different sugar substitute sweeteners on sensory aspects of sweet fruit preserves: A systematic review

“…Despite these benefits, it is known that there are several technological and sensory challenges in replacing sugar, this is because sugar has a specific and unique sweetness profile, in addition to being an important bulk agent, giving volume, viscosity, and texture to mixtures (Chattopadhyay et al., 2014; Grembecka, 2015; Nabors, 2002). Thus, to provide not only low‐sugar or sugar‐free food products, but also more sensory‐friendly, manufacturers must have knowledge about the different types of sugar‐substitute sweeteners available on the market, as well as their possible effects on the sensory aspects and acceptance of these products (Rubio‐Arraez et al., 2018; Minh, 2020; Mora & Dando, 2021; Sutwal et al., 2019; Souza et al., 2013).…”