DOCSLIB.ORG

Development of Low-Fat Sugar-Free Orange Sherbet Containing Soy Protein

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Development of Low-Fat Sugar-Free Orange Sherbet Containing Soy Protein View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Louisiana State University Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2002 Development of low-fat sugar-free orange sherbet containing soy protein Jonathan Aaron Walker Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Life Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Walker, Jonathan Aaron, "Development of low-fat sugar-free orange sherbet containing soy protein" (2002). LSU Master's Theses. 3025. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/3025 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEVELOPMENT OF LOW-FAT SUGAR-FREE ORANGE SHERBET CONTAINING SOY PROTEIN A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Food Science by Jonathan Aaron Walker B.S., Louisiana State University, 2000 December 2002 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I would like to thank Dr. Witoon Prinyawiwatkul, my Major Professor, for his patience, guidance and advice throughout this project. He has been a great help, an inspiration, and both a teacher and a dear friend. I want to extend special thanks to Melissa Durham who helped me tremendously with the product preparation of both consumer study one and two. Without her help this project would not have been possible. I would also like to extend thanks to Noemi Pavon, Sirisha Sonti, and Cate Munene, graduate students from the Department of Food Science, for their gracious help during consumer study one and two. Dr. Barry Moser and Xiaomei Zhu, from the Department of Experimental Statistics, were very generous with advice regarding data analysis and interpretation for the consumer responses of study one and two. I am grateful to Chuck Boeneke, manager of the LSU Creamery, for allowing me to use the equipment in the Louisiana State Univeristy Creamery. I also offer thanks to my committee members, Dr. Michael Moody and Dr. Joan King, for their help in reviewing my thesis and offering suggestions for improvement. Finally, I would like to express my appreciation to my parents, Frank and Bobbie Walker, for their love and financial support during my graduate program. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ ii LIST OF TABLES ..........................................................................................................................vi ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................. viii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................................................................ 4 2.1 Sherbet ................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1.1 Formulations ................................................................................................................. 6 2.1.2 Regulations.................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Sucralose .............................................................................................................................. 9 2.2.1 Use in Sherbets/Related Products ................................................................................. 9 2.2.2 Physical and Chemical Properties............................................................................... 10 2.2.3 Sensory Properties ...................................................................................................... 13 2.2.4 Shelf-Life .................................................................................................................... 14 2.2.5 Safety.......................................................................................................................... 15 2.3 Acesulfame-K .................................................................................................................... 19 2.3.1 Use in Sherbets/Related Products ............................................................................... 19 2.3.2 Chemical Properties .................................................................................................... 19 2.3.3 Sensory Properties ...................................................................................................... 23 2.3.4 Shelf-Life .................................................................................................................... 24 2.3.5 Safety.......................................................................................................................... 24 2.4 Soy Protein......................................................................................................................... 28 2.4.1 Properties .................................................................................................................... 28 2.4.2 Chemical Properties .................................................................................................... 30 2.4.3 Sensory Properties ...................................................................................................... 31 2.5 Product Optimization......................................................................................................... 31 2.5.1 Data Analysis .............................................................................................................. 35 2.5.1.1 Linear Programming ............................................................................................ 36 2.5.1.2 Mixture Design .................................................................................................... 36 2.5.1.3 Multiple Regression............................................................................................. 36 2.5.1.4 Response Surface Methodology (RSM) .............................................................. 37 CHAPTER 3. A NOVEL LOW-FAT SUGAR-FREE SHERBET CONTAINING SOY PROTEIN: PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE AND MARKET OPPORTUNITY DRIVEN BY SPECIFIC CONSUMER SENSORY ATTRIBUTES.................................................................. 38 3.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 38 3.2 Materials and Methods....................................................................................................... 39 3.2.1 Soy Protein Isolate ...................................................................................................... 39 3.2.2 Sherbet Preparation..................................................................................................... 39 3.2.3 Experimental Design and Consumer Tests ................................................................. 42 3.2.4 Statistical Analysis ...................................................................................................... 44 iii 3.3 Results and Discussion...................................................................................................... 44 3.3.1 Consumer Characteristics ........................................................................................... 44 3.3.2 Consumer Acceptability.............................................................................................. 49 3.3.3 Acceptability and Purchase Intent............................................................................... 51 3.3.4 Overall Product Differences – Pooled Within Canonical Structure r’s ...................... 54 3.3.5 Logistic Regression vs. Predictive Discriminant Analysis for Acceptance and Purchase Intent ...................................................................................................................... 54 3.3.6 Logistic Regression Analysis for Acceptability ......................................................... 59 3.3.7 Logistic Regression Analysis for Purchase Intent ...................................................... 63 3.3.8 Logistic Regression Analysis for Purchase Intent with Soy Protein .......................... 64 3.4 Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 64 CHAPTER 4. A NOVEL LOW-FAT SUGAR-FREE SHERBET CONTAINING SOY PROTEIN BELOW OR ABOVE THE FDA REQUIREMENT : PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE AND MARKET OPPORTUNITY DRIVEN BY SPECIFIC CONSUMER SENSORY ATTRIBUTES .............................................................................................................................. 68 4.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 68 4.2 Materials and Methods....................................................................................................... 69 4.2.1 Soy Protein Concentrate ............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Acesulfame Potassium
    ACESULFAME POTASSIUM Prepared at the 57th JECFA (2001) and published in FNP 52 Add 9 (2001), superseding specifications prepared at the 46th JECFA (1996) and published in FNP 52 Add 4 (1996). An ADI of 0-15 mg/kg body weight was established at the 37th JECFA (1990). SYNONYMS Acesulfame K; INS No. 950 DEFINITION Chemical names Potassium salt of 6-methyl-1,2,3-oxathiazine-4(3H)-one-2,2-dioxide; potassium salt of 3,4-dihydro-6-methyl-1,2,3-oxathiazine-4-one-2,2-dioxide C.A.S. number 55589-62-3 Chemical formula C4H4KNO4S Structural formula Formula weight 201.24 Assay Not less than 99.0% and not more than 101.0% on the dried basis DESCRIPTION Odourless, white crystalline powder FUNCTIONAL USES Sweetener, flavour enhancer CHARACTERISTICS IDENTIFICATION Solubility (Vol. 4) Freely soluble in water, very slightly soluble in ethanol Spectrophotometry Dissolve 10 mg of the sample in 1,000 ml of water. The solution shows an absorbance maximum at 227±2 nm Test for potassium Passes test (Vol.4) Test the residue obtained by igniting 2 g of the sample Precipitation test Add a few drops of a 10% solution of sodium cobaltinitrite to a solution of 0.2 g of the sample in 2 ml of acetic acid TS and 2 ml of water. A yellow precipitate is produced. PURITY Loss on drying (Vol. 4) Not more than 1.0% (105o, 2 h) pH (Vol. 4) 5.5 - 7.5 (1% soln) Organic impurities Passes test for 20 mg/kg of UV active components See description under TESTS Fluoride (Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Hormonal Responses to Non-Nutritive Sweeteners in Water and Diet Soda Allison C
    Sylvetsky et al. Nutrition & Metabolism (2016) 13:71 DOI 10.1186/s12986-016-0129-3 RESEARCH Open Access Hormonal responses to non-nutritive sweeteners in water and diet soda Allison C. Sylvetsky1,2,3, Rebecca J. Brown1, Jenny E. Blau1, Mary Walter4 and Kristina I. Rother1* Abstract Background: Non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS), especially in form of diet soda, have been linked to metabolic derangements (e.g. obesity and diabetes) in epidemiologic studies. We aimed to test acute metabolic effects of NNS in isolation (water or seltzer) and in diet sodas. Methods: We conducted a four-period, cross-over study at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (Bethesda, Maryland). Thirty healthy adults consumed 355 mL water with 0 mg, 68 mg, 170 mg, and 250 mg sucralose, and 31 individuals consumed 355 mL caffeine-free Diet Rite Cola™, Diet Mountain Dew™ (18 mg sucralose, 18 mg acesulfame-potassium, 57 mg aspartame), and seltzer water with NNS (68 mg sucralose and 41 mg acesulfame-potassium, equivalent to Diet Rite Cola™) in randomized order, prior to oral glucose tolerance tests. Blood samples were collected serially for 130 min. Measures included GLP-1, GIP, glucose, insulin, C-peptide, glucose absorption, gastric emptying, and subjective hunger and satiety ratings. Results: Diet sodas augmented active GLP-1 (Diet Rite Cola™ vs. seltzer water, AUC, p =0.039;DietMountainDew™ vs. seltzer water, AUC, p = 0.07), but gastric emptying and satiety were unaffected. Insulin concentrations were nominally higher following all NNS conditions without altering glycemia. Sucralose alone (at any concentration) did not affect metabolic outcomes. Conclusions: Diet sodas but not NNS in water augmented GLP-1 responses to oral glucose.
    [Show full text]
  • Simultaneous Determination of Acesulfame-K, Aspartame and Stevioside in Sweetener Blends by Ultraviolet Spectroscopy with Variable Selection by Sipls Algorithm
    Macedonian Journal of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 17–28 (2012) MJCCA9 – 588 ISSN 1857-5552 UDC: 664.162.8:543.422.3-76 Received: June 5, 2011 Accepted: January 25, 2012 Original scientific paper SIMULTANEOUS DETERMINATION OF ACESULFAME-K, ASPARTAME AND STEVIOSIDE IN SWEETENER BLENDS BY ULTRAVIOLET SPECTROSCOPY WITH VARIABLE SELECTION BY SIPLS ALGORITHM Yang-Chun He, Sheng Fang*, Xue-Jiao Xu College of Food Science and Biotechnology Engineering, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou 310035, China [email protected] A chemometric-assisted UV absorption spectroscopic method is proposed for the simultaneous de- termination of acesulfame-K, aspartame and stevioside in raw powder mixtures of commercial sweeteners. The synergy interval partial least squares (siPLS) algorithm was applied to select the optimum spectral range and their combinations. The utilization of spectral region selection aims to construct better partial least squares (PLS) model than that established from the full-spectrum range. The results show that the siPLS algorithm can find out an optimized combination of spectral regions, yielding lower relative stand- ard error of prediction (RSEP) and root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP), as well as simplifying the model. The RMSEP and RSEP obtained after selection of intervals by siPLS were 0.1330 µg·ml–1 and 1.50 % for acesulfame-K, 0.2540 µg·ml–1 and 1.64 % for aspartame, 1.4041 µg·ml–1 and 2.03 % for ste- vioside respectively. The recovery values range from 98.12 % to 101.88 % for acesulfame-K, 98.63 % to 102.96% for aspartame, and 96.38 % to 104.04 % for stevioside respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Review on Artificial Sweeteners Used in Formulation of Sugar Free Syrups
    International Journal of Advances in Pharmaceutics ISSN: 2320–4923; DOI: 10.7439/ijap Volume 4 Issue 2 [2015] Journal home page: http://ssjournals.com/index.php/ijap Review Article Review on artificial sweeteners used in formulation of sugar free syrups Afaque Raza Mehboob Ansari*, Saddamhusen Jahangir Mulla and Gosavi Jairam Pramod Department of Quality Assurance, D.S.T.S. Mandal’s College of Pharmacy, Jule Solapur-1, Bijapur Road, Solapur- 413004, Maharashtra, India. *Correspondence Info: Abstract Prof. Afaque Raza Mehboob Ansari Sweetening agents are employed in liquid formulations designed for oral Department of Quality Assurance, administration specifically to increase the palatability of the therapeutic agent. The D.S.T.S. Mandal’s College of main sweetening agents employed in oral preparations are sucrose, liquid glucose, Pharmacy, Jule Solapur-1, Bijapur glycerol, Sorbitol, saccharin sodium and aspartame. The use of artificial Road, Solapur- 413004, Maharashtra, sweetening agents in formulations is increasing and, in many formulations, India saccharin sodium is used either as the sole sweetening agent or in combination Email: [email protected] with sugars or Sorbitol to reduce the sugar concentration in the formulation. The Keywords: use of sugars in oral formulations for children and patients with diabetes mellitus is to be avoided. The present review discusses about the Artificial sweetening agents Sugar free syrup, which are generally used while the preparation of Sugar-free Syrup. Artificial sweeteners, Diabetes mellitus, Sucralose, and Aspartame. 1. Introduction Syrups are highly concentrated, aqueous solutions of sugar or a sugar substitute that traditionally contain a flavoring agent, e.g. cherry syrup, cocoa syrup, orange syrup, raspberry syrup.
    [Show full text]
  • Larosa's Ingredient and Allergen Listing
    LaRosa's Ingredient and Allergen Listing - 4.26.21 EGG FISH MILK PEANUT SHELLFISH SOY* TREE NUTS WHEAT PIZZA INGREDIENTS BUDDY DELUXE YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + PIZZA SAUCE, PROVOLONE, PEPPERONI, SAUSAGE, SPICY SAUSAGE, BANANA PEPPERS, CAPOCOLLA HAM CHICKEN BACON RANCH YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + RANCH DRESSING, PROVOLONE, CHICKEN BREAST STRIPS, RED ONION, BACON, TOMATOES DOUBLE PEPPERONI YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + PIZZA SAUCE, PROVOLONE, PEPPERONI FOCACCIA FLORENTINE YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + FOCACCIA SAUCE, 4 CHEESE BLEND, MUSHROOMS, SPINACH, TOMATOES, GREEN OLIVES, ROMANO HERB MIX FOCACCIA ROMA YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + FOCACCIA SAUCE, 4 CHEESE BLEND, PEPPERONI, SAUSAGE, GROUND BEEF, CAPOCOLLA HAM, ROMANO HERB MIX HAWAIIAN YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + PIZZA SAUCE, PROVOLONE, PINEAPPLE, CAPOCOLLA HAM, BACON, BANANA PEPPERS MEAT DELUXE YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + PIZZA SAUCE, PROVOLONE, PEPPERONI, SAUSAGE, GROUND BEEF, CAPOCOLLA HAM, BACON ORIGINAL DELUXE YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + PIZZA SAUCE, PROVOLONE, PEPPERONI, SAUSAGE, GREEN PEPPERS, RED ONION, GROUND BEEF VEGGIE DELUXE YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + PIZZA SAUCE, PROVOLONE, MUSHROOMS, GREEN OLIVES, RED ONIONS, SPINACH, ROMA TOMATOES ZESTY BBQ CHICKEN YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + BBQ SAUCE, PROVOLONE, CHICKEN BREAST STRIPS, JALAPENOS, RED ONION, BACON CREATE YOUR OWN PIZZA YOUR CHOICE OF CRUST + SAUCE + CHEESE + TOPPINGS ---> check allergens individually on the dough, sauce, cheese and toppings you choose WATER, MILK, PARMESAN CHEESE, HEAVY WHIPPING CREAM, ASIAGO CHEESE, WHEY PROTEIN CONCENTRATE, BUTTER, MODIFIED FOOD STARCH, SOY OIL, ROMANO CHEESE, SALT, ALFREDO SAUCE 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 XANTHAN GUM, BLACK PEPPER, GROUND NUTMEG, TURMERIC OLEORESIN (FOR COLOR) ANCHOVIES ANCHOVY FILLETS, OLIVE OIL, AND SALT 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 CURED WITH: WATER, SALT, SODIUM NITRITE.
    [Show full text]
  • Gluten-Free Food Labels
    GLUTEN-FREE DIET: FOOD LABELS Identifying Gluten in Packaged Foods The Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act states ‘wheat’ must be listed on the food label when wheat is an ingredient in the item. This is not true for oats, barley and rye; food manufacturers do not have to declare oats, barley or rye in the allergen statement. If you are unsure about a product’s ingredients avoid it. Use these tips to help you make gluten-free food choices: 1. Read the allergen statement. If the product contains wheat, look for another option. 2. Read the ingredient list. Please refer the lists below for ‘gluten-free’ and ‘gluten-containing’ ingredients to decide if the food is gluten free or not. 3. Look for a statement regarding the facility in which the food was processed. If the food was processed in a factory that also processes wheat, then look for another option. Please note that it is not required to include a statement regarding the facility in which the food was produced on the label. GLUTEN FREE ingredients * An asterisk denotes controversial and confusing ingredients. Details on these follow in “Controversial and Confusing Ingredients”. Acacia gum Carbooxymethlcellulose Malic acid Smoke flavoring* Acesulfame-potassium Carob bean Maltitol Sodium benzoate, Acetic acid Carrageenan Maltitol syrup metabisulphite, nitrate, Adipic acid Cellulose gum Maltol nitrite, sulphite Agar Citric acid Maltose Sorbate Agave Corn syrup Mannitol Sorbic acid Align Corn, corn bran, corn Methylycellulose Sorbitol Amaranth meal
    [Show full text]
  • Bulk Drug Substances Nominated for Use in Compounding Under Section 503B of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
    Updated June 07, 2021 Bulk Drug Substances Nominated for Use in Compounding Under Section 503B of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act Three categories of bulk drug substances: • Category 1: Bulk Drug Substances Under Evaluation • Category 2: Bulk Drug Substances that Raise Significant Safety Risks • Category 3: Bulk Drug Substances Nominated Without Adequate Support Updates to Categories of Substances Nominated for the 503B Bulk Drug Substances List1 • Add the following entry to category 2 due to serious safety concerns of mutagenicity, cytotoxicity, and possible carcinogenicity when quinacrine hydrochloride is used for intrauterine administration for non- surgical female sterilization: 2,3 o Quinacrine Hydrochloride for intrauterine administration • Revision to category 1 for clarity: o Modify the entry for “Quinacrine Hydrochloride” to “Quinacrine Hydrochloride (except for intrauterine administration).” • Revision to category 1 to correct a substance name error: o Correct the error in the substance name “DHEA (dehydroepiandosterone)” to “DHEA (dehydroepiandrosterone).” 1 For the purposes of the substance names in the categories, hydrated forms of the substance are included in the scope of the substance name. 2 Quinacrine HCl was previously reviewed in 2016 as part of FDA’s consideration of this bulk drug substance for inclusion on the 503A Bulks List. As part of this review, the Division of Bone, Reproductive and Urologic Products (DBRUP), now the Division of Urology, Obstetrics and Gynecology (DUOG), evaluated the nomination of quinacrine for intrauterine administration for non-surgical female sterilization and recommended that quinacrine should not be included on the 503A Bulks List for this use. This recommendation was based on the lack of information on efficacy comparable to other available methods of female sterilization and serious safety concerns of mutagenicity, cytotoxicity and possible carcinogenicity in use of quinacrine for this indication and route of administration.
    [Show full text]
  • Remember, Just Because a Product Contains a Sugar Substitute Does Not
    Health and wellness tips for your work, home and life—brought to you by the insurance professionals at National Insurance Services, Inc. Remember, removed from the government list of possible carcinogens. SUGAR SUBSTITUTES That same year, the warning label that was implemented in just because 1977 was removed from all products containing saccharin. Aspartame a product With obesity rates skyrocketing and excess sugar in diets blamed as a major culprit, many people have turned to NutraSweet®, Sugar Twin® and Equal® are examples of contains a artificial sweeteners to satisfy their sweet tooth instead. aspartame. Aspartame is about 200 times sweeter than sugar and was approved by the FDA in 1981. sugar What is a sugar substitute? Aspartame is perhaps the most controversial artificial substitute A sugar substitute is a low-calorie sweetener or artificial sweetener. There are many that believe it can cause adverse sweetener. Sugar substitutes provide a sweet taste without effects to the body, such as headaches, depression and does not the calories or carbohydrates that accompany sugar and even cancer. However, the FDA refers to this sweetener as necessarily other sweeteners. They are hundreds of times sweeter than one of the most tested and studied food additives that it sugar, so it takes much less of them to create the same has ever approved and insists that it is safe to consume. mean it is sweetness. Therefore, the resulting calorie count is insignificant. This is why many dieters choose artificial Products with aspartame are required to carry the label calorie-free sweeteners over sugar. “Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine,” because in large amounts it may be harmful to those born with the or even Are sugar substitutes safe to consume? rare disease phenylketonuria (PKU).
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Acesulfame Potassium and Saccharin on Angiogenesis in Cam Assay
    Research Article ISSN: 2574 -1241 DOI: 10.26717/BJSTR.2021.36.005922 The Effect of Acesulfame Potassium and Saccharin on Angiogenesis in Cam Assay Yunus Emre Ayhan1, Samet Cirik2, Osman Furkan Harmankaya3, Omer Faruk Dönmez4, Faruk Yildiztekin5, Elif Aksu6, Cihan Gökdemir7, Mehmet Hakan Ozma8, Ahmet Hakan Yilmazer9, Mehmet Gazi Yilmaz10, Davut Kendal11, Edip Aydın12, Burak Arslan13 and Orkhan Farmanli14* 1Marmara University Faculty of Pharmacy, Clinical Pharmacy Department, Turkey 2Sakarya University, School of Medicine, Turkey 3Kırıkkale University School of Medicine, Turkey 4İstanbul Medeniyet University School of Medicine, Turkey 5,6Bezmialem University School of Medicine, Turkey 7-12Marmara University School of Medicine, Turkey 13Biruni University School of Medicine, Turkey 14Marmara University Pendik Education and Research Hospital, Department of Pathology, Turkey *Corresponding author: Orkhan Farmanlı, Department of Pathology, Marmara University Pendik Education and Research Hospital, Turkey ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Received: Published: June 16, 2021 Angiogenesis is the formation of new blood vessels from main blood vessel. The chorioallantoic membrane model has been frequently used method for functionally July 01, 2021 beneficial aspects of demonstration of the angiogenesis and understanding of the cancer Citation: pathogenesis. Acesulfame-K is an artificial sweetener and about 120 times sweeter than sucrose. It is not metabolized in the human body, so it does not provide calories. Yunus Emre Ayhan, Samet Saccharin is also an artificial sweetener and about 300 times sweeter than sucrose. Cirik, Osman Furkan Harmankaya, Omer Some studies have shown a relationship between saccharin consumption and cancer Faruk Dönmez, Faruk Yildiztekin, et al., incidence. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the effect of acesulfame-K and saccharin The Effect of Acesulfame Potassium and onKeywords: angiogenesis by using in vivo CAM assay.
    [Show full text]
  • Artificial Sweeteners and Cancer
    CancerMyths Sweeteners and Cancer Origin of the myth Aspartame [additive #951] is an artificial (non-nutritive) sweetener used to replace sugar in food and drinks. Early animal studies showed varied results about the safety of aspartame. There was a large controversy regarding the approval of aspartame in the US. In 1981, the head of the FDA was fired, allegedly after refusing to approve the legalisation of aspartame. His successor legalised it and later accepted a job offer with Searle, the company which owned aspartame. Aspartame was later rebranded to NutraSweet®. This controversy has created further suspicion that aspartame is unsafe. Equal® also contains aspartame. There are four other major commercial sweeteners, sucralose [955] (Splenda®), saccharin [954] (Sweet’n Low™), cyclamate [952] and acesulphame potassium [950] (Ace K, Twinsweet™). In recent times we have seen the introduction of steviol glycoside, which is a natural, intense sweetener known as ‘Stevia’. Current evidence Aspartame In 2006, the European Ramazzini Foundation published a study on aspartame consumption in rats and linked its consumption to an increase in the incidence of cancer.1 The European Food and Safety Authority (EFSA) requested all unpublished data from the study and re-evaluated all current evidence. They maintained that the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) for aspartame (40 mg/kg body weight/day) was still safe. A full risk assessment was published in 2013 and concluded that aspartame and its breakdown products are safe for the general population.2 A survey conducted by Food Standards Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ) in 2003 examined the amount of aspartame eaten in Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Sugar Reduction in Dairy Food: an Overview with Flavoured Milk As an Example
    foods Review Sugar Reduction in Dairy Food: An Overview with Flavoured Milk as an Example Dipendra Kumar Mahato * , Russell Keast , Djin Gie Liem , Catherine Georgina Russell , Sara Cicerale and Shirani Gamlath CASS Food Research Centre, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC 3125, Australia; [email protected] (R.K.); [email protected] (D.G.L.); [email protected] (C.G.R.); [email protected] (S.C.); [email protected] (S.G.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +61-3-925-17267 Received: 3 September 2020; Accepted: 30 September 2020; Published: 2 October 2020 Abstract: Owing to the public health concern associated with the consumption of added sugar, the World Health Organization recommends cutting down sugar in processed foods. Furthermore, due to the growing concern of increased calorie intake from added sugar in sweetened dairy foods, the present review provides an overview of different types and functions of sugar, various sugar reduction strategies, and current trends in the use of sweeteners for sugar reduction in dairy food, taking flavoured milk as a central theme where possible to explore the aforementioned aspects. The strength and uniqueness of this review are that it brings together all the information on the available types of sugar and sugar reduction strategies and explores the current trends that could be applied for reducing sugar in dairy foods without much impact on consumer acceptance. Among different strategies for sugar reduction, the use of natural non-nutritive sweeteners (NNSs), has received much attention due to consumer demand for natural ingredients.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of the Health Hazards of Artificial Sweeteners
    Progress in Nutrition 2018; Vol. 20, Supplement 2: 36-43 DOI: 10.23751/pn.v20i2-S.5901 © Mattioli 1885 Reviews A review of the health hazards of artificial sweeteners: are they safe? Vahideh Ebrahimzadeh1, Mohammad Reza Ardalan2, Aida Malek Mahdavi3, Abolfazl Gorbani4 1Maraghe University of Medical Sciences, Maraghe, Iran - E-mail: [email protected]; 2Kidney Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran; 3Connective Tissue Diseases Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran; 4Department of Animal Science, Islamic Azad University, Shabestar Branch, Shabestar, Iran. Summary. The increasing prevalence of obesity and diabetes mellitus has led to an increased production and consumption of artificially sweetened foods all over the world. Artificial sweeteners are high-intensity sweeteners which contribute no calorie. As a result, most of these foods may be sold with a “healthy” or “diet” labeling; however, there have been lots of controversy regarding their safety and adverse health effects. Therefore, the present article review aimed to summarize the results of most relevant studies concerning side effects of artificial sweeteners. Accordingly, a search of several databases was performed to identify all related manuscripts from 1980 to 2016. As a result, most of the available animal studies demonstrated that chronic exposure to artificial sweeteners led to increased body weight, impairment of glucose and insulin homeostasis, alteration in gut microbiota, neurobehavioral effects and also induction of kidney injury and cancer. However, the existing clinical and epidemiologic data are partly inconsistent to make a definitive conclusion regarding some of those adverse effects. In conclusion, consumers should be aware of the potential side effects of artifi- cial sweeteners and it may be recommended that only minimal amounts of NNS could be consumed.
    [Show full text]