Sugar is steadily being removed from formulations for all sorts of reasons – a desire to reduce weight, reduce the risk of diabetes etc. Product developers are actively seeking alternatives to it especially in beverages. There are light, diet, no added sugar variants revolutionising the food market and now with active discouragement using taxes – the so called sugar tax, alternative sweeteners need to be found. Stepping up to the plate is a modified type of sugar called Sucralose.
Sucralose, along with a number of other sweeteners including aspartame, acesulfame K, stevia, cyclamate is a typical low-calorie ingredient used in sports formulations for example (see article). Sucralose has the benefits of:-
- having a similar sweetener profile in sensory terms to sugar (sucrose) but is 600x sweeter.
- suited to synergistic combinations with stevia or acesulfame K.
- little or no residual aftertaste
- relatively easy to manufacture being based on selective chlorination of sucrose.
- long shelf-life in foods, especially beverages
- reasonably resistant to breaking down during heat processing.
- absence of any known toxicity profile and deemed very safe for human consumption.
The taste and flavour advantages of sucralose are many fold because of its synergistic activity with acesulfame-K in particular (Wiet & Beyts, 1992). It is possible to achieve significant energy reductions in any high sugar product when it is added to a formulation without losing a certain sweetness profile. the only issue tends to be loss of mouthfeel which sucrose in particular gives to a food. The need to judiciously add thickeners to make up for the loss is highly advisable as the consumer soon loses trust in a beverage. Additionally, reinforcing through good marketing that the product is low or lower in calorie content is a necessity.
Regulations
Sucralose (E 955) is authorised as a food additive in the EU in accordance with Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 on food additives.
New Health Studies
A recent study into this sweetener has been found to have an ‘unexpected effect on the immune system’ and in a positive way. Scientists from the Francis Crick Institute in London showed that sucralose lowers the activation of T cells, which is a type of white blood cell, in mice.
The result is exciting if it could be proved in humans because it is thought to be a route to treating some autoimmune disorders such as type-1 diabetes.
Toxicity Of Sucralose
In terms of toxicity, there are no studies yet that could convincingly suggest it is a safety concern especially attempting to link it to cancer. One review has gathered together all the evidence up to 2009 and examined it in some detail and largely drawn the conclusion that it is safe. EFSA likewise consider it to be a very safe sweetener to use. Recently one study attempted to find an association with tumour formation in mice but did not present any adequate dose-response data to back up this claim (Soffritti et al., 2016) and has been criticised for its lack of rigour (Aguilar et al., 2017).
Perhaps the biggest concern is that it is appearing in environmental waste waters simply because it is so resistant to breaking down (Kokotou et al., 2012).
References
Aguilar, F., Crebelli, R., Di Domenico, A., Dusemund, B., Frutos, M.J., Galtier, P., Gott, D., Gundert‐Remy, U., Lambré, C., Leblanc, J.C. and Lindtner, O., 2017. Statement on the validity of the conclusions of a mouse carcinogenicity study on sucralose (E 955) performed by the Ramazzini Institute. EFSA Journal, 15(5).
Cardello, H. M. A. B., Da Silva, M. A. P. A., & Damasio, M. H. (1999). Measurement of the relative sweetness of stevia extract, aspartame and cyclamate/saccharin blend as compared to sucrose at different concentrations. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition (Formerly Qualitas Plantarum), 54(2), pp. 119-129.
Grotz, V.L. and Munro, I.C., 2009. An overview of the safety of sucralose. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 55(1), pp. 1-5
Kokotou, M.G., Asimakopoulos, A.G. and Thomaidis, N.S., 2012. Artificial sweeteners as emerging pollutants in the environment: analytical methodologies and environmental impact. Analytical Methods, 4(10), pp.3057-3070.
Wiet, S. G., & Beyts, P. K. (1992). Sensory characteristics of sucralose and other high intensity sweeteners. Journal of Food Science, 57(4), pp. 1014-1019
Amended article: new information added on the role of sucralose in raising T-cell content in mice.
I like using this ingredient. It works well in my product development especially for beverages. It seems to be really good with acesulfame K and in fact I agree that it is ideal with stevia. I never believed for one moment that stevia would ever work on its own and my work suggests that is still the case.
I use sucralose a great deal after I stopped using aspartame, saccharin and even stevia. I had given up sugar a long time ago including the carbs to go on a low carb diet and needed some alternative sweeteners. I think sweetener is one which helps me maintain a low carb diet and I use it in hot and cold beverages and it gives me a sweet sensation which is just about as close to sugar as I feel I can get. I lived in the States where tried Splenda and I think it works when you only need to use very small amounts. I also use xylitol and erthritol and I dissolve in a hot mug of water to sweeten my puddings. I use it in some of my baking as well because it doesn’t seem to break down like others. Unless I reference it, very few people would know that I haven’t had sugar in my house in years, so I’m happy that I’ve hit on a wholly believable DIY ‘sugar’ that keeps me sated and healthy too.
I feel sucralose is ideal for baking. I prefer it to stevia because of the funny taste you get in the mouth. Still not sure why people actually use stevia but you do see loads of it now in drinks.
I have heard rumors but never got any verification about Splenda which I know is where sucralose comes from until now. I’m diabetic so I need to look for a sweetener that will replace sugar. I’m really bothered about the stories you hear but I don’t believe they are toxic. I think Stevia might be worse for me although it doesn’t give me a severe headache like Aspartame does but I don’t want to take any chances on organ failure either. I’m going to keep with Stevia for the time being and see what happens to me. Haley
I certainly think that stevia is not as great as people make out. I find sucralose a better sweetener for my purposes especially in the cake baking department. Can anybody who reads this advise me a bit better on cooking with stevia ? BR Jessie.