JUST CURIOUS--

Does anyone know why manufacturers of "sugar free" foods use so many sugar alcohols in their foods? Are they alot cheaper to use than other sugar substitutes such as sucralose (Splenda), aspartame, saccharin, etc? I realize that some substitutes cannot withstand heat, but some products (i.e. sugar free syrup) are available with either sugar alcohols or other substitutes. That leads me to believe that there must be a financial incentive in manufacturing with sugar alcohols.

I am getting really angry at the companies who advertise "sugar-free", tempting me with their products, only to find out that there are 10+ grams of sugar alcohol per serving! Do they not realize just how sick some of us become when we eat maltitol, etc? I CANNOT tolerate the stuff and WILL NEVER try them again.

I've even written to S.F. chocolate manufacturers and they don't bother to give me an explanation.

On a tirade---
Robin

Sonbin

Why Did It Take Me Ten Years to Finally Do This??!!!

134/122/110-115

Sonbin, it makes me angry, too. I keep joking about how somebody should sue these guys, but I'm not completely joking.

They use sugar alcohols for a few reasons.

First, they add to the texture of products. Maltitol is used mainly for its bulking properties, as I understand. It gives low carb chocolate, for instance, it's characteristic texture. Artificial sweeteners like splenda and aspartame don't contribute to the texture. For one thing, they're not sticky.

Also, sugar alcohols are known to be safe. Food manufacturers could experiment with new bulking agents, but foods like maltitol and sorbitol are considered natural by the FDA, they've been around a long time, and thus, the food makers are not likely to get into as many legal hassles with the government.

Sorbitol has been used for a VERY long time. It's one of the main ingredients in toothpaste that make it sweet. Estes has been making sugar-free candy for diabetics for God knows how long, primarily using sorbitol and artificial sweeteners. I remember, back in the 60's, my diabetic grandma eating Estes lemon drops and they were made out of sorbitol even back then.

**************
"Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don't know what your rights are, or who the person is you're talking to. Then on the way out, slam the door."

What I don't understand is how companies like Atkins can produce products with these sugar alcohols that undermine the effectiveness of the plan.

How many people do we see here every month who stop losing weight because of eating the bars and candies? Quite a few! And, there must be many more "out there".

It just seems so contrary!

~~~Teelbee

174 (Mar. 2002, highest weight), 164 (Jan. 2003, begin LC)
174/132/137-134
remember, amateurs built the Ark, professionals built the Titanic

Thanks for the info. I am familiar with the whole FDA approval process and I cannot for the life of me figure out how maltitol and some of the other digestively offensive S.A. made it through clinical trials. Surely some significant portion of the trial population was stricken with intestinal distress. (Like many of us.) It cracks me up that they put a short sentence in small letters on S.F. food labels warning people of the laxative effects of S.A. The labels should go on to say that "if you do not experience digestive distress, then you are probably digesting the product and your actual carbohydrate count is almost as high as a REAL candy bar." Ha Ha JOKE'S ON YOU!

Ironically, WOW chips (i.e., Olestra and "anal leakage") received such bad press that many people would not even buy them. Man, I could eat half a bag of WOW chips and feel great compared to the torture of eating 1 serving of S.F. chocolate!

Sonbin

Why Did It Take Me Ten Years to Finally Do This??!!!

134/122/110-115

Well, my understanding is (and I could be wrong) that maltitol is natural. So I don't think it required FDA approval like Olestra, a totally synthetic chemical. Of course, cyanide is natural too; almonds are rich in cyanide.

**************
"Sometimes I think you have to march right in and demand your rights, even if you don't know what your rights are, or who the person is you're talking to. Then on the way out, slam the door."

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> almonds are rich in cyanide.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

... and don't eat any peach pits!

Maggie
5'1" ~~ Atkins since '98 (160)/Maintaining nicely (110) ~~ Redhead until further notice!

The labels should go on to say that "if you do not experience digestive distress, then you are probably digesting the product and your actual carbohydrate count is almost as high as a REAL candy bar." Ha Ha JOKE'S ON YOU!

Yeah, that's the problem with DH and I. We can eat and eat the candy, the bars and anything else with the SA. Doesn't do a thing to us intestinally. (is that a word, he he) But causes stalls big time.

My problem with the sugar alcohols is that it keeps me from losing. I don't have any stomach ailments from them, and I liked to believe that an Atkins Caramel Nut Chew had only 2 carbs, but the truth is, including the sugar alcohols, it contained many more carbs than that. No wonder I haven't been losing in a while. I think they can be pretty misleading, and I think that they can be safely used once you're close to goal weight, AND of course, in moderation.

"The more I meet people, the more I love my dogs"

202/187

until very recently, health food stores were the biggest resellers of low carb products. and they were almost all concerned about splenda as an artificial sweetener.

as the FDA revisits the whole issue of "net carbs",(something they will do soon, I'm sure) and as more mainstream stores and low carb stores carry the products, I think you'll see more products being sweetened with Splenda.

As far as I know, no one has produced a truly shelf-stable and delicious low carb chocolate w/o sugar alcohols. I've heard of this or that company that did it, but then I never see the bars anywhere, so I have to assume it's not been done.

THERE's a way to get rich quick, though.

In the November issue of CARBHEALTH magazine, I read that Splenda and other sweeteners of that type are extremely expensive to use in the manufacture of low-carb chocolates, etc. compared to sugar alcohols. So, it COULD be done, but consumers might not be willing to pay the price. Bob Kochman did some firsthand research to write the article.

Barb L.
Started Atkins January 2003
162/141/130

Right Barb, you took the words right out of my mouth. I read that in CarbHealth mag. too. Maltitol is wayyyyyyy cheaper right now and manuf. aren't willing to expend the expense if consumers aren't going to buy the product. It's just not cost effective enough right now. But I'll bet if we wrote to the "Sugar-Free" candy companies and let them know we would buy their splenda sweetened products, we would start seeing more of them. We consumers DO have a lot of power.

BTW, if anyone wants to subscribe to this little gem of a magazine, I'm sure Andrea would tell you how. I LOVE mine and always look forward to the next issue.
Actually........nevermind about bothering Andrea about it. There's a link on the homepage to subscribe. It's worth it!!!!


Barb
Atkins-3/14/03
174/146/135
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

I just finished to read the list of ingredients in my favorite chocolate bar that will be history as of tomorrow. It says" carbohydrates in the Malitol, which impact on the blood sugar/insulin level, is negligible; total 14.8g. Net impactible carbs 1.0g." does it mean that the 1.2 oz chocolate bar that cost $1.99 is in fact like eating a candy bar with a sugar content of 14.8 carb?
I will call the company tomorrow and I will post a new report, for the moment I am somewhat amused with myself for beliving that I could be on Atkins, loose weight, and have my chocolate too.

We should all regard maltitol as real sugar. For much of the population, that's how it impacts insulin levels. Better just to leave those out of the food chain altogether.



Barb
Atkins-3/14/03
174/146/135
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."