--S-A-- Question regarding alternative sweetners

[Guest guest]

My apologies for the confusion. I'll try to be more clear in future

posts

 

I'm a little uneasy about using xylitol although I have eaten baked

goods from whole foods markets and I like the taste. The excerpt

below is from

http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfood/sugarfree_blues.html. It

provides information on sugar alcohols. Personally, I've never had a

bad reaction to baked goods containing xylitol but I eat it

infrequently. I've definitely had a bad tummy reaction to malitol,

however. - Leslie

 

Excerpt from " Sugar-Free Blues--Everything You Wanted to Know About

Artificial Sweeteners " By Jim Earles, Weston A. Price foundation.

 

The so-called nutritive sweeteners include a class of substances

known variously as sugar alcohols, polyols, polyalcohols or

polyhydric acids. These are the substances which are usually, but not

always, identifiable by the suffix " -itol " --sorbitol, xylitol,

mannitol, erythritol, lactitol, maltitol, isomalt and hydrogenated

starch hydrolysates (HSH). Scientists call them sugar alcohols

because part of their structure chemically resembles sugar and part

is similar to alcohol, but they don't completely fit into either

category.93 Each of these substances has its own particular history,

but mercifully--for the purpose of brevity--they all share a great

deal of similarity.

 

Although several sugar alcohols are touted as naturally occurring in

various foods--which is technically true--all commercially-available

sugar alcohols are synthesized by the hydrogenation of sugars from

various sources.94 While the author could not find any information

commenting on this fact, the use of a hydrogenation process may or

may not be of concern. Hydrogenation of fats and oils is certainly

detrimental to the nutritive qualities of said items, but the process

must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. One must keep in mind,

however, that fats and oils were hydrogenated for some time before we

became aware of the detrimental effects of this practice. If anyone

has bothered to specifically research the effects of hydrogenating

sugars, that information is not readily available at this time.

 

According to the American Dietetics Association: " [sugar alcohols]

can . . . be categorized as sugar replacers because they can replace

sugar sweeteners, usually on a one-to-one basis; offer less energy;

and offer potential health benefits, such as reduced glycemic

response and reduced dental caries risk. " 98

 

It should be noted that lactitol, mannitol and some of the

hydrogenated starch hydrolysates have less than half of the

sweetening power of sucrose, and for this reason are usually employed

for other purposes. Mannitol is frequently used as a dusting agent on

chewing gum, intended to prevent the gum from sticking to the

wrapper. Sweeteners from the HSH family commonly serve as viscosity

or bodifying agents, humectants, crystallization modifiers,

cryoprotectants, and rehydration aids. Lactitol frequently finds its

way into blends with more potent sweeteners, such as aspartame,

saccharin and acesulfame-K. Whatever their intended usage, all of the

sugar alcohols are touted as being safe for diabetics and

hypoglycemics, lower in calories than sugar, and non-contributory

towards tooth decay and the growth of intestinal yeasts.

 

Xylitol has the additional claims of increasing absorption of B-

vitamins and calcium, re-mineralizing tooth enamel and

fighting/preventing ear infections,99 as well as possibly

contributing to fresher breath, greater athletic performance, and

recovery from sinus infections.100 It also takes the prize as the

sweetener with the most bizarre application--a Japanese company

recently began to market a line of women's t-shirts with xylitol

infused into the fabric. Xylitol, like several other sugar alcohols,

exhibits a cooling effect in the mouth. The t-shirts are intended to

utilize this same property to keep a person cooler in warm

weather.101

 

It is interesting to note that even the manufacturers and the

official regulatory bodies hint at the potential problems with sugar

alcohols. According to the ADA website: " All [sugar alcohols] are

absorbed slowly and incompletely from the intestine by passive

diffusion. Therefore, an excessive load (e.g., greater than 50 g

sorbitol per day, greater than 20 g mannitol per day) may cause

diarrhea. . . . ncomplete absorption causes indirect metabolism of

[sugar alcohols] via fermentive (sic) degradation by the intestinal

flora. The energy return from indirect metabolism is less than the

direct route; thus, [sugar alcohols] are referred to as reduced-

energy or low-energy sweeteners. [The] FDA allows these nutritive

sweeteners to be labeled as having fewer kilocalories per gram than

other nutritive sweeteners. . . . Products with sorbitol and mannitol

may have the following statement on the label because high intakes

increase the risk of malabsorption: `excess consumption may have a

laxative effect.' " 102

The ADA description hints at more than it actually says. Sugar

alcohols are not broken down in the stomach, so they make their way

intact into the bowels. It is here in the bowels that the " passive

diffusion " mentioned by the ADA takes place, meaning that the

presence of the sugar alcohols draws water into the bowels. This

leads to the fermentation by undesirable bacteria and a resultant

partial degradation or " metabolism " of the sugar alcohols. (This

fermentation of intestinal bacteria can lead to or exacerbate

problems with candida and other yeast problems.) The direct result of

this chain of events is the severe stomach cramping and diarrhea that

many people experience after ingesting too much sugar alcohol. So how

much is too much? The above quotation lists the official, generally

agreed upon thresholds for sorbitol and mannitol, but each sugar

alcohol has its own threshold. However, certain individuals have been

known to experience reactions at much lower dosages. Lactitol in

particular may be problematic in small doses, especially for lactose-

sensitive individuals.103,104

Stomach cramping and diarrhea are certainly not as serious as the

conditions associated with some of the non-nutritive sweeteners, but

the sugar alcohols can cause other more serious problems. One of

these conditions is metabolic acidosis, which can lead to acid reflux

and an increased risk of cancer of the larynx. And diabetics and

hypoglycemics should be aware that sugar alcohols do raise blood

sugar levels, although not as much as sugar. Sugar alcohols also

promote dehydration and loss of electrolytes, creating feelings of

excessive thirst. This is a potential concern to those who consume a

lot of low-carb, energy bar types of foods. Exercising after

consuming these types of products may put one at risk for heat

stroke, muscle cramping and cardiovascular problems. Those who are

trying to avoid carbohydrates and burn body fat should also know that

sugar alcohols will immediately take the body out of ketosis, the

state wherein fat reserves rather than dietary calories are being

metabolized. . . assuming that the body was in a state of ketosis to

begin with.

Additional concerns with sugar alcohols stem from the fact that they

seem to increase the frequency of seizures in epileptics, and

children are especially sensitive to the gastrointestinal side

effects, possibly due to their propensity for bingeing on sweet

foods. Children who regularly consume sugar alcohols also seem to

have an increased incidence of childhood obesity.105

The final word on sugar alcohols as a group seems to be a mixed

message. The evidence does seem to support the positive claims made

on behalf of these sweeteners, and perhaps this gives them a valid

place in certain applications. For example, given the choice between

treating a child's ear infection with a course of antibiotics or with

administration of a therapeutic dose of xylitol, the latter option

would certainly be preferable. Of course, there may be even better

options.

, zoe W

<ilovegrafix wrote:

For baking I use Xylitol

O, and when you make a post about artificial sweeteners and then

talk about stevia in the same breath without clarification