Sugar? Part Two

Read and research more for yourself

After posting on the history and properties of one of the natural preservative trilogy - Sugar, I felt that I needed to put the other side of the modern equation.

By far the most common question that I get asked in workshops and talks is ‘what can I use instead of sugar?’ The short answer is, for preserving, ‘nothing’. Sugar is the preservative in all types of jams, jellies and cordials. In other preserves it will work alongside salt and/or vinegar to ensure that the food is safe to eat after a prolonged period of storage. By storage I mean at ambient temperature, without refrigeration or freezing, without the use of external means as, when disaster strikes, any outside source of power required for that storage may not be available. So it is safe - and also cheaper as no energy is needed to keep the food in a certain condition. These are important, vital even, considerations which were not envisaged before refrigeration was invented. Back then it was basic survival, and here we are, we have almost turned full circle to where we can no longer assume that our modern solutions can be relied upon.

So, before you decide to ignore all of that an do away with sugar may I ask you a question? Do you just not have any ‘sugar’ of any type or do you mean refined sugar such as would be found in jam? Is artificial sugar and sweetener acceptable? It isn’t acceptable to me and I would like you to know why. I could write an extensive paper on this subject but I will try to keep it brief and then if you wish to know more the information is all out there to read. So let’s get into it.

The benefit of artificial sweeteners and sugars is cost savings in production and calorie saving in the overall product. Is it worth the overall risk though? If you need to take account of the sugar in your diet you are aware of ingredients and the overall total of sugars consumed. With sweeteners, the fact the calorie saving is so high, very little account is taken of the amount consumed and the overall effect on the internal organs. For each of these sweeteners further reading is essential to inform yourself of the broad spectrum of possible side effects, bearing in mind people consume low calorie products with impunity.

ASPARTAME (E951) Approximately 200 times sweeter than sugar. Probably the best known of all of the modern sweeteners and still popular for diet drinks, sugar-free gum, and a whole range of diet foods. It has a bad press as it is been proved to be carciogenic, to increase cardiovascular risks* and to contribute to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
* to increase cardiovascular risks means to increase the risks of heart attacks and strokes.

SUCRALOSE (E955) has largely replaced Aspartame as the general public had taken notice of negative press reports associated with Aspartame. Sucralose is very commonly used and is 600 times sweeter than sugar and displays good heat stability. Used in baked goods, beverages, as table ‘sugar’ sachets, and all manner of sugar-free products. It is considered to be one of the safer sweeteners but nevertheless can affect gut bacteria negatively and also be responsible for unwanted metabolic problems such as inflammation. There are also links to risks of coronary heart disease.

ACESULFAME K Otherwise known as ACE K (E950) Calorie-free sweetener 200 times sweeter than sugar. Often combined with other artificial sweeteners because of its stability at high temperatures. It is widely used in food manufacturing and is mainly considered safe in the use for weight management and diabetes. However, there are issues in this respect for which more studies are needed. There are also associated risks linked to cancer and heart disease. Level of consumption seems to be key in all cases of artificial sweeteners.

SORBITOL (E420) A very common sweetener found in sweets, diet foods, chewing gum, even toothpaste. Mostly known to cause digestive issues such as bloating and diarrhea

XYLITOL (E967) Generally speaking this sugar alcohol has been regarded as one of the good guys - it may actally improve gut health and support good bacteria in the digestive system. It is widely used in similar products to sucralose particularly in oral health products. It can have a laxative effect.

However, Xylitol is widely used in condiments and is highly toxic to dogs. Be very careful, especially in the Summer months, that any sauces that you buy do not contain this sweetener. It is so tempting for dogs who see an abandoned beefburger - almost certainly covered in ketchup or BBQ sauce - to snaffle up a tasy treat or two. Depending on the size of the dog, you have around 20 minutes to get to a vet - your pet will become very ill with a collapse of internal organs which can end in death. Do not attempt to induce vomiting. Please be careful and warn any guests to not leave food on plates or on the ground.

ERYTHRITOL (E968) - another sugar alcohol popular for use in a variety of food products. It does not cause notable digestive issues with ‘normal’ consumption.

However, it has also been found that it is very effective as an insecticide, especially against fruit flies.

I don’t know about you but I would rather not have a known insectide sweetening my baked goods!

There are many more artificial sweeteners and you really need to study the ingredients on any products you buy and look up anything that you don’t recognise. Research goes on continuously and things can change quickly. There is just one more that I would like to highlight - mainly because it commands a premium price.

STEVIA is cultivated in countries along the 30-45 degree lattitude - countries such as Kenya, Peru, Paraguay, China and the like. There can be multiple harvest per year depending on the climate. Which is just as well as the stevial glycosides that make up the sweetener are extracted from the dry leaves by simply soaking. That provides the purest form of sweetener and is obviously the most expensive.

The second form of extraction is Enzymatic Production - this still starts with the base dry leaves but enzymes are added which typically come from genetically modified micro-organisms. The end product is chemically identical to the naturally produced extract but produces a lot more of the extract which is also sometimes increased with the addition of glucose - which also increases the sweetness. There is no requirement to mark the resulting extract as being obtained from GMO ingredients or the additional glucose. It is obviously cheaper to produce and less pure. It is perfectly possible that a product could be labelled on the front with ‘contains real Stevia’ or ‘extract from Stevia plant’ and still be the GMO glucose-laced option.

You will be relieved to hear that this has been addressed by the various food authorities in order that consumers can make an informed decison. Please see below.

E960a: Stevial glycosides from Stevia ( indicating the real deal )

E960c: Enzymatically produced steviol glycosides ( indicating product obtained through enzymatic processes )

To be clear any ingredients list only has to say E960a or E960c - it is up to you to know which is which.

There, in a nutshell, is the contempt with which the food industry and the authorities treat the consumer and the reason why I do not willingly eat processed food, ultra or otherwise.

And none of them will preserve your food at ambient temperature.

Homework - if you haven’t already read Swallo This by Joanne Blythman or
Ulta-Processed People by Prof. Chris Van Tuleken then please do so.