Idris Ali Mohamed, Vani Nandimandalam Venkata, Almutari Dhafi A, Jafar Mohammed A, Boreak Nezar
Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2016 Dec;6(Suppl 3):S192-S196. doi: 10.4103/2231-0762.197190.
To determine the amount of sugar and pH in commercially available soft drinks in Jazan, Saudi Arabia. This was further compared with their labeled values in order to inform the regulations. The effects of these drinks on teeth is reviewed.
Ten brands of popular soft drinks including 6 regular carbonated drinks and 4 energy drinks were obtained from the local markets. Their pH was determined using a pH meter. The amount of total sugar, glucose, fructose, and sucrose was estimated using high performance liquid chromatography (using Dionex ICS 5000 ion chromatography) at the Saudi Food and Drug Authority. Descriptive statistics was done to obtain the mean and standard deviation. Intergroup comparison was performed using independent -test, and the labeled and estimated values within the group were compared with paired -test.
The labeled and estimated sugar in energy drinks (14.3 ± 0.48 and 15.6 ± 2.3, respectively) were higher than the carbonated drinks (11.2 ± 0.46 and 12.8 ± 0.99), which was statistically significant. In addition, there was a significant difference in the concentration of glucose in energy drinks (5.7 ± 1.7) compared to carbonated drinks (4.1 ± 1.4). The pH of these drinks ranged from 2.4 to 3.2. The differences between the estimated and labeled sugar in carbonated drinks showed statistical significance. Mild variation was observed in total sugar, glucose, fructose, and sucrose levels among different bottles of the same brand of these drinks.
The low pH and high sugar content in these drinks are detrimental to dental health. Comparison of the estimated sugar with their labeled values showed variation in most of the brands. Preventive strategies should be implemented to reduce the health risks posed by these soft drinks.
测定沙特阿拉伯吉赞市市售软饮料中的糖分含量和pH值。并将其与标签标注值进行进一步比较,以便为相关规定提供参考。同时综述这些饮料对牙齿的影响。
从当地市场获取10个品牌的流行软饮料,其中包括6种常规碳酸饮料和4种能量饮料。使用pH计测定其pH值。在沙特食品药品管理局,采用高效液相色谱法(使用戴安ICS 5000离子色谱仪)估算总糖、葡萄糖、果糖和蔗糖的含量。进行描述性统计以获取均值和标准差。采用独立样本t检验进行组间比较,并使用配对t检验比较组内的标签标注值和估算值。
能量饮料中的标签标注糖含量和估算糖含量(分别为14.3±0.48和15.6±2.3)高于碳酸饮料(分别为11.2±0.46和12.8±0.99),具有统计学意义。此外,与碳酸饮料(4.1±1.4)相比,能量饮料中葡萄糖的浓度(5.7±1.7)存在显著差异。这些饮料的pH值范围为2.4至3.2。碳酸饮料中估算糖含量与标签标注值之间的差异具有统计学意义。在同一品牌的不同瓶这些饮料中,总糖、葡萄糖、果糖和蔗糖水平观察到轻微差异。
这些饮料的低pH值和高糖含量对牙齿健康有害。估算糖含量与其标签标注值的比较显示,大多数品牌存在差异。应实施预防策略以降低这些软饮料带来的健康风险。