Mora Margaux R, Dando Robin
Department of Food Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2021 Mar;20(2):1554-1583. doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.12703. Epub 2021 Feb 13.
The global rise in obesity, type II diabetes, and other metabolic disorders in recent years has been attributed in part to the overconsumption of added sugars. Sugar reduction strategies often rely on synthetic and naturally occurring sweetening compounds to achieve their goals, with popular synthetic sweeteners including saccharin, cyclamate, acesulfame potassium, aspartame, sucralose, neotame, alitame, and advantame. Natural sweeteners can be further partitioned into nutritive, including polyols, rare sugars, honey, maple syrup, and agave, and nonnutritive, which include steviol glycosides and rebaudiosides, luo han guo (monk fruit), and thaumatin. We choose the foods we consume largely on their sensory properties, an area in which these sugar substitutes often fall short. Here, we discuss the most popular synthetic and natural sweeteners, with the goal of providing an understanding of differences in the sensory profiles of these sweeteners versus sucrose, that they are designed to replace, essential for the effectiveness of sugar reduction strategies. In addition, we break down the influence of these sweeteners on metabolism, and present results from a large survey of consumers' opinions on these sweeteners. Consumer interest in clean label foods has driven a move toward natural sweeteners; however, neither natural nor synthetic sweeteners are metabolically inert. Identifying sugar replacements that not only closely imitate the sensory profile of sucrose but also exert advantageous effects on body weight and metabolism is critical in successfully the ultimate goals of reducing added sugar in the average consumer's diet. With so many options for sucrose replacement available, consumer opinion and cost, which vary widely with suagr replacements, will also play a vital role in which sweeteners are successful in widespread adoption.
近年来，全球肥胖症、II 型糖尿病和其他代谢紊乱的发病率上升，部分原因是添加糖的过度消费。减糖策略通常依靠合成甜味剂和天然甜味剂来实现目标，常见的合成甜味剂包括糖精、甜蜜素、安赛蜜、阿斯巴甜、三氯蔗糖、纽甜、阿力甜和爱德万甜。天然甜味剂可进一步分为营养性甜味剂，包括多元醇、稀有糖、蜂蜜、枫糖浆和龙舌兰，以及非营养性甜味剂，包括甜菊糖苷和莱鲍迪苷、罗汉果和索马甜。我们选择食物很大程度上基于其感官特性，而这些糖替代品在这方面往往有所欠缺。在此，我们讨论最常见的合成甜味剂和天然甜味剂，目的是让大家了解这些甜味剂与它们旨在替代的蔗糖在感官特征上的差异，这对减糖策略的有效性至关重要。此外，我们分析了这些甜味剂对新陈代谢的影响，并展示了一项关于消费者对这些甜味剂看法的大型调查结果。消费者对清洁标签食品的兴趣推动了向天然甜味剂的转变；然而，无论是天然甜味剂还是合成甜味剂在代谢上都不是惰性的。找到不仅能紧密模仿蔗糖感官特征，而且对体重和新陈代谢有有利影响的糖替代品，对于成功实现降低普通消费者饮食中添加糖这一最终目标至关重要。由于有如此多的蔗糖替代品可供选择，消费者的意见和成本（因糖替代品而异）在哪些甜味剂能成功广泛应用方面也将发挥至关重要的作用。
