Maedbh Lillis

910701342
Lab Report #2 Carbohydrates

I. Name: Maedbh Lillis

Title: Carbohydrates
Date: 9/15/17
Laboratory Conditions: Normal

Part A: Evaluation of Non-nutritive Sweeteners

II. Purpose
The purpose of this experiment is to evaluate and compare a variety of non-nutritive sweeteners.
Each sweetener will be evaluated and compared on various factors (appearance, texture, flavor,
intensity) and rated as acceptable or unacceptable. The mechanisms of action, physiological
effects, and safety of non-nutritive sweeteners will be discussed, along with their impact on
consumer health.

Procedure
1. Collect samples of all available non-nutritive sweeteners from instructor.
2. Sprinkle a small amount of non-nutritive sweetener on a piece of fruit for sampling.
3. Evaluate each non-nutritive sweetener for appearance, flavor, texture and intensity.
4. Record all observations in Evaluation Table.

Discussion

1. Read and address (in your own words) the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
position paper on non-nutritive sweeteners.

Non-nutritive sweeteners provide little energy upon ingestion, which appeals to

consumers attempting to lower their added sugar consumption. Consumer interest in diet and
low calorie foods has driven ongoing research and development of non-nutritive sweeteners
(McWilliams, 2008). Added sugars, which comprise 14.6% of the energy intake of an average
American, are linked to health issues such as diabetes, overweight and obesity, and
cardiovascular disease (Fitch, 2012). There are seven types of NNS that are approved for safe
consumption in the United States (acesulfame K, aspartame, luo han guo extract, saccharin,
stevia, and sucralose), which gives consumers a variety of choices to satisfy their natural affinity
for a sweet taste (Fitch, 2012).
 NNS (also known as high-intensity sweeteners) can be hundreds of times sweeter than
sucrose, which means that a smaller amount of sweetener will achieve the desired sweetness
level. NNS are not absorbed for the most part when passing through the GI tract and they are
excreted in the same form in the feces and urine (Fitch, 2012). Registered dietitians provide
education on the use of non-nutritive sweeteners and recommend that they be consumed as part
of a dietary plan outlined by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (Fitch, 2012).

2. Consider the safety of the non-nutritive sweeteners, nutritional consequences

including toxicity, physiological responses, and evaluate the potential for the products to
interfere with natural absorption/metabolism.

Polyhydric alcohols (polyols such as erythritol, sorbitol, and xylitol) occur naturally in
foods and are generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by the Food and Drug Administration. They
can contribute some sweetness to products while adding fewer calories per gram than sugar.
Foods containing polyols can be labeled as sugar free within food labeling guidelines (Fitch,
2012). Polyols are absorbed into the intestine at a much slower rate than sugars, which is an
appealing quality for those with diabetes. However, since the polyols remain in the colon for an
extended period, prolonged microbial activity produces excessive gas. This leads to undesirable
physiological responses such as bloating, abdominal pain, and diarrhea. Consumption of low-
sugar or sugar-free products should be moderated to mitigate gastrointestinal side effects
(McWilliams, 2008).

An NNS product may be deemed safe for most consumers, but still pose a risk for those
with an inborn error of metabolism that affects the digestion and absorption of nutrients. In this
case, the FDA requires a label that alerts consumers to the presence of potentially unsafe
additives in products (Fitch, 2012). One prominent example is aspartame, a sweetener widely
used in soft drink production that yields phenylalanine when metabolized. The FDA requires that
these soft drinks carry a label with the statement Phenylketonurics: contains phenylalanine.
People with phenylketonuria must limit their consumption of phenylalanine due to health
concerns (intellectual disability, brain damage, seizures).

When the FDA is in the process of approving a new NNS product, they take probable
intake, cumulative effects of use, and toxicology studies from animals into account (Fitch, 2012).
Evaluation by FDA scientists on the extent of absorption, tissue distribution, metabolic
rates/pathways, and elimination from the body is used to design toxicity studies (Fitch, 2012).
Toxicity studies include short-term/long-term toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity,
and carcinogenicity among many other factors. The GRAS designation requires that the
sweetener has the reasonable certainty of no harm (Fitch, 2012). Approved non-nutritive
sweeteners are generally safe, but sensitive individuals or those with metabolic conditions should
take caution and consume in moderation.
3. Which non-nutritive sweetener do you find the most acceptable? Which is the least
acceptable? Discuss your reasoning. Would you recommend these to anyone? If so, who
and why?

In terms of taste, I thought Splenda (sucralose) was the most acceptable sweetener. It had
a moderately sweet taste that was close to sugar, a sweet aftertaste, and was not gritty or crunchy.
Splenda is a versatile sweetener and can be used for a variety of purposes, such as sweetening
hot and cold beverages and substituting for sugar in baked goods. As a dietitian, my
recommendation to a patient would be to limit consumption of added sugars and use non-
nutritive sweeteners moderately for special treats that need sweetness (such as an occasional
glass of lemonade).

The least acceptable sweetener was the stevia, which I found to be dry, bitter, and
unappealing. Stevia is an acquired taste - if someone were to try it as their first sweetener, they
may be put off. The flavor was intensely bitter, and it would work much differently than sugar in
a baked recipe (a much smaller amount would be needed).

Evaluation of Non-nutritive Sweeteners

Product Appearanc Flavor Texture Intensity Mouthfeel Acceptability

e

Stevia White Bitter, smooth Intense Astringent, No

powder somewhat (8) slightly
sweet bitter

Monk granular fruit-like smooth Mild (2) gritty yes

Fruit

Fructose Large Sweet with Large Mild (3) Gritty, yes

crystals, no granules coarse
granules aftertaste

Pure Fine powder Intense Bitter, no

Monk powder, Medicinal (8) medicinal
Fruit light brown burning,
then sweet

Sucrose Finely Cough Easily Mild (4) Melts in somewhat

+Dextros powdered syrup dissolve mouth
 e d in
mouth

Sucrose Finely mild smooth Mild (3) Cools yes

ground mouth

Dextrose Small mild gritty Mild (1) Dissolves somewhat

granules quickly

Large Light crunchy Mild (2) Dissolves yes

Erythritol crystals sweetness quickly

Equal Small Sweet smooth Mild (4) Dissolves yes

granules before and quickly
after

Sweet-n- Small Sweet, gritty Intense Smooth, No

Low granules bitter (7) cools mouth
aftertaste

Splenda Powdered, Sweet Rough, Medium Sweet yes

granular grain- (6) aftertaste
like

Zing Small Bitter, gritty Medium gritty no

(Stevia) granules astringent (6)

Part B: Cookie Comparison

Purpose

To compare the influence of the type of sugar used in a baked item. Cookies recipes that are
identical except for type of sugar used will be baked and evaluated for appearance, smile,. Taste,
and texture. The physical properties of sugar will be used to explain differences (if any) between
the two batches of cookies.

Procedure

1. Create your own data table.

2. Bake two versions of chocolate chip cookies using two different types of sugar: white
and brown.
3. Sample cookies; note observations in table format.
 Product Appearance Aroma Flavor Texture Consistency

White Sugar Lighter butter/sugar sweet crispier breaks in

Cookies mouth

Brown Sugar Darker butter/sugar caramel chewy easier to

Cookies flavor chew

Discussion

1. Describe the differences in color, texture (in your hands), and odor before sampling
the cookie and then describe the texture, flavor, and mouthfeel after sampling.

The brown sugar cookies came out darker while the white sugar baked to a lighter color.
The brown sugar cookie felt softer in the hand and had more moisture than the white sugar
cookie. The brown sugar cookie was easier to break apart with hands was less crumbly. Both
cookies had a similar smell of warm butter and sugar, however the brown sugar was a bit more
distinctive because of the molasses.

After sampling both cookies, I found that the white cookie had a sweeter flavor compared
to the brown sugar cookie (which more of a caramel flavor to it). The white sugar cookie did not
dissolve in the mouth as easily and felt a lot drier, more chewing was required compared to the
brown sugar cookie (easily dissolved in mouth).

2. Discuss what properties of sugar discussed in class may contribute to the differences
you experienced (flavor, texture, appearance) between the white sugar and brown sugar
cookie. Note: If you didnt experience clear differences between the two samples, explain
what extraneous variables may have caused this.

Brown sugar is less refined than white sugar (fewer impurities are removed during
processing, which lends flavor to the sugar). This would explain the difference of color between
the two cookies. Brown sugar is more acidic and more hygroscopic (capable of attracting and
retaining water) than white sugar (McWilliams, 2008), which would explain the textural
differences. White sugar has less moisture than brown sugar, which explains why the cookie was
drier and less chewy than the brown sugar cookie.

3. Based on your INDIVIDUAL experience (each cookie may have been slightly
different; thus your results may differ from your partner's), what might be your next steps
for further experimentation based on your ideal type of cookie?
Hint: briefly describe your perfect cookie (crunchy, chewy, cakey, etc) and then note what
changes you would make with the sugar in the recipe and any other changes youd want to
experiment on.

My ideal cookie would be thin, medium brown, and chewy. I would first investigate the
effects of sugar type on cookie texture by baking with different ratios of sugar (100% brown,
100% white, 50/50. 75/25, etc.) and observing the outcome. Other variables could include the
type of fat used (butter, margarine, coconut butter, etc.), the mixing method (creamed butter or
melted), egg/egg substitutes, leavening agents, and types of flour.

Part C: Flavor Trip

Purpose
To compare flavor perceptions before and after sampling Miraculin. The mechanism of action
and potential uses of miracle berry will be explored in a consumer marketing context.

Procedure
1. Create your own data table.
2. Taste food item(s) provided by instructor lime wedges, berries, etc.
Record observations.
3. Slowly dissolve to tablet of miracle berry extract, Miraculin, on tongue. Do not chew
process takes about 10 minutes.
4. Taste food item(s) again. Record observations.

Before Appearance Aroma Flavor Texture Consistency

Miraculin

Lime wedges dark strong acidic bitter smooth instant bitter

flavor

Berries Soft sugar sweet smooth Soft, juicy

inside

Apple Hard unscented sweet stiff firm

 After Appearance Aroma Flavor Texture Consistency
Miraculin

Lime wedges strong tangy sweet smooth sweet flavor

throughout

Berries soft Fruity Very sweet squishy Soft, juicy

Apple hard fruity Overwhelmin stiff firm

gly sweet

Discussion

1. What is Miraculin and what is its mechanism of action?

Miraculin is a naturally occurring glycoprotein extracted from the synsepalum dulcificum

fruit, which is used as a sugar substitute. Miraculin does not have an inherently sweet taste, but
binds to sweet receptors on the tongue and makes normally sour/acidic foods taste sweet. This
effect can last for about an hour. Two histidine residues (His30 and His60) appear to drive the
mechanism that changes the perception of flavor (Ito, 2007). Miraculin does not affect taste
receptors at neutral pH - acid is required to denature the protein so that extremely sweet tastes
can be perceived.

2. Discuss its potential uses. Why isnt it commercially available like Splenda is?

The sweet effect of Miraculin is only temporary, which would make it difficult to
produce foods for supermarkets or any food that is not consumed immediately. It would only be
suitable for events such as tasting parties where food is consumed right away. Miraculin cannot
be marketed for baked goods because is not a heat-stable protein (heat denatures it) and
deactivates when cooked (Ito, 2007). I had never heard of Miraculin before this class, but I do
think there is a place in the market for it, especially with sugar (public enemy number one) being
at the center of our current health crisis. Miracle berries might prove to be popular with children
and diabetics. It may possibly help chemotherapy patients who are suffering from disturbances in
taste (dysgeusia).

3. Tell me all about your experience!

I didnt think the Miraculin would work at first because I did not think it would have any
discernible effect. I tried it with the lime first (I was sure it would still taste sour) and was
amazed at how sweet it tasted. With the miracle berry I was able to taste foods in a completely
different light - everything tasted like candy. I ate the blackberry and apple afterwards - they
both tasted much sweeter than normal. It would be interesting to try Miraculin with normally
bitter alcoholic drinks (wine or beer).
 References

Fitch, C., & Keim, K. S. (2012). Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Use of
nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and
Dietetics, 112(5), 739-758.

Ito K, Asakura T, Morita Y, Nakajima K, Koizumi A, Shimizu-Ibuka A, Masuda K, Ishiguro

M, Terada T, Maruyama J, Kitamoto K, Misaka T, Abe K (August 2007). "Microbial
production of sensory-active miraculin". Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 360 (2):
40711. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2007.06.064. PMID 17592723.

McWilliams, M. (2008). Foods Experimental Perspectives Sixth Edition. Pearson Prentice

Hall